SPECIAL BRIEFING ON BILATERAL SECURITY AGREEMENT

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Background Briefing: Senior State Department Officials and Senior Administration Official on Bilateral Security Agreement

Special Briefing
ERT London, England
October 12, 2013

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  Okay.  So we're just going to do a quick backgrounder on the meetings that Secretary Kerry just had in Afghanistan, and a readout of those.  And we have Senior State Department Official One, Senior Administration Official One here.  And if I have anything, I'll be Number Two.

So, I think we'll do an overview first, and then do some questions, if that works.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  So the visit, obviously, was focused on the Bilateral Security Agreement.  It comes 11-ish months into the negotiations.  It was generally productive.  From our vantage, positive in that we reached a basic agreement on all of the key issues.

The President – when President Karzai visited Washington last January, the President announced our objectives for a post-2014 presence as being, first, a train, advise, and assist mission under NATO leadership, and then also a CT mission, by which --

QUESTION:  Train, advise, and what?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  Train, advise, and assist mission.

QUESTION:  Assist.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  And also a counter-terrorism mission, by which we could pursue the remnants of al-Qaida.

And the language of the agreement as it stands right now provides what we need for both of those missions.  And, more importantly, as with every status of forces agreement worldwide, the language also provides what we need in terms of assurances and guarantees for rights of self-defense, for force protection, and the jurisdiction issues that are obviously so important to us.

So, overall, the text, we believe, is in a good place.  And I think we stayed a little bit longer than we had hoped, but I think it was worth it in that we were able to come to that basic agreement.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  Why don't we do some questions?

QUESTION:  Before we get into the – what the Secretary was talking about – strike that.  (Laughter.)  Before we get into the area that is not – that still is awaiting – the most contentious issue, the jurisdictional issue, can you explain to us what exactly the – has been agreed, in terms of the counterterrorism stuff and in terms of sovereignty?  Like, Karzai made a big deal out of the definition of "invasion" and the definition of "sovereignty."  Can you explain what that is, or is it just like a standard dictionary definition?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  The most important thing President Karzai had said to us he needed out of the Bilateral Security Agreement was the ability to take it to his Afghan people and explain how it was going to bring security to Afghanistan beyond 2014.

The other thing that he said he needed was – and this was coming out of the Strategic Partnership Agreement – was improved understanding between the two of us in terms of what threats faced Afghanistan, both externally and internally.  And what we were able to do, I think, in very broad terms, is find that common understanding in these 24 hours of talks, both in terms of the threats that Afghanistan faces internally and externally, the final language to characterize those threats, and then, more importantly, to characterize our commitment to enable the Afghans to defend themselves against those threats.  And I think that was one of the major very difficult issues that was left to this late stage that we needed to work through.

QUESTION:  Can you say what it – what the language says?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  No.

QUESTION:  Is that because – and you can't say because you're waiting for – you don't want to preempt the Loya Jirga, or --

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  Yeah.  I think we would want to wait until the right time, until the internal processes are more mature.  We --

QUESTION:  Yours or theirs?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  Both.  We have to put ours through a very technical, internal legal review.  They have to put theirs through their interagency equivalent process with their national security council, and then prepare it to take to their people.  And we certainly wouldn't want to disclose dimensions or parts of the language prematurely.

QUESTION:  But it will be at some point.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE:  The language will be public, eventually.

QUESTION:  [Senior Administration Official One], you were talking about defining the threats to Afghanistan and their ability to defend themselves.  Is this the reference to the part about Afghanistan wanting the U.S. to give it a sort of defense pact, and that we would defend them against outside threats, presumably from Pakistan?  That is part one of the question.

Part two is the issue on counterterrorism and them wanting us to hand over our intel and they do their own ops, and how did you address that?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  Yes, on the first part, that the Bilateral Security Agreement is clearly something that stopped short of a mutual defense pact.  And the language that we found, I think, is sufficient to both parties in terms of not overreaching the bounds of what can be – what kind of commitments we can come to.

On the counterterrorism language, it's a broad concept of cooperation at this point, which I think allows for enough flexibility in terms of their evolving capabilities, but also our needs to take actions in a joint, cooperative manner, when we need to.  So, it's not so clear as, "Hand over the intel and we'll take care of it."  It's not at that kind of an evolved stage.

QUESTION:  When you say, "when you need to," for joint actions, did you clarify when that would be?  When would those joint actions take place?  I mean is – would you have to define under what circumstances?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  Well, I think the circumstances are any circumstances where the – there is a transnational threat, one that could impact upon U.S. homeland, U.S. allies, U.S. interests.  But in all cases, that we would do so in a manner that was cooperative, in some cases – in many cases, partnered.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE:  Well, I think it's important to add that that's the way we would describe how we're handling CT right now.  This is not a dramatic departure from the way that we're handling those operations under current policy guidance, the difference being that this is – when it goes into force, it would be a legally
binding agreement.

QUESTION:  Can you please describe what – on this issue of immunity?  Because from where we were sitting, it sounded, or personally to me, that this really couldn't be a deal unless that was agreed upon.  And if the Secretary – or if an official is saying that it is in the text, well, then there is an agreement.  But he was pretty clear in his quotes during the news conference that they weren’t --

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  Let me put it this way.  We've agreed on language that can be put to his Loya Jirga for their consideration.

QUESTION:  In terms of the U.S. side, though, other than just this interagency review, I mean, the Pentagon is not going to come back and say, "Sorry, this doesn't work for us."  It's a done deal, from the U.S. perspective.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE:  Well, I mean, that's the corollary to what [Senior Administration Official One] – the elaboration on what [Senior Administration Official One] said is the language that is in the text that goes to the Loya Jirga is satisfactory for our purposes on the --

QUESTION:  So it’s the same question.  As far as you're concerned, what you got is good, and it – and then – and I have this question I asked [Senior State Department Official One] earlier.  Who signs it, if it gets approved by --

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  Don't know yet.

QUESTION:  But is it a presidential thing, or is it a Secretary --

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  We don't know what yet.

QUESTION:  Who would sign it?

QUESTION:  You don't know?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  Yeah, we don't know the details of the signing phase.

QUESTION:  Why not?  I mean, and – obviously, I guess not.  But, I mean, other agreements like this --

QUESTION:  Procedurally.  Like, who signs it?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  I think it could be signed by a number of --

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE:  There are a lot of options.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  -- Cabinet or Administration people.

QUESTION:  So it doesn't need to be president and president?  It can be --

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  Not necessarily.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  No.  It could technically be a range of people.

And the other piece on the – just process-wise, is that the Secretary spoke with Secretary Hagel a number of times over the last 24 hours.  He spoke with Susan Rice a number of times, other people on the team.  And you guys would know better all the people that were – you were in contact with.  But – about the text and the progress.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  We were in constant contact with the legal support team in Washington, and, as [Senior State Department Official Two] said, both --

QUESTION:  And then my last one is --

QUESTION:  (Inaudible.)

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  I can't say whether Ambassador Rice was in touch with the President.  But the Secretary was in direct contact with Ambassador Rice several times.

QUESTION:  My last one here, and you can – it's a chance for you to talk up your boss.  What was it – I mean, this stuff hadn't been agreed to beforehand.  So what was it that the Secretary brought into this that got it done, basically?  What – I mean, how did he change the dynamic?  For 11 months, you haven't had a deal.  You still don't, technically, but you got what could be a deal.  So what was it that he was able to do to change the dynamic to get something done?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  I can start, but – I know.  But still, I can talk just --

QUESTION:  Just don’t make it too hagiographic.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  Too what?

QUESTION:  Hagiographic.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  Hagiographic?

QUESTION:  Hagiographic.

QUESTION:  (Inaudible.)

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  Okay.  Too – okay.  One is their personal relationship and the fact that it goes back for a number of years, and you all know the details of that because we’ve talked about that previously and many of you covered it.  Two is persistence.  You’ve all covered the Secretary on a number of these occasions, on a number of these journeys to try to get agreement, right?  And he is somebody who will sit there for hours and talk through the substantive issues, and this is something they can add more to.  And three is probably patience.  I didn’t even mean to do a three-piece.  But patience, because obviously he wanted to --

QUESTION:  (Inaudible.)

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  I didn’t plan it.  (Laughter.)  But --

QUESTION:  What about personality?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  Sure.  But they can add a little more perhaps from in the room, but, I mean, I think those are some of the characters and characteristics of these --

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE:  Fully agree with all that, and I would say also that sometimes you get to a point in these sorts of negotiations where both sides need higher-level political involvement to sort of get things further along.  And it’s not clear the degree to which President Karzai had been engaged on the text before these last couple of days.  Secretary Kerry obviously had been monitoring the negotiations, but had not been personally involved until the last couple of days.  And having that kind of higher-level political push, I think, was essential to the progress that was achieved.

QUESTION:  So would you agree with the characterization that this is really kind of a deal, or at least the last points fell into place – the last points falling into place is a deal between Karzai and the Secretary?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE:  I think it’s a deal between the United States and the Government of Afghanistan.

QUESTION:  I know.  In closing the circle, it was him and Karzai.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE:  The high-level political involvement was key to getting it to where it is now.  There is no doubt about that.

QUESTION:  To follow on that, so can you say now, then, that the purpose of this trip really was for the Secretary to close the deal?  I mean, there was a lot of discussion ahead of time about --

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE:  I think we had a – I think we had to see where things stood.  I mean, I don’t think I – I certainly didn’t deliberately mislead you when I said the other night he wasn’t coming here to close the deal, and I think he had a positive conversation with Karzai a week ago.  Did we know, when he had a positive conversation, that the result if we showed up here was going to be getting what we got?  No.  But he knew that it was worth testing the proposition, and so here we are.

QUESTION: Was there any discussion about troop levels?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  I don’t think so.

QUESTION:  So are there going to be (inaudible)?

QUESTION:  (Inaudible.)

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE:  So I defer to [Senior Administration Official One] on this.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  I didn’t hear.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE:  About troops (inaudible).

