FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks on U.S. Policy in the Western Hemisphere
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Organization of American States
Washington, DC
November 18, 2013
Mr. Secretary-General, thank you very, very much. Thank you for a wonderful welcome on this absolutely beautiful, luscious, seductive fall day, as pretty as it gets, and one that’s quickly prompting all of us to ask why we’re at work today. I’m privileged to be here. I want to thank the Inter-American Dialogue. Thank you, Michael Shifter, and thank you, Ambassador Deborah-Mae Lovell for the invitation to be here. I want to thank the Organization of American States for inviting me to speak here this morning. And it’s always wonderful to be in this remarkable, beautiful, historic building.
A few minutes ago, we were down below in the atrium and Secretary-General Insulza took me over to see the peace tree that President Taft planted more than 100 years ago. It’s a remarkable tree, and it’s a testimony to the deep roots of the OAS, which is the quintessential multilateral entity of the Americas and has its origins obviously dating back to even before that peace tree was planted. The – I was tempted to tell a story about William Howard Taft who – and a famous introduction that he made – but I’m going to spare you that particular story – (laughter) – but it’s a very funny one, and worth at some point sharing with you. I’m delighted to be in the company of former Trade Representative Carla Hills. Great to be here with you. And I’m particularly proud to be here with our Assistant Secretary Roberta Jacobson, who does such an outstanding job with respect to all of the Western Hemisphere, has come – just come back from China on a dialogue in China regarding the Western Hemisphere and Latin America particularly.
Since I became Secretary of State, I’ve had the privilege of speaking in some beautiful rooms like this in about, what, 30 countries all over the world. But I cannot tell you how nice it is to speak in one where I get to drive for two minutes instead of fly 12 hours. It makes a difference.
The fact is that this is a very important moment for all of the American states. Fifty years ago, President Kennedy spoke about the promise of the Western Hemisphere, and in what would become, sadly, his final address on foreign policy. President Kennedy expressed his hope for a hemisphere of nations, each confident in the strength of its own independence, devoted to the liberty of its citizens. If he could only see where we are today. In the half century since he spoke, more and more countries are coming closer and closer to realizing his vision and all of our hopes.
When people speak of the Western Hemisphere, they often talk about transformations that have taken place, but the truth is one of the biggest transformations has happened right here in the United States of America. In the early days of our republic, the United States made a choice about its relationship with Latin America. President James Monroe, who was also a former Secretary of State, declared that the United States would unilaterally, and as a matter of fact, act as the protector of the region. The doctrine that bears his name asserted our authority to step in and oppose the influence of European powers in Latin America. And throughout our nation’s history, successive presidents have reinforced that doctrine and made a similar choice.
Today, however, we have made a different choice. The era of the Monroe Doctrine is over. (Applause.) The relationship – that’s worth applauding. That’s not a bad thing. (Applause.) The relationship that we seek and that we have worked hard to foster is not about a United States declaration about how and when it will intervene in the affairs of other American states. It’s about all of our countries viewing one another as equals, sharing responsibilities, cooperating on security issues, and adhering not to doctrine, but to the decisions that we make as partners to advance the values and the interests that we share.
As the old proverb says, La union hace la fuerza. The union – in unity, there is strength. Through our shared commitment to democracy, we collectively present a vivid example to the world that diversity is strength, that inclusion works, that justice can reject impunity, and that the rights of individuals must be protected against government overreach and abuse. We also prove that peace is possible. You don’t need force to have fuerza. The vision that we share for our countries is actually within our grasp, but we have to ask ourselves some tough and important questions in order to secure our goal.
First and foremost, will we together promote and protect the democracy, security, and peace that all the people of the Americas deserve? Second, will we seize the chance to advance prosperity throughout the Western Hemisphere and educate the young people who will drive the economies of the future? And third, will we together meet a responsibility that requires more strength, and thus more unity than ever before, and thereby effectively address the threat posed by climate change?
Now, how we answer these questions will determine whether or not we can actually become the hemisphere of nations that President Kennedy envisioned, each country existing side-by-side, confident, strong, and independent and free. The first question is actually answered by the broad protection of democratic values that have become the rule and not the exception within the Western Hemisphere. In a few short decades, democratic representation has, for the most part, displaced the repression of dictators. But the real challenge of the 21st century in the Americas will be how we use our democratic governments to deliver development, overcome poverty, and improve social inclusion.
Last summer, I traveled to Brasilia, and as I was leaving my meeting with the Foreign Minister, I was greeted by a group of protestors. Now, I don’t speak Portuguese – my wife does, I don’t – but I did understand the four-letter words that they yelled because they were in English. (Laughter.) And as jarring as it can be sometimes, that moment was actually the picture of a healthy democracy.
And today, it is our shared democratic values that have enabled us to weather challenges like the understandable concerns around the surveillance disclosures, concerns that prompt us all to figure out how we’re going to get through and build a stronger foundation for the future based on our common democratic values and beliefs.
Successful democracies depend on all citizens having a voice and on respecting those voices, and all governments having the courage and the capacity to listen to those voices. We can be immensely proud, I think, of this hemisphere’s democratic trajectory and of the institutions that we built in order to hold ourselves to the future and to be accountable. That is the difference, and to hold ourselves to the OAS Charter.
And we also express our concern when democratic institutions are weakened, as we’ve seen in Venezuela recently. In March of this year, the United States joined with many of you right here in this very room, as a matter of fact, to affirm the independence and the mandate of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.
We have also joined together to support the OAS electoral observation missions throughout the hemisphere, including the one for the election in Honduras next week. All of us here have an opportunity to help assure that this election is transparent, inclusive, peaceful, and fair, and that the process is one that the Honduran people could actually rely on in order to express their will. We – all of us – must do everything that we can to support the OAS efforts to provide assistance and impartially observe the elections. There is no better expression of our strength and unity than following through on that effort.
We also know well that the critical ingredient of a successful democracy is how we provide for our security at home for all of our citizens. Safe streets, safe neighborhoods, safe communities, really do depend on upholding the rule of law.
In June, I went to Guatemala and I met with Attorney General Paz y Paz. She has made extraordinary progress in combating corruption and organized crime, protecting women from violence, and prosecuting human rights violations.
In August, I traveled to Bogota and I saw a remarkable demonstration of Colombia’s sacrifice and progress in the fight against illegal drugs and violence, a fight which has actually made it possible for President Santos’s courageous effort to achieve sustainable and just peace.
I think it is undeniable what our unity of purpose is. Step by step, making our democracies stronger and our people more secure – in Guatemala, in Colombia, and throughout the Americas. And for the most part, I think you’ll agree with me the Western Hemisphere is unified in its commitment to pursuing successful democracies in the way that I describe.
But one exception, of course, remains: Cuba. Since President Obama took office, the Administration has started to search for a new beginning with Cuba. As he said just last week, when it comes to our relationship with Cuba, we have to be creative, we have to be thoughtful, and we have to continue to update our policies.
Our governments are finding some cooperation on common interests at this point in time. Each year, hundreds of thousands of Americans visit Havana, and hundreds of millions of dollars in trade and remittances flow from the United States to Cuba. We are committed to this human interchange, and in the United States we believe that our people are actually our best ambassadors. They are ambassadors of our ideals, of our values, of our beliefs.
And while we also welcome some of the changes that are taking place in Cuba which allow more Cubans to be able to travel freely and work for themselves, these changes should absolutely not blind us to the authoritarian reality of life for ordinary Cubans. In a hemisphere where citizens everywhere have a right to be able to choose their leaders, Cubans uniquely do not. In a hemisphere where people can criticize their leaders without fear of arrest or violence, Cubans still cannot. And if more does not change soon, it is clear that the 21st century will continue, unfortunately, to leave the Cuban people behind.
We look forward to the day – and we hope it will come soon – when the Cuban Government embraces a broader political reform agenda that will enable its people to freely determine their own future. The entire hemisphere – all of us – share an interest in ensuring that Cubans enjoy the rights protected by our Inter-American Democratic Charter, and we expect to stand united in this aspiration. Because in every country, including the United States, each day that we don’t press forward on behalf of personal freedoms and representative government, we risk sliding backwards. And none of us can accept that.
Even as we celebrate the democratic values that have spread throughout Latin America, we must also acknowledge where those values are being challenged. After all, timely elections matter little if they are not really free and fair with all political parties competing on a level playing field. A separation of powers is of little comfort if independent institutions are not able to hold the powerful to account. And laws that guarantee freedom of the press, freedom of expression, and freedom of religion are of little consequence if they are not enforced. Democracy is not a final destination; it is an endless journey. And every day, all of us must renew our decision to actually move it forward. And we are no less immune to that reality here in the United States than anywhere else; in fact, in recent days, perhaps even more susceptible to it.
We’ve also – all of us – got important decisions to make about how we bring about shared economic prosperity – the prosperity to which we all aspire. To start with, educational opportunity, above all, must be a priority. It is only with widely available, high-quality education that our workforce, the workforce of the hemisphere, will be equipped for the jobs of the future. Education, as we all know, opens up other doors as well. As former Senator J. William Fulbright said: “Having people who understand your thought is much greater security than another submarine.” That’s the idea behind the State Department’s Fulbright exchanges. And it is the idea behind President Obama’s 100,000 Strong in the Americas initiative, which is aimed at increasing the flow of exchange students in both directions here in the Western Hemisphere.
But my friends, education, as we know, is only the first step. We must also press even harder to help create jobs and economic opportunity for our young people for the day after graduation comes and goes. Our hemisphere is already, as the Secretary General mentioned in his introductory comments, a thriving market of nearly a billion people. Over the past decade, the economies of Latin America and the Caribbean grew at a rate of 4 percent a year. The United States is proud to play a role in this. Just last week, we announced more than $98 million in private financing for 4,000 small- and medium-sized businesses throughout the hemisphere in order to encourage this energy and create it and keep it moving.
And the kind of growth that the region is experiencing fueled by sound economic policies, innovative social programs, and increased international trade and investment – that growth has dramatically improved the lives of all of our citizens. In the past decade alone as trade has grown between the United States and Latin America – nearly tripled – more than 73 million people, as the Secretary General mentioned, have been lifted out of poverty. Think about that. That’s more people than live in Canada and Argentina combined. It’s an extraordinary story, and it’s a story of success. It’s a story of policies that are working but need to be grown, not moved away from. Imagine what is possible if we continue to open up trade and investment in our children’s futures.
When I was a senator, I was very proud and pleased to vote to ratify both the Colombia and the Panama Trade Promotion Agreements, which President Obama signed into law. And we’re already seeing the growth that these agreements made possible. During the first year of the U.S.-Colombia FTA, nearly 800 Colombian companies of all sizes entered the U.S. market for the very first time. These new exporters sold their goods and services in more than 20 different American states. And today, Vice President Biden is traveling to Panama to visit the canal expansion project that will continue to spark increased trade throughout the region.
Under President Obama’s leadership, we’ve also helped expand the region’s participation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership, taking it beyond Chile and Peru to include Canada and Mexico. And we have redoubled our commitment to NAFTA, the greatest single step toward shared prosperity in this hemisphere, which I am pleased to say also I voted for at a time when I think people remember it was very contentious and very difficult. But all of us know – can’t rest on those agreements alone. That’s not enough. We know we can do more. And if we do more, the Western Hemisphere will continue to be a leader in the global markets for decades to come.
One of the opportunities that is staring at us that I just mentioned a moment ago about these many opportunities – one of those opportunities is a $6 trillion market and has 4 billion users. I’m talking about the new energy market – biggest market in human history. The market that created such extraordinary wealth in the 1990s where in America, in the United States, every single quintile of American income earner, from the bottom right through to the top – everybody saw their incomes go up. And we all know it was a time when we balanced the budget three years in a row. It was a time of extraordinary growth.
The market that drove that growth was a $1 trillion market with 1 billion users – the high-tech computer, home computer model. That was the market – technology. The energy market is six times that market. And the 4 billion users today will grow to 6 billion, ultimately 9 billion between now and 2050. It will help us to answer the third and final question that I mentioned – whether or not we will leave to our children and grandchildren a planet that is healthy, clean, and sustainable. Actually, this is not so much a question as it really is a compelling challenge, the challenge of a generation, maybe even the challenge of a century, maybe even the challenge of life itself on the planet if you digest adequately all that science is telling us today.
More than two decades ago, I visited Brazil as part of the U.S. delegation to the Rio Summit. This was the first time that the global community came together united to try to address climate change. It was also the trip where I got to know an amazing Portuguese-speaking woman named Teresa, who three years later would become my wife. So I like Rio. It’s a good place. (Laughter.)
But Teresa and I still talk about a young 12-year-old girl from Vancouver named Severn Suzuki, who took the stage at that summit in order to, as she put it, quote, “fight for her future.” Twenty-one years later, I still remember what she said about climate change, as follows: “I’m only a child,” she told us, “yet I know we are all in this together and should act as one single world towards one single goal.” Severn understood something that a lot of folks today need to grasp, something still missing from our political debate, like the saying goes that I said a moment ago, La union hace la fuerza – we need that more than ever now with respect to this challenge of climate change. Decades later, we have a lot to learn from that young woman.
The Americas have become the new center of our global energy map. Our hemisphere supplies now one-fourth of the world’s crude oil and nearly one-fourth of its coal. We support over a third of global electricity. And what that means is that we have the ability and the great responsibility to influence the way that the entire world is powered. To do this, it will require each of our nations to make some very fundamental policy choices. We need to embrace the energy future over the energy of the past.
And I am well aware – I’ve been through these battles in the United States Senate – I know how tough it is. I know how many different industries and how many powerful interests there are to push back. But we, people, all of us have a responsibility to push back against them. Climate change is real. It is happening. And if we don’t take significant action as partners, it will continue to threaten not only our environment and our communities, but as our friends from the Caribbean and other island nations know, it will threaten potentially our entire way of life, certainly theirs.
The challenge of climate change will cost us far more for its negative impact than the investment that we need to make today in order to meet the challenge. Every economic model shows that, and yet we shy away. Our economies have yet to factor in the monetary costs of doing nothing or doing too little. The devastating effects that droughts can have on farmers’ harvests; the hefty price tag that comes with rebuilding communities after every catastrophe, after every hurricane or tropical storm tears through them and leaves a trail of destruction in their wake; the extraordinary cost of fires that didn’t burn as ferociously and as frequently as they do today because of the increased dryness; the increasing signs of loss of water for the Himalayas as the glaciers shrink; and therefore, as the great rivers of China and other countries on one side and India on the other are threatened as billions of people see their food and food security affected.
These are real challenges, and they’re not somewhere in the future. We’re already seeing them now. For all of these reasons, combating climate change is an urgent priority for President Obama and myself, and we know that we are one of the largest contributors to the problem. There are about 20 nations that contribute over 90 percent of the problem. That’s why President Obama unveiled a new Climate Action Plan to drive more aggressive domestic policy on climate change than ever before. And the good news is the agenda that he’s put together is one specifically designed to be able to be done by administrative order so you don’t have to wait for Congress to act.
Many other nations in the Western Hemisphere are also working hard to do their part as well. And I’m proud to say that as part of the Energy and Climate Partnership of the Americas, the United States has collaborated with more than two dozen countries, Latin America, and the Caribbean in order to support effective programs to address the reality of this grave threat. But if we take advantage, my friends, this is not a threat where there is not a solution. We have a solution, a number of them staring us in the face. We just don’t make the political decision because of these forces that push back.
We know what the alternatives are. We know the advantage of the enormous breakthroughs that are happening in clean energy. And if we share expertise and deploy new technologies throughout the region, if we connect the electrical grids throughout the Americas, then we can share and sell power to each other at different points of time in different ways with a more vibrant marketplace. If we harness the power of the wind in Mexico and the biomass in Brazil, the sunshine in Chile and Peru, the natural gas in the United States and Argentina, then the enormous benefits for local economies, public health, and of course climate change mitigation could reach every corner of the Americas and beyond.
This is what a new inter-American partnership is really all about. The Brazilian novelist Paulo Coelho, one of the most widely read authors in the world, wrote “When we least expect it, life sets us a challenge to test our courage and willingness to change.” So the question for all of us is: Will we have the courage to make the tough choices and the willingness to change? Fifty years from today, on the hundredth anniversary of President Kennedy’s call to the region, will the hemisphere of nations that he dreamed about become a reality?
Many years ago, the United States dictated a policy that defined the hemisphere for many years after. We’ve moved past that era. And today, we must go even further. All of the things that we’ve talked about today – the future of our democracies, the strength of our democracies, the development of those democracies, the inclusion of all of our people in a system with accountability and without impunity for the defections, our shared prosperity and all that brings us, the education of our children, the future of our planet, our response to climate change – all of these things do not depend on the next administration or the next generation. They depend on us now.
And the question is: will we work as equal partners in order to achieve our goals? It will require courage and a willingness to change. But above all, it will require a higher and deeper level of cooperation between us, all of us together, as equal partners in this hemisphere. That is the way we will make the difference, and that is the way we will live up to our responsibility.
Thank you very much. (Applause.)
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S STATEMENT REGARDING NOMINEES TO THE FEDERAL BENCH
FROM: THE WHITE HOUSE
Statement by the President
I am deeply disappointed that Senate Republicans have once again refused to do their job and give well-qualified nominees to the federal bench the yes-or-no votes they deserve. The D.C. Circuit, considered the Nation’s second-highest court, has three vacancies. These are judgeships created by Congress. Chief Justice John Roberts and the Judicial Conference of the United States believe that these vacancies should be filled, not removed. And my constitutional duty as President is to nominate highly qualified individuals to fill these vacancies.
