PRESIDENT ISSUES LETTER REGARDING CONTINUATION OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY WITH RESPECT TO LIBYA

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE
February 23, 2015
Letter -- Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to Libya

Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

Section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)) provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency unless, within 90 days prior to the anniversary date of its declaration, the President publishes in the Federal Register and transmits to the Congress a notice stating that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary date.  In accordance with this provision, I have sent to the Federal Register for publication the enclosed notice stating that the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13566 of February 25, 2011, with respect to Libya is to continue in effect beyond February 25, 2015.

Colonel Muammar Qadhafi, his government, and close associates took extreme measures against the people of Libya, including by using weapons of war, mercenaries, and wanton violence against unarmed civilians.  In addition, there was a serious risk that Libyan state assets would be misappropriated by Qadhafi, members of his government, members of his family, or his close associates if those assets were not protected. The foregoing circumstances, the prolonged attacks, and the increased numbers of Libyans seeking refuge in other countries caused a deterioration in the security of Libya, posed a serious risk to its stability, and led me to declare a national emergency to deal with this threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.

The violence that has spread throughout the country, resulting in the evacuation and temporary relocation of U.S. Embassy personnel, demonstrates the continued insecurity and threat to regional stability caused by the ongoing conflict in Libya.  Much of the current conflict is over power and access to Libya's resources, and we run the risk of further destabilization if sanctions do not remain in effect.  We continue to encourage Libyans to engage in dialogue and cease violence.  Those that reject dialogue and obstruct and undermine Libya's democratic transition must be held accountable, which is why we worked with the U.N. Security Council to pass U.N. Security Council Resolution 2174 in August 2014 to address threats to Libya's peace, security, and stability.  While we work with the international community to identify those individuals who pose a threat to Libya's democratic transition, we must also continue to ensure that the appropriate sanctions remain in place.

The situation in Libya continues to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States, and we need to protect against the diversion of assets or other abuse by certain members of Qadhafi's family and other former regime officials.  Therefore, I have determined that it is necessary to continue the national emergency with respect to Libya.

U.S. CONGRATULATES PEOPLE OF ESTONIA ON THEIR NATIONAL DAY

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
On the Occasion of Estonia's National Day
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
February 23, 2015

On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States, I congratulate the people of Estonia as you celebrate 97 years since the founding of your republic.

President Obama’s historic visit to your country last year was a visible demonstration of the ties between our two countries. As he said then, the energy and optimism of today’s Estonians is a model for those yearning for freedom.

Estonia is a global leader in e-governance, Internet freedom, cybersecurity, and free-market economics.

Most recently, Foreign Minister Pentus-Rosimannus and I had the opportunity to discuss issues of mutual importance at the NATO Ministerial in December 2014.

As you raise the blue, black, and white flag of Estonia over Toompea Hill, I wish all Estonians peace and prosperity in the year ahead. The United States stands with you as a steadfast partner and looks forward to continuing to expand ties between our peoples.

DOD REPORTS ON AIRSTRIKES AGAINST ISIL

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Airstrikes Continue Against ISIL in Syria, Iraq

From a Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve News Release
SOUTHWEST ASIA, Feb. 22, 2015 – U.S. and coalition military forces continued to attack ISIL terrorists in Syria and Iraq, Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve officials reported today.

Officials reported details of the latest strikes, which took place between 8 a.m. yesterday and 8 a.m. today, local time, noting that assessments of results are based on initial reports.

Airstrikes in Syria

Attack, fighter and bomber aircraft conducted six airstrikes in Syria:
-- Near Al Hasakah, two airstrikes struck two ISIL tactical units.
-- Near Dayr az Zawr, an airstrike destroyed an artillery system.
-- Near Kobani, three airstrikes struck two ISIL tactical units, an ISIL counter mobility berm and destroyed two ISIL checkpoints.
Airstrikes in Iraq
Attack and fighter aircraft conducted four airstrikes in Iraq:
-- Near Kirkuk, an airstrike stuck an ISIL tactical unit.
-- Near Mosul, two airstrikes struck an ISIL staging area, an ISIL large tactical unit and destroyed nine ISIL vehicles, an ISIL fighting position and an ISIL building.
-- Near Tal Afar, an airstrike struck an ISIL large tactical unit and destroyed an ISIL vehicle.

All aircraft returned to base safely.