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  Yeah, all of our troops are trained and capable of conducting combat operations.  There will be no combat mission after 2014.  And what is clear is that combat operations would be much more exceptional after 2014 --

QUESTION:  Much more what?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  Exceptional.

QUESTION:  So CT doesn’t fall under combat, it’s a separate category?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE:  No, I think it could.  I think that the range of combat operations that you would have seen will be greatly reduced from what you have now.  Frankly, they would be, again, the counterterrorism mission to go after residual transnational threats, and then there could be some combat operations in terms of the troops that are working inside the training, advise and assist mission.  And then of course, if there were ever a contingency where you have a force protection mission, that could also be a combat operation, but that would be as a contingency, not as a general rule.

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  All right.  They’re trying to serve dinner.

QUESTION:  Thank you.

QUESTION:  And what was the time of the meetings?  Was there a time today?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  Let’s see, 9:30 to 12:15, then they broke for about two hours, though there were still talks between the teams, and the national security advisor hosted the lunch.  So – and then they reconvened at 2:15.  That went until about four-something, 4:30 maybe.  They had about 30 minutes by themselves.  Then --

QUESTION:  (Inaudible.)

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  Yeah, at the end.  Then they came back at 6:30, and we did the press avail at 9:00.  So – and they had maybe 10 minutes by themselves before the avail.  So, okay, I don’t know if anybody was adding that up.

QUESTION:  (Inaudible.)

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  Eight hours today.

QUESTION:  And then yesterday?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  And yesterday, yeah, it was about three hours.  Yeah.

QUESTION:  And on the calls, were they back to Washington?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  Yeah.

QUESTION:  When were they?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  I mean, they were throughout the last 24 hours.  I mean, Secretary Kerry spoke with Hagel around this morning, before the day began.  He spoke with him again, I believe.  I’ll double check this.  I can probably get you guys a list of the calls he did.  But he spoke with Hagel and Rice a number of times.  Other people on the team spoke with a number of other officials as well.  Like, the Admiral, I think, spoke with somebody from the Joint Chiefs, and so on and so forth.  But --

QUESTION:  (Inaudible) the Secretary’s answer to my question on the Taliban (inaudible) some confusion over communication (inaudible)?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL ONE:  There’s a chain of command.

QUESTION:  Did Karzai ask him (inaudible)?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  Not that I am aware of.  I mean with – I don’t know that there’s much more we’re going to add on that, but I’ll talk to folks who were in all the meetings.

QUESTION:  Afghan security forces (inaudible)?

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  Okay.  I’ll ask and see if there was more talk of it aside from the one that we mentioned last night.

QUESTION:  Was he trying to (inaudible) answer to the question of why there was, like, a miscommunication on the U.S. side when the Secretary --

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  Not the U.S. side.

QUESTION:  Oh.  See, I kind of assumed (inaudible).

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  I don’t think he was implying the U.S. side.

QUESTION:  So he was implying there was a miscommunication (inaudible).

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  I will talk to folks and see if there is more we can explain.

QUESTION:  (Inaudible.)

SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL TWO:  Yeah, I get it.  Okay.

QUESTION:  Thank you very much.

THE GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN AND CIVILIAN MORALE

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
DOD Leaders Worry About Shutdown's Effect on Civilian Morale
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Oct. 11, 2013 - The partial government shutdown is hurting DOD civilian morale, the department's comptroller told Congress yesterday.

Under Secretary of Defense Robert F. Hale told the House Armed Services Readiness Subcommittee DOD civilians have been through a lot over the past year and it is hurting productivity.

The furloughs triggered by the shutdown that began Oct. 1 are only the most recent instance of this damage, Hale said. Civilian employees have not had annual raises for more than three years. Hiring freezes, cuts in training, cuts in bonuses and step increases all work to erode morale.

Earlier this year, almost all DOD civilians were furloughed under sequestration for six days.

The lapse in appropriations that began Oct. 1 continues to affect morale. Around 400,000 DOD civilian employees were furloughed after the fiscal 2013 appropriations lapsed. About 95 percent of them were recalled under the Pay Our Military Act. Still, there are around 7,000 DOD civilians remaining on furlough.

"In the first days of the lapse, commanders repeatedly told me that civilian workers were frustrated and angry," Hale said. "And I can't imagine they'd be any other way."

The comptroller said many DOD employees say they will retire or resign and seek other jobs.

"And low morale means low productivity at most DOD support activities," Hale said.

Later in the hearing, Hale corrected a representative who called furloughed employees "non-essential."

"Please don't use the word non-essential as regards our civilians," he said. "The folks that are still on furlough are essential. We can't operate without them in the longer term. It is very ... harmful to morale. Call them nonexempt or non-excepted, but please don't use that phrase."

KERRY, KARZAI MAKE REMARKS AFTER MEETING

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Joint Press Availability With Afghan President Hamid Karzai After Their Meeting
Press Availability
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Kabul, Afghanistan
October 12, 2013

PRESIDENT KARZAI: (Via interpreter) (Inaudible) Afghan and international media, the United States media, welcome to our today’s press conference. And we apologize for making you waiting from morning up to now. Thanks for being so patient. And I’m very happy that today, His Excellency John Kerry, U.S. Secretary of State, is here with us in Kabul. He arrived here yesterday so that we can discuss our relationship with the United States, especially with regards to the security pact between Afghanistan and the United States. He has been kind enough to spend enough time with us, and we – he delayed his visit to Middle East so that we could discuss these issues in details, and both sides, so that we can both reach a result considering other national interests, both countries.

Are you all right?

SECRETARY KERRY: I’m all right, but I don’t hear anything.

PRESIDENT KARZAI: (Via interpreter) Can you hear? Sir, can you hear us now?

SECRETARY KERRY: Yes.

PRESIDENT KARZAI: Can everyone hear us?

Brothers and sisters, as you are all aware, that after we signed the Strategic Partnership Agreement between Afghanistan and United States, we started to discuss security. Let’s wait until we get the system fixed. Okay.

As you are aware, after we signed the Strategic Partnership Agreement, the United States and Afghanistan started discussing the security agreement between our two countries. It was a very difficult discussion. Afghanistan considered its own interest, United States considering its own interest. Afghanistan’s interest is Afghanistan. Our main priority is Afghan sovereignty. Respecting Afghanistan’s sovereignty was considered our highest priority. Unfortunately, our past experiences were not happy experiences. Afghanistan suffered a lot in the fight against international terrorism. Afghan houses suffered a lot. And Afghanistan’s sovereignty has been violated, and the Afghan Government and the Afghan people were disappointed about all this.

The discussion of the security agreement has been an important issue, and our demand is our – defending our Afghan sovereignty. Afghanistan’s national sovereignty was our most important issue for all of us. It has been. And one of the other important thing for all of us was the safety of the Afghan people as well as their assets and property from terror and terrorism, as well as from the fight against terrorism that’s been conducted by international forces. And the Afghan people suffered a lot so far.

Only 15 days ago, I met a very young girl from Kunar province of Afghanistan in a hospital. She lost her both eyes. She was 14 and a half years old. Her – she lost her face as well as her hand – one of these. And she also lost her whole family. It happened during foreign forces operation. The Afghan nation, whatever cost they paid, want a guarantee that such violation will not take place in terms of the lives of the people, children, and citizens. And under no circumstance or excuse, foreign forces will not search the homes of the Afghan people, the people of Afghanistan; will not attack – will not conduct any sort of ground attack or air attack on the Afghan homes.

The third issue is invasion or attack on Afghanistan. In our Strategic Partnership Agreement, it states United States committed itself to support Afghanistan in case of attack on Afghanistan. But we realized that we, once we signed the Strategic Partnership, some of our neighboring countries shot rockets and missiles on Afghan territory, but the United States did not even accept that such violation did take place in Afghanistan. At this point, the definition of invasion or attack was very important for all of us, so that we can have a clear definition of attack on our country or invasion of our country. Invasion means bringing mortars and tanks to Afghanistan. Invasion also means sending terrorism and suicide bombers to Afghanistan.

Four, and stopping foreign forces from whatever they do in Afghanistan so that international forces cannot conduct operations by themselves without permission. The Government of Afghanistan and I myself, during the past few years, have been in touch with security forces of other countries who are here to fight terror and defend their interest, and we had some sort of disappointments as well. In these cases, Afghanistan’s sovereignty and definition of invasion, civilian casualties in Afghanistan, and prevention of foreign forces operation – we have been discussing this for a long now.

After a long discussion and exchanging thoughts and ideas, tonight we reached some sort of agreements. In our agreements, the United States will no longer conduct operations by themselves. We have been provided written guarantee for the safety of Afghan people about invasion. A clear definition has been provided and we accepted it. Our national sovereignty is being also clear, and they have committed themselves that they will respect and no violation will take place.

The security agreement we discussed today, many issues are related to this agreement. One element is foreign forces immunity. We don’t have a common understanding on this, and such an issue is beyond Afghan Government authority. We therefore did not discuss this issue. And the decision about this particular subject will – is up to the Afghan people and especially the Loya Jirga. They will be the one to make the decision on this particular issue. The Afghan – this will go to the Afghan people, the Jirga itself, and it will be then sent to Afghan parliament, and such issue is beyond our authority, and it will be presented to Afghan people at Loya Jirga.

There are other things. There are other issues. We had a common understanding and a common agreement, but I have been – I stated the most important issues during the past three nights, and I just mentioned these issues. But I did not study the details, the technical details of this particular agreement, and I will have time tomorrow to study the details, to study the agreement in details, and I will then send it to the Afghan Security Council and I will then also consult with the (inaudible) jirga, and then it will be presented to Afghan people’s Loya Jirga, and they will be the one to make a decision, the final decision. If they approve it, it will be sent to Afghan parliament, and so that they can approve it too.

I just would like to be short on this. In this agreement, we considered national sovereignty and prevention of casualties, civilian casualty, and the clear definition of invasion. We reached some agreements. We reached agreements. Foreign troops and forces, foreign forces immunity, we were not able to discuss this because it is clear, because the Afghan people’s Jirga will make their decision about this.