Patricia Millett, Nina Pillard, and Judge Robert Wilkins have all received the highest possible rating from the non-partisan American Bar Association. They have broad bipartisan support, and no one has questioned their merit. Yet Senate Republicans have blocked all three from receiving a yes-or-no vote. This obstruction is completely unprecedented. Four of my predecessor’s six nominees to the D.C. Circuit were confirmed. Four of my five nominees to this court have been obstructed. When it comes to judicial nominations, I am fulfilling my constitutional responsibility, but Congress is not. Instead, Senate Republicans are standing in the way of a fully-functioning judiciary that serves the American people.
The American people and our judicial system deserve better. A majority of the United States Senate supports these three extraordinary nominees, and it is time for simple yes-or-no votes without further obstruction or delay.
Statement by the President
I am deeply disappointed that Senate Republicans have once again refused to do their job and give well-qualified nominees to the federal bench the yes-or-no votes they deserve. The D.C. Circuit, considered the Nation’s second-highest court, has three vacancies. These are judgeships created by Congress. Chief Justice John Roberts and the Judicial Conference of the United States believe that these vacancies should be filled, not removed. And my constitutional duty as President is to nominate highly qualified individuals to fill these vacancies.
Patricia Millett, Nina Pillard, and Judge Robert Wilkins have all received the highest possible rating from the non-partisan American Bar Association. They have broad bipartisan support, and no one has questioned their merit. Yet Senate Republicans have blocked all three from receiving a yes-or-no vote. This obstruction is completely unprecedented. Four of my predecessor’s six nominees to the D.C. Circuit were confirmed. Four of my five nominees to this court have been obstructed. When it comes to judicial nominations, I am fulfilling my constitutional responsibility, but Congress is not. Instead, Senate Republicans are standing in the way of a fully-functioning judiciary that serves the American people.
The American people and our judicial system deserve better. A majority of the United States Senate supports these three extraordinary nominees, and it is time for simple yes-or-no votes without further obstruction or delay.
SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY MAKES REMARKS WITH TURKISH FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks With Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu
Press Availability
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Treaty Room
Washington, DC
November 18, 2013
SECRETARY KERRY: Good afternoon, everybody. I am really delighted to welcome Foreign Minister Davutoglu back to Washington. He has been such a gracious host for me now on three trips to Turkey, and frankly, it was really high time that I had an opportunity to be able to reciprocate here. We’re delighted that he’s coming here on a beautiful, beautiful fall day with lots of colors out there. We’re trying to see if we can do our best to contest the beauty of the Bosporus and all that you’ve offered me. (Laughter.) But we have spectacular views and we’re happy to have you here.
Ahmet and I have worked very, very closely on a lot of issues, and you all are very familiar with them: the question of Israel and Turkey and a rapprochement, the question of Syria enormously, and other issues on a global basis. So it’s special for me to be able to welcome him here because the U.S.-Turkey relationship is vital on so many different levels. And he and I never seem to have enough time to be able to cover all of the issues. I might say that we’ve really only begun the process today. We’ve had a bilateral meeting. We’ve had a one-on-one meeting, then we’ve had a group meeting bilateral, and now we will go to lunch and continue the conversation on a number of the issues in front of us. But I’m happy that we’ve been able to have a very, very thorough, full discussion, even to date, on almost all the issues of concern, and we’re going to continue.
Whether the challenge is Syria or Iran, Middle East peace process, the future of our NATO alliance, or ensuring our economic prosperity, the U.S. and Turkey share strategic goals. And as the Foreign Minister put it in a recent article that he wrote, the U.S. and Turkey both seek a sustainable, peaceful regional and global order rooted in good governance and democratic accountability. We also appreciate how much hard work we have to do together and with our allies and partners to achieve all of these objectives.
In Syria, our objective together and with our friends and allies is to stop the bloodshed once and for all. And to do that, we agree that we must get the parties to the negotiating table. We are moving closer to that, literally, day by day now, and we commend the opposition’s recent vote to participate in a Geneva II conference, where we hope to forge the political solution to this conflict. I’ve had conversations when I was recently in Geneva with Foreign Minister Lavrov. I’ve had telephone conversations with fellow foreign ministers over the course of the last week, and now a face-to-face meeting with Foreign Minister Davutoglu, and we are all committed to this goal and will remain so.
Today, we also talked about the way that we can tackle together and with other friends the rising extremism of the region, which threatens not only Syria’s future but it threatens its neighbors, and obviously, in this case, Turkey. We discussed the horrific humanitarian situation that exists inside Syria; and by preventing vital aid from reaching those who need it, the Assad regime is now using a policy of starvation as a weapon of war. That is against the laws of war. It is against human conscience. It is unacceptable, and we are going to continue to press in order to deal with it. I talked to Foreign Minister Lavrov over the weekend about this issue, and we are going to continue to find ways, all together, in order to address it.
We commend Turkey’s remarkable generosity in hosting over 600,000 Syrian refugees now, as well as its vaccination program for 1 million children that they just announced today. And the United States is proud to have provided an additional 96 million in assistance to refugees to Turkey. That’s part of our now 1.3 billion that the American people have graciously and generously provided in order to relieve this humanitarian crisis, and America is proudly the number one donor in order to deal with this crisis.
We also discussed Iran and the key role that Turkey has played in helping to enforce the sanctions that have brought Iran to the negotiating table. This was the very purpose of these sanctions, and we are achieving the goal of at least getting to the negotiation. Now we obviously need to achieve something at that table. We need to remain united in our goal of ensuring that Iran never gets a nuclear weapon.
Now, I’ve heard a lot of back and forth in the last days and we respect the vigorous debate; we really do. But the bottom line is that we all agree, all of us, that there must be a verifiable, certain, failsafe process by which the guarantee of not getting a nuclear weapon is clear to all. That means our friends in Israel, that means our friends in the region, and that, of course, means all of us here in the United States and the United States Congress.
As we discussed today, the first step that the P5+1 is working on would stop the Iranian program from advancing while you engage in the negotiation to get to that situation where you have a comprehensive agreement and the guarantees that I talked about. We also want to commend Turkey for its recent high-level meetings with Iraq, which are important to every part of what is happening there, particularly in Iraq itself as well as with respect to Syria.
Turkey plays, as I said, a very large role in so many ways. For months now, we have been talking about Cyprus and we have been talking about Nagorno-Karabakh. And quietly, we have been trying to work ways that our ambassadors, who are front and center in this – in these initiatives, are continuing that process. Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot negotiators are making important progress, and we urge all parties to make the most of the current window of opportunity and to restart comprehensive talks.
I talked with both President Aliyev and President Sargsian in the last 48 hours – or I guess the last 72, anyway – and they are meeting shortly. We are urging that process to move forward, and we will continue to be engaged in that.
And of course, the relationship between the United States and Turkey is also defined by our work to promote prosperity for our people, the economic opportunities for all of our peoples, as well as across the world.
In September, we launched a high-level committee headed by the U.S. Trade Representative and the Turkish Minister of the Economy, and they will focus on developments between the U.S., EU, and the TTIP negotiations, as we call them. We will monitor any impacts on Turkey and closely continue to find ways to strengthen our economic ties, which are growing every year, and continue to work with Turkey on this process as we go forward.
The United States is particularly encouraged by the historic Kurdish peace agreement – process, I should say – we hope agreement – the Turkish process and the recent announcement by Turkey of several domestic reforms. Implementing these changes will spur greater openness and greater freedom in Turkish society, which the former – the Foreign Minister and the Prime Minister completely embrace, and which we encourage them and commit to working with them in order to try to promote going forward.
The United States firmly believes all of these things that I’ve just mentioned are the fundamentals of our future of prosperity. Strengthening due process and freedoms of the press, expression, and assembly always strengthens the nation as a whole. And as the Minister has said, the U.S.-Turkish partnership is values-based and founded on universal principles of fundamental rights and democratic norms, and we appreciate the way in which Turkey is consistently moving, as we are, to try to improve our approach to each and every one of those challenges.
So as you can see, there is a lot on our plate today. I think there are only a few countries – you can count them on one or two hands – who work on as many issues together as effectively as we are working on them. And we are both stronger when we tackle these challenges and create opportunities together. So Ahmet, thank you for you partnership at this critical moment for both of our countries, and thank you so much for Turkey’s support and partnership with us on so many issues of regional and global concern. We appreciate it.
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: Thank you. Thank you, John, for this excellent hospitality and excellent weather. I welcomed John to Turkey during spring three times. I always was feeling very guilty not to reciprocate with a visit and after Prime Minister’s visit to Washington in May. It is a great pleasure for me to meet you again and within this excellent atmosphere.
Of course, we met several times on many occasions meanwhile last in New York, and sometimes every week we are having telephone consultations, conversations. This is an excellent opportunity. I always followed your very active dynamic diplomacy, John, from Middle Eastern peace process to engagement with Iran, in all fields. I don’t know how many times you came to our region. This is – you are the most – the fast moving foreign minister or Secretary of State in the history, I am sure.
SECRETARY KERRY: I have to keep ahead of these guys. (Laughter.)
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: And any time, of course, it will be a pleasure to host you again, and we will continue to work together. And always, as Turkey and as Minister of Foreign Affairs of Turkey, I myself and our government has been supporting all of your initiatives – diplomatic initiatives, Middle Eastern peace process and many other initiatives you are leading.
First of all, let me express my sympathies for the loss of lives and destruction caused by the tornadoes in and around state of Illinois. And this is our sympathy as Turkish Government, Turkish nation. Whether there is any loss of lives in, whichever reason it happens, Turkey will be always shoulder-to-shoulder with American nation everywhere.
Today, we had again an excellent opportunity to discuss several issues. When I was listening you, John, it was an excellent summary. I thought, what else should I say? And you can imagine how Turkish-American common (inaudible), it’s so widespread from the frozen conflicts like Cyprus and Nagorno-Karabakh, for last 40 years, 30 years conflicts until today the existing conflicts next to us in Syria or in the Middle East, we are always working together. And in this sense, as I wrote in my article – thank you very much for your reference to the article – our partnership is a value-based partnership. And therefore, President Obama used the right terminology. It is a model partnership. Of course, sometimes there will be difference of opinion or other synergy which we need to do more, but this value-based model partnership will continue forever, and will be one of the main asset for international community to resolve any issue.
And it is very structured partnership. We have several mechanisms, and I am also grateful for mentioning this high-level comity on TTIP, which is very important for us because we see Turkish-American relation not only as a security-based strategic cooperation but as a cooperation on democracy, economic prosperity, for our nations and for the global society. In this sense, there are many challenges in front of us, especially regarding the developments in the Middle East and in Syria.
We had an excellent meeting in London. Eleven countries agreed on a framework. And today, we confirmed again that as Turkey and the United States, we will do everything possible to end this bloodshed, to help victims of this crisis in Syria, and to make a diplomacy possible in Geneva II. In London we agreed together as 11 ministers that this new process of Geneva II will not be an open-ended process which will continue months and years, and will be a process leading to a political transition with full executive power by a transitioning governing body. And there also we agreed that we need to work with Syrian National Coalition, especially for them to join this process. And after our joint effort with the United States, our teams worked very efficiently in several meeting thrusts, after several meetings with Syrian National Coalition in Istanbul in other places, now they agreed to come to Geneva II and based on the principles of London meeting. This is success, and this success is joint – is a result of a joint effort of our teams.
And from now on, our objective is to organize this conference as early as possible, because even in one day, one hour a day in this process, cause many loss of – other loss of lives. And as you said, Bashar Assad, who committed many crimes, using chemical weapons, using missiles, attacking cities, urban areas, now he’s implementing a policy of starvation. People in Damascus and in many other parts of Syria are dying because of illness, diseases, and hunger. They cannot find anything to eat and drink. It is a responsibility of international community and responsibility of all of us, to end these crimes against humanity. And as Turkey and the United States, we will continue to work on this. And today it was a very fruitful consultation for the next steps we will be taking together for the success of Geneva conference.
And also it is a great opportunity for us to share our views on Iran, Iranian nuclear program. I am sure you have been following how Turkey worked in the past in order to end this issue, because as Turkey, we don’t want to see any nuclear weapon in the region. We don’t want any state obtaining nuclear weapon. But at the same times – at the same time, we are in favor of peaceful access of nuclear technology. So based on these two principles, we will always support P5+1 Iran negotiations, John. And we appreciate and very strategic approach of President Obama’s engagement policy with Iran and your very efficient diplomacy to make this engagement in a positive way for a resolution of this longstanding issue in the region. If there is a solution in coming weeks, I am sure that will be a big – a great news to ease the tensions in our region, and that will affect all other issues in positive faith. I can assure that as Turkey, we will support this process. We will support your efforts in P5+1 Iran talks. And whatever Turkey is expected to do, Turkey will do everything possible to ease this tension.
On Middle Eastern peace efforts you are leading, John, again, we give full support. We wish success. And whenever you go to the region, we always expect good news from you. And I hope in coming visit, there will be more progress. And whatever is needed to be done again for any peace initiative in the Middle East, Turkey is ready to contribute and to work together.
Your reference to Iraq is very important. Iraq is one of the most important neighbors of Turkey. And my visit to Iraq last week was very successful, not only successful in restoring our relations in positive faith but also successful in the sense of a clear message to the people of Iraq and to the people of the region that Turkey will be doing everything possible to prevent sectarian tension in the region. And the timing of the visit was important. During Muharram, I visited Najaf and Karbala. I didn’t meet only with Prime Minister Maliki, but I also had chance and honor to meet Ayatollah al-Sistani and other Shiite and Sunni religious leaders.
Again, with the United States and with other allies, we need to work together to prevent sectarian and ethnic tensions in the region. Turkey will continue to have excellent relations with all the parties in Iraq. I am sure you followed very closely recent visit of Mr. Barzani to Diyarbakir. This shows that Turkey is – has a strategy of acting and sectarian peace in the region – in Iraq and in the region. And our relation with Iraq will be strengthened. And as the United States and Turkey, we will work together for the stability in Iraq and also for the stability in the region.
Regarding Nagorno-Karabakh and Cyprus, on Nagorno-Karabakh we have been consulting through several mechanisms, co-chairs of Minsk Group and other bilateral consultations. And we hope that this frozen conflict will be ending soon. And that will bring peace to Caucasia; that will bring peace to the region beyond Caucasia. Therefore, today I am happy to see that John and me and Turkey and the United States look to this issue from the same perspective, and we hope that this meeting between President Sargsyan and President Aliyev will be successful.
After a few days, I will be in St. Petersburg with Prime Minister Erdogan. This was a good chance of consultation with John about these coming visits to Russia and Iran. And our relation with Russia will – and peace consultations will be bringing positive contribution in all the regional issues in Caucasia and the Middle East. And Turkey and the United States will continue to work together in all different challenging issues in front of us.
Thank you for your hospitality. Thank you.
SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you. Thanks, Ahmet.
MS. PSAKI: Our first question will be from Margaret Brennan of CBS News.
QUESTION: Thank you, and thank you to both of you.
Mr. Secretary, do you expect negotiators to sign a deal with Iran in Geneva this week? Prime Minister Netanyahu seems to be saying he’s going to re-litigate the issue with you. Is that necessary? And on the question of Syria, you negotiated the basis for this OPCW agreement to dismantle Syria’s chemical weapons. It appears to be stalled; no countries agreed to take the weapons. Albania rejected the U.S. request to do so. What are you doing to move that along?
And Minister Davutoglu, if you could tell us if you think – on the issue of Syria – if this discussion of chemical weapons is just a distraction from the violence that threatens your borders.
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: Sorry?
QUESTION: A distraction from the violence that continues to threaten your border in Turkey.
SECRETARY KERRY: Do you want to go ahead? Go have at it.
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: Please.
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I have no specific expectations with respect to the negotiation in Geneva except that we will negotiate in good faith and we will try to get a first-step agreement and hope that Iran will understand the importance of coming there prepared to create a document that can prove to the world that this is a peaceful program. That’s always been our standard. Now, I’m not going to negotiate this in public. We all need to be respectful of each other’s processes here and positions. And so I think it’s best to leave that negotiation to the negotiating table. And it will begin on Wednesday and I will be here. I’m testifying on Thursday before the U.S. Congress on – before the Senate on the Disabilities Treaty, and we’ll see what develops as to whether or not we can get close and get this done.
With respect to Prime Minister Netanyahu, the Prime Minister and I – first of all, we are good friends. We’ve known each other for almost, what, 30 years or maybe more. I have great respect for his concerns about his country. The Prime Minister should express his concerns, and he has every right in the world to publicly state his position and defend what he perceives as his interests. We believe deeply in our commitment to Israel – deeply. And I have a long voting record, 100 percent record of support for our friends in Israel. And I can assure those friends and everybody else watching this that nothing that we are doing here, in my judgment, will put Israel at any additional risk. In fact, let me make this clear: We believe it reduces risk. We believe it helps all of us to move closer to this goal of achieving the comprehensive agreement that I talked about earlier.
The Prime Minister and I are talking several times a week. We talked over the weekend. We discussed timing and what may occur. I may not be able to get to – it looks as if I probably will not be able to get there over the course of this weekend, but I am committed to going in order to engage in the ongoing discussions that we are currently engaged in shortly after the Thanksgiving break, as soon as we can work out the timing. And that’s a priority for me and it doesn’t change. We remain deeply committed to this ongoing dialogue, to our friendship, and we intend to consult frequently and deeply about everything that we are engaged in.