Part of Operation Inherent Resolve

The strikes were conducted as part of Operation Inherent Resolve, the operation to eliminate the ISIL terrorist group and the threat they pose to Iraq, Syria, the region, and the wider international community. The destruction of ISIL targets in Syria and Iraq further limits the terrorist group's ability to project terror and conduct operations.

Coalition nations which have conducted airstrikes in Iraq include the U.S., Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. Coalition nations which have conducted airstrikes in Syria include the U.S., Bahrain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.

NASA VIDEO: DEEP SPACE CLIMATE OBSERVATORY (DSCOVR) BRIEFING FROM KENNEDY SPACE CENTER

U.S. CONGRATULATES PEOPLE OF COOPERATIVE REPUBLIC OF GUYANA ON THEIR INDEPENDENCE DAY

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Guyana Republic Day Message
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
February 22, 2015

On behalf of President Obama and the American people, I congratulate the people of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana as you celebrate 45 years of independence on February 23.

Your nation will hold national elections this year. I am confident that it will serve as an example of the peaceful exercise of the right to vote. Your actions will strengthen the entire region’s commitment to democratic institutions.

Guyana participates positively in the region through the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative, the Caribbean Community, and the Union of South American Nations.

The United States stands with you as a partner and friend in the Inter-American System and in continuing to strengthen and revitalize the Organization of American States.

We will continue to work together to achieve energy and environmental sustainability, as agreed upon during the recent Caribbean Energy Security Summit.

I wish you all a joyful Mashramani and Guyanese Republic Day.

COMPANY, OWNER AND EMPLOYEE CHARGED WITH ILLEGALLY EXPORTING AND IMPORTING MILITARY ITEMS

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Thursday, February 19, 2015
Arlington Heights, Illinois, Company and its Owner and Employee Charged with Illegal Export and Import of Military Articles

Assistant Attorney General for National Security John P. Carlin, U.S. Attorney Zachary T. Fardon of the Northern District of Illinois, Special Agent in Charge Gary Hartwig of Homeland Security Investigations Chicago, Special Agent in Charge James C. Lee of the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) Chicago Office and Special Agent in Charge Brian Reihms of the Department of Defense Criminal Investigative Service in Chicago announced today that an Arlington Heights, Illinois, company, its president and a former employee were indicted on federal charges for unlawfully exporting and importing military articles, including components used in night vision systems and an M1A1 Abrams tank, which is the main battle tank used by the U.S. Armed Forces.  The defendants were charged in an indictment returned by a federal grand jury in January and made public this week.

Vibgyor Optical Systems Inc., a company located in Arlington Heights, purported to manufacture optics and optical systems, including items that were to be supplied to the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD).  Instead of manufacturing the items in Illinois, as it claimed, Vibgyor illegally sent the technical data for, and samples of, the military articles to manufacturers in China, then imported the items from China to sell to its customers—including DOD prime contractors.  Bharat “Victor” Verma, 74, of Arlington Heights, Vibgyor’s president, and Urvashi “Sonia” Verma, 40, of Chicago, a former Vibgyor employee and owner of a now-defunct company that operated as a subcontractor for Vibgyor, were also charged in the indictment.

According to the indictment, between November 2006 and March 2014, the defendants conspired to defraud the United States and violate the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) and International Traffic in Arms Regulations.  The AECA prohibits the export or import of defense articles and defense services without first obtaining a license from the U.S. Department of State and is one of the principal export control laws in the United States.  Under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, any person seeking to import items designated as defense articles on the United States Munitions Import List is required to obtain a permit to do so from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.  Vibgyor won subcontracts to supply optical components and systems to DOD prime contractors by misrepresenting the location of manufacture of the items it supplied.  Bharat Verma falsely claimed that the items Vibgyor supplied were manufactured in domestically, when they actually had been manufactured in China, based on information illegally exported to Chinese manufacturers.  In addition to illegally providing technical data for a military item to China, Urvashi Verma attempted to ship an example of one of the military items to the Chinese manufacturer.

“The Arms Export Control Act and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations are vital to preventing embargoed countries from gaining access to our sensitive military technology, and to ensuring that our armed forces are not issued substandard equipment,” said U.S. Attorney Fardon.  “Where companies and individuals seek to violate the AECA and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, we will not hesitate to act."