The whole document will be presented to the Loya Jirga. They will discuss it, especially this particular issue. United States Government and people, we are grateful of the American assistance to Afghanistan in order to bring changes in the area of education and the life of the Afghan people, and they did provide help in other areas too, and we are grateful of that. But we are hopeful beside we – while we appreciate this, we hope that the security agreement between Afghanistan and the United States, once the Jirga approve it, they will provide us with the things that we did not have during the past 10 years in Afghanistan, which is the safety of the Afghan people as well as the national sovereignty.

We hope to reach these goals, and we will present the document to the American people too. And I am grateful to His Excellency John Kerry and as well as the American people. We hope that once we finalize this agreement, the Afghan – Afghanistan and Americans will become real friends, friends in reality. Thank you so much.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, Mr. President, thank you very, very much. Thank you first of all for your generous hospitality, as always. We appreciate it enormously. And I don’t know who could produce a setting like this, which is really very, very beautiful. As we walked over here, the President informed me that some of these trees are probably more than 300 years old, maybe more.

PRESIDENT KARZAI: Maybe more.

SECRETARY KERRY: Maybe more. So it’s a privilege to stand in a place that reminds us all about the history of Afghanistan, the durability, and really the importance of what we are trying to achieve here.

I thank the President for his serious effort over these last hours. Late last night, all last night, all today we have been discussing and we have been negotiating. And as the President said, these are not easy negotiations because they involve issues of life and death, issues of the future of a country, issues of emotions, and the history. Particularly, the kinds of things the President talked about, about a young woman without a face. And indeed, there have been horrible things that have happened to people in the course of war. Too many Afghans have lost their lives. Too many Afghans have been subject to terrible violence. And the United States hopes and prays and looks forward to the day that Afghanistan can be free from that violence and that the people of Afghanistan will be free to move around and live their lives with full respect for their sovereignty and for their nationhood, for who they are as a people. The people of Afghanistan are a brave people, a capable people. And the United States has only respect for what the people of Afghanistan have been through and how difficult these years have been.

We also know that there are young men in hospitals in America, and women, who are still recovering from their wounds. And there are too many who have been buried in cemeteries in America because they came over here to help make a difference for this country and for the world – to fight terrorism, and to fight to give an opportunity for Afghanistan’s future to blossom in its full sovereignty and with the full opportunities that people need and deserve.

We are proud of the fact that in the years that we have been here, in cooperation with President Karzai and the government, much has changed for the better. When we came here, there were maybe a million children in school, most of them boys. Today, there are 8 million, and perhaps 40 percent of them are young girls. When we came here, only 9 percent of the people in Afghanistan had access to health care. Today, 60 percent of the people in this country have access to health care. And when we came here, the life expectancy of Afghans was 20 years less than what it is today. It has grown by 20 years. There are many things that are positive, even as there have been great difficulties.

We want a different relationship. President Obama wants the United States to work in partnership with Afghanistan. And nothing would please us more or serve American interests more than to see an Afghanistan free and independent, and without the need for support from America or any other country. I know that’s what President Karzai wants. That’s what we want.

And I believe that in the last 24 hours, as we have worked hard at these issues that really have been negotiated over now for more than 11 months, that we have resolved, in these last 24 hours, the major issues that the President went through. We have resolved those issues. And we have put ourselves in a position for an enduring partnership going forward in the years ahead, providing that the political process of Afghanistan accepts that. We respect completely the President’s need, the President’s right, the Afghan people’s need to approve of whatever agreement might come forward. We are pleased that the agreement that we have put together now is in a place where it can be submitted to a Loya Jirga, where it will now go through the appropriate political process of the President reviewing it and submitting it with his security cabinet, with his various – with the parliament and others, as is necessary.

But I need to make very clear that the one issue that is outstanding, which is an issue that we call an issue of jurisdiction – in our judgment, there is no immunity in this agreement. Anybody who were to do anything will be subject to the law. But the question of jurisdiction is an appropriate one for the President to submit to the Loya Jirga, and we have high confidence that the people of Afghanistan will see the benefits that exist in this agreement. But we need to say that if the issue of jurisdiction cannot be resolved, then, unfortunately, there cannot be a bilateral security agreement. So we hope that that will be resolved. And it’s up to the Afghan people, as it should be.

What we have achieved in this agreement addresses the fundamental questions the President has raised about aggression, about support, about – most importantly – the protection of Afghan people in their homes, in their lives. We respect completely, and President Obama supports and is committed to the principles that the President of Afghanistan has laid out in order to protect the people of Afghanistan. The people deserve to know that in their homes and in their lives they can be free from interference and free from violence. And we believe in that.

What has happened in this moment is important. It is a moment where the United States willingly and happily is able to work in partnership with our Afghan friends and transfer to the Afghan forces the full responsibility for the defense of Afghanistan as we near the end of 2014, and we will be in a very different position here – happily for the President, the government, and the people of Afghanistan. We will not be conducting combat operations; we will be engaged in training, assisting, and equipping the Afghan forces who will defend their country. And I think the President and the people of Afghanistan welcome that.

So in the agreements that we have reached here, we have in fact arrived at a point where we know with certainty how we can proceed down the road, to fully – fully guaranteeing the opportunities that the Afghan people want for their future.

We will have a respect that the President wants in a definitive way for the sovereignty of Afghanistan and for the people of Afghanistan. And over the coming year, the Afghan people will be assuming greater and greater responsibility. We welcome that. And we say very simply that this agreement, if it finally approved, will cement a relationship of cooperation, a relationship where the Government of Afghanistan is fully independent and sovereign and making its decisions, and the United States and those other friends who join in this effort will be helping and working in cooperation.

In addition, we will be following along the lines of what was agreed in Tokyo and in Chicago in terms of assistance, which will be important in order to sustain the development and the growth that has so characterized what has happened, even in the midst of war.

The Bilateral Security Agreement also provides the foundation for us to be able to work together against terrorism, against those who wish to harm us or our partners, our interests, and the region. And that is vital to both Americans and to Afghans. But let me underscore that nothing – neither this agreement when completed, nor the assistance that we provide – nothing can replace the commitment and energy of the Afghan people to be defining their own future.

So it is clear, through this agreement in addressing each of the concerns President Karzai has raised, that President Obama and the American people believe in the people of Afghanistan. We are excited about the way the President and his government have put in place the workings of a new election. The election law, the registration of candidates, are all a great success. And we look forward to not picking any candidates, not being involved in the election, not in any way affecting it, but only to helping in any way that Afghanistan wants us to for this election to work effectively, free, fair, accessible, transparent, and accountable. This is an enormous transition. It’s an historic moment for this country. And we are proud and pleased to be able to work at being part of it.

The United States believes firmly that lasting security and prosperity in a unified Afghanistan and an independent Afghanistan, whose people and sovereignty are respected, will take root when the people’s voice is heard in the course of this election. And this will be a great legacy for President Karzai, who has led his country during these very, very difficult times.

So Mr. President, I’m very, very grateful to you as always. Your friendship, your warm welcome, the serious way which you and your team have really come at the difficult issues that we had to work on in the last few days. And we look forward to the technical review process that you will undergo, we will likewise undergo, and I am confident that in this agreement, we have laid the foundation for all of the issues that you listed to be addressed, and for the future success of your country and our friendship. Thank you, my friend.

MODERATOR: (Via interpreter) It is very late. We will just take two questions. The first question can be addressed to – the Secretary of State will choose the first question, and I will ask – pick up the second question.

SECRETARY KERRY: If I’m picking first, Lesley Wroughton.

QUESTION: Lesley Wroughton from Reuters. Mr. Secretary, you said that there’s no deal without addressing the issue of immunity. How does one proceed with this, and what kinds of concessions do you need from each other to close this deal?

The same for you, President Karzai. What do you need for this – if the U.S. doesn’t seal this deal, if this immunity issue is still outstanding, how do you see this relationship going forward?

The other question I have for the Secretary –

SECRETARY KERRY: That’s all right – as I cough away. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: I’m sorry.

SECRETARY KERRY: It’s all right.

QUESTION: And the other question I have – so I’m (inaudible) with the immunity. The second question is: What faith – this is for the Secretary. What faith does it show in Afghan sovereignty when the U.S. snatches a Taliban commander from Afghan hands when you’re so close – when you were so close to a deal?

To the President – how can Afghanistan stand for this kind of operation, and does it undermine you just when you’re trying to agree on issues of counterterrorism and security?

SECRETARY KERRY: Yes. Well, let me – Lesley, let me begin by, first of all politely correcting you, the premise of your question about something called immunity. There is no immunity. There is no question of immunity. If an American who is part of any expeditionary force under agreement from the Afghan Government were to violate any law, as we have in the past, we will continue to prosecute to the full measure of that law, and any perpetrator of any incident, crime, anything will be punished. There is no immunity. Let me make that clear: No immunity.

And we have proven in many cases, unfortunately too many instances, that when somebody has violated the law, they have paid the price. There are people in prison today in the United States of America who have paid that price.

Secondly, with respect to the jurisdiction issue, we have great respect for Afghan sovereignty. And we will respect it, completely. And that is laid out in this agreement. But where we have forces in any part of the world, and we unfortunately have them in a number of places in the world – in Japan, in Korea, in Europe, in other parts of the world, Africa. Wherever our forces are found, they operate under the same standard. We are not singling out Afghanistan for any separate standard. We are defending exactly what the constitutional laws of the United States require.

Now, we completely respect that the President should decide appropriately that this issue ought to be decided in his Loya Jirga. We absolutely – that’s the best of democracy. We embrace that. But there are realities that if it isn’t resolved, we can’t send our forces in places because we don’t subject United States citizens to that kind of uncertainty with respect to their rights and lives. It is no comment on any other country. It’s nothing negative. It’s an historical tradition and something that exists everywhere in the world. So that is a very important principle.

Now, the President has expressed his concerns. He’s been honest with us and upfront about it. But he understands that the other issues that we have resolved in this important agreement are important and that we have worked hard in good faith to resolve it. And so his consultative process will go to work, and the United States will respect that process, as we should.