With respect the OPCW process being stalled, on the contrary, a remarkable event is unfolding under the eyes of the world. The chemical weapons of one country are being corralled and moved and contained and placed under the supervision of an international organization which is committed to removing those weapons from Syria by the end of the year – by the end of the year. And I believe we are on target currently to achieve that. Now, while one country or another may have examined the question of taking those weapons under their jurisdiction in order to destroy them, we are not without other alternatives. In fact, we are actively pursuing two other alternatives which provide us a complete capacity to do the destruction and to meet the schedule.
So we’re on schedule, and I think it’s a remarkable thing that this cooperation that began in Geneva between Russia and the United States – or began earlier than Geneva; it began with telephone calls and conversations in St. Petersburg – is now actually being affected so effectively with the United Nations engagement with multiple countries aiding and assisting, and is on schedule and getting the job done. This is a great example of why multilateral organization and multilateral energy and commitment is so critical to all of us. I’m not going to crow about it till the job’s done, but we’re on track and we’re proud of the course that we’re on, and we are far from stalled. We are very much in business and we have alternatives as to how this will be destroyed.
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: Thank you, John. Yes, Turkey is the most affected country because of the crisis in Syria, because we have the longest border: 911 kilometers long. So on this border, of course, it is getting a national security issue for Turkey. Turkey has been affected because of this humanitarian tragedy. As John mentioned now, we have more than 600,000 refugees who came from Syria not for holiday unfortunately, but in order to escape from these air bombardments, missiles, and massacres.
Of course, they are our guests. We will do everything possible. It’s our humanitarian responsibility. We spent $2 billion and Turkish nation opened their hearts, their doors, to these people and embraced them as their brothers and sisters. And we will continue this policy from humanitarian perspective. But at the same time, beyond this humanitarian issue, Turkish border security has been affected negatively because there is not any orderly public authority on the other side of the border. In these type of cases, if two sides of the border are not – do not have equal authority to control, you will have – you will always face problems.
Therefore, in last two and a half years, there’s an increasing threat to Turkish national security. And for us – today, I mentioned to Secretary Hagel as well – of course, Syrian issue is important for us, but our first concern is Turkish national security. And the situation in Syria is threatening Turkish national security. Every day, there are some attempts by Syrian air forces to violate or coming and bombarding close to our border, and we had to take certain measures. And at the same time, every day we are receiving more and more refugees escaping, and this is affecting. On the other side of the border, there is no control and this creates a power vacuum which might be used by extremists groups.
And there are two threats now to Turkish national security: one is Syrian regime itself because of the policies; the second is those extremists groups which are misusing and exploiting this power vacuum for their ill intentions. Therefore, it is important to end this crisis as early as possible. When the crisis prolongs, these type of threats are emerging. And Turkey will be doing everything possible for humanitarian issues and for our national security and border control, but is not only Turkish responsibility. It is responsibility of international community to end this crisis in order to prevent these threats against Turkey and other neighboring countries.
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: Please.
QUESTION: Thank you. Mr. Foreign Minister, you were in Iraq a couple weeks ago, and you stated that we are opening a new page with Iraq. What does Turkey want to see on this new page? And we know that you are going to Russia and few days later to Iran. What is Turkey hoping will come out this visit?
And Mr. Secretary, can Turkey trust U.S. will fully be on its side when it struggles with the prospect of failed state in Syria, largely due to ineffectiveness of international community so far? What concrete plans does your Administration have to have is huge humanitarian and security burden over Turkey’s shoulders?
And also Mr. Foreign Minister, could you give some comment at this point? Did you feel U.S. Government has sent mixed signals to Ankara or left Turkey abandoned?
And quick question, Mr. Secretary – (laughter) – just Middle East peace for a second.
SECRETARY KERRY: That’s what we call in the law a leading question. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: Yeah, just on the Middle East process, Prime Minister Netanyahu said you will be in Israel on Friday. You have said Israeli settlements are illegal, a barrier to peace, and U.S. Government has been saying this for more than 30 years. What is difference now? Thank you.
SECRETARY KERRY: Go ahead. (Laughter.)
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: Two ladies asks so many questions, not two questions. The gentleman will ask for gender equality. (Laughter.)
SECRETARY KERRY: She asked you first, but I’m happy to go first.
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: Okay, okay, thank you. Thank you very much. About the new page on Iraq, yes, my visit was very successful, but it was a visit after so many other diplomatic meetings. The Speaker of the Parliament Nujaifi came to Turkey. We met with Hoshyar Zebari several times. Hoshyar Zebari visited Turkey. And this – we prepared the ground for my visit.
And three basic messages was there in my visit: First is, Turkey wants to have excellent bilateral relations, cooperation, and economic integration, if possible, with Iraq. That has been our intention when we established High-Level Strategic Cooperation Council mechanism first with Iraq. Now what we are doing, what we have decided with Prime Minister Maliki, is the preparatory meeting of this High-Level Strategic Cooperation Council will be completed soon. And Prime Minister Maliki in his visit – was probably late December, early January – there will be a High-Level Strategic Cooperation Council mechanism where all the important ministers will be accompanying Prime Minister Maliki, and we will have joint cabinet meeting in Turkey.
Second message was that Turkey is supporting ethnic and sectarian peace in Iraq, and Turkey will supporting the electoral process, and Turkey’s happy that a date has been declared for the general elections in Iraq. And Turkey’s at equal distance to all the groups in Iraq, and I am happy that the same messages were shared by United States as well. And we will support this process of election, and we will give the same message to all Iraqi parties. When Massoud Barzani – Mr. Barzani came to Diyarbakir, we also shared these views, and I shared with other Sunni and Shiite leaders when I was in (inaudible). (Inaudible) message, which is really even as important as the others, is a message to the region that we don’t want sectarian tension. With the leaders – Sunni and Shiite leaders – we shared this same concern, and as Turkey and Iraq – once we have good relations and in full solidarity, I am sure that will be the right message to those who want to provocate sectarian tension and war in our region. We will not tolerate, and I am happy to see the same political will on the Iraqi side that they are ready to work with us, that these scenarios of sectarian war in our region will not be successful.
About our visit to Russia and Iran – in fact, this month, we had several visits – but to Russia, we are going for High Level Cooperation Council meeting. Like Iraq, we have this mechanism with Russia, and Prime Minister Erdogan and President Putin will be co-chairing this joint cabinet meeting and Cooperation Council mechanism. There we discuss – we will discuss bilateral issues and new projects of cooperation. But at the same time, of course, as I said before, we will be consulting on Syria, Caucasia, and all other pending issues international, and that will be an excellent opportunity. After my visit to Washington, the same week, I will be visiting Tehran and (inaudible). So with this excellent consultation here, we will have the same opportunity of consultation with Russia and Iran on these difficult files.
In Tehran, again, this will be my first visit after the new government. Although I went for immigration ceremony, this will be bilateral visit. And we are preparing President Rouhani’s visit to Turkey and Prime Minister Erdogan’s visit to Tehran. Of course, we will be sharing not only bilateral issues, but also P5+1, Iran negotiations, as well as all regional issues from Afghanistan to Iraq, from Syria to Lebanon, and other regional issues. And that will be another good opportunity to create a common position in all these difficult files.
Thank you.
SECRETARY KERRY: Every fact in our relationship – every fact in our relationship – speaks to the trust that is built on an ongoing basis between our countries. And the fact is that Turkey is a NATO ally. The United States is supporting Turkey with respect to its border challenges and the unrest in Syria. The United States is working extremely closely on a daily basis with their officials and ours, cooperating completely with respect to Syria. We have consistent sharing of intelligence. We work on strategy. We are both involved on the challenges of the borders with respect to humanitarian assistance.
As you just heard, Turkey has put in 2 billion, and some of that internally in its own country. We’ve delivered over 1.3 billion in aid in order to help. We are collaborating and working closely together with respect to the London 11. We’ve been meeting consistently with respect to this challenge of Syria and the region. Ahmet and I talk some weeks several times, and then certainly once every week or two weeks we’re on the phone together. We have a constant discussion. And I think that if you look at the work we’ve done together with respect to Israel and Turkish relations where we’ve cooperated, the visit of Prime Minister Erdogan to here, to the United States, the President’s statements, this relationship is strong, and nobody should try to get in the way of it and suggest questions about its durability. We are working with Turkey with respect to European membership. We would love to see – we’ve been supportive of that for a long time. We’re encouraging that dialogue to continue.
So there are so many things that we are really engaged in that any neutral observer would have to look at this relationship and say, “Wow, these guys are really working together and they’ve got mutual interests.” And that’s what really brings nations together – when you share values, you share interests. Sometimes we have a disagreement. That’s okay. Friends can have disagreements as long as they respect each other about how they deal with it and how they are proceeding forward. So I’m very confident about this relationship going forward, and as I said to you earlier, we’re grateful for the work Turkey has done with us on so many different issues.
With respect to the Middle East peace process – and one other thing about – you asked about failed states and failing states in the region. Those are our interests too. We are deeply concerned about failed or failing states. And the United States believes in helping to bring about the stability of that region. It is not just of interest to Turkey or to Jordan or to Iraq or Lebanon. It is of great interest to us, and has been for many, many years. And we will not move away from or walk away from or turn away from that interest that is at the forefront of what President Obama talked about at the United Nations and remains a center of his foreign policy.
On the question of the Middle East peace process and the settlements and sort of – “What’s the difference,” is what you asked. Well, the difference is enormous. First of all, we have said that the settlements are illegitimate, and the United States policy has always opposed these settlements. And you saw an effort during the first four years of the Obama Administration to try to achieve a freeze on those settlements. For a temporary period of time, it was achieved. But then other things changed, and so that’s not the current framework within which we find ourselves.
But if you look back in history, few administrations have been able to begin on day one of a second term to focus on the Middle East peace process. Too often it’s been in the final months or in latter months. So we now have three years-plus ahead of us here to continue to work on this. I don’t want it and President Obama doesn’t want it, and I don’t think Prime Minister Netanyahu or Israelis want it to drag on for that long. We believe that there is a difference in the air today in all parties. The Israelis have taken great risks. Even when they made decisions with respect to Gaza or Lebanon and rockets came at them, nevertheless, they are still committed to peace, and the vast majority of the people in Israel are committed to a two-state solution. And Prime Minister Netanyahu, to his credit, has said, “We’re going to negotiate,” and believes it is worth trying to find a way to change the status quo. And he took great risks in the decision he made and the formula he accepted to come back to these talks. The world should credit him and Israel for doing that.
The Palestinians likewise have made a commitment to come to this process. The President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, has given up what is his ability to take issues to the United Nations for a period of time because he’s committed to be part of this process. And he has taken political heat for that, but he believes it’s the right thing to do to be at the negotiating table. The Arab community, through the Arab League, has a committee of foreign ministers who are following these negotiations, who have recommitted to the Saudi King’s creative peace proposal of a number of years ago, which has now been updated and now includes a sort of state-of-the-art 2013 recognition of how one might achieve territorial solution here.
So there’s a lot of energy going into this, a lot of people supporting it outside, in Europe. The Japanese have made a commitment recently, others, to do things. There’s a great deal of support. And I think that makes this different, because people understand that this is a crisis, a conflict that has been locked in a place for too long, and that the benefits of peace for everybody are significant enough to be working for them. So that’s what’s driving this, and our hope is that over the next weeks, months, progress can conceivably be made. But we’re going to try to exhaust every possibility that is available in order to put that to the test, and that’s where we’re heading with this.
And I think that with respect to the visit that – you asked the question – let me reiterate: Originally, we thought that I was going to try to travel this weekend, but because I’m testifying before the Senate on Thursday and the timing gets sort of difficult, it’s going to be very hard to be able to fit that in right before the Thanksgiving holiday. And I pleaded guilty of wanting to be able to spend some time with my family over the course of the Thanksgiving holiday, so we agreed that it would be better to try to do this after that, and that’s exactly what I’m going to do. But nobody should interpret anything from that except my schedule and my challenges.
That’s it.
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: Just – I forget to answer your question about mixed signals.
QUESTION: Exactly.
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: I think there is no need of sending any signals, even not-mixed or – mixed or not-mixed. There is – in our relations, we have always had channels of communication, not signals. We don’t need signals. And we still remember how President Obama welcomed our Prime Minister in May in an extraordinary way of hospitality, and both – Prime Minister Erdogan everywhere, he praises President Obama’s leadership, and President Obama always praise our Prime Minister and our President’s contributions to global peace. And between us, we met I don’t know how many times in less than a year, and how many telephone calls? Once I remember there – we spoke three times by phone, and my wife rebelled. She said, “Maybe I should call you as well to consult some family issues by phone. It is easier to reach you by phone other than seeing each other.” (Laughter.)
So we are – so therefore, there is no signal between us. There are – since there is a sincere dialogue, consultation, and not-mixed or not – mixed or not-mixed signals, but there is no signals. Direct, sincere, friendly, if sometimes needed, very frank also consultation between us, because we are working not only for our nations, but for regional and global peace. And that will continue forever between Turkish presidents, leaders, as well as American, Turkish ministers of foreign affairs forever. Thank you.
SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you very much
Remarks With Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu
Press Availability
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Treaty Room
Washington, DC
November 18, 2013
SECRETARY KERRY: Good afternoon, everybody. I am really delighted to welcome Foreign Minister Davutoglu back to Washington. He has been such a gracious host for me now on three trips to Turkey, and frankly, it was really high time that I had an opportunity to be able to reciprocate here. We’re delighted that he’s coming here on a beautiful, beautiful fall day with lots of colors out there. We’re trying to see if we can do our best to contest the beauty of the Bosporus and all that you’ve offered me. (Laughter.) But we have spectacular views and we’re happy to have you here.
Ahmet and I have worked very, very closely on a lot of issues, and you all are very familiar with them: the question of Israel and Turkey and a rapprochement, the question of Syria enormously, and other issues on a global basis. So it’s special for me to be able to welcome him here because the U.S.-Turkey relationship is vital on so many different levels. And he and I never seem to have enough time to be able to cover all of the issues. I might say that we’ve really only begun the process today. We’ve had a bilateral meeting. We’ve had a one-on-one meeting, then we’ve had a group meeting bilateral, and now we will go to lunch and continue the conversation on a number of the issues in front of us. But I’m happy that we’ve been able to have a very, very thorough, full discussion, even to date, on almost all the issues of concern, and we’re going to continue.
Whether the challenge is Syria or Iran, Middle East peace process, the future of our NATO alliance, or ensuring our economic prosperity, the U.S. and Turkey share strategic goals. And as the Foreign Minister put it in a recent article that he wrote, the U.S. and Turkey both seek a sustainable, peaceful regional and global order rooted in good governance and democratic accountability. We also appreciate how much hard work we have to do together and with our allies and partners to achieve all of these objectives.
In Syria, our objective together and with our friends and allies is to stop the bloodshed once and for all. And to do that, we agree that we must get the parties to the negotiating table. We are moving closer to that, literally, day by day now, and we commend the opposition’s recent vote to participate in a Geneva II conference, where we hope to forge the political solution to this conflict. I’ve had conversations when I was recently in Geneva with Foreign Minister Lavrov. I’ve had telephone conversations with fellow foreign ministers over the course of the last week, and now a face-to-face meeting with Foreign Minister Davutoglu, and we are all committed to this goal and will remain so.
Today, we also talked about the way that we can tackle together and with other friends the rising extremism of the region, which threatens not only Syria’s future but it threatens its neighbors, and obviously, in this case, Turkey. We discussed the horrific humanitarian situation that exists inside Syria; and by preventing vital aid from reaching those who need it, the Assad regime is now using a policy of starvation as a weapon of war. That is against the laws of war. It is against human conscience. It is unacceptable, and we are going to continue to press in order to deal with it. I talked to Foreign Minister Lavrov over the weekend about this issue, and we are going to continue to find ways, all together, in order to address it.
We commend Turkey’s remarkable generosity in hosting over 600,000 Syrian refugees now, as well as its vaccination program for 1 million children that they just announced today. And the United States is proud to have provided an additional 96 million in assistance to refugees to Turkey. That’s part of our now 1.3 billion that the American people have graciously and generously provided in order to relieve this humanitarian crisis, and America is proudly the number one donor in order to deal with this crisis.
We also discussed Iran and the key role that Turkey has played in helping to enforce the sanctions that have brought Iran to the negotiating table. This was the very purpose of these sanctions, and we are achieving the goal of at least getting to the negotiation. Now we obviously need to achieve something at that table. We need to remain united in our goal of ensuring that Iran never gets a nuclear weapon.
Now, I’ve heard a lot of back and forth in the last days and we respect the vigorous debate; we really do. But the bottom line is that we all agree, all of us, that there must be a verifiable, certain, failsafe process by which the guarantee of not getting a nuclear weapon is clear to all. That means our friends in Israel, that means our friends in the region, and that, of course, means all of us here in the United States and the United States Congress.
As we discussed today, the first step that the P5+1 is working on would stop the Iranian program from advancing while you engage in the negotiation to get to that situation where you have a comprehensive agreement and the guarantees that I talked about. We also want to commend Turkey for its recent high-level meetings with Iraq, which are important to every part of what is happening there, particularly in Iraq itself as well as with respect to Syria.
Turkey plays, as I said, a very large role in so many ways. For months now, we have been talking about Cyprus and we have been talking about Nagorno-Karabakh. And quietly, we have been trying to work ways that our ambassadors, who are front and center in this – in these initiatives, are continuing that process. Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot negotiators are making important progress, and we urge all parties to make the most of the current window of opportunity and to restart comprehensive talks.