Vibgyor, Bharat Verma and Urvashi Verma are charged with one count of conspiracy to violate both the AECA and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations; one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States—each offense is punishable by up to five years’ imprisonment—and one count of  violating the AECA, with a maximum possible penalty of 20 years in prison and a fine up to $1,000,000.  Vibgyor and Bharat Verma were also charged with international money laundering, an offense with a maximum possible sentence of 20 years’ imprisonment and a fine up to $500,000.  The defendants are scheduled to be arraigned Friday, Feb. 20, 2015, before U.S. Magistrate Judge Sidney I. Schenkier.  

The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorney Casey Arrowood of the Justice Department’s National Security Division, and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Diane MacArthur, Bolling W. Haxall and Shoba Pillay of the Northern District of Illinois.

The public is reminded that an indictment contains only charges and is not evidence of guilt.  The defendants are presumed innocent and are entitled to a fair trial at which the government has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

AG HOLDER PRAISES COURT DECISION THAT AMERICAN EXPRESS VIOLATED ANTITRUST LAWS

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 2015
U.S. DISTRICT COURT RULES THAT AMERICAN EXPRESS
VIOLATED ANTITRUST LAWS

WASHINGTON — Attorney General Eric Holder today praised the decision by a judge in the United States District Court in the Eastern District of New York who found in favor of the Justice Department’s lawsuit claiming that American Express’ rules for merchants violate antitrust laws.

“Today’s decision is a triumph for fair competition and for American consumers,” said Attorney General Holder.  “By recognizing that American Express’s rules harm competition, the court vindicates the promise of robust marketplaces that is enshrined in our antitrust laws.  I salute the hardworking men and women who led the lengthy investigation and trial with uncommon skill and unwavering dedication.  With this achievement, we are sending an unambiguous message that the Department of Justice is prepared to litigate any case, no matter how complex, in its pursuit of justice and protection for the American people.”

The United States Department of Justice and 17 state attorneys general sued American Express, Visa Inc. and MasterCard International Inc., in 2010 to eliminate restrictions that the three credit card networks imposed on merchants.  Over the course of a seven week trial during the summer of 2014, the department argued that these restrictions obstruct merchants from using competition to try to keep credit card fees from increasing.  The civil case, brought under Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, sought to end the violation and to restore competition.

The trial focused on credit card “swipe fees” which generate over $50 billion annually for credit card networks.  Millions of merchants of all sizes and in scores of industries pay those fees.  Despite these large fee revenues, the Justice Department argued that price competition over merchant swipe fees has been almost non-existent and for decades the credit card networks have not competed on price.  Today’s decision was rendered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis.

“Merchants pay over $50 billion in credit card swipe fees each year.  The department and the attorneys general of 17 states brought this case because competition over those fees was being suppressed,” said Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division Leslie C. Overton.  “The Court’s ruling establishes that the American Express anti-steering rules block merchants from using competition to keep credit card swipe fees down, which means higher costs to those merchants’ customers.  I am proud of the outstanding work done by the investigative and trial teams.  As today’s decision reaffirms, the Antitrust Division remains committed to ensuring that competition is not restricted in this important sector of the economy.”

Settlements with Visa and MasterCard were filed at the same time the case against American Express was begun; the settlements prohibit the two networks from continuing their rules and practices that had obstructed competition.  The court approved the settlements on July 20, 2011, and they applied immediately to Visa and MasterCard.  American Express was not a party to the settlements, and the litigation against American Express continued.

The department argued that the principal reason for an absence of price competition among credit card companies has been rules imposed by each of the networks that limit merchants’ ability to take advantage of a basic tool to keep prices competitive.  That tool – commonly used elsewhere in the economy – is merchants’ freedom to “steer” transactions to a network willing to lower its price.  Each network has long prohibited such steering to lower-cost cards.  Now that Visa and MasterCard have reformed their anti-steering rules, American Express rules stood as the last barrier to competition.

At trial, an array of merchants came forward to explain both the substantial costs they incur when their customers pay with credit cards and their inability to ignite competition among the networks to reduce those costs.  In fact, the rules not only prevent merchants from offering their customers lower prices or other incentives for choosing a less costly card, they even block merchants from providing consumers with truthful price information about the cost of swipe fees of different credit cards.

Closing arguments in the trial took place on Oct. 9, 2014.  Craig Conrath was the lead trial attorney for the United States.  The 17 plaintiff states were Arizona, Connecticut, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Ohio, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Vermont.  The court also entered a scheduling order instructing the parties to submit, within 30 days, a joint proposed remedial order.