With respect to counterterrorism activities and the apprehension of an individual, we followed the normal procedures that the United States follows in our agreement. We regret that this circumstance took place in some ways that some folks apparently the chain of communication didn’t go as far. But we did what we are supposed to do under the agreement.

Now, I’m not going to discuss the details except to tell you that this individual is responsible for the loss of lives not just here in Afghanistan, but has plotted against the United States, has association with other major plots to injure many people, and is a serious terrorist. And so we will work with the government, as we have said. We will absolutely work with the Government of Afghanistan to cooperate so that the appropriate process flows out of this, to respect their interests and respect their sovereignty. But this was a normal counterterrorism procedure, according to the standards that we have been operating by for a long period of time.

PRESIDENT KARZAI: Ma’am, as I said in my introductory remarks, the whole document will go before the Afghan Loya Jirga for their consideration and consultation. And if it is approved, it will go to the Afghan parliament for the formal approval of state – relevant state institutions.

The issue of jurisdiction is one such issue that is beyond the authority of the Afghan Government, and it is only and entirely up to the Afghan people to decide upon through two mechanisms: One is the traditional Loya Jirga of Afghanistan; the second is the constitutional mechanism, which is the Afghan parliament.

On the issue of seizing a Taliban commander by the U.S. Forces Afghanistan, this is an issue that we have raised in earnest with the United States in the past few days, as we have on other previous occasions of such arrests in which the Afghan laws were disregarded, which we do consider a violation of Afghan sovereignty. And therefore, our discussion today in particular has been focused on making sure that through the Bilateral Security Agreement we make sure that such violations are not repeated. This is an issue of extreme importance to the Afghan people, and it is an issue that the Afghan people will demand in very clear, vivid manifestation from their government to make sure is ours – meaning sovereignty.

QUESTION: (Via interpreter) Thank you, Mr. President. We welcome Secretary of State Mr. John Kerry to Afghanistan. And my question is specifically for Your Excellency. As you had serious discussion during the past two days with your U.S. counterpart, can you assure the Afghan people that after this agreement is signed, the United States will not conduct operations by themselves and they will consider Afghan people’s sovereignty?

And how – what – how you came up with the definition of sovereignty? And also, that there is insurgency that (inaudible) Afghanistan, how do you define that? The third issue is, the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey (inaudible) stated that some specific terrorist group received training in Afghanistan, in terms of using chemical weapon. What do you think? What’s your position on this?

PRESIDENT KARZAI: (Via interpreter) With regards to the security and safety of the Afghan people and the security of the Afghan people, as well as the honor of the Afghan people and their families, and as well as full sovereignty, both the Afghan people as well as their homes, we are aware that it’s been years that we have been discussing this with our NATO and ISAF counterpart on this particular issue, the life of the Afghan people and the security of the Afghan people, and making sure that the house of the Afghan people are not searched under the name of fight against terror or not attacked under the name of the fighting against terror.

Civilian casualty in Afghanistan is one of the top priority of the Afghan Government, and it’s been our top priority and we try to address this so that the Afghan people can no longer suffer, not yesterday, not today, since the start of negotiation about Strategic Partnership Agreement with the U.S. Government, and after we signed the Strategic Partnership Agreement with the United States, I stated discussing security agreement with the United States. We have been raising our concerns with our counterparts.

Afghan sovereignty, the security of the Afghan people, and the safety of the Afghan homes, as well as respecting Afghan people’s honor and culture, and the clear definition of terror, are the issues we have been discussing during the past two days with His Excellency the Secretary of State. And we had long and deep discussions about these issues. And I am very happy, and I can tell you that we received some guarantees and we have written guarantees especially about the definition of invasion or attack. And we will, later on, share this with our media. I don’t know whether we can share this with you before Jirga or not, but we will definitely share it with you.

With regards to whether these guarantees will be implemented in practical or not, it is natural that the Afghan people (inaudible) and will move forward. Because we have a past, and we learn from our past. For the Afghan Government is going to seriously go forward, and will carefully go forward, and there is going to be no room for violation, including United States.

If they want to be partner with us, this partnership must completely guarantee sovereignty and security of Afghanistan. And we receive this through our document, but the rest will be up to the Afghan Government and our friends, and in order to build on this, based on mutual respect and friendship. And it’s for their interests, too.

Mr. Lavrov, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian – he had some statements that Syrian extremist groups – or in part of Afghanistan that are out of control of the Afghan Government, and they received training chemical – how to use chemical weapon. And this is against Afghanistan, and this is against our well-being. The Afghan Government will take action against this, and our ally – we will also have some questions for our allies who are here with us so that we can find answers for these concerns.

They have to leave, and we are also leaving. We will have more discussions tomorrow. His Excellency the Secretary has to leave because he has been for the past two days. You have important questions, but we will meet next time.

SECRETARY KERRY: I have to get on the plane. And I apologize because we would like to stay longer. I just want to say that I agree with what the President said with respect to sovereignty. We will work at that because we believe we have defined in this agreement. And we’re feeling very positive and excited about the possibilities from this agreement.

Final comment, Mr. President: Tonight, the Boston Red Sox – do you know who they are?

PRESIDENT KARZAI: Yes.

SECRETARY KERRY: It’s a baseball team.

PRESIDENT KARZAI: It’s a baseball team.

SECRETARY KERRY: They’re going to play for the American League Championship in Boston, and we want some of your cricket and soccer team luck to go with me, okay?

PRESIDENT KARZAI: Wish you all the best of luck there.

SECRETARY KERRY: No, wish them, the Boston Red Sox.

PRESIDENT KARZAI: Well, they’re your team, I believe. (Laughter.)

SECRETARY KERRY: My team. (Laughter.) Thank you.

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY MEETS WITH MISSION STAFF IN AFGHANISTAN

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Meeting With Mission Afghanistan Staff
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Kabul, Afghanistan
October 12, 2013

AMBASSADOR CUNNINGHAM: I apologize for keeping you waiting. It’s been a very long and eventful day, and it’s not over yet for us, but it’s been very successful so far. And Secretary Kerry, I really want to thank you on behalf of all of us here, not just for coming to see us again, but for leading such a productive period here in our discussions with the Afghans.

I’m not going to introduce the Secretary, except to say that – how proud we are to welcome him here, and to say what a pleasure it is to have him come and meet with all of you. And what I can promise you is an extremely grueling day, but he very much wanted to do this.

So without further ado, Mr. Secretary.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you, sir. (Applause.) Thank you. Thank you very much. Well, hello, Embassy Kabul. Nice to be here. Great to be here, great to be here. In fact, I am having such a good time, I just decided to stay all – (laughter) – why would I ever want to leave? (Laughter.) We’ve had a terrific day, a very long – very, very long day; long night last night too. And it’s going to be a little bit longer even this evening. We’re going to go back to the palace and enjoy a dinner, again, with the President and his crew, but more importantly, we’re going to try to see if we can make a little more progress, which is what we’ve been doing all day long.

So I am very, very blessed to be part of an extraordinary team out here. First of all, Jim Cunningham and Leslie, I got to know them a little bit when they were in Israel. My wife Teresa and I went out, we had dinner with them there, and now I’m having dinner with them here. So we just dine all around the world, folks, wherever he is. (Laughter.)

But Jim, thank you for your outstanding leadership out here, and likewise Mike McKinley and the gang, and Fatima, and all of you who are part of an extraordinary team out here. About a thousand or 1,100 strong I guess, and almost a thousand local folks working with us. How many are there? A bunch – any locals here, raising your hands? Raise – we want to say a special thank you to you, all of you who are so important. Thank you very, very much. (Applause.)

We really couldn’t possibly do what we try to do without your help, and so we’re extraordinarily grateful. And I know it’s not easy. So we thank you for the extra commitment, in a sense, that it takes to go through the barricades, walk through the process, come in here, be affiliated with this great endeavor. It’s courageous and it’s significant. So we say thank you to you from everybody in America.

Likewise to all of you who are a part of that 1,100 Americans who are stationed out here. This is one of those posts, obviously, that will be with you for a lifetime. And for some of you, it probably feels like it has been a lifetime. (Laughter.) And for a few of you, this is not your first tour here, and we recognize that.

What is happening here is one of the great challenges on the planet today that really represents part of the complexity of the world that we’re dealing with and of the new foreign policy that not just we face, but every country that is engaged with the world faces. I just came from several days in the Far East. I was at the APEC conference and the ASEAN conference and East Asia Conference. And I can’t tell you how amazing it is to sort of sit around an ASEAN table, for instance, and sitting to my right is – or left – the Prime Minister of Myanmar, and on another side the Prime Minister of Vietnam, and Prime Minister of Laos, and you run the list. Improbable as that picture might have been quite a few years ago, that’s the new norm. And they’re all talking about global engagement. And in many of these meetings, they’re all talking in English. That really struck me.

When we sat around – the leaders, because I represented President Obama at the summit in APEC – with a few exceptions, people chose to speak their native language, but even those who could have, didn’t. They chose to speak English. And leader after leader was speaking in what is sort of the new international language of diplomacy and of business, of culture, of a lot of other things.

But what struck me that I think is important to your mission here and what you’re engaged in is the fact that they were, all of them, talking about stability and peace and trade and development, and the needs to meet the demands of their people, and how they see a new connectedness that is creating a new accountability in public life. There’s a new cop on the beat. It’s called the social network, the internet. Literally, a leader – I guess half a leader anyway – China – was viewed – a picture, and they saw this white spot on his arm in the picture where sort of a watch had been, and clickety-click, people said, “Well, that’s very strange.” And they went back and looked at other pictures, and they saw him with a bunch of different watches over a successive period of time. He’s a guy who couldn’t possibly have earned each of those watches. And lo and behold, they uncovered corruption.

That’s the kind of internet connection that we face today. You can’t beat up people in the streets without people seeing it all over the world. And that new connectedness is going to change everything – foreign policy, politics, all of the things we’re engaged in. You know that and you feel it.