I talked with both President Aliyev and President Sargsian in the last 48 hours – or I guess the last 72, anyway – and they are meeting shortly. We are urging that process to move forward, and we will continue to be engaged in that.
And of course, the relationship between the United States and Turkey is also defined by our work to promote prosperity for our people, the economic opportunities for all of our peoples, as well as across the world.
In September, we launched a high-level committee headed by the U.S. Trade Representative and the Turkish Minister of the Economy, and they will focus on developments between the U.S., EU, and the TTIP negotiations, as we call them. We will monitor any impacts on Turkey and closely continue to find ways to strengthen our economic ties, which are growing every year, and continue to work with Turkey on this process as we go forward.
The United States is particularly encouraged by the historic Kurdish peace agreement – process, I should say – we hope agreement – the Turkish process and the recent announcement by Turkey of several domestic reforms. Implementing these changes will spur greater openness and greater freedom in Turkish society, which the former – the Foreign Minister and the Prime Minister completely embrace, and which we encourage them and commit to working with them in order to try to promote going forward.
The United States firmly believes all of these things that I’ve just mentioned are the fundamentals of our future of prosperity. Strengthening due process and freedoms of the press, expression, and assembly always strengthens the nation as a whole. And as the Minister has said, the U.S.-Turkish partnership is values-based and founded on universal principles of fundamental rights and democratic norms, and we appreciate the way in which Turkey is consistently moving, as we are, to try to improve our approach to each and every one of those challenges.
So as you can see, there is a lot on our plate today. I think there are only a few countries – you can count them on one or two hands – who work on as many issues together as effectively as we are working on them. And we are both stronger when we tackle these challenges and create opportunities together. So Ahmet, thank you for you partnership at this critical moment for both of our countries, and thank you so much for Turkey’s support and partnership with us on so many issues of regional and global concern. We appreciate it.
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: Thank you. Thank you, John, for this excellent hospitality and excellent weather. I welcomed John to Turkey during spring three times. I always was feeling very guilty not to reciprocate with a visit and after Prime Minister’s visit to Washington in May. It is a great pleasure for me to meet you again and within this excellent atmosphere.
Of course, we met several times on many occasions meanwhile last in New York, and sometimes every week we are having telephone consultations, conversations. This is an excellent opportunity. I always followed your very active dynamic diplomacy, John, from Middle Eastern peace process to engagement with Iran, in all fields. I don’t know how many times you came to our region. This is – you are the most – the fast moving foreign minister or Secretary of State in the history, I am sure.
SECRETARY KERRY: I have to keep ahead of these guys. (Laughter.)
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: And any time, of course, it will be a pleasure to host you again, and we will continue to work together. And always, as Turkey and as Minister of Foreign Affairs of Turkey, I myself and our government has been supporting all of your initiatives – diplomatic initiatives, Middle Eastern peace process and many other initiatives you are leading.
First of all, let me express my sympathies for the loss of lives and destruction caused by the tornadoes in and around state of Illinois. And this is our sympathy as Turkish Government, Turkish nation. Whether there is any loss of lives in, whichever reason it happens, Turkey will be always shoulder-to-shoulder with American nation everywhere.
Today, we had again an excellent opportunity to discuss several issues. When I was listening you, John, it was an excellent summary. I thought, what else should I say? And you can imagine how Turkish-American common (inaudible), it’s so widespread from the frozen conflicts like Cyprus and Nagorno-Karabakh, for last 40 years, 30 years conflicts until today the existing conflicts next to us in Syria or in the Middle East, we are always working together. And in this sense, as I wrote in my article – thank you very much for your reference to the article – our partnership is a value-based partnership. And therefore, President Obama used the right terminology. It is a model partnership. Of course, sometimes there will be difference of opinion or other synergy which we need to do more, but this value-based model partnership will continue forever, and will be one of the main asset for international community to resolve any issue.
And it is very structured partnership. We have several mechanisms, and I am also grateful for mentioning this high-level comity on TTIP, which is very important for us because we see Turkish-American relation not only as a security-based strategic cooperation but as a cooperation on democracy, economic prosperity, for our nations and for the global society. In this sense, there are many challenges in front of us, especially regarding the developments in the Middle East and in Syria.
We had an excellent meeting in London. Eleven countries agreed on a framework. And today, we confirmed again that as Turkey and the United States, we will do everything possible to end this bloodshed, to help victims of this crisis in Syria, and to make a diplomacy possible in Geneva II. In London we agreed together as 11 ministers that this new process of Geneva II will not be an open-ended process which will continue months and years, and will be a process leading to a political transition with full executive power by a transitioning governing body. And there also we agreed that we need to work with Syrian National Coalition, especially for them to join this process. And after our joint effort with the United States, our teams worked very efficiently in several meeting thrusts, after several meetings with Syrian National Coalition in Istanbul in other places, now they agreed to come to Geneva II and based on the principles of London meeting. This is success, and this success is joint – is a result of a joint effort of our teams.
And from now on, our objective is to organize this conference as early as possible, because even in one day, one hour a day in this process, cause many loss of – other loss of lives. And as you said, Bashar Assad, who committed many crimes, using chemical weapons, using missiles, attacking cities, urban areas, now he’s implementing a policy of starvation. People in Damascus and in many other parts of Syria are dying because of illness, diseases, and hunger. They cannot find anything to eat and drink. It is a responsibility of international community and responsibility of all of us, to end these crimes against humanity. And as Turkey and the United States, we will continue to work on this. And today it was a very fruitful consultation for the next steps we will be taking together for the success of Geneva conference.
And also it is a great opportunity for us to share our views on Iran, Iranian nuclear program. I am sure you have been following how Turkey worked in the past in order to end this issue, because as Turkey, we don’t want to see any nuclear weapon in the region. We don’t want any state obtaining nuclear weapon. But at the same times – at the same time, we are in favor of peaceful access of nuclear technology. So based on these two principles, we will always support P5+1 Iran negotiations, John. And we appreciate and very strategic approach of President Obama’s engagement policy with Iran and your very efficient diplomacy to make this engagement in a positive way for a resolution of this longstanding issue in the region. If there is a solution in coming weeks, I am sure that will be a big – a great news to ease the tensions in our region, and that will affect all other issues in positive faith. I can assure that as Turkey, we will support this process. We will support your efforts in P5+1 Iran talks. And whatever Turkey is expected to do, Turkey will do everything possible to ease this tension.
On Middle Eastern peace efforts you are leading, John, again, we give full support. We wish success. And whenever you go to the region, we always expect good news from you. And I hope in coming visit, there will be more progress. And whatever is needed to be done again for any peace initiative in the Middle East, Turkey is ready to contribute and to work together.
Your reference to Iraq is very important. Iraq is one of the most important neighbors of Turkey. And my visit to Iraq last week was very successful, not only successful in restoring our relations in positive faith but also successful in the sense of a clear message to the people of Iraq and to the people of the region that Turkey will be doing everything possible to prevent sectarian tension in the region. And the timing of the visit was important. During Muharram, I visited Najaf and Karbala. I didn’t meet only with Prime Minister Maliki, but I also had chance and honor to meet Ayatollah al-Sistani and other Shiite and Sunni religious leaders.
Again, with the United States and with other allies, we need to work together to prevent sectarian and ethnic tensions in the region. Turkey will continue to have excellent relations with all the parties in Iraq. I am sure you followed very closely recent visit of Mr. Barzani to Diyarbakir. This shows that Turkey is – has a strategy of acting and sectarian peace in the region – in Iraq and in the region. And our relation with Iraq will be strengthened. And as the United States and Turkey, we will work together for the stability in Iraq and also for the stability in the region.
Regarding Nagorno-Karabakh and Cyprus, on Nagorno-Karabakh we have been consulting through several mechanisms, co-chairs of Minsk Group and other bilateral consultations. And we hope that this frozen conflict will be ending soon. And that will bring peace to Caucasia; that will bring peace to the region beyond Caucasia. Therefore, today I am happy to see that John and me and Turkey and the United States look to this issue from the same perspective, and we hope that this meeting between President Sargsyan and President Aliyev will be successful.
After a few days, I will be in St. Petersburg with Prime Minister Erdogan. This was a good chance of consultation with John about these coming visits to Russia and Iran. And our relation with Russia will – and peace consultations will be bringing positive contribution in all the regional issues in Caucasia and the Middle East. And Turkey and the United States will continue to work together in all different challenging issues in front of us.
Thank you for your hospitality. Thank you.
SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you. Thanks, Ahmet.
MS. PSAKI: Our first question will be from Margaret Brennan of CBS News.
QUESTION: Thank you, and thank you to both of you.
Mr. Secretary, do you expect negotiators to sign a deal with Iran in Geneva this week? Prime Minister Netanyahu seems to be saying he’s going to re-litigate the issue with you. Is that necessary? And on the question of Syria, you negotiated the basis for this OPCW agreement to dismantle Syria’s chemical weapons. It appears to be stalled; no countries agreed to take the weapons. Albania rejected the U.S. request to do so. What are you doing to move that along?
And Minister Davutoglu, if you could tell us if you think – on the issue of Syria – if this discussion of chemical weapons is just a distraction from the violence that threatens your borders.
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: Sorry?
QUESTION: A distraction from the violence that continues to threaten your border in Turkey.
SECRETARY KERRY: Do you want to go ahead? Go have at it.
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: Please.
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I have no specific expectations with respect to the negotiation in Geneva except that we will negotiate in good faith and we will try to get a first-step agreement and hope that Iran will understand the importance of coming there prepared to create a document that can prove to the world that this is a peaceful program. That’s always been our standard. Now, I’m not going to negotiate this in public. We all need to be respectful of each other’s processes here and positions. And so I think it’s best to leave that negotiation to the negotiating table. And it will begin on Wednesday and I will be here. I’m testifying on Thursday before the U.S. Congress on – before the Senate on the Disabilities Treaty, and we’ll see what develops as to whether or not we can get close and get this done.
With respect to Prime Minister Netanyahu, the Prime Minister and I – first of all, we are good friends. We’ve known each other for almost, what, 30 years or maybe more. I have great respect for his concerns about his country. The Prime Minister should express his concerns, and he has every right in the world to publicly state his position and defend what he perceives as his interests. We believe deeply in our commitment to Israel – deeply. And I have a long voting record, 100 percent record of support for our friends in Israel. And I can assure those friends and everybody else watching this that nothing that we are doing here, in my judgment, will put Israel at any additional risk. In fact, let me make this clear: We believe it reduces risk. We believe it helps all of us to move closer to this goal of achieving the comprehensive agreement that I talked about earlier.
The Prime Minister and I are talking several times a week. We talked over the weekend. We discussed timing and what may occur. I may not be able to get to – it looks as if I probably will not be able to get there over the course of this weekend, but I am committed to going in order to engage in the ongoing discussions that we are currently engaged in shortly after the Thanksgiving break, as soon as we can work out the timing. And that’s a priority for me and it doesn’t change. We remain deeply committed to this ongoing dialogue, to our friendship, and we intend to consult frequently and deeply about everything that we are engaged in.
With respect the OPCW process being stalled, on the contrary, a remarkable event is unfolding under the eyes of the world. The chemical weapons of one country are being corralled and moved and contained and placed under the supervision of an international organization which is committed to removing those weapons from Syria by the end of the year – by the end of the year. And I believe we are on target currently to achieve that. Now, while one country or another may have examined the question of taking those weapons under their jurisdiction in order to destroy them, we are not without other alternatives. In fact, we are actively pursuing two other alternatives which provide us a complete capacity to do the destruction and to meet the schedule.
So we’re on schedule, and I think it’s a remarkable thing that this cooperation that began in Geneva between Russia and the United States – or began earlier than Geneva; it began with telephone calls and conversations in St. Petersburg – is now actually being affected so effectively with the United Nations engagement with multiple countries aiding and assisting, and is on schedule and getting the job done. This is a great example of why multilateral organization and multilateral energy and commitment is so critical to all of us. I’m not going to crow about it till the job’s done, but we’re on track and we’re proud of the course that we’re on, and we are far from stalled. We are very much in business and we have alternatives as to how this will be destroyed.
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: Thank you, John. Yes, Turkey is the most affected country because of the crisis in Syria, because we have the longest border: 911 kilometers long. So on this border, of course, it is getting a national security issue for Turkey. Turkey has been affected because of this humanitarian tragedy. As John mentioned now, we have more than 600,000 refugees who came from Syria not for holiday unfortunately, but in order to escape from these air bombardments, missiles, and massacres.
Of course, they are our guests. We will do everything possible. It’s our humanitarian responsibility. We spent $2 billion and Turkish nation opened their hearts, their doors, to these people and embraced them as their brothers and sisters. And we will continue this policy from humanitarian perspective. But at the same time, beyond this humanitarian issue, Turkish border security has been affected negatively because there is not any orderly public authority on the other side of the border. In these type of cases, if two sides of the border are not – do not have equal authority to control, you will have – you will always face problems.
Therefore, in last two and a half years, there’s an increasing threat to Turkish national security. And for us – today, I mentioned to Secretary Hagel as well – of course, Syrian issue is important for us, but our first concern is Turkish national security. And the situation in Syria is threatening Turkish national security. Every day, there are some attempts by Syrian air forces to violate or coming and bombarding close to our border, and we had to take certain measures. And at the same time, every day we are receiving more and more refugees escaping, and this is affecting. On the other side of the border, there is no control and this creates a power vacuum which might be used by extremists groups.
And there are two threats now to Turkish national security: one is Syrian regime itself because of the policies; the second is those extremists groups which are misusing and exploiting this power vacuum for their ill intentions. Therefore, it is important to end this crisis as early as possible. When the crisis prolongs, these type of threats are emerging. And Turkey will be doing everything possible for humanitarian issues and for our national security and border control, but is not only Turkish responsibility. It is responsibility of international community to end this crisis in order to prevent these threats against Turkey and other neighboring countries.
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: Please.
QUESTION: Thank you. Mr. Foreign Minister, you were in Iraq a couple weeks ago, and you stated that we are opening a new page with Iraq. What does Turkey want to see on this new page? And we know that you are going to Russia and few days later to Iran. What is Turkey hoping will come out this visit?
And Mr. Secretary, can Turkey trust U.S. will fully be on its side when it struggles with the prospect of failed state in Syria, largely due to ineffectiveness of international community so far? What concrete plans does your Administration have to have is huge humanitarian and security burden over Turkey’s shoulders?
And also Mr. Foreign Minister, could you give some comment at this point? Did you feel U.S. Government has sent mixed signals to Ankara or left Turkey abandoned?
And quick question, Mr. Secretary – (laughter) – just Middle East peace for a second.
SECRETARY KERRY: That’s what we call in the law a leading question. (Laughter.)
QUESTION: Yeah, just on the Middle East process, Prime Minister Netanyahu said you will be in Israel on Friday. You have said Israeli settlements are illegal, a barrier to peace, and U.S. Government has been saying this for more than 30 years. What is difference now? Thank you.
SECRETARY KERRY: Go ahead. (Laughter.)
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: Two ladies asks so many questions, not two questions. The gentleman will ask for gender equality. (Laughter.)
SECRETARY KERRY: She asked you first, but I’m happy to go first.
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: Okay, okay, thank you. Thank you very much. About the new page on Iraq, yes, my visit was very successful, but it was a visit after so many other diplomatic meetings. The Speaker of the Parliament Nujaifi came to Turkey. We met with Hoshyar Zebari several times. Hoshyar Zebari visited Turkey. And this – we prepared the ground for my visit.
And three basic messages was there in my visit: First is, Turkey wants to have excellent bilateral relations, cooperation, and economic integration, if possible, with Iraq. That has been our intention when we established High-Level Strategic Cooperation Council mechanism first with Iraq. Now what we are doing, what we have decided with Prime Minister Maliki, is the preparatory meeting of this High-Level Strategic Cooperation Council will be completed soon. And Prime Minister Maliki in his visit – was probably late December, early January – there will be a High-Level Strategic Cooperation Council mechanism where all the important ministers will be accompanying Prime Minister Maliki, and we will have joint cabinet meeting in Turkey.
Second message was that Turkey is supporting ethnic and sectarian peace in Iraq, and Turkey will supporting the electoral process, and Turkey’s happy that a date has been declared for the general elections in Iraq. And Turkey’s at equal distance to all the groups in Iraq, and I am happy that the same messages were shared by United States as well. And we will support this process of election, and we will give the same message to all Iraqi parties. When Massoud Barzani – Mr. Barzani came to Diyarbakir, we also shared these views, and I shared with other Sunni and Shiite leaders when I was in (inaudible). (Inaudible) message, which is really even as important as the others, is a message to the region that we don’t want sectarian tension. With the leaders – Sunni and Shiite leaders – we shared this same concern, and as Turkey and Iraq – once we have good relations and in full solidarity, I am sure that will be the right message to those who want to provocate sectarian tension and war in our region. We will not tolerate, and I am happy to see the same political will on the Iraqi side that they are ready to work with us, that these scenarios of sectarian war in our region will not be successful.
About our visit to Russia and Iran – in fact, this month, we had several visits – but to Russia, we are going for High Level Cooperation Council meeting. Like Iraq, we have this mechanism with Russia, and Prime Minister Erdogan and President Putin will be co-chairing this joint cabinet meeting and Cooperation Council mechanism. There we discuss – we will discuss bilateral issues and new projects of cooperation. But at the same time, of course, as I said before, we will be consulting on Syria, Caucasia, and all other pending issues international, and that will be an excellent opportunity. After my visit to Washington, the same week, I will be visiting Tehran and (inaudible). So with this excellent consultation here, we will have the same opportunity of consultation with Russia and Iran on these difficult files.