U.S. OFFICIAL'S REMARKS ON BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE IN EAST ASIA

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
02/21/2015 12:53 PM EST
Ballistic Missile Defense and Strategic Stability in East Asia
Remarks
Frank A. Rose
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Arms Control, Verification and Compliance
Federation of American Scientists
Washington, DC
February 20, 2015

Introduction

Thank you all very much, and a special thanks to Bruce and Chuck for having me here today to address this important workshop.

I’m told that this group is exploring China’s potential interest in and deployment of strategic ballistic missile defense and what that means for U.S. and allied security.

At the State Department, we’re taking a hard look at it as well, and in particular, the role of ballistic missile defense in achieving the overarching goal of strategic stability between the United States and China.

Overview of Strategic Stability with China

Before discussing China’s interest in developing a BMD system and the possible implications of such an effort, I’d first like to provide an overview of what the United States is doing to ensure a stable U.S.-China strategic relationship in the region.

As stated in the Nuclear Posture Review, the United States is committed to maintaining strategic stability in U.S.-China relations and supports initiation of a dialogue on strategic stability and nuclear postures aimed at fostering a more stable, resilient, and transparent security relationship with China.

During the Cold War, many associated strategic stability with what we called “mutual assured destruction,” the notion that the incentive to initiate nuclear use would be discouraged by the fear of suffering unacceptable retaliatory damage. This notion, of course, is ill-suited and too narrow to fully capture the U.S.-China relationship given our multifaceted and shared interests. In today’s world, strategic stability encompasses much more than just nuclear relations and reflects the fact that the U.S.-China relationship, which has both elements of competition and cooperation, is not adversarial.

The strategic relationship between the United States and China is complex, and we each view stability differently. Thus, it is important that we have frank and open dialogue about how our nations define and view strategic stability and how we perceive our nuclear postures and policies impacting this balance. As part of these discussions, the United States is willing to discuss all issues, including missile defense, space-related issues, conventional precision strike capabilities, and nuclear weapons issues, with the goal of improving the conditions for a more predictable and safer security environment.

A sustained and substantive discussion of our national approaches to maintaining effective deterrent postures and modernization of associated strategic capabilities can increase understanding, enhance confidence and reduce mistrust.

Overview of China’s BMD Activities

As you’re all aware, China is continuing to develop its BMD capabilities.

Although China does not say much about its BMD programs, China publicly announced that it conducted ground-based mid-course BMD tests in 2010, 2013, and 2014. I’ll say more about the 2014 “BMD” test later. Chinese state media has stated that such tests are defensive in nature and are not targeted at any country.

I was in Beijing earlier this month, and the message I delivered was clear: It is important that our governments have a sustained dialogue on the role that our BMD systems have in our respective defense policies and strategies. We would welcome an opportunity to learn more about how BMD fits into China’s defense policy and strategy.

More broadly, a sustained dialogue would improve our understanding of China’s strategic perspective and enhance China’s understanding of U.S. policy and strategy. Institutionalizing discussions of strategic issues is a prudent long-term approach to strengthening strategic stability and exploring means for strengthening mutual trust and risk reduction.

To encourage that dialogue, we have taken and will continue to take steps to keep China informed about developments in U.S. BMD policy.

Potential Chinese BMD through the Lens of the U.S. Experience

The U.S. experience with BMD and specifically with our Ground-based Midcourse Defense System, or GMD, provides a useful lens for examining the challenges the Chinese would face in developing a BMD capability to threaten our nuclear deterrent.

We have been clear that our homeland BMD capabilities provide for defense of the U.S. homeland from limited ICBM attack, and are purposely not intended to affect Russia’s or China’s strategic deterrent. The GMD system is designed to support that policy, and it is not scaled, intended, or capable of defending the United States against the larger and more sophisticated arsenals of Russia and China. GMD is designed to protect the U.S. homeland only from limited ICBM attacks from states such as North Korea and Iran.

The U.S. experience with BMD suggests that attempting to develop a comprehensive homeland BMD system to defend against ballistic missile attack from China or Russia would be extremely challenging – and costly - given the size and sophistication of Chinese and Russian ICBMs. This owes to several factors, including the relatively low number of GMD interceptors and the sophistication and large numbers of Russian and Chinese missiles.

Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stated this publically on May 18, 2010, in testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee when he said that trying to eliminate the viability of the Russian nuclear capability would be “unbelievably expensive.”