Here in Afghanistan, you’re on the cutting edge of everything. You’ve been part of taking the country, which not so long ago had very few girls in school, and not that many boys, and now it has 8 million children in school, 40 percent of whom are girls. A country where you had about 9 percent or something who had access to health care; now it’s 60 percent have access to health care. A country where the life expectancy has grown by 20 years in the past 10 years, where you have an extraordinary amount of opportunity that didn’t exist previously. It’s mind-boggling what has gone on. And you are at the heart and center of how that has been able to happen.

Now we’re on the cusp of something new, and what the Ambassador and General Dunford and I and others have been negotiating over the course of the last day and a half is to guarantee that we can define that something new in the most confident terms possible, so that we know that your work here is going to be possible in an environment that can get safer, in a place where Afghans have confidence there’ll be a partnership with the United States and the rest of the international community that have been here, where we understand the rules of the road, and we’re giving our work the best opportunity to flourish into an Afghanistan that’s independent, that’s proud, that has respect, and that has the ability to have a fighting chance to define its own future for itself.

I think that because of that, if this thing can come together, this will put the Taliban on their heels, this will send a message to the community of nations that Afghans’ future is being defined in a way that is achievable, and all of your work will have a greater meaning than it does anyway.

So I just want to say thank you to you. This is on the cutting edge of diplomacy, right here. This is the toughest – one of the toughest places you could be anywhere in the world today. So I thank you profoundly. I want to have a chance to say hello a little bit and move around. But I cannot thank you enough for being part of this really extraordinary team. And obviously, it’s not without its risks. Last time I was here, a young woman, and you know her – Anne Smeddinghoff. Some of you knew her personally. Some have rotated out. She was my control officer during that visit and she died about a week later, trying to deliver books to help people be able to read. In Herat, we just lost local folks. No difference; all the same commitment, all the same action. And there have been a lot of others over the course of time who have put their lives at risk out here in order to make things better.

So this is the proudest tradition in the world, what you are engaged in. You can get up every morning and feel like your work is the most rewarding in the world, because you are touching those kids who are in school, those women who have businesses, the health care – all of those things that are happening, you’re a part of that. It doesn’t get better than that.

So on behalf of President Obama, the American people, thanks for putting up with the hardship of a yearlong out here, and those on second tour, for second-touring it. And we will welcome – and I promise you that those of us in Washington, when the government opens up again, we’ll get you all the money in the world, get you paid. (Laughter.) We’ll keep fighting. Don’t despair. Hope you ordered your turkeys. Have a great Thanksgiving and God bless you all. Thank you. (Applause.)

S.D. NATIONAL GUARD HELPS AFTER EARLY WINTER STORM HITS

South Dakota National Guard soldiers assist an electrical crew with setting a utility pole near Faith, S.D., Oct. 10, 2013. Army National Guard photo 

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
South Dakota National Guard Continues Storm Aid
South Dakota National Guard

RAPID CITY, S.D., Oct. 11, 2013 - South Dakota National Guard members continue to support the state after the Oct. 4 winter storm that crippled western South Dakota.
Nearly 50 soldiers and airmen have been called to state active duty to support residents since Oct. 5. They've helped to clear roads, remove snow and assist electrical cooperative crews with gaining access to locations needing power lines repaired.
More than a dozen other full-time National Guard members have also provided support to state active-duty personnel in response to the storm. So far, 19 separate missions have been requested of the Guard since operations began.

Eight missions are complete and the Guard expects to continue to assist electric companies in power restoration efforts for the next seven to 10 days.

Guard forces and equipment began responding immediately after the blizzard and sent to locations hardest hit in Harding, Meade, Perkins and Pennington counties. Equipped with snow blowers, front-end loaders, bulldozers, heavy expanded mobility tactical trucks and Humvees, Guard members were dispatched locally and from across the state to help communities dig out from the record-breaking storm.

"Our soldiers and airmen are proud to be able to respond to local emergencies such as this," said Maj. Gen. Tim Reisch, adjutant general of the SDNG. "Our service in a state active-duty status like this is foundational to what the National Guard is all about."

Across the region, snow totals averaged 30 inches, with some isolated areas recording almost five feet, setting new snowfall records for October in the Black Hills and many western counties. Snow accumulation, along with freezing temperatures and wind gusts up to 70 mph, downed thousands of tree limbs and electrical power lines, blocked roadways and decimated livestock caught in the storm.

Emergency management officials from multiple counties requested support from the state's emergency management office and the governor, who declared a state of emergency and activated National Guard forces to assist.

The call for Guard assistance came early Oct. 5 and coordination began immediately to bring in personnel and dig out equipment. With roads nearly impassable and no travel advised, several soldiers trekked on foot several miles to reach the Guard headquarters on Camp Rapid in Rapid City to set up operations. Soldiers also trudged through deep snow in the towns of Belle Fourche and Sturgis to begin opening equipment yards. From across the state, Guard personnel from units in Aberdeen, Mobridge, Sioux Falls and Yankton were dispatched to deliver equipment and to assist recovery efforts.

According to local power companies, more than 38,000 customers lost electricity during the storm and reported more than 3,800 downed power poles.

While snow removal missions are complete, the Guard continues to support power crews who are working from house to house to restore electricity in rural areas, working alongside them pulling electrical bucket trucks out of the snow and mud after they work on a utility pole.

Guard units providing state active duty personnel to the storm recovery efforts include Alpha and Bravo Batteries of the 1-147th Field Artillery Battalion, 109th Regional Support Group, 842nd Engineer Company, 200th Engineer Company, 155th Engineer Company, Joint Force Headquarters and the 114th Fighter Wing.

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY VISITS EMBASSY IN KUALA LUMPUR

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Meeting With Staff and Families of Embassy Kuala Lumpur
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Joseph Y. Yun
U.S. Ambassador to Malaysia
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
October 10, 2013

AMBASSADOR YUN: Thank you, guys, for being here. I am so fortunate. Many, many ambassadors don’t get a chance to introduce the Secretary, but in my first four weeks, (inaudible). (Laughter.) I’ve traveled with the Secretary a couple of times. I know how tiring it is. He is so gracious and charming, and he looks great, fresh. (Laughter.)

So this is our Embassy. Thank you, for everyone, on a wet night for being – for giving us such a warm welcome to the Secretary.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you. Thank you. Joe, thank you very, very much. Thank you, all. It’s great to be here with you. You have, I’ve got to tell you, a great ambassador in Joe Yun. I cannot (inaudible). (Applause.) They had to twist my arm for me to give him up in the State Department to let him come out here, but I’m glad he is, and he was very, very diplomatic in his introduction of me, because he took great pleasure in introducing me, but the truth is I know he’s really sad he’s not introducing the President of the United States. (Laughter.)

But nevertheless, I’m happy that he is introducing me. I’m very, very pleased to be here with all of you. Thank you for taking time to come out here. I want to introduce Dr. Melanie Billings-Yun, who is here somewhere.

AMBASSADOR YUN: She couldn’t be here. She --

SECRETARY KERRY: Oh, she couldn’t be here?

AMBASSADOR YUN: Yeah.

SECRETARY KERRY: She’s being a doctor somewhere. (Laughter.) What can I say? Well, somebody – anyway, Lee, thanks for your great work, appreciate all you’re doing as DCM, and thank you, all of you. I understand we have five employees here who each have spent something like 35 years. I don't know if they’re all here.

AMBASSADOR YUN: I think some of them are here.

SECRETARY KERRY: Have we got – let me see, I wrote them down so that I could embarrass them appropriately. (Laughter.) Gerard George, is Gerard here? Gerard, there’s Gerard. (Applause.) And Andrew Sin? Andrew here somewhere? Who else have we got? I can’t read my own writing. Oh, Letchu Alagirisamy?

QUESTION: No.

SECRETARY KERRY: No? Not here? Gosh. Okay. Selena Liew Kim Lan?

QUESTION: No.

SECRETARY KERRY: Not here also? How about Irene Tham Chee Lin?

QUESTION: Irene --

SECRETARY KERRY: Irene? Irene, we can all say – well, they’re all working for (inaudible). (Laughter.) Well, I’m glad they’re working hard, but between the five of them, they’ve put in 190 years in helping our Embassy and the United States of America. And even though only one of them is here, how about a round of applause for all of them. (Applause.) Thank you. They’re fantastic, pretty amazing.

And is Matt Ingeneri here?

AMBASSADOR YUN: He’s with Froman.

SECRETARY KERRY: Oh, he’s with Froman, all right. Well, I want to just congratulate him for all the work he has done on this global summit, which is absolutely incredible, and I look forward to addressing it tomorrow, but – everybody’s out working. I mean, Christ. (Laughter.)

Anyway, thank you all. I really just wanted to be able to meet you and, first of all, tell you that the President is obviously not happy that he is not able to be out here doing the business that he needed to do over the course of the last few days. And while I’m proud to be here as the Secretary, the Secretary, as we all know, is not the President and doesn’t have the ability that – the meaning, obviously, of a presidential visit.

So the President will get out here. I’m actually confident of that. But I know he sends his best wishes to every single one of you, but also his apologies for what is going on in Washington, (inaudible) from all of us. I spent 28-plus years in the United States Senate, and it is really painful, sad, to watch what is happening – I should say not happening – right now. But it’s affecting all of you; it affects everybody – the uncertainties, the disruption, the question marks about our country and our government. Believe me, I’ve had some conversations in the last few days out here with leaders about it. It’s impossible – for the Government of the United States of America to be shut down when there are people out here – not to say, “Question mark, what’s going on here? What does this mean and what does the long term mean?” And so my hope is this will end quickly. I know you hope the same thing.

I want to thank you for hanging in, staying at it, not being deterred, not being demoralized, and for recognizing that all of us got into this because we care about the values and the principles that we’re trying to share with the world, and that doesn’t change because of what is happening in Washington. So we’re on the same mission, and we can hold our heads high and be proud that every single one of us are out there trying the best we can to represent our country and to stand up and advance our interests. That’s what this is all about.