In Tehran, again, this will be my first visit after the new government. Although I went for immigration ceremony, this will be bilateral visit. And we are preparing President Rouhani’s visit to Turkey and Prime Minister Erdogan’s visit to Tehran. Of course, we will be sharing not only bilateral issues, but also P5+1, Iran negotiations, as well as all regional issues from Afghanistan to Iraq, from Syria to Lebanon, and other regional issues. And that will be another good opportunity to create a common position in all these difficult files.
Thank you.
SECRETARY KERRY: Every fact in our relationship – every fact in our relationship – speaks to the trust that is built on an ongoing basis between our countries. And the fact is that Turkey is a NATO ally. The United States is supporting Turkey with respect to its border challenges and the unrest in Syria. The United States is working extremely closely on a daily basis with their officials and ours, cooperating completely with respect to Syria. We have consistent sharing of intelligence. We work on strategy. We are both involved on the challenges of the borders with respect to humanitarian assistance.
As you just heard, Turkey has put in 2 billion, and some of that internally in its own country. We’ve delivered over 1.3 billion in aid in order to help. We are collaborating and working closely together with respect to the London 11. We’ve been meeting consistently with respect to this challenge of Syria and the region. Ahmet and I talk some weeks several times, and then certainly once every week or two weeks we’re on the phone together. We have a constant discussion. And I think that if you look at the work we’ve done together with respect to Israel and Turkish relations where we’ve cooperated, the visit of Prime Minister Erdogan to here, to the United States, the President’s statements, this relationship is strong, and nobody should try to get in the way of it and suggest questions about its durability. We are working with Turkey with respect to European membership. We would love to see – we’ve been supportive of that for a long time. We’re encouraging that dialogue to continue.
So there are so many things that we are really engaged in that any neutral observer would have to look at this relationship and say, “Wow, these guys are really working together and they’ve got mutual interests.” And that’s what really brings nations together – when you share values, you share interests. Sometimes we have a disagreement. That’s okay. Friends can have disagreements as long as they respect each other about how they deal with it and how they are proceeding forward. So I’m very confident about this relationship going forward, and as I said to you earlier, we’re grateful for the work Turkey has done with us on so many different issues.
With respect to the Middle East peace process – and one other thing about – you asked about failed states and failing states in the region. Those are our interests too. We are deeply concerned about failed or failing states. And the United States believes in helping to bring about the stability of that region. It is not just of interest to Turkey or to Jordan or to Iraq or Lebanon. It is of great interest to us, and has been for many, many years. And we will not move away from or walk away from or turn away from that interest that is at the forefront of what President Obama talked about at the United Nations and remains a center of his foreign policy.
On the question of the Middle East peace process and the settlements and sort of – “What’s the difference,” is what you asked. Well, the difference is enormous. First of all, we have said that the settlements are illegitimate, and the United States policy has always opposed these settlements. And you saw an effort during the first four years of the Obama Administration to try to achieve a freeze on those settlements. For a temporary period of time, it was achieved. But then other things changed, and so that’s not the current framework within which we find ourselves.
But if you look back in history, few administrations have been able to begin on day one of a second term to focus on the Middle East peace process. Too often it’s been in the final months or in latter months. So we now have three years-plus ahead of us here to continue to work on this. I don’t want it and President Obama doesn’t want it, and I don’t think Prime Minister Netanyahu or Israelis want it to drag on for that long. We believe that there is a difference in the air today in all parties. The Israelis have taken great risks. Even when they made decisions with respect to Gaza or Lebanon and rockets came at them, nevertheless, they are still committed to peace, and the vast majority of the people in Israel are committed to a two-state solution. And Prime Minister Netanyahu, to his credit, has said, “We’re going to negotiate,” and believes it is worth trying to find a way to change the status quo. And he took great risks in the decision he made and the formula he accepted to come back to these talks. The world should credit him and Israel for doing that.
The Palestinians likewise have made a commitment to come to this process. The President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, has given up what is his ability to take issues to the United Nations for a period of time because he’s committed to be part of this process. And he has taken political heat for that, but he believes it’s the right thing to do to be at the negotiating table. The Arab community, through the Arab League, has a committee of foreign ministers who are following these negotiations, who have recommitted to the Saudi King’s creative peace proposal of a number of years ago, which has now been updated and now includes a sort of state-of-the-art 2013 recognition of how one might achieve territorial solution here.
So there’s a lot of energy going into this, a lot of people supporting it outside, in Europe. The Japanese have made a commitment recently, others, to do things. There’s a great deal of support. And I think that makes this different, because people understand that this is a crisis, a conflict that has been locked in a place for too long, and that the benefits of peace for everybody are significant enough to be working for them. So that’s what’s driving this, and our hope is that over the next weeks, months, progress can conceivably be made. But we’re going to try to exhaust every possibility that is available in order to put that to the test, and that’s where we’re heading with this.
And I think that with respect to the visit that – you asked the question – let me reiterate: Originally, we thought that I was going to try to travel this weekend, but because I’m testifying before the Senate on Thursday and the timing gets sort of difficult, it’s going to be very hard to be able to fit that in right before the Thanksgiving holiday. And I pleaded guilty of wanting to be able to spend some time with my family over the course of the Thanksgiving holiday, so we agreed that it would be better to try to do this after that, and that’s exactly what I’m going to do. But nobody should interpret anything from that except my schedule and my challenges.
That’s it.
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: Just – I forget to answer your question about mixed signals.
QUESTION: Exactly.
FOREIGN MINISTER DAVUTOGLU: I think there is no need of sending any signals, even not-mixed or – mixed or not-mixed. There is – in our relations, we have always had channels of communication, not signals. We don’t need signals. And we still remember how President Obama welcomed our Prime Minister in May in an extraordinary way of hospitality, and both – Prime Minister Erdogan everywhere, he praises President Obama’s leadership, and President Obama always praise our Prime Minister and our President’s contributions to global peace. And between us, we met I don’t know how many times in less than a year, and how many telephone calls? Once I remember there – we spoke three times by phone, and my wife rebelled. She said, “Maybe I should call you as well to consult some family issues by phone. It is easier to reach you by phone other than seeing each other.” (Laughter.)
So we are – so therefore, there is no signal between us. There are – since there is a sincere dialogue, consultation, and not-mixed or not – mixed or not-mixed signals, but there is no signals. Direct, sincere, friendly, if sometimes needed, very frank also consultation between us, because we are working not only for our nations, but for regional and global peace. And that will continue forever between Turkish presidents, leaders, as well as American, Turkish ministers of foreign affairs forever. Thank you.
SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you very much
"BRIGADE HELICOPTERS PROVIDE HEAVY LIFT CAPABILITIES OVER EASTERN AFGHANISTAN"
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
A CH-47 Chinook helicopter makes its approach into the forward arming and refueling point to refuel on Forward Operating Base Fenty, Afghanistan, Nov. 12, 2013. The aircrew, which is assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 10th Combat Aviation Brigade, Task Force Phoenix, was conducting a personnel and cargo movement mission over eastern Afghanistan. U.S. Army photo by Capt. Peter Smedberg.
U.S.+Army+photo+by+Capt.+Peter+Smedberg.jpg)
Soldiers hot load a CH-47 Chinook helicopter on Forward Operating Base Fenty, Afghanistan, Nov. 12, 2013. The aircrew, which is assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 10th Combat Aviation Brigade, Task Force Phoenix, was conducting a personnel and cargo movement mission over eastern Afghanistan. U.S. Army photo by Capt. Peter Smedberg.
A CH-47 Chinook helicopter makes its approach into the forward arming and refueling point to refuel on Forward Operating Base Fenty, Afghanistan, Nov. 12, 2013. The aircrew, which is assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 10th Combat Aviation Brigade, Task Force Phoenix, was conducting a personnel and cargo movement mission over eastern Afghanistan. U.S. Army photo by Capt. Peter Smedberg.
U.S.+Army+photo+by+Capt.+Peter+Smedberg.jpg)
Soldiers hot load a CH-47 Chinook helicopter on Forward Operating Base Fenty, Afghanistan, Nov. 12, 2013. The aircrew, which is assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 10th Combat Aviation Brigade, Task Force Phoenix, was conducting a personnel and cargo movement mission over eastern Afghanistan. U.S. Army photo by Capt. Peter Smedberg.
NEW GUIDELINES FOR SMARTER USE OF ANTIBIOTIC PRESCRIPTIONS FOR CHILDREN
FROM: CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION
New guidance limits antibiotics for common infections in children
Get Smart About Antibiotics Week 2013 calls for responsible antibiotic prescribing
Every year as many as 10 million U.S. children risk side effects from antibiotic prescriptions that are unlikely to help their upper respiratory conditions. Many of these infections are caused by viruses, which are not helped by antibiotics.
This overuse of antibiotics, a significant factor fueling antibiotic resistance, is the focus of a new report Principles of Judicious Antibiotic Prescribing for Bacterial Upper Respiratory Tract Infections in PediatricsExternal Web Site Icon by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Released today during Get Smart About Antibiotics Week, the report amplifies recent AAP guidance and promotes responsible antibiotic prescribing for three common upper respiratory tract infections in children: ear infections, sinus infections, and sore throats.
Antibiotic resistance occurs when bacteria evolve and are able to outsmart antibiotics, making even common infections difficult to treat. According to a landmark CDC report from September 2013, each year more than two million Americans get infections that are resistant to antibiotics and 23,000 die as a result.
“Our medicine cabinet is nearly empty of antibiotics to treat some infections,” said CDC Director Tom Frieden, M.D., M.P.H. “If doctors prescribe antibiotics carefully and patients take them as prescribed we can preserve these lifesaving drugs and avoid entering a post-antibiotic era.”
By providing detailed clinical criteria to help physicians distinguish between viral and bacterial upper respiratory tract infections, the recommendations provide guidance for physicians that will improve care for children. At the same time, it will help limit antibiotic prescriptions, giving bacteria fewer chances to become resistant and lowering children’s risk of side effects.
“Many people have the misconception that since antibiotics are commonly used that they are harmless,” says Dr. Lauri Hicks, a coauthor of the report and medical director of CDC’s Get Smart: Know When Antibiotics Work program. “Taking antibiotics when you have a virus can do more harm than good.”
These harms can be in the form of antibiotic side effects or promoting the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, which can then spread through a community.
CDC promotes responsible antibiotic use to consumers and health care providers through the combined efforts of the Get Smart: Know When Antibiotics Work and Get Smart for Healthcare programs, as well as during Get Smart About Antibiotics Week (Nov. 18–24, 2013) each year. State health departments, non-profit partners, and for-profit partners all contribute to the observance week’s success by spreading the word about when antibiotics work — and when they don’t.
This year’s activities include a Public Health Grand Rounds about the growing problem of antibiotic resistance in outpatient and inpatient settings on Tuesday, November 19 at 1 pm (EST). In addition, a Twitter chat on the topic will be held Friday, November 22 at 1 pm (EST). Follow the hashtag #CDCchat on Twitter and join in the conversation to talk with Dr. Frieden, CDC experts and other partners about your experiences with antibiotic resistance.
New guidance limits antibiotics for common infections in children
Get Smart About Antibiotics Week 2013 calls for responsible antibiotic prescribing
Every year as many as 10 million U.S. children risk side effects from antibiotic prescriptions that are unlikely to help their upper respiratory conditions. Many of these infections are caused by viruses, which are not helped by antibiotics.
This overuse of antibiotics, a significant factor fueling antibiotic resistance, is the focus of a new report Principles of Judicious Antibiotic Prescribing for Bacterial Upper Respiratory Tract Infections in PediatricsExternal Web Site Icon by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Released today during Get Smart About Antibiotics Week, the report amplifies recent AAP guidance and promotes responsible antibiotic prescribing for three common upper respiratory tract infections in children: ear infections, sinus infections, and sore throats.
Antibiotic resistance occurs when bacteria evolve and are able to outsmart antibiotics, making even common infections difficult to treat. According to a landmark CDC report from September 2013, each year more than two million Americans get infections that are resistant to antibiotics and 23,000 die as a result.
“Our medicine cabinet is nearly empty of antibiotics to treat some infections,” said CDC Director Tom Frieden, M.D., M.P.H. “If doctors prescribe antibiotics carefully and patients take them as prescribed we can preserve these lifesaving drugs and avoid entering a post-antibiotic era.”
By providing detailed clinical criteria to help physicians distinguish between viral and bacterial upper respiratory tract infections, the recommendations provide guidance for physicians that will improve care for children. At the same time, it will help limit antibiotic prescriptions, giving bacteria fewer chances to become resistant and lowering children’s risk of side effects.
“Many people have the misconception that since antibiotics are commonly used that they are harmless,” says Dr. Lauri Hicks, a coauthor of the report and medical director of CDC’s Get Smart: Know When Antibiotics Work program. “Taking antibiotics when you have a virus can do more harm than good.”
These harms can be in the form of antibiotic side effects or promoting the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, which can then spread through a community.
CDC promotes responsible antibiotic use to consumers and health care providers through the combined efforts of the Get Smart: Know When Antibiotics Work and Get Smart for Healthcare programs, as well as during Get Smart About Antibiotics Week (Nov. 18–24, 2013) each year. State health departments, non-profit partners, and for-profit partners all contribute to the observance week’s success by spreading the word about when antibiotics work — and when they don’t.
This year’s activities include a Public Health Grand Rounds about the growing problem of antibiotic resistance in outpatient and inpatient settings on Tuesday, November 19 at 1 pm (EST). In addition, a Twitter chat on the topic will be held Friday, November 22 at 1 pm (EST). Follow the hashtag #CDCchat on Twitter and join in the conversation to talk with Dr. Frieden, CDC experts and other partners about your experiences with antibiotic resistance.
READOUT: WHITE HOUSE OFFICIAL'S CALL WITH PRESIDENT HADI OF YEMEN
FROM: THE WHITE HOUSE
Readout of Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Lisa Monaco's Call with President Hadi of Yemen
Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Lisa Monaco called President Abdo Rabu Mansour Hadi of Yemen today to reaffirm the U.S. government’s strong support for Yemen’s political transition. Ms. Monaco commended the National Dialogue for its efforts to develop a shared vision for a more just and democratic Yemen, and expressed U.S. support for President Hadi’s efforts to bring the National Dialogue to conclusion and move forward with implementation of the Gulf Cooperation Council Initiative. She praised the contributions that Yemeni women, youth, and civil society have made to the National Dialogue, and expressed the hope that they will continue their engagement in subsequent stages of the transition. Ms. Monaco also reaffirmed the U.S. government’s commitment to stand with the Yemeni government and people as they implement the National Dialogue’s outcomes, foster economic development, and combat the security threat from al-Qa’ida in the Arabian Peninsula.
Readout of Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Lisa Monaco's Call with President Hadi of Yemen
Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Lisa Monaco called President Abdo Rabu Mansour Hadi of Yemen today to reaffirm the U.S. government’s strong support for Yemen’s political transition. Ms. Monaco commended the National Dialogue for its efforts to develop a shared vision for a more just and democratic Yemen, and expressed U.S. support for President Hadi’s efforts to bring the National Dialogue to conclusion and move forward with implementation of the Gulf Cooperation Council Initiative. She praised the contributions that Yemeni women, youth, and civil society have made to the National Dialogue, and expressed the hope that they will continue their engagement in subsequent stages of the transition. Ms. Monaco also reaffirmed the U.S. government’s commitment to stand with the Yemeni government and people as they implement the National Dialogue’s outcomes, foster economic development, and combat the security threat from al-Qa’ida in the Arabian Peninsula.
FTC CRACKS DOWN ON PAYMENT PROCESSING SCAMMERS CHARGING HIDDEN FEES
FROM: U.S. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
FTC Settlements Crack Down on Payment Processing Operation that Enabled 'Google Money Tree' Scammers to Charge Consumers $15 Million in Hidden Fees
The Federal Trade Commission is continuing its crackdown on payment processing operations that enable scam artists to charge consumer accounts despite signs of ongoing fraud and unauthorized transactions. Today, the Commission announced a proposed settlement resolving allegations that a payment processor, Process America Inc., and its owners, Kim Ricketts, Keith Phillips and Craig Rickard, used unfair tactics to open and maintain scores of merchant accounts for Infusion Media Inc., which perpetrated the “Google Money Tree” work-at-home scheme. Using these merchant accounts, Infusion Media charged more than $15 million in unauthorized charges on consumers’ debit and credit card accounts.
Payment processors and Independent Sales Organizations (ISOs) enable merchants to charge consumers’ credit cards for products and services. In exchange, payment processors and ISOs get paid for each payment transaction the merchant processes.
In June 2009, the FTC charged the Infusion Media defendants with falsely claiming that consumers could earn $100,000 in six months, misrepresenting an affiliation with Google, and tricking consumers into signing up for automatic monthly charges that would continue until the consumer took affirmative steps to cancel.
The complaint against Process America alleges that the defendants knew or should have known that they were processing charges that consumers had not authorized. Evidence that consumers were being charged without their permission included plainly deceptive statements on merchant websites, notices that the merchant should be placed in Visa and MasterCard chargeback monitoring programs, and chronically excessive chargeback rates – the percentage of charges that are challenged by consumers and result in the charges being reversed. From 2008 through 2009, the defendants opened and maintained 131 merchant accounts through which the perpetrators processed more than $15 million in unauthorized charges on consumer debit and credit card accounts.