Given these factors, we could potentially expect a notional Chinese equivalent to the GMD system to provide at most a limited defense of the Chinese homeland, which would not counter the U.S. strategic deterrent and therefore would not undermine strategic stability.

This is for the same reason that GMD does not impact strategic stability: the number of interceptors is low and they are not designed to deal with complex threats, and developing a comprehensive system to cope with a full-scale attack from another nuclear-armed great power would be expensive and ultimately unsuccessful.

Relationship to ASAT Testing

There is a another important aspect of China’s BMD program that bears discussing, which is its connection with China’s anti-satellite, or ASAT, weapons program.

On July 23, 2014, the Chinese Government conducted a non-destructive test of a missile designed to destroy satellites in low Earth orbit. However, China publicly called this ASAT test a “land-based missile interception test.”

Despite China’s claims that this was not an ASAT test; let me assure you the United States has high confidence in its assessment, that the event was indeed an ASAT test.

The continued development and testing of destructive ASAT systems is both destabilizing and threatens the long-term security and sustainability of the outer space environment. A previous destructive test of the Chinese system in 2007 created thousands of pieces of debris, which continue to present an ongoing danger to the space systems—as well as astronauts—of all nations, including China.

The destructive nature of debris-generating weapons has decades-long consequences: they can increase the potential for further collisions in the future, which only create more debris. A debris-forming test or attack may only be minutes in duration, but the consequences can last for decades. It is for these reasons that the United States believes testing debris-generating ASAT systems threaten the security, economic well-being, and civil endeavors of all nations.

Space systems and their supporting infrastructures enable a wide range of services, including communication; position, navigation, and timing; intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; and meteorology, which provide vital national, military, civil, scientific, and economic benefits. Other nations recognize these benefits to the United States and seek to counter the U.S. strategic advantage by pursuing capabilities to deny or destroy our access to space services.

The use of such ASAT weapons could be escalatory in a crisis.

China’s ASAT program, and the lack of transparency accompanying it, also impedes bilateral space cooperation. While we prefer cooperation, it will by necessity have to be a product of a step-by-step approach starting with dialogue, leading to modest CBMs, which might then perhaps lead to deeper engagement. However, none of this is possible until China changes its behavior with regard to ASATs.

Conclusion

As many of you know, one of my biggest priorities as Assistant Secretary is to look over the horizon a bit and begin to structure our Bureau to address the emerging security challenges of the 21st Century.

For me, that means an increased focus on developing a stable strategic relationship with China, while at the same time reassuring our Allies.

Managing the U.S.-China relationship will take a lot of time and effort, and we won’t always be successful. It’s a challenge. But as Secretary Kerry likes to remind us, it’s important for us to get caught trying, and that’s what we intend to do.

Thanks very much.

U.S. SENDS CONGRATULATIONS TO PEOPLE OF BRUNEI DARUSSALAM ON THEIR NATIONAL DAY

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Brunei Darussalam National Day
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
February 20, 2015

On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States of America, I wish to send my congratulations to the people of Brunei Darussalam as you celebrate your 31st National Day on February 23rd.

I have enjoyed my visits to your country, and we work together in so many areas of critical importance to the region, including trade, energy, English language training, and maritime security. Our relationship has only deepened over the years, and I look forward to finding new areas of cooperation in the future. We hope our partnership will continue to be a force for peace and stability in the region.

I wish His Majesty Hassanal Bolkiah and all the people of Brunei the very best on this special anniversary and look forward to many more years of working closely together.

U.S. CONGRATULATES PEOPLE OF SAINT LUCIA ON THEIR INDEPENDENCE DAY ANNIVERSARY

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Saint Lucia's Independence Day
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
February 22, 2015

On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States, I congratulate the people of Saint Lucia on the 36th anniversary of your independence.

The United States and Saint Lucia are united in our shared democratic values and cultural and linguistic diversity.

We cooperate on a wide range of issues – including at the Organization of American States, whose Permanent Council was chaired by Saint Lucia last summer.

Most recently, we welcomed Prime Minister Kenny Anthony to the U.S. Department of State for the Caribbean Energy Security Summit. We discussed the importance of attracting energy investments to move us down the path of energy independence.

By working together, we can create a more stable, prosperous, and environmentally friendly region for both our peoples.

As you gather to celebrate with family and friends, I wish you a happy and fulfilling Independence Day.