Every single one of you is an ambassador. I know we have about 118 or so local staff. How many of you are local staff who – thank you, all of you, very, very much. (Applause.) There’s no way for us to do what we do here or to try to do what we do without your help and support, and I know that sometimes it can be difficult. And we appreciate enormously the fact that you’re committed to this task, and some of you for, as I say, as many as 35 years, which is quite extraordinary.

And for all the rest of you, the hundred and, I guess, 20 or so – 118 or so who are in the Embassy and the some 75 families represented here, many of you sitting right here, I really am happy to say, on behalf of your country, on behalf of the President of the United States, a profound thank you to all of you for what you’re doing. Every one of you may not be walking around yet. Some of you newer people are either in the consular division or in your first or second round. You don’t get the title of ambassador, but there isn’t one of you who isn’t an ambassador every day. And for a lot of people, you may be the first person they ever see that has contact with America, in some cases maybe the only person, but in other cases, you’ll go – they may go on through travel or through one of our education exchange programs or through other things to go to America, or to be in some other country where they have a sense of what they learned by being part of our journey. And it makes a difference in their lives too.

So this is a big deal. This part of the world is changing faster than any other place on the face of this planet. You are part of an extraordinary moment of history. When you think of the journey of this region over the last 20, 30, 40, 50 years, and you go back to the Cold War, and even World War II, where we find ourselves today in this region is stunning. And I’ll tell you, as I sat around that table, listening to the Prime Minister of Vietnam, to the Prime Minister of Laos, to the prime minister of any number of them – of Singapore, of Malaysia, and all these places expressing this commonality of interests, every single one of them feeling the sense of globalization and change and the impact on their governments.

I was talking with the prime – well, I won’t say because it’s not appropriate, it’s a personal conversation – but I just was talking with one prime minister at lunch today who was telling me how it can’t – nobody can go back. There’s too much accountability now. The social media has changed everything. Instant accountability and globalization itself has created a set of norms that’s conditioning behavior, and so everybody’s sort of now reaching for the brass ring. That’s why things like the TPP, the trade agreement, and other things are raising standards and people realize, “Whoa, we better be part of that if we’re going to be successful and continue to go down this road of growth and development, and provide for our citizens.” And the beauty of it is citizens everywhere know what citizens everywhere else are getting, and they know what their problems are, and they know what the challenges are. So we’re now on a much smaller planet with a much greater degree of shared responsibility and shared opportunity, and you all are on the cutting edge of that, making history literally every single day in this transformation that is taking place.

So keep it up, don’t worry. We will get through this in America. We will get back on track. This will end. You will get paid. Things will happen and you’ll enjoy the turkeys I hope you ordered for Thanksgiving, and life will go on, and we’re going to continue to do what we do, because I think that we’re involved in one of the greatest adventures you can ever be involved in. You get up every morning and go to work with the belief that you’re really making a difference for the lives of other people and making a difference for your country. It doesn’t get better than that.

So, thank you all very, very much. (Applause.)

UN SECRETARY GENERAL COMMENTS ON PROGRESS IN AFGHANISTAN

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
Rasmussen: Progress in Afghanistan Remarkable, Undeniable
By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Oct. 10, 2013 - The partial government shutdown has not affected U.S. contributions to the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan or other NATO missions, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen told reporters in Brussels today.

"So far we haven't seen any negative impact on U.S. contributions to NATO-led operations," Rasmussen said, noting that U.S. military members have been exempted from the shutdown.

Speaking at his monthly news conference, the secretary general also dismissed reported allegations by Afghan President Hamid Karzai that NATO hasn't done enough in Afghanistan.

"Thanks to the immense efforts and the solemn sacrifices of the troops and civilians from ISAF contributing nations, Afghanistan has come a long way in the past decade," Rasmussen said. "The changes have been remarkable, and our investment in lives and resources has been unprecedented. Nobody can deny that. And this effort should be respected."

Rasmussen said he is struck by the Afghan people's recognition of NATO's contribution.

"We have sacrificed much in blood and treasure to assist the Afghan people, and ... whenever I meet Afghans, they express appreciation for that," he said.

While working to ensure the sovereignty of the Afghan state, NATO and other troop-contributing nations in Afghanistan have helped build a strong Afghan National Security Force that now numbers about 350,000, Rasmussen said.

"We have seen the resilience and the growing professionalism of Afghan forces," he said. "And I am confident that the Afghan security forces will be able to take full responsibility by the end of 2014 as planned."

Meanwhile, Afghanistan is preparing to hold elections next year that will be fully led and managed by the Afghans.

"Six months before the polls, preparations are more advanced than for any other elections in Afghanistan's modern history," Rasmussen said.

The registration of candidates was recently completed, with a multi-ethnic lineup of presidential tickets, he said. In addition, women are actively participating as voters, election workers and candidates -- with at least one woman vying for office in every provincial council.

Rasmussen emphasized the importance of "transparent, inclusive and credible" elections, with the results acceptable to the Afghan people so "the political process provides the certainty and predictability that both Afghans and the international community expect."

He welcomed Great Britain's offer to host the 2014 NATO Summit at a turning point for the alliance as it prepares to complete the longest and largest operation in its history.

"This will be a critical opportunity to take stock of our ongoing work, including in Afghanistan, and to look to the future," he said.

"The summit will also ensure that we continue to build on the lessons that we have learned, to strengthen the alliance and keep it ready to deal with modern security challenges," Rasmussen said.

"It will reaffirm the vital transatlantic bond on which NATO was founded," he added. "And it will further enhance our partnerships, which are key to our future success in a world where risks cross borders and we are all interconnected."

TRANSCRIPT OF PRESIDENT OBAMA'S WEEKLY ADDRESS

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE WEEKLY ADDRESS 
Weekly Address: End the Government Shutdown

WASHINGTON, DC— In this week’s address, President Obama said that Republicans in the House of Representatives chose to shut down the government over a health care law they don’t like. He urged the Congress to pass a budget that funds our government, with no partisan strings attached.  The President made clear he will work with anyone of either party on ways to grow this economy, create new jobs, and get our fiscal house in order for the long haul – but not under the shadow of these threats to our economy.

Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
The White House
October 5, 2013


Good morning.  Earlier this week, the Republican House of Representatives chose to shut down a government they don’t like over a health care law they don’t like.  And I’ve talked a lot about the real-world consequences of this shutdown in recent days – the services disrupted; the benefits delayed; the public servants kicked off the job without pay.

But today, I want to let the Americans dealing with those real-world consequences have their say.  And these are just a few of the many heartbreaking letters I’ve gotten from them in the past couple weeks – including more than 30,000 over the past few days.

Kelly Mumper lives in rural Alabama.  She works in early education, and has three children of her own in the Marines.  Here’s what she wrote to me on Wednesday.

“Our Head Start agency…was forced to stop providing services on October 1st for over 770 children, and 175 staff were furloughed.  I am extremely concerned for the welfare of these children.  There are parents who work and who attend school.  Where are they leaving their children…is it a safe environment…are [they] getting the food that they receive at their Head Start program?”

On the day Julia Pruden’s application to buy a home for her and her special needs children was approved by the USDA’s rural development direct loan program, she wrote me from Minot, North Dakota.

“We put in an offer to purchase a home this weekend, and it was accepted…if funding does not go through, our chances of the American Dream [are] down the drain…We have worked really hard to get our credit to be acceptable to purchase a home…if it weren’t for the direct lending program provided by the USDA, we would not qualify to buy the home we found.”

These are just two of the many letters I’ve received from people who work hard; try to make ends meet; try to do right by their families.  They’re military or military spouses who’ve seen commissaries closed on their bases.  They’re veterans worried the services they’ve earned won’t be there.  They’re business owners who’ve seen their contracts with the government put on hold, worried they’ll have to let people go.  I want them to know, I read the stories you share with me.

These are our fellow Americans.  These are the people who sent us here to serve.  And I know that Republicans in the House of Representatives are hearing the same kinds of stories, too.

As I made clear to them this week, there’s only one way out of this reckless and damaging shutdown: pass a budget that funds our government, with no partisan strings attached.  The Senate has already done this.  And there are enough Republican and Democratic votes in the House of Representatives willing to do the same, and end this shutdown immediately.  But the far right of the Republican Party won’t let Speaker John Boehner give that bill a yes-or-no vote.

Take that vote.  Stop this farce.  End this shutdown now.

The American people don’t get to demand ransom in exchange for doing their job. Neither does Congress. They don’t get to hold our democracy or our economy hostage over a settled law. They don’t get to kick a child out of Head Start if I don’t agree to take her parents’ health insurance away. That’s not how our democracy is supposed to work.

That's why I won't pay a ransom in exchange for reopening the government. And I certainly won't pay a ransom in exchange for raising the debt ceiling. For as reckless as a government shutdown is, an economic shutdown that comes with default would be dramatically worse.

I'll always work with anyone of either party on ways to grow this economy, create new jobs, and get our fiscal house in order for the long haul. But not under the shadow of these threats to our economy.

Pass a budget. End this government shutdown.

Pay our bills. Prevent an economic shutdown.

These Americans and millions of others are counting on Congress to do the right thing. And I will do everything I can to make sure they do.

Thank you.

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY VISIT TO KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Press Availability in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Press Availability
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
October 10, 2013


SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I know that President Obama was very disappointed to cancel his visit, especially given his personal connection and commitment to the region. But I also know that he believes very deeply in the importance of the relationship between the United States and Malaysia and also in the potential for a relationship in the years to come.

Today, our two nations are really working together in more areas than ever before, in economics, in climate, in connectivity, law enforcement, counterterrorism, counter-proliferation, maritime security, science, education – you name it, and we are doing it and doing it together. We’re very grateful for Malaysia’s leadership on every single one of these issues.

I had the occasion at a couple of the dinners in the last few days and at the ASEAN meeting as well as the APEC and similarly at the East Asia Summit to have long and good conversations with the Prime Minister, Prime Minister Najib. And I’m grateful for the discussions that we had, as well as with the Foreign Minister. And having just left Brunei and the first-ever summit that has taken place between the U.S. and ASEAN, I want to thank Malaysia for its leadership through every single one of those meetings on all of the topics of importance to us. So we’re very much looking forward to Malaysia’s chair of ASEAN, which will take place a year hence in 2015.