To keep Infusion Media’s merchant accounts open, the defendants allegedly engaged in tactics that were designed to evade fraud monitoring programs implemented by Visa and MasterCard. These tactics included submitting merchant applications containing false information and “load balancing” – distributing transaction volume among numerous merchant accounts. As a result, Infusion Media’s scam operated for nearly a year, and Process America continued to earn fees from its payment processing activity.
To resolve the allegations in the complaint, the individual defendants have agreed to separate permanent injunctions containing prohibitions and restrictions on their future payment processing activities:
Rickard is banned from payment processing and acting as an ISO. He is prohibited from acting as a sales agent for any client engaged in (a) unfair or deceptive business practices; (b) certain categories of high-risk activities, including negative-option marketing (where the seller interprets consumers’ silence or inaction as permission to charge them), money-making opportunities, credit card or identity theft protection, timeshare resale services, buying clubs, medical discount plans; or (c) conduct that has qualified a client for a chargeback monitoring program.
Rickard is also prohibited from acting as a sales agent for any client without first screening them for unfair or deceptive business practices. The order imposes a judgment of more than $184,000 that will be suspended based on his inability to pay. The full judgment will become due immediately if Rickard is found to have misrepresented his financial condition.
Ricketts and Phillips are prohibited from acting as payment processors, ISOs, or sales agents for any client engaged in (a) unfair or deceptive business practices; or (b) certain categories of high-risk activities certain categories of high-risk clients. They also are barred from acting as a sales agent for any client without screening and monitoring them for unfair or deceptive business practices.
In addition, Process America’s Chief Restructuring Officer has agreed to recommend and seek authority from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California to enter into the proposed settlement with the FTC. Under the proposed settlement:
Process America is prohibited from payment processing or acting as an ISO or sales agent for any client engaged in negative-option marketing or unfair or deceptive business practices, and from failing to screen, monitor, and promptly investigate clients for such practices.
The orders prohibit all of the defendants from selling or otherwise benefitting from consumers’ personal information, and failing to properly dispose of customer information.
The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the complaint and approving the proposed consent judgment was 4-0. The proposed settlement with Process America is subject to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California’s approval of a Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9019 Motion for Compromise. The proposed consent judgments with Process America and the individual defendants are also subject to court approval.
NOTE: The Commission files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. Consent judgments have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court judge.
FTC Settlements Crack Down on Payment Processing Operation that Enabled 'Google Money Tree' Scammers to Charge Consumers $15 Million in Hidden Fees
The Federal Trade Commission is continuing its crackdown on payment processing operations that enable scam artists to charge consumer accounts despite signs of ongoing fraud and unauthorized transactions. Today, the Commission announced a proposed settlement resolving allegations that a payment processor, Process America Inc., and its owners, Kim Ricketts, Keith Phillips and Craig Rickard, used unfair tactics to open and maintain scores of merchant accounts for Infusion Media Inc., which perpetrated the “Google Money Tree” work-at-home scheme. Using these merchant accounts, Infusion Media charged more than $15 million in unauthorized charges on consumers’ debit and credit card accounts.
Payment processors and Independent Sales Organizations (ISOs) enable merchants to charge consumers’ credit cards for products and services. In exchange, payment processors and ISOs get paid for each payment transaction the merchant processes.
In June 2009, the FTC charged the Infusion Media defendants with falsely claiming that consumers could earn $100,000 in six months, misrepresenting an affiliation with Google, and tricking consumers into signing up for automatic monthly charges that would continue until the consumer took affirmative steps to cancel.
The complaint against Process America alleges that the defendants knew or should have known that they were processing charges that consumers had not authorized. Evidence that consumers were being charged without their permission included plainly deceptive statements on merchant websites, notices that the merchant should be placed in Visa and MasterCard chargeback monitoring programs, and chronically excessive chargeback rates – the percentage of charges that are challenged by consumers and result in the charges being reversed. From 2008 through 2009, the defendants opened and maintained 131 merchant accounts through which the perpetrators processed more than $15 million in unauthorized charges on consumer debit and credit card accounts.
To keep Infusion Media’s merchant accounts open, the defendants allegedly engaged in tactics that were designed to evade fraud monitoring programs implemented by Visa and MasterCard. These tactics included submitting merchant applications containing false information and “load balancing” – distributing transaction volume among numerous merchant accounts. As a result, Infusion Media’s scam operated for nearly a year, and Process America continued to earn fees from its payment processing activity.
To resolve the allegations in the complaint, the individual defendants have agreed to separate permanent injunctions containing prohibitions and restrictions on their future payment processing activities:
Rickard is banned from payment processing and acting as an ISO. He is prohibited from acting as a sales agent for any client engaged in (a) unfair or deceptive business practices; (b) certain categories of high-risk activities, including negative-option marketing (where the seller interprets consumers’ silence or inaction as permission to charge them), money-making opportunities, credit card or identity theft protection, timeshare resale services, buying clubs, medical discount plans; or (c) conduct that has qualified a client for a chargeback monitoring program.
Rickard is also prohibited from acting as a sales agent for any client without first screening them for unfair or deceptive business practices. The order imposes a judgment of more than $184,000 that will be suspended based on his inability to pay. The full judgment will become due immediately if Rickard is found to have misrepresented his financial condition.
Ricketts and Phillips are prohibited from acting as payment processors, ISOs, or sales agents for any client engaged in (a) unfair or deceptive business practices; or (b) certain categories of high-risk activities certain categories of high-risk clients. They also are barred from acting as a sales agent for any client without screening and monitoring them for unfair or deceptive business practices.
In addition, Process America’s Chief Restructuring Officer has agreed to recommend and seek authority from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California to enter into the proposed settlement with the FTC. Under the proposed settlement:
Process America is prohibited from payment processing or acting as an ISO or sales agent for any client engaged in negative-option marketing or unfair or deceptive business practices, and from failing to screen, monitor, and promptly investigate clients for such practices.
The orders prohibit all of the defendants from selling or otherwise benefitting from consumers’ personal information, and failing to properly dispose of customer information.
The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the complaint and approving the proposed consent judgment was 4-0. The proposed settlement with Process America is subject to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California’s approval of a Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9019 Motion for Compromise. The proposed consent judgments with Process America and the individual defendants are also subject to court approval.
NOTE: The Commission files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. Consent judgments have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court judge.
DEPUTY AG COLE MAKES REMARKS AT MONEY LAUNDERING ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole Delivers Remarks at Money Laundering Enforcement Conference in Washington, D.C.
~ Monday, November 18, 2013
Thank you, Amy, for that kind introduction. I would also like to thank both the American Bar Association and the American Bankers Association for hosting this money laundering enforcement conference and inviting me to speak today. I am honored to be here, especially on the 25th anniversary of this important conference, which provides invaluable Bank Secrecy Act and anti-money laundering training – and underscores the vital importance of the compliance function at financial institutions.
As all of you know, banking and financial services play a vital role in our country. They spawn growth, spread risk, facilitate the creation of jobs, and generally drive our economy. Without it, much of the prosperity that allows for our freedoms and our power in the world would not exist.
But it is also susceptible to abuse. It can be used to launder the illegal proceeds of criminal and terrorist organizations. It can be used to defraud people, particularly when the transactions are complex. And the flow of dollars through our financial system is so large, that even a small fraudulent adjustment of a rate or a fee can result in billions of dollars being illegally diverted. Just as the financial industry has the power to create great good, it has the power to create great harm. The crash in 2008 was a stark reminder of this power to harm.
At the Department of Justice, we know that compliance officers within financial institutions, and the lawyers, bankers, and others who work with them, are the first line of defense against abuse within these institutions. Compliance officers are critical to protecting both a bank’s reputation and its bottom line. They’re essential when it comes to preventing criminal activity – and if that effort is not entirely successful, detecting and reporting such conduct. It is not an exaggeration to say that compliance is fundamental to protecting the security of our financial institutions and is essential to the integrity of our entire financial system.
Despite, and in some ways because of, this crucial role, I know that working in compliance is often difficult. Compliance is seldom thought of as a “money-maker” for any bank, and it may be challenging to get sufficient resources and authority to do the job well. To some, compliance may not seem to fit within the culture of a fast-moving, cutting-edge institution. And at times, certain business units or managers may seem downright hostile toward the compliance function.
We at the Department of Justice understand this reality. And we appreciate that, despite these challenges, you and your colleagues are fully committed to helping protect the integrity of your institutions and our financial system.
I want to assure you today that I am grateful for that, because you are our strongest partners in the fight against money laundering, fraud, and other financial crimes. You’re in a unique position to understand that a strong compliance culture is not only good for a bank’s overall standing and reputation in the business community, it is ultimately good for its business.
Right now, compliance within financial institutions is of particular concern to the Department, because we have recently seen cases that involved not only criminal conduct by bank customers, but – more concerning – serious criminal conduct by bank employees, including managerial employees. I’d like to speak with you today about how the Department evaluates financial institutions that violate the law, along with some of the considerations that all bankers should be mindful of as they decide how their institutions should operate.
I want to begin with the fundamental proposition that no individual or business – including a financial institution – is immune from prosecution. As I’m sure you’ve noticed, the Justice Department is taking a hard look at financial institutions in all areas – including AML, BSA, IEEPA, securities laws, tax violations, and all other forms of financial fraud. We are committed to holding banks and their employees responsible for their misconduct.
In recent years, we have proven our determination to pursue a range of challenging and complex financial crimes. For example, in one of the more brazen types of misconduct we have encountered in the financial industry, the Department and other law enforcement agencies and regulators around the world are investigating the manipulation of LIBOR and other benchmark interest rates. As you all know, LIBOR serves as the premier benchmark for short-term interest rates around the globe. Hundreds of trillions of dollars in financial derivatives, corporate debt, credit card debt, mortgages, student loans, and other financial instruments worldwide are tied to LIBOR. But LIBOR necessarily depends on the integrity of the rate setting process and the bankers who provide input into that process. The investigation revealed that traders in some banks were manipulating their bank’s LIBOR submissions in the hopes of affecting the final published LIBOR fix – thereby increasing their trading profits. Some even coordinated with traders at other banks and inter-dealer brokers to try to get several banks to submit LIBORs favorable to their trading positions. We’ve also seen that certain banks artificially lowered their LIBORs in order to appear more credit-worthy during the financial crisis.
Unfortunately, these manipulations were not isolated incidents involving a few rogue traders. In some institutions, LIBOR manipulation was pervasive. We found institutions with traders in multiple offices around the world attempting to manipulate LIBOR and other benchmark rates tied to multiple currencies, with the conduct at some banks extending over a period of five or more years. During our investigation, it became apparent that certain institutions condoned a culture of illegal behavior. And it was this culture that led the Justice Department to investigate and prosecute not just the individuals engaged in LIBOR manipulation, but the institutions that condoned it.
As a result of our enforcement actions stemming from this illegal conduct, billions of dollars have been paid in penalties, banks have admitted to serious crimes, and certain employees have been criminally charged. To date, corporate LIBOR resolutions with Rabobank, Barclays, UBS, RBS, and the brokerage firm ICAP have resulted in over $3.7 billion in penalties paid to law enforcement and regulatory agencies. Thus far, the Department has charged five individuals – two former senior traders at UBS, and three former brokers at ICAP – with crimes in connection with the LIBOR investigation. In addition, many in executive management on whose watch these crimes took place have paid a heavy price. Two CEOs have resigned, other senior managers have stepped down; executives have testified before the U.K. Parliament; bonuses have been withheld; and other compensation has been clawed back. And this may be only the beginning – because our investigation of LIBOR is far from over.
As another example, just last month, a jury in the Southern District of New York found Countrywide, Bank of America, and a senior executive liable for making bad loans and removing quality control checks. Countrywide initiated the “hustle” program to move loans quickly through the origination process and eliminate quality control steps that could slow it down. Countrywide, then Bank of America, sold the toxic mortgage loans to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, knowing that they did not meet the representations of quality.
We have also seen IEEPA violations involving the circumvention of sanctions against Cuba and Iran; violations of the Bank Secrecy Act; Residential Mortgage Backed Securities fraud and mortgage origination fraud; anti-trust violations; tax violations involving off-shore accounts; and civil rights violations for discriminatory lending practices.
And in one of the more recent developments, the Department's Criminal and Antitrust Divisions, along with the FBI, regulators and other law enforcement agencies around the world, are aggressively investigating possible manipulation of foreign exchange rates, involving a number of financial institutions, and you will be hearing more about these investigations in the future.
These investigations are just a few examples of how the Justice Department is pursuing corporate financial malfeasance. Financial institutions have agreed to pay about $17 billion in settlements with law enforcement and regulators in the United States this year alone. And that number will increase, as we are more committed than ever to investigating crimes committed by and within financial institutions, and to hold the perpetrators of those crimes accountable.
In every case and circumstance, our decisions about prosecuting corporate crime are guided by the Principles of Federal Prosecution of Business Organizations, which describes nine factors we consider when determining whether to charge a corporation. Those factors include, among other things: the nature and seriousness of the offense; the pervasiveness of the wrongdoing within the corporation, including the complicity of corporate management; the corporation’s history of similar misconduct, including prior criminal, civil, and regulatory actions against it; and the adequacy of a corporation’s pre-existing compliance program. We have found that these factors are often linked. How widespread the misconduct is, how high in the corporate hierarchy knowledge of it goes, and how effective a corporate compliance program is – are often related to each other, and to a corporation’s criminal history.
The notion that compliance must be firmly embedded in a corporation’s culture has been raised before, including at this conference, by many government officials. You’ve heard a great deal about the importance of “tone at the top.” Indeed, companies regularly argue during negotiations that they have taken various steps to set the right tone at the highest levels of their institutions. But based on what we have seen, we cannot help but feel that the message is not getting through often enough or clearly enough.
Despite years of admonitions by government officials that compliance must be an important part of a corporation’s culture, we continue to see significant violations of law at banks, inadequate compliance programs, and missed opportunities to prevent and detect crimes.
We are concerned that too many bank employees and supervisors value coming as close to the line as possible, or even crossing the line, as being “competitive” or “aggressive.” Too many seem to be willing to take advantage of any edge – including those of dubious legality – to make money. Too many supervisors seem to incentivize excessive risk-taking – knowing that risky products can be unloaded down the road, or anticipating that they will have left for another bank by the time such risks are played out, leaving someone else to deal with the consequences. And we are troubled that many employees believe that their supervisors, including in some cases corporate management, actually want them to behave this way. Even a single employee who thinks this way is one too many. And what we’ve been seeing and making public in a number of our recently-announced resolutions should give everyone pause, and cause all leaders and managers within financial institutions to reflect on how they can do better.
Now we’ve seen numerous news reports of senior bank management condemning the uncovered conduct after an announced resolution – calling the conduct “shameful”[1]; “contrary to our core values”[2]; “reprehensible.”[3] One CEO said that he “strongly condemn[ed]” the behavior at issue;[4] another said that learning about the misconduct made him “physically ill.”[5] While it’s easy for everyone to agree with these after-the-fact condemnations of the discovered misconduct, our collective goal must be to establish cultures within these important institutions that prevent people from engaging in this type of conduct in the first instance. Labeling certain behavior “shameful” after being caught is simply too little, too late.
This is why, when deciding whether to prosecute an institution for the actions of its employees, we look hard at the messages that bank management and supervisors are actually giving to employees in the context of their day-to-day work. We look at chats, emails, and recorded phone calls -- things that are readily available to senior management and compliance professionals. We talk to witnesses in order to determine what kinds of messages about compliance have been conveyed, or, on the flip side of that coin, what encouragement they may have received to exploit any possible edge to make money. We examine the incentives that banks provide their employees to either cross the line, or to exhibit compliant behavior. If a financial institution wants to encourage compliance – if its values are not skewed towards making money at all costs – then that message must be conveyed to employees in a meaningful and effective way if they’d like Department to view it as credible. To have an effective compliance program, we expect banks to put in place procedures to detect problems, and proactively utilize those procedures -- without waiting until the government comes knocking at their door with a subpoena.
When a problem is identified, we expect banks to undertake a thorough search – at every level, across the institution – for misconduct that may have been committed elsewhere, by similarly-situated employees or in similar business units. We expect that banks will not look only at employees in the same positions or in the same offices to determine whether they are violating the law – but that, cognizant of the ways in which violations have occurred, they will also look to other places or other types of employees where similar misconduct could take place. Whenever employees in different units, or in different office locations, or involved in different product lines, are engaging in criminal conduct at the same institution, it is well past time for that institution to think more broadly about problems that may span across the organization as a whole. In fact, we have seen this pattern in a number of financial institutions and what this tells us is that even if a specific conduct didn't directly involve senior management, that repetition speaks volumes about the culture senior management has create in the institution. A culture that breeds violations instead of a culture that encourages compliance.
The benefits of having a strong compliance program can go a long way toward mitigating institutional liability. For instance, last year, we announced the guilty plea of a former managing director of Morgan Stanley to a violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The managing director admitted that he had conspired to evade Morgan Stanley’s internal accounting controls in order to transfer a multi-million dollar ownership interest in a Shanghai building to himself and a Chinese public official. The Department announced that it was declining to bring any enforcement action against Morgan Stanley – in large part because the bank had voluntarily disclosed the misconduct, cooperated throughout the investigation, and had constructed and maintained a system of internal controls that provided reasonable assurances that its employees were not bribing government officials. Our decision not to prosecute Morgan Stanley was founded primarily on the strength of its robust and active compliance program.
But where we do not see such exemplary conduct, we must – and we will – use all of the tools available to us to hold banks answerable for their crimes.