NASA VIDEO: SPACE STATION SPACE WALKS ON THIS WEEK @NASA

FORMER NATIONAL GUARD SERGEANT SENTENCED FOR ROLE IN PROTECTING ALLEGED DRUG TRAFFICKERS

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Friday, February 20, 2015
Former Arizona Army National Guard Sergeant Sentenced to 52 Months in Prison for Participating in Scheme to Protect Purported Drug Traffickers
Fifty-Seven Individuals Previously Convicted and Sentenced as Part of This Investigation

A former member of the Arizona Army National Guard was sentenced today to 52 months in prison for his role in a scheme to accept bribes from purported drug traffickers in exchange for using his military position to protect shipments of cocaine during transportation, announced Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division.

Raul Portillo, 42, of Phoenix, Arizona, pleaded guilty on Nov. 21, 2014, to one count of conspiracy to commit bribery and interfere with commerce by attempted extortion.  U.S. District Judge James A. Soto of the District of Arizona imposed the sentence.

According to admissions made in connection with his guilty plea, Portillo, a sergeant in the Arizona Army National Guard, conspired with others from the Arizona Army National Guard to accept cash bribes to protect narcotics traffickers who were purportedly transporting and distributing cocaine from Arizona to other locations in the southwestern United States.  Unbeknownst to Portillo and the other co-conspirators, however, the supposed narcotics traffickers were actually undercover FBI agents.

Specifically, Portillo admitted that he wore his official uniform, carried official forms of identification, used official vehicles and used his official authority, where necessary, to prevent police stops and searches as he drove cocaine shipments through checkpoints manned by the U.S. Border Patrol, the Arizona Department of Public Safety, and Nevada law enforcement officers.  Portillo admitted that he took bribe payments totaling $12,000 for transporting cocaine on two separate occasions.  Portillo also admitted that he accepted a $2,000 cash payment in exchange for recruiting an Immigration and Customs Enforcement inspector into the conspiracy.

In 2006, an arrest warrant was issued for Portillo, and Portillo was arrested in May 2011, arraigned and released on personal recognizance.  Portillo admitted that in or around July 2011, he fled to avoid prosecution.

To date, 58 defendants have been convicted and sentenced for charges stemming from this investigation.

This case is part of a joint investigation conducted by the Southern Arizona Corruption Task Force (SACTF), which is comprised of the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the Tucson Police Department.  Though not part of the SACTF, the Arizona National Guard, Air Force Office of Special Investigations, Defense Criminal Investigative Service and Internal Revenue Service’s Criminal Investigation Division also participated in the investigation.  The case is being prosecuted by Trial Attorneys Monique T. Abrishami and Peter N. Halpern of the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section.

2/20/15: WHITE HOUSE PRESS BRIEFING

SECRETARY KERRY'S STATEMENT ON ANNIVERSARY OF MAIDAN PROTESTS IN UKRAINE

FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
One Year Anniversary of the Maidan Protests in Ukraine
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
February 21, 2015

For three months ending last year, Ukrainians braved long nights, bitter cold, and violent crackdowns by a government that refused to hear its own people. Snipers shot at them from rooftops, cutting down more than 100 people -- protestors and police alike.

We will never forget those who lost their lives and raised their voices for freedom and dignity.

Ukrainians celebrate this weekend the first anniversary of the Revolution of Dignity, when the EuroMaidan protestors stood up against injustice and sparked the birth of a new Ukraine.

I visited Kyiv in the aftermath of these protests, and I was inspired by the remarkable strength of the Ukrainian people.

I saw barricades made of mattresses and discarded chairs, burned tires stacked like firewood, and street lamps riddled with bullet holes. I paid my respects at the Rada, where photos of the fallen stood on display framed by crowns of thorns. And I placed roses and a candle on the Shrine of the Fallen on Institutska Street.

But what inspired me most was the Ukrainian people themselves, who are striving for a democratic and European future in the face of adversity and Russian aggression.

Today we are united with Ukraine in somber remembrance of the sacrifices made by the “heavenly hundred.” We also recognize the efforts of the people of Ukraine to make progress over this difficult year. From L’viv to Luhansk, from Chernivtsi to Sevastopol, Ukrainians are coming together to define their own future.

And finally, we join you in declaring, Slava Ukrayini. Glory to Ukraine.

America stands with you.