I’m also proud to say that the ties between our people are clearly getting stronger. Thanks to the close coordination between President Obama and Prime Minister Najib, today American Fulbright English teaching assistants are connecting to Malaysian students all over the country in Kuala Lumpur all the way to Kuantan. And I know firsthand the importance of that program, because I was lucky to have my daughter take part as a Fulbrighter, and I know how profound the impact of that program can be. In fact, all of those exchanges make a difference, and that’s why we’re deeply committed to them here in the region.

These critical connections are also behind our commitment in expanding our people-to-people initiatives like the Global Entrepreneurial Summit, which I will have the privilege of addressing tomorrow. I think it speaks to Malaysia’s important role in driving regional prosperity that it is holding and hosting the fourth global summit right here in Kuala Lumpur. And tomorrow, when I speak to them, I’m going to have a chance to talk to young people from around the world who are here in order to find ways to pursue their dreams and make their communities stronger and better.

On behalf of President Obama, the United States is really proud to be part of that effort. But we’re convinced that we can do even more to help young leaders be able to achieve their goals. In order for their success – excuse me – and the success of other entrepreneurs, both in the United States and Malaysia, to be as far reaching as possible, it’s imperative that we support open trade and open investment wherever we can.

Today, the United States and Malaysia have a very strong economic relationship. We are Malaysia’s fourth-largest trading partner and we are the largest foreign investor in Malaysian industries. But we believe we can do more. And the Trans-Pacific Partnership, we think is the instrument to help get us there. Prime Minister Najib and I had a very productive meeting with the TPP leaders in Bali earlier this week. And I really look forward to working with our partners in Malaysia in order to finalize that agreement by the end of the year.

We recognize there are always hurdles in each country, but as U.S. Trade Representative Ambassador Froman has said, we are prepared to be both flexible and creative in order to help countries be able to meet both the timing and the goals.

So on behalf of President Obama, I want to thank Malaysia for its very committed partnership. I want to thank them for their friendship. And I look forward to continuing what has already been a very productive trip to the region with a dynamic set of meetings tomorrow morning. With that, I’m happy to take a couple questions.

MS. PSAKI: Anne.

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. On Egypt, having taken this step on aid, what leverage does the United States still have to encourage the result you want there, a transition to – a return to civilian rule, given that neither the previous elected government nor the current interim military government seem to listen to you so far? What hope do you have that the result will be different?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I disagree with the premise of that. We’ve had a series of constant conversations regarding the roadmap, the road forward for Egypt. And we will continue to have those conversations. And I think the interim government understands very well our commitment to the success of this government, which we want to see achieve. And by no means is this a withdrawal from our relationship or severing of our serious commitment to helping the government meet those goals.

Obviously, we want to make sure that the roadmap results in a constitution that recognizes universal human rights, that respects minorities, that brings people to the table in an inclusive way, and we’re convinced that – and ultimately results in free and fair elections. In our conversations with the Egyptians, they insist to us that that is exactly the roadmap that they are on, that that is what they intend to achieve. And what we’re doing is holding back a certain element of the aid which we don’t believe is relevant to the immediate needs of this government in terms of the roadmap or in terms of their security.

Now with respect to security, with respect to the Sinai, with respect to the peace process, and with respect to the security needs of the region, we are continuing to provide assistance because it’s in our interest as well as theirs and our friends in the region to do so. In addition, we’re going to continue to provide spare and replacement parts and related services for some of the programs that we think are important to continuing military education and training, because that’s important to our interests. And they are grateful and, I think, understand that.

In addition, we’re going to continue to support areas that directly benefit the Egyptian people – education, private sector development. We will be engaged in that. And we will continue to make certain that the roadmap remains a primary goal for the interim government, because I believe they do want to continue the relationship in a positive way with the United States. Now, we will not be providing direct cash assistance to the budget of the government at this moment in time, and we’re reserving delivery with respect to any key large systems like the Apache or M1A1 tanks and a few things like that.

So I think that on the contrary, we’re going to continue. We want this government to succeed, but we want it also to be the kind of government that Americans will feel comfortable supporting and being engaged in.

QUESTION: How long do you think that suspension will last? And also, could I just ask you very quickly to comment on the kidnapping of the Libyan Prime Minister Ali Zeidan?

SECRETARY KERRY: Sure. I think this recalibration of assistance is really geared to try to leverage the outcomes that citizens in American care about enormously, that Egyptians care about equally – more importantly, that the Egyptian people want for their country. And so as we see this roadmap evolve and actually be met, which the Egyptian Government has said, we expect the renewal of certain of those systems as it is deemed by the President of the United States to be relevant to that particular moment and to the relationship. So this will be on a basis of performance, and it’ll be on the basis of what evolves over the course of the roadmap in the next months.

With respect to Libya, I spoke this afternoon with Ambassador Deborah Jones and we’ve been, obviously, in touch with Washington regarding this. It is clearly a situation that is still evolving. The Libyan Prime Minister, to our understanding, has been released. It is our understanding that there has been no statement yet issued as to the who, what, why, and how. And so we’re staying in very close touch, obviously. Our embassy personnel are secure. We’re confident about our abilities to keep them in that security. But as the situation evolves over the next hours and days, we will obviously share more with you. But it is an evolving situation.

One of the things that it really underscores is something that we’ve been really focused on in these last months, which is building capacity in Libya. And we’ve had a number of meetings and discussions about this over the course of the last months. It’s something we and others, our friends and allies involved in Libya – the French, the British, Italians, and others – are all unified in trying to address. And we have hopes that we can continue to do that probably with greater speed and with greater success, but that is a very major focus that this really underscores the events of the last 24 hours.

MODERATOR: Indira.

QUESTION: Thank you, Secretary Kerry. Is this on? South Africa and Brazil both had nuclear weapons programs, and today they’re both enriching uranium. Iran has said that its right to peaceful enrichment is non-negotiable in the upcoming talks. Can you assure Iran’s new government, which says it wants a deal within a year but is facing strong opposition from domestic hardliners at home, that it too will be allowed to enrich like South Africa and Brazil once it comes clean on all illicit activities?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, obviously the question of enrichment is at the center of the negotiations themselves, and I’m not about to negotiate here in Kuala Lumpur today in answer to your question. But we have made it clear to Iran that they can have a peaceful nuclear program as they meet the requirements of the international community as expressed in the additional protocols and in the resolutions that have been passed by the UN Security Council.

Now, there is a negotiation coming up in the next few days. We’ve had private discussions; I’ve personally had private discussion with the Foreign Minister, and I think it’s best to keep those discussions private and personal at this point in time. But Iran knows what it needs to do in order to be able to have a peaceful program, and we’re prepared to negotiate a resolution and believe, as President Obama has said many times, that a negotiated, peaceful resolution is by far his preference. So we will negotiate, but we’re not going to negotiate publicly in the next days.

MODERATOR: Thanks, everyone.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you all. Have a good evening. Thanks.

VIRTUAL CURRICULUM ASSISTS TROOPS LEAVING SERVICE

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
New Virtual Curriculum Assists Separating Troops
By Army Sgt. 1st Class Tyrone C. Marshall Jr.
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Oct. 9, 2013 - The Defense Department continues to assist service members and their families in preparing for the transition to civilian life with a new virtual curriculum, a Defense Department official said here.

During a telephone interview with American Forces Press Service, Susan S. Kelly, director of the Transition to Veterans Program office, discussed the redesign of the Transition Assistance Program and its evolution to include the Transition GPS virtual curriculum on the Joint Knowledge Online portal, or JKO, which became available today.

"We recognize that many of our service members don't have access to brick and mortar classrooms for transition instruction" Kelly said. "The JKO portal is our effort to take all of the redesigned TAP curriculum, which is called Transition GPS, ... and put it into an environment where they can access it whenever they need it from anywhere in the world."

Service members, she said, can improve their job search skills, find out about Veterans Administration benefits, learn how to find and apply to a college or university that fits their goals, or how to start their own business by accessing the Transition GPS virtual curriculum.

An essential part of the virtual curriculum capability, Kelly added, is to support the ability to meet career readiness standards published by the Defense Department.

"Those career readiness standards extend all the way from registering in VA's 'e-Benefits' so they're connected to the Veterans Affairs family immediately, all the way to career readiness standards for employment, where service members have to develop a job application packet, resume, personal and professional references as well as job applications," she said.

Those standards also include a completed application for institutions of higher learning or technical institutions if service members are planning to go to college or receive a certification using the Post 9/11 GI Bill, Kelly said.

"There's a whole expanse of career readiness standards that the military members must meet before they separate," she said. "The Transition GPS curriculum has modules that build the skills for the service members to meet each one of those career readiness standards."

The ultimate goal is for the service members to determine what their personal goals are when they enter civilian life and to posture them well to be successful in pursuing those goals, Kelly said.

"The goal of the entire TAP redesign is to get military members career-ready for their civilian lives and to help them do very, very deliberate planning for both themselves and their families to do well as they become civilians," she added.

The best way for a service member to begin this process is to contact the transition assistance program staff on their installation, Kelly said. Soldiers should contact the Army Career Alumni Program, sailors and Marines can use fleet and family support centers, and airmen can begin this process at their nearest airmen and family readiness center.

"That's the first entry point for them to get scheduled for classes," Kelly said. For those who are geographically separated or isolated from installations, she added, the virtual curriculum is there for them on the JKO website.

Kelly also noted it's important that this virtual curriculum is being hosted on the JKO portal.

"That's where service members go for military training now in the joint world," she said. "So we are putting transition preparation training into that military training platform."

The virtual curriculum is a major accomplishment in the TAP redesign according to Kelly. It's the first time that the Veterans Employment Initiative Task Force, as an interagency partnership that includes the DOD and the Veterans Affairs, Labor and Education departments, as well as the Small Business Administration and the Office of Personnel Management, has developed and hosted a complete curriculum for service members on one website.