When we see criminal violations in multiple business units or locations, we will hold banks accountable. When we see compliance programs that are not comprehensive, or are not funded, or lack sufficient resources to be effective, we cannot give them credit. When we see repeat players – such as banks that have previously entered into non-prosecution agreements or deferred prosecution agreements with the Department, and yet come under scrutiny again for other violations of law – we will have no choice but to consider all of the possible actions at our disposal. And when we see crimes condoned by management, banks, like all corporations, will face significant consequences.
Of course, we are mindful of the consequences of our actions, and we must act responsibly. Collateral consequences, including harm to innocent employees and to the public, is one of the nine factors we carefully consider in determining what action to take. And in this regard, we work closely with our regulatory partners, both here and abroad, to ensure that we understand the specific, likely consequences for a bank when it is accused of criminal conduct or when when it is resolving criminal conduct. And we take steps to minimize those consequences, while holding the individuals and institutions that are responsible to account. But to be clear, the size of a financial institution does not mean that it gets immunity in a criminal case.
The last session in this conference is entitled “What to tell your CEO when you return to the bank: A 30-minute recap of the critical issues from the conference.” With this in mind, here is my message to you: Businesses need to create a culture of compliance. To do this, compliance programs must be real, effective, and proactive. Banks need to think more broadly about problems within their institutions, and redouble their efforts to detect and prevent them. It will never be enough merely to identify and address a particular problem once it surfaces. If we see illegal conduct at a number of the bank's business units, the old saw of "It's an isolated instance of bad actors in a single business unit. The institution as a whole should not be held accountable" won't cut it. Instead, banks must actively seek out whether there could be similar misconduct elsewhere. They must analyze what steps are necessary to reduce the risk of such misconduct occurring. And then they must take those steps. All banks should demonstrate their institutional commitments to ensuring that a clear and powerful message is being sent to their employees: that compliance matters, and if they cross the line, both they and their employer will face serious consequences. I know these can be difficult messages to deliver, but they are important messages to deliver -- messages that in the long run are good for the bank as well as good for society as a whole.
I want to thank you for the opportunity to discuss these issues with you today. I’m grateful for your hard work, your dedication to the goals we share, and your resolve to help strengthen compliance programs and instill cultures of accountability throughout the financial sector. I look forward to continuing this critical dialogue at future forums like this one.
Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole Delivers Remarks at Money Laundering Enforcement Conference in Washington, D.C.
~ Monday, November 18, 2013
Thank you, Amy, for that kind introduction. I would also like to thank both the American Bar Association and the American Bankers Association for hosting this money laundering enforcement conference and inviting me to speak today. I am honored to be here, especially on the 25th anniversary of this important conference, which provides invaluable Bank Secrecy Act and anti-money laundering training – and underscores the vital importance of the compliance function at financial institutions.
As all of you know, banking and financial services play a vital role in our country. They spawn growth, spread risk, facilitate the creation of jobs, and generally drive our economy. Without it, much of the prosperity that allows for our freedoms and our power in the world would not exist.
But it is also susceptible to abuse. It can be used to launder the illegal proceeds of criminal and terrorist organizations. It can be used to defraud people, particularly when the transactions are complex. And the flow of dollars through our financial system is so large, that even a small fraudulent adjustment of a rate or a fee can result in billions of dollars being illegally diverted. Just as the financial industry has the power to create great good, it has the power to create great harm. The crash in 2008 was a stark reminder of this power to harm.
At the Department of Justice, we know that compliance officers within financial institutions, and the lawyers, bankers, and others who work with them, are the first line of defense against abuse within these institutions. Compliance officers are critical to protecting both a bank’s reputation and its bottom line. They’re essential when it comes to preventing criminal activity – and if that effort is not entirely successful, detecting and reporting such conduct. It is not an exaggeration to say that compliance is fundamental to protecting the security of our financial institutions and is essential to the integrity of our entire financial system.
Despite, and in some ways because of, this crucial role, I know that working in compliance is often difficult. Compliance is seldom thought of as a “money-maker” for any bank, and it may be challenging to get sufficient resources and authority to do the job well. To some, compliance may not seem to fit within the culture of a fast-moving, cutting-edge institution. And at times, certain business units or managers may seem downright hostile toward the compliance function.
We at the Department of Justice understand this reality. And we appreciate that, despite these challenges, you and your colleagues are fully committed to helping protect the integrity of your institutions and our financial system.
I want to assure you today that I am grateful for that, because you are our strongest partners in the fight against money laundering, fraud, and other financial crimes. You’re in a unique position to understand that a strong compliance culture is not only good for a bank’s overall standing and reputation in the business community, it is ultimately good for its business.
Right now, compliance within financial institutions is of particular concern to the Department, because we have recently seen cases that involved not only criminal conduct by bank customers, but – more concerning – serious criminal conduct by bank employees, including managerial employees. I’d like to speak with you today about how the Department evaluates financial institutions that violate the law, along with some of the considerations that all bankers should be mindful of as they decide how their institutions should operate.
I want to begin with the fundamental proposition that no individual or business – including a financial institution – is immune from prosecution. As I’m sure you’ve noticed, the Justice Department is taking a hard look at financial institutions in all areas – including AML, BSA, IEEPA, securities laws, tax violations, and all other forms of financial fraud. We are committed to holding banks and their employees responsible for their misconduct.
In recent years, we have proven our determination to pursue a range of challenging and complex financial crimes. For example, in one of the more brazen types of misconduct we have encountered in the financial industry, the Department and other law enforcement agencies and regulators around the world are investigating the manipulation of LIBOR and other benchmark interest rates. As you all know, LIBOR serves as the premier benchmark for short-term interest rates around the globe. Hundreds of trillions of dollars in financial derivatives, corporate debt, credit card debt, mortgages, student loans, and other financial instruments worldwide are tied to LIBOR. But LIBOR necessarily depends on the integrity of the rate setting process and the bankers who provide input into that process. The investigation revealed that traders in some banks were manipulating their bank’s LIBOR submissions in the hopes of affecting the final published LIBOR fix – thereby increasing their trading profits. Some even coordinated with traders at other banks and inter-dealer brokers to try to get several banks to submit LIBORs favorable to their trading positions. We’ve also seen that certain banks artificially lowered their LIBORs in order to appear more credit-worthy during the financial crisis.
Unfortunately, these manipulations were not isolated incidents involving a few rogue traders. In some institutions, LIBOR manipulation was pervasive. We found institutions with traders in multiple offices around the world attempting to manipulate LIBOR and other benchmark rates tied to multiple currencies, with the conduct at some banks extending over a period of five or more years. During our investigation, it became apparent that certain institutions condoned a culture of illegal behavior. And it was this culture that led the Justice Department to investigate and prosecute not just the individuals engaged in LIBOR manipulation, but the institutions that condoned it.
As a result of our enforcement actions stemming from this illegal conduct, billions of dollars have been paid in penalties, banks have admitted to serious crimes, and certain employees have been criminally charged. To date, corporate LIBOR resolutions with Rabobank, Barclays, UBS, RBS, and the brokerage firm ICAP have resulted in over $3.7 billion in penalties paid to law enforcement and regulatory agencies. Thus far, the Department has charged five individuals – two former senior traders at UBS, and three former brokers at ICAP – with crimes in connection with the LIBOR investigation. In addition, many in executive management on whose watch these crimes took place have paid a heavy price. Two CEOs have resigned, other senior managers have stepped down; executives have testified before the U.K. Parliament; bonuses have been withheld; and other compensation has been clawed back. And this may be only the beginning – because our investigation of LIBOR is far from over.
As another example, just last month, a jury in the Southern District of New York found Countrywide, Bank of America, and a senior executive liable for making bad loans and removing quality control checks. Countrywide initiated the “hustle” program to move loans quickly through the origination process and eliminate quality control steps that could slow it down. Countrywide, then Bank of America, sold the toxic mortgage loans to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, knowing that they did not meet the representations of quality.
We have also seen IEEPA violations involving the circumvention of sanctions against Cuba and Iran; violations of the Bank Secrecy Act; Residential Mortgage Backed Securities fraud and mortgage origination fraud; anti-trust violations; tax violations involving off-shore accounts; and civil rights violations for discriminatory lending practices.
And in one of the more recent developments, the Department's Criminal and Antitrust Divisions, along with the FBI, regulators and other law enforcement agencies around the world, are aggressively investigating possible manipulation of foreign exchange rates, involving a number of financial institutions, and you will be hearing more about these investigations in the future.
These investigations are just a few examples of how the Justice Department is pursuing corporate financial malfeasance. Financial institutions have agreed to pay about $17 billion in settlements with law enforcement and regulators in the United States this year alone. And that number will increase, as we are more committed than ever to investigating crimes committed by and within financial institutions, and to hold the perpetrators of those crimes accountable.
In every case and circumstance, our decisions about prosecuting corporate crime are guided by the Principles of Federal Prosecution of Business Organizations, which describes nine factors we consider when determining whether to charge a corporation. Those factors include, among other things: the nature and seriousness of the offense; the pervasiveness of the wrongdoing within the corporation, including the complicity of corporate management; the corporation’s history of similar misconduct, including prior criminal, civil, and regulatory actions against it; and the adequacy of a corporation’s pre-existing compliance program. We have found that these factors are often linked. How widespread the misconduct is, how high in the corporate hierarchy knowledge of it goes, and how effective a corporate compliance program is – are often related to each other, and to a corporation’s criminal history.
The notion that compliance must be firmly embedded in a corporation’s culture has been raised before, including at this conference, by many government officials. You’ve heard a great deal about the importance of “tone at the top.” Indeed, companies regularly argue during negotiations that they have taken various steps to set the right tone at the highest levels of their institutions. But based on what we have seen, we cannot help but feel that the message is not getting through often enough or clearly enough.
Despite years of admonitions by government officials that compliance must be an important part of a corporation’s culture, we continue to see significant violations of law at banks, inadequate compliance programs, and missed opportunities to prevent and detect crimes.
We are concerned that too many bank employees and supervisors value coming as close to the line as possible, or even crossing the line, as being “competitive” or “aggressive.” Too many seem to be willing to take advantage of any edge – including those of dubious legality – to make money. Too many supervisors seem to incentivize excessive risk-taking – knowing that risky products can be unloaded down the road, or anticipating that they will have left for another bank by the time such risks are played out, leaving someone else to deal with the consequences. And we are troubled that many employees believe that their supervisors, including in some cases corporate management, actually want them to behave this way. Even a single employee who thinks this way is one too many. And what we’ve been seeing and making public in a number of our recently-announced resolutions should give everyone pause, and cause all leaders and managers within financial institutions to reflect on how they can do better.
Now we’ve seen numerous news reports of senior bank management condemning the uncovered conduct after an announced resolution – calling the conduct “shameful”[1]; “contrary to our core values”[2]; “reprehensible.”[3] One CEO said that he “strongly condemn[ed]” the behavior at issue;[4] another said that learning about the misconduct made him “physically ill.”[5] While it’s easy for everyone to agree with these after-the-fact condemnations of the discovered misconduct, our collective goal must be to establish cultures within these important institutions that prevent people from engaging in this type of conduct in the first instance. Labeling certain behavior “shameful” after being caught is simply too little, too late.
This is why, when deciding whether to prosecute an institution for the actions of its employees, we look hard at the messages that bank management and supervisors are actually giving to employees in the context of their day-to-day work. We look at chats, emails, and recorded phone calls -- things that are readily available to senior management and compliance professionals. We talk to witnesses in order to determine what kinds of messages about compliance have been conveyed, or, on the flip side of that coin, what encouragement they may have received to exploit any possible edge to make money. We examine the incentives that banks provide their employees to either cross the line, or to exhibit compliant behavior. If a financial institution wants to encourage compliance – if its values are not skewed towards making money at all costs – then that message must be conveyed to employees in a meaningful and effective way if they’d like Department to view it as credible. To have an effective compliance program, we expect banks to put in place procedures to detect problems, and proactively utilize those procedures -- without waiting until the government comes knocking at their door with a subpoena.
When a problem is identified, we expect banks to undertake a thorough search – at every level, across the institution – for misconduct that may have been committed elsewhere, by similarly-situated employees or in similar business units. We expect that banks will not look only at employees in the same positions or in the same offices to determine whether they are violating the law – but that, cognizant of the ways in which violations have occurred, they will also look to other places or other types of employees where similar misconduct could take place. Whenever employees in different units, or in different office locations, or involved in different product lines, are engaging in criminal conduct at the same institution, it is well past time for that institution to think more broadly about problems that may span across the organization as a whole. In fact, we have seen this pattern in a number of financial institutions and what this tells us is that even if a specific conduct didn't directly involve senior management, that repetition speaks volumes about the culture senior management has create in the institution. A culture that breeds violations instead of a culture that encourages compliance.
The benefits of having a strong compliance program can go a long way toward mitigating institutional liability. For instance, last year, we announced the guilty plea of a former managing director of Morgan Stanley to a violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The managing director admitted that he had conspired to evade Morgan Stanley’s internal accounting controls in order to transfer a multi-million dollar ownership interest in a Shanghai building to himself and a Chinese public official. The Department announced that it was declining to bring any enforcement action against Morgan Stanley – in large part because the bank had voluntarily disclosed the misconduct, cooperated throughout the investigation, and had constructed and maintained a system of internal controls that provided reasonable assurances that its employees were not bribing government officials. Our decision not to prosecute Morgan Stanley was founded primarily on the strength of its robust and active compliance program.
But where we do not see such exemplary conduct, we must – and we will – use all of the tools available to us to hold banks answerable for their crimes.
When we see criminal violations in multiple business units or locations, we will hold banks accountable. When we see compliance programs that are not comprehensive, or are not funded, or lack sufficient resources to be effective, we cannot give them credit. When we see repeat players – such as banks that have previously entered into non-prosecution agreements or deferred prosecution agreements with the Department, and yet come under scrutiny again for other violations of law – we will have no choice but to consider all of the possible actions at our disposal. And when we see crimes condoned by management, banks, like all corporations, will face significant consequences.
Of course, we are mindful of the consequences of our actions, and we must act responsibly. Collateral consequences, including harm to innocent employees and to the public, is one of the nine factors we carefully consider in determining what action to take. And in this regard, we work closely with our regulatory partners, both here and abroad, to ensure that we understand the specific, likely consequences for a bank when it is accused of criminal conduct or when when it is resolving criminal conduct. And we take steps to minimize those consequences, while holding the individuals and institutions that are responsible to account. But to be clear, the size of a financial institution does not mean that it gets immunity in a criminal case.
The last session in this conference is entitled “What to tell your CEO when you return to the bank: A 30-minute recap of the critical issues from the conference.” With this in mind, here is my message to you: Businesses need to create a culture of compliance. To do this, compliance programs must be real, effective, and proactive. Banks need to think more broadly about problems within their institutions, and redouble their efforts to detect and prevent them. It will never be enough merely to identify and address a particular problem once it surfaces. If we see illegal conduct at a number of the bank's business units, the old saw of "It's an isolated instance of bad actors in a single business unit. The institution as a whole should not be held accountable" won't cut it. Instead, banks must actively seek out whether there could be similar misconduct elsewhere. They must analyze what steps are necessary to reduce the risk of such misconduct occurring. And then they must take those steps. All banks should demonstrate their institutional commitments to ensuring that a clear and powerful message is being sent to their employees: that compliance matters, and if they cross the line, both they and their employer will face serious consequences. I know these can be difficult messages to deliver, but they are important messages to deliver -- messages that in the long run are good for the bank as well as good for society as a whole.
I want to thank you for the opportunity to discuss these issues with you today. I’m grateful for your hard work, your dedication to the goals we share, and your resolve to help strengthen compliance programs and instill cultures of accountability throughout the financial sector. I look forward to continuing this critical dialogue at future forums like this one.
MASA EXPLAINS MARS ROVER IMAGE OF WESTERN RIM OF ENDEAVOUR CRATER
This scene shows the "Murray Ridge" portion of the western rim of Endeavour Crater on Mars. The ridge is the NASA's Mars Exploration Rover Opportunity's work area for the rover's sixth Martian winter. The ridge rises about 130 feet (40 meters) above the surrounding plain, between "Solander Point" at the north end of the ridge and "Cape Tribulation," beyond Murray Ridge to the south. This view does not show the entire ridge. The visible ridge line is about 10 meters (33 feet) above the rover's location when the component images were taken. The scene sweeps from east to south. The planar rocks in the foreground at the base of the hill are part of a layer of rocks laid down around the margins of the crater rim. At this location, Opportunity is sitting at the contact between the Meridiani Planum sandstone plains and the rocks of the Endeavour Crater rim. On the upper left, the view is directed about 22 kilometers (14 miles) across the center of Endeavour crater to the eastern rim. Opportunity landed on Mars in January 2004 and has been investigating parts of Endeavour's western rim since August 2011. The scene combines several images taken by the panoramic camera (Pancam) on NASA's Mars Exploration Rover Opportunity during the 3,446th Martian day, or sol, of the mission's work on Mars (Oct. 3, 2013) and the following three sols. On Sol 3451 (Oct. 8, 2013), Opportunity began climbing the ridge. The slope offers outcrops that contain clay minerals detected from orbit and also gives the rover a northward tilt that provides a solar-energy advantage during the Martian southern hemisphere's autumn and winter. The rover team chose to call this feature Murray Ridge in tribute to Bruce Murray (1931-2013), an influential advocate for planetary exploration who was a member of the science teams for NASA's earliest missions to Mars and later served as director of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, in Pasadena. This view is presented in approximately true color, merging exposures taken through three of the Pancam's color filters, centered on wavelengths of 753 nanometers (near-infrared), 535 nanometers (green) and 432 nanometers (violet). Image Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Cornell/ASU.