WHITE HOUSE VIDEO: FIRST LADY SPEAKS AT "CELEBRATING WOMEN OF THE MOVEMENT" EVENT

SECRETARY KERRY, U.K. FOREIGN SECRETARY HAMMOND MAKE REMARKS BEFORE MEETING

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks With U.K. Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond Before Their Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Carlton Gardens
London, United Kingdom
February 21, 2015

FOREIGN SECRETARY HAMMOND: Well, it’s a great pleasure to welcome John Kerry here this morning. We have got a series of important challenges to the rules-based international system which is so important both for the United States and the United Kingdom, and our cooperation, our alliance, is at the heart of the response to those challenges.

We’re going to take the opportunity this morning to talk about the challenge we face in Ukraine from Russia’s continued aggression, the unacceptable way in which the cease-fire agreement that was signed just 10 days ago has been so systematically breached. We’re going to talk about how we maintain European Union unity and U.S.-European alignment in response to those breaches of that agreement.

We’ll also be talking about the challenges that we face from Islamist extremism, particularly now the challenges that we’re seeing in Libya, where the extremists are getting a foothold and the UN special representative initiative is making some progress, but we urgently need to see a government of national unity emerging in Libya so that the international community can put its weight behind that government in order to squeeze the terrorists out of the ungoverned space that’s currently available to them in Libya.

We’ve got a lot of challenges ahead of us, but we’re going to have, I know, very constructive discussions today, and we will make sure that our alliance remains at the heart of the international community’s response to those challenges. John.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, Philip, thank you very much. First of all, thank you for your welcome and thanks for being available to have this important discussion. I think the special relationship between the United Kingdom and the United States is really never more prominent than it is right now at this period where we are cooperating on so many different challenges all at the same time. We’re particularly appreciative for Britain’s home secretary’s presence at the White House summit on violent extremism just over the last few days.

And I have to say that I am personally encouraged by the unanimity of the response at that summit to steps that need to be taken over the course of the next months and years in order to counter violent extremism. But for the immediate moment, we face a series of very real, immediate challenges which we are determined to respond to. And we’re going to talk about each of them here today, and I will go on from here to discussions with respect to Iran. The P5+1 remains united on the subject of Iran. There is absolutely no divergence whatsoever in what we believe is necessary for Iran to prove that its nuclear program is going to be peaceful into the future.

But in the immediacy, Russia has engaged in an absolutely brazen and cynical process over these last days. There is no secret to any of us, not in this age of all kinds of visibility and technical means and satellites and the ability to watch what people are doing – we know to a certainty what Russia has been providing to the separatists, how Russia is involved with the separatists, and the ways in which Russia has cynically been willing to go to – even lead an effort at the UN, even simultaneously as it is continuing to do land grabbing in Ukraine. And what is happening with respect to Mariupol even now is just simply unacceptable.

So we are talking about additional sanctions, additional efforts. I’m confident that over the course of the next days, people are determined to make it clear we’re not going to play this game. We’re not going to sit there and be part of this kind of extraordinarily craven behavior at the expense of the sovereignty and integrity of a nation. This is behavior that is completely counter to everything that the global community has worked to achieve and to put in place ever since World War II. And I’m confident that the United Kingdom, the United States, and others are prepared to stand up to it.

With respect to ISIS/Daesh, there is a unanimity now that is even more determined than it was previously to put the people in the places that they need to be to get the job done, to commit the resources, and to continue to put the pressure on Daesh in Iraq and into Syria, and wherever they may be. And in Libya, there is an increasing determination – we had a meeting in Washington just the other day with the foreign minister of Egypt, with the EU high representative, with the secretary-general of the United Nations. I will have a discussion with Philip about that. And I’m confident that we’re going to have a unanimous approach over these next weeks that will begin to create an even more coordinated and effective response with respect to Libya itself.

And so there’s a great deal on the plate. We understand that. But one thing I think we know: We have the tools, we have the political will, we have the determination, and we are making gains in Iraq. Territory is increasingly beginning to come back into the hands of the Iraqi Government. The Iraqi military is now beginning to stand up with greater capacity. There is a fixed determination by every country in the region, every country in the region – even those with whom we have major disagreements – they are all standing in opposition to the brutality and to the extraordinary criminality of the Daesh enterprise wherever it is found. And I have genuine confidence in our ability to be able to continue to make that progress. So thank you all.

SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS AT U.S. EMBASSY IN LONDON

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
02/21/2015 04:31 