Kelly noted that the virtual curriculum can also be used by service members who are exploring their options as they think about continuing in the military or transitioning out.

"You don't have to be enrolled in the TAP class to use this website," she said. "Any service member can log in and use it, even years before they make the decision to transition to civilian life."

Preparing for separation is a part of any service member's military career, Kelly said.

"You want to align what you're gaining out of military training and experience with what you want to do as a civilian when you separate," she added.

OPCW BRIEFING TO THE PRESS

Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW): Director General's Briefing to the Press

Taken Question

Office of the Spokesperson

Washington, DC

October 9, 2013

---

QUESTION: The DG of the OPCW said inspectors are to visit 20 sites that the Syrians declared, but the U.S. has said that there are at least 45 sites – have Syrians not declared all of their sites, or are we counting differently? If we are only visiting fewer than half of the sites, how can we characterize this as an “encouraging” start?

ANSWER: According to the September 27 OPCW Executive Council Decision, the OPCW will visit all declared sites within 30 days of adoption of the Executive Council Decision (October 27). The same decision and UN Security Council Resolution 2118 require that Syria permit the OPCW unfettered, immediate access to all other sites of interest. Syria's initial declaration of its chemical weapons holdings and facilities required under Article III of the Chemical Weapons Convention is due to the OPCW on October 27, pursuant to the OPCW Executive Council Decision.

We will continue to assess the completeness and accuracy of Syria's disclosures to the OPCW. As the Syrian disclosure to the OPCW has not been released to the public by the OPCW, we will not at this time discuss its details or our assessment of it.

The fact that just a month ago the Syrian regime did not even acknowledge it had chemical weapons, and now inspectors are not only on the ground but they are overseeing the initial stages of destruction, is a step forward. However, there is more work to be done, and the international community will be paying close attention to whether the Syrian regime is abiding by all of its obligations under UN Security Council Resolution 2118 and the OPCW Executive Council Decision. It's critical that Syria's declaration of its chemical weapons holdings and facilities be complete.

NSA DIRECTOR ASKS INDUSTRY'S HELP IN GETTING AMERICAN PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THE FACTS

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
Alexander Calls on Industry to Help Set Record Straight
By Nick Simeone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Oct. 9, 2013 - The nation's top cyber commander called on industry today to "put the facts on the table" about the National Security Agency following leaks about the agency's surveillance programs, blaming inaccurate or sensational reporting for congressional failure to approve measures that he said are needed to protect the nation from a devastating cyberattack.

"We need the American people to understand the facts. And it's got to start with what we're actually doing -- not what we could be doing -- with the data," Army Gen. Keith B. Alexander, NSA director and commander of U.S. Cyber Command, told an industry conference in suburban Maryland. "Most of the reporting is, 'They could be doing 'A.' The facts are they're doing 'B.'"

Warning that he doesn't want to have to explain why he failed to prevent another 9/11, Alexander appealed to industry to help in light of the damaging leaks in June by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

Snowden has been charged in absentia with violating the Espionage Act and stealing government property for turning over secret documents to reporters detailing classified NSA programs, actions that Alexander has blamed for causing irreversible and significant damage to the security of the United States and its allies.

In the time since the leaks, Alexander said, the media have complicated matters through exaggerated or inaccurate reporting.

"Everything that comes out is almost sensationalized and inflamed by what it could be, not by what it is, and that singularly in my mind will impact our ability to get cyber legislation and defend the nation," he said. "And if you think about the numbers of disruptive attacks over the last year, and destructive attacks, and you plot that out statistically, what it says to me is it's getting worse, and that's going to grow."

Alexander pointed to a series of recent destructive cyberattacks around the world, including on Saudi Aramco, a Saudi oil company, where he said data in more than 30,000 systems was destroyed last year, as well as attacks against Qatar's Rasgas gas company and twin attacks in South Korea earlier this year.

"Then, look at what hit Wall Street over the last year: over 300 distributed denial-of-service attacks. How do we defend against those?"

Alexander called for laws that would encourage industry and government to share information about potential threats in real time. "This will become hugely important in the future," he said. We've got to have legislation that allows us to communicate back and forth."

To get there, the general said, the rhetoric on media leaks must change and the trust factor must be fixed, "because we're not going to move forward with all that hanging out there."

In the absence of congressional action, President Barack Obama has issued an executive order promoting increased sharing of information about cyber threats across government and industry. However, Alexander said, the nation's cyber defenses remain dependent on closer, real-time cooperation between the government and Internet service providers and the anti-virus community.

"Our team -- government, industry and allies -- have to be ready to act, and we're not," he said. "We're stuck because of where we are in the debate, so what you could do to help is get the facts. We need your help to inform the American people and Congress about what we're doing."

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S STATEMENT OF THE AWARDING OF THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE

FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Statement on Awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
October 11, 2013

I want to congratulate the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons for winning the Nobel Peace Prize. The world will never forget the loss of the more than 1,000 innocent Syrians senselessly killed with chemical weapons on Aug. 21. There could be no more stark reminder why for almost 100 years, the international community has deemed the use of these weapons far beyond the bounds of acceptable conduct.

Since that horrific attack, the OPCW has taken extraordinary steps and worked with unprecedented speed to address this blatant violation of international norms that shocked the conscience of people around the world. Just a few weeks ago, a united international community came together at the OPCW and the United Nations to establish a clear path toward eliminating Syria’s chemical weapons forever. And last week, OPCW inspectors, backed by the full weight of the United Nations, took the first, critical steps toward that goal.

Today, the Nobel Committee has rightly recognized their bravery and resolve to carry out this vital mission amid an ongoing war in Syria. On this occasion, I am also particularly mindful of the more than 100,000 Syrians lost in this bloody conflict, and the need for the entire international community to redouble our effort to bring it to an end and give peace-loving Syrians a country to return to, free of carnage.

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S REMARKS REGARDING THE INTERNATIONAL DAY OF THE GIRL

U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
International Day of the Girl
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
October 11, 2013

When many of the world’s 850 million girls go to sleep tonight, they will dream about futures that sadly –tragically–are nearly impossible for them to achieve.

In too many countries, the promise of the next generation of girls is at risk. In too many communities, the contributions of girls are not valued, their well-being is not protected, and their aspirations are not taken seriously.

As the father of two daughters, I know that is unacceptable. Supporting the rights of girls is the moral and just thing to do. And as someone who sits today in the same chair where extraordinary women like Hillary Rodham Clinton, Condoleezza Rice, and Madeleine Albright sat before me, I know that it’s also the smart thing to do. Investing in girls is a critical part of our duty to promote prosperity, security, and peace around the world. Empowered girls grow up to be empowered women. They grow up to be empowered mothers, leaders, and innovators. They grow up to move their communities forward and make the world a better place.

I am proud of the accomplishments of my own daughters and my wife. I want all girls to have the same opportunities they had to get a good education, pursue their passions in a safe environment, and achieve their full potential.

Thanks to a number of global partnerships and programs led by the State Department, like TechGirls and NeXXt Scholars – and great USAID programs like Safe Schools – we have made important progress. Today, more and more girls are enrolling in school in Afghanistan, and fewer and fewer girls are victims of female genital mutilation in Africa. But our work is far from over.

Every year, the International Day of the Girl is a chance for us to reaffirm our commitment to girls’ rights, to celebrate their value to society, and to address the unique challenges they still face. It is a call to action for everyone to build on the progress we have made on global women’s rights. If we heed that call, if we keep faith with the enormous potential and promise of young women, the dreams of our daughters will one day be just as viable as the dreams of our sons.

NATIONAL GUARD FEELS IMPACT FROM SHUTDOWN

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
National Guard Faces the Shutdown
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Oct. 11, 2013 - National Guard personnel are feeling the effects of the government shutdown and leaders are worried about the readiness of the component, Air Force Gen. Joseph Lengyel, the vice chief of the National Guard Bureau said today.

The Pay Our Military Act has mitigated some of the effects of the partial government shutdown for the Guard, but there are still concerns, the general said.

The act does not allow for drill training periods, unless the drill is in support of an excepted activity such as preparing for an overseas deployment, he said. "Most October drills are canceled, impacting nearly 400,000 National Guard members," Lengyel said. "These drill periods are critical to maintaining the training and preparedness of our citizen soldiers and airmen – nearly 85 percent of our force."

For individual Guardsmen canceling drills means a loss of pay. For units it means degrading the readiness needed to respond to homeland and overseas missions.

Not all units are impacted. "Units preparing for deployment are not affected by the government shutdown," Lengyel said. "The National Guard is now the best-trained and best-equipped force in our history. We are indispensable to both domestic and overseas operations. It would be extremely unfortunate to this nation if our readiness is allowed to atrophy."

The shutdown is delaying some training deployments, the general said, but it will not affect Guardsmen's ability to deploy for actual, real-world missions.

The National Guard responds to emergencies within the United States. Recent activities included providing assistance to local authorities during flooding in Colorado, aiding in fighting wildfires in the West and preparing for storms in the East. Guardsmen and civilians who work for the Guard remain on call despite the shutdown. "During the lapse of appropriations, DOD civilians who support the military in support of the preservation of life and protection of property were allowed to continue working," Lengyel said.

When Tropical Storm Karen threatened the Gulf Coast, the Guard worked with Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to authorize the recall of up to 2,200 additional National Guard military technicians to assist with disaster response actions. "The department has now recalled additional categories of civilians as defined by the Pay Our Military Act," he said.

The initial shutdown furlough impacted more than 40,000 dual-status military technicians. These men and women are civilian employees during the week and drilling Guardsmen. "They provide critical support that makes it possible for traditional Guard soldiers to train and operate, such as performing day-to-day equipment maintenance, managing pay and other administrative functions," the general said.

Under POMA, DOD was able to recall additional categories of civilians, leaving the National Guard with nearly 250 dual-status technicians still on furlough. "While this is a positive development, there is still more work to be done in order to get everyone back to work," he said.