Monday, November 18, 2013
U.S. DOD CONTRACTS FOR NOVEMBER 18, 2013
FROM; U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
CONTRACTS
ARMY
Sikorsky Aircraft Corp., Stratford, Conn., was awarded a $77,524,748 modification (P00113) to firm-fixed-price contract W58RGZ-12-C-0008 to exercise an option for the procurement of seven Army UH-60M Black Hawk helicopters in accordance with contract clause H-23, “Option for Increased Quantity of Helicopters.” Estimated completion date is June 30, 2015. Work location is Stratford, Conn. One bid was solicited and one received. Fiscal 2013 other procurement funds in the amount of $77,524,748 are being obligated. Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal (Aviation), Ala., is the contracting agency.
McTech Corp.*, Cleveland, Ohio, was awarded a $51,784,000 firm-fixed-price contract with options for the construction of a dormitory and conference center, advanced training center. Base plus all contract option contract line item numbering systems are awarded in this contract. Estimated completion date is May 30, 2016. Work location is Harpers Ferry, W.Va. Thirteen bids were solicited, and thirteen received. Fiscal 2014 other procurement funds in the amount of $51,784,000 are being obligated at time of award. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore, Md., is the contracting agency (W912DR-14-C-0004).
Birdon America Inc.*, New Orleans, La., was awarded a $9,397,711 firm-fixed-price contract for hardware, test, logistics demonstration, contractor support and data deliverables for the Bridge Erection Boat. The contract also includes options for additional production units and services. Estimated completion date is Feb. 8, 2015. Work location is New Orleans, La., ($7,518,169) and Clackamas, Ore. ($1,879,542). Fiscal 2012 other procurement funds in the amount of $7,520,577 are being obligated at time of award. Bids were solicited via the Internet, with five received. Army Contracting Command - Tank and Automotive, Warren, Mich., is the contracting agency (W56HZV-14-C-0015).
Alliant Corp.*, Knoxville, Tenn., was awarded a $9,000,000 firm-fixed-price, architect/engineer indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for environmental services for the Army Corps of Engineers, Louisville Mission Boundaries. Estimated completion date is Nov. 17, 2018. Work location and funding will be determined by each order. Army Corps of Engineers, Louisville, Ky., is the contracting agency (W912QR-14-D-0001).
NAVY
TerraGroup Corp., Allentown, Pa., is being awarded a $49,900,000 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for the Lightweight Water Purification System (LWPS) in support of the product manager, expeditionary power systems, program manager, combat support systems. The LWPS is a lightweight, modular, highly transportable, self-contained water purification system used to produce potable water from water sources such as rivers, lakes, wells, and oceans for Marines operating in austere environments. The initial delivery order 0001 will procure LWPS and enhanced pump modules. Work will be performed in Allentown, Pa., and is expected to be completed by November 2018. Delivery order 0001 has an expected completion date of January 2015. No funds will be obligated on the base contract. Fiscal 2013 Marine Corps procurement contract funds in the amount of $14,994,714 will be obligated on delivery order 0001, and funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively awarded via the Federal Business Opportunities website, with three offers received. The Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico, Va., is the contracting activity (M67854-14-D-5001).
Delta Resources Inc., Alexandria, Va., (N00189-14-D-Z003), Group W Inc.*, Fairfax, Va., N00189-14-D-Z004), Metron Scientific Solutions Inc., Reston, Va., (N00189-14-D-Z005), Serco Inc. Reston, Va. (N00189-14-D-Z006), and Systems Planning and Analysis Inc. Alexandria, Va., (N00189-14-D-Z007), are each being awarded cost-plus-fixed-fee, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contracts to provide world class modeling and simulation services in support of the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (OPNAV) Assessment Division (N81). The services are for systems engineering, model development and research, model modification and improvements, and model testing, transition, and demonstration support. The models support OPNAV in the areas of warfighting, manpower, and fleet readiness. Work will be performed in Washington, D.C., and work is expected to be completed by Nov. 30, 2016. These five contractors shall compete for task orders under the terms and conditions of the awarded contract. The maximum value of all task orders will be $43,042,246. A minimum guarantee of $30,000 will be provided to each of the five contractors at the time of award. Fiscal 2014 operations and maintenance, Navy funds in the amount of $150,000 will be obligated at the time of award, and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The requirement was competitively procured through full and open competition and solicited via the Federal Business Opportunities website, with five offers received in response to this solicitation. NAVSUP Fleet Logistics Center Norfolk, Contracting Department, Philadelphia Office, Philadelphia, Pa., is the contracting activity.
Bell Boeing Joint Project Office, Amarillo, Texas, is being awarded a $9,256,869 modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract (N00019-12-C-0091) to exercise an option for the procurement of four Block A to B 50 - 69 series upgrade installs for the V-22 aircraft. Work will be performed in Philadelphia, Pa. (60 percent); Havelock, N.C. (20 percent); and Fort Worth, Texas (20 percent), and is expected to be completed in September 2015. Fiscal 2014 aircraft procurement, Navy funds in the amount of $9,256,869 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity.
DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY
DMS Pharmaceutical Group Inc.**, Park Ridge, Ill., has been awarded a maximum $46,647,841 modification (P00094) exercising the second one-year option period on a one-year base contract (SPM2D0-11-D-0005) with five one-year option periods for various pharmaceutical products in support of the vendor managed inventory program which provides access to inventory to ensure material availability of medical and surgical surge, and re-supply and sustainment material. This is a fixed-price with economic-price-adjustment, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract. Location of performance is Illinois with a Nov. 20, 2014 performance completion date. Using military services are Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and federal civilian agencies. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2014 warstopper funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pa.
URS Federal Technical Services Inc., Germantown, Md., has been awarded a maximum $7,976,352 modification (P00056) exercising the fourth one-year option period on a one-year base contract (SP3300-10-C-0006) with four one-year option periods for material distribution services to include receipt, storage, and issuance. This is a fixed-price, incentive-firm-target, award-fee, hybrid contract. Locations of performance are Maryland and Florida with a Dec. 31, 2014 performance completion date. Using service is DLA Distribution, Pennsylvania. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2014 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Distribution, New Cumberland, Pa.
AIR FORCE
Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems, McKinney, Texas, has been awarded a $9,084,334 order (0011) under basic ordering agreement (FA8620-11-G-4050) for Multispectral Targeting System (MTS)-B High Definition/Target Location Accuracy (HD/TLA) Production Readiness which entails the delivery of an economical fabrication, assembly, inspection, test, delivery readiness and ability for the contractor to achieve full-rate production readiness for an MTS-B HD/TLA turret unit. Work will be performed at McKinney, Texas and is expected to be complete by Oct. 31, 2014. This award is the result of a sole-source acquisition. Fiscal 2012 procurement funds in the amount of $9,084,334 are being obligated at time of award. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center/WIIK, Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity.
*Small Business
**Woman Owned Small Business
CONTRACTS
ARMY
Sikorsky Aircraft Corp., Stratford, Conn., was awarded a $77,524,748 modification (P00113) to firm-fixed-price contract W58RGZ-12-C-0008 to exercise an option for the procurement of seven Army UH-60M Black Hawk helicopters in accordance with contract clause H-23, “Option for Increased Quantity of Helicopters.” Estimated completion date is June 30, 2015. Work location is Stratford, Conn. One bid was solicited and one received. Fiscal 2013 other procurement funds in the amount of $77,524,748 are being obligated. Army Contracting Command, Redstone Arsenal (Aviation), Ala., is the contracting agency.
McTech Corp.*, Cleveland, Ohio, was awarded a $51,784,000 firm-fixed-price contract with options for the construction of a dormitory and conference center, advanced training center. Base plus all contract option contract line item numbering systems are awarded in this contract. Estimated completion date is May 30, 2016. Work location is Harpers Ferry, W.Va. Thirteen bids were solicited, and thirteen received. Fiscal 2014 other procurement funds in the amount of $51,784,000 are being obligated at time of award. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore, Md., is the contracting agency (W912DR-14-C-0004).
Birdon America Inc.*, New Orleans, La., was awarded a $9,397,711 firm-fixed-price contract for hardware, test, logistics demonstration, contractor support and data deliverables for the Bridge Erection Boat. The contract also includes options for additional production units and services. Estimated completion date is Feb. 8, 2015. Work location is New Orleans, La., ($7,518,169) and Clackamas, Ore. ($1,879,542). Fiscal 2012 other procurement funds in the amount of $7,520,577 are being obligated at time of award. Bids were solicited via the Internet, with five received. Army Contracting Command - Tank and Automotive, Warren, Mich., is the contracting agency (W56HZV-14-C-0015).
Alliant Corp.*, Knoxville, Tenn., was awarded a $9,000,000 firm-fixed-price, architect/engineer indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for environmental services for the Army Corps of Engineers, Louisville Mission Boundaries. Estimated completion date is Nov. 17, 2018. Work location and funding will be determined by each order. Army Corps of Engineers, Louisville, Ky., is the contracting agency (W912QR-14-D-0001).
NAVY
TerraGroup Corp., Allentown, Pa., is being awarded a $49,900,000 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for the Lightweight Water Purification System (LWPS) in support of the product manager, expeditionary power systems, program manager, combat support systems. The LWPS is a lightweight, modular, highly transportable, self-contained water purification system used to produce potable water from water sources such as rivers, lakes, wells, and oceans for Marines operating in austere environments. The initial delivery order 0001 will procure LWPS and enhanced pump modules. Work will be performed in Allentown, Pa., and is expected to be completed by November 2018. Delivery order 0001 has an expected completion date of January 2015. No funds will be obligated on the base contract. Fiscal 2013 Marine Corps procurement contract funds in the amount of $14,994,714 will be obligated on delivery order 0001, and funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively awarded via the Federal Business Opportunities website, with three offers received. The Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico, Va., is the contracting activity (M67854-14-D-5001).
Delta Resources Inc., Alexandria, Va., (N00189-14-D-Z003), Group W Inc.*, Fairfax, Va., N00189-14-D-Z004), Metron Scientific Solutions Inc., Reston, Va., (N00189-14-D-Z005), Serco Inc. Reston, Va. (N00189-14-D-Z006), and Systems Planning and Analysis Inc. Alexandria, Va., (N00189-14-D-Z007), are each being awarded cost-plus-fixed-fee, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contracts to provide world class modeling and simulation services in support of the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (OPNAV) Assessment Division (N81). The services are for systems engineering, model development and research, model modification and improvements, and model testing, transition, and demonstration support. The models support OPNAV in the areas of warfighting, manpower, and fleet readiness. Work will be performed in Washington, D.C., and work is expected to be completed by Nov. 30, 2016. These five contractors shall compete for task orders under the terms and conditions of the awarded contract. The maximum value of all task orders will be $43,042,246. A minimum guarantee of $30,000 will be provided to each of the five contractors at the time of award. Fiscal 2014 operations and maintenance, Navy funds in the amount of $150,000 will be obligated at the time of award, and will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The requirement was competitively procured through full and open competition and solicited via the Federal Business Opportunities website, with five offers received in response to this solicitation. NAVSUP Fleet Logistics Center Norfolk, Contracting Department, Philadelphia Office, Philadelphia, Pa., is the contracting activity.
Bell Boeing Joint Project Office, Amarillo, Texas, is being awarded a $9,256,869 modification to a previously awarded firm-fixed-price contract (N00019-12-C-0091) to exercise an option for the procurement of four Block A to B 50 - 69 series upgrade installs for the V-22 aircraft. Work will be performed in Philadelphia, Pa. (60 percent); Havelock, N.C. (20 percent); and Fort Worth, Texas (20 percent), and is expected to be completed in September 2015. Fiscal 2014 aircraft procurement, Navy funds in the amount of $9,256,869 will be obligated at time of award, none of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity.
DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY
DMS Pharmaceutical Group Inc.**, Park Ridge, Ill., has been awarded a maximum $46,647,841 modification (P00094) exercising the second one-year option period on a one-year base contract (SPM2D0-11-D-0005) with five one-year option periods for various pharmaceutical products in support of the vendor managed inventory program which provides access to inventory to ensure material availability of medical and surgical surge, and re-supply and sustainment material. This is a fixed-price with economic-price-adjustment, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract. Location of performance is Illinois with a Nov. 20, 2014 performance completion date. Using military services are Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and federal civilian agencies. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2014 warstopper funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pa.
URS Federal Technical Services Inc., Germantown, Md., has been awarded a maximum $7,976,352 modification (P00056) exercising the fourth one-year option period on a one-year base contract (SP3300-10-C-0006) with four one-year option periods for material distribution services to include receipt, storage, and issuance. This is a fixed-price, incentive-firm-target, award-fee, hybrid contract. Locations of performance are Maryland and Florida with a Dec. 31, 2014 performance completion date. Using service is DLA Distribution, Pennsylvania. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2014 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Distribution, New Cumberland, Pa.
AIR FORCE
Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems, McKinney, Texas, has been awarded a $9,084,334 order (0011) under basic ordering agreement (FA8620-11-G-4050) for Multispectral Targeting System (MTS)-B High Definition/Target Location Accuracy (HD/TLA) Production Readiness which entails the delivery of an economical fabrication, assembly, inspection, test, delivery readiness and ability for the contractor to achieve full-rate production readiness for an MTS-B HD/TLA turret unit. Work will be performed at McKinney, Texas and is expected to be complete by Oct. 31, 2014. This award is the result of a sole-source acquisition. Fiscal 2012 procurement funds in the amount of $9,084,334 are being obligated at time of award. Air Force Life Cycle Management Center/WIIK, Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity.
*Small Business
**Woman Owned Small Business
NLRB GENERAL COUNSEL'S OFFICE AUTHORIZES COMPLAINTS AGAINST WALMART, NO MERIT TO OTHER CHARGES
FROM: NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
NLRB Office of the General Counsel Authorizes Complaints against Walmart, Also Finds No Merit to Other Charges
The National Labor Relations Board Office of the General Counsel has investigated charges alleging that Walmart violated the rights of its employees as a result of activities surrounding employee protests. The Office of the General Counsel found merit in some of the charges and no merit in others. The Office of the General Counsel has authorized complaints on alleged violations of the National Labor Relations Act. If the parties cannot reach settlements in these cases, complaints will issue.
The Office of the General Counsel found merit to alleged violations of the National Labor Relations Act against Walmart, such as the following:
During two national television news broadcasts and in statements to employees at Walmart stores in California and Texas, Walmart unlawfully threatened employees with reprisal if they engaged in strikes and protests on November 22, 2012.
Walmart stores in California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas and Washington unlawfully threatened, disciplined, and/or terminated employees for having engaged in legally protected strikes and protests.
Walmart stores in California, Florida, Missouri and Texas unlawfully threatened, surveilled, disciplined, and/or terminated employees in anticipation of or in response to employees’ other protected concerted activities.
The Office of the General Counsel found no merit, absent appeal, to alleged violations of the National Labor Relations Act against Walmart, such as the following:
Walmart stores in Illinois and Texas did not interfere with their employees’ right to strike by telling large groups of non-employee protestors to move from Walmart’s property to public property, pursuant to a lawful Solicitation and Distribution policy, where the groups contained only a small number of employees who either did not seek to stay on Walmart’s property or were permitted to remain without non-employee protesters.
Walmart stores in California and Washington did not unlawfully change work schedules, disparately apply their policies, or otherwise coerce employees in retaliation for their exercise of statutory rights.
The National Labor Relations Act guarantees the right of private sector employees to act together to try to improve their wages and working conditions with or without a union.
NLRB Office of the General Counsel Authorizes Complaints against Walmart, Also Finds No Merit to Other Charges
The National Labor Relations Board Office of the General Counsel has investigated charges alleging that Walmart violated the rights of its employees as a result of activities surrounding employee protests. The Office of the General Counsel found merit in some of the charges and no merit in others. The Office of the General Counsel has authorized complaints on alleged violations of the National Labor Relations Act. If the parties cannot reach settlements in these cases, complaints will issue.
The Office of the General Counsel found merit to alleged violations of the National Labor Relations Act against Walmart, such as the following:
During two national television news broadcasts and in statements to employees at Walmart stores in California and Texas, Walmart unlawfully threatened employees with reprisal if they engaged in strikes and protests on November 22, 2012.
Walmart stores in California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas and Washington unlawfully threatened, disciplined, and/or terminated employees for having engaged in legally protected strikes and protests.
Walmart stores in California, Florida, Missouri and Texas unlawfully threatened, surveilled, disciplined, and/or terminated employees in anticipation of or in response to employees’ other protected concerted activities.
The Office of the General Counsel found no merit, absent appeal, to alleged violations of the National Labor Relations Act against Walmart, such as the following:
Walmart stores in Illinois and Texas did not interfere with their employees’ right to strike by telling large groups of non-employee protestors to move from Walmart’s property to public property, pursuant to a lawful Solicitation and Distribution policy, where the groups contained only a small number of employees who either did not seek to stay on Walmart’s property or were permitted to remain without non-employee protesters.
Walmart stores in California and Washington did not unlawfully change work schedules, disparately apply their policies, or otherwise coerce employees in retaliation for their exercise of statutory rights.
The National Labor Relations Act guarantees the right of private sector employees to act together to try to improve their wages and working conditions with or without a union.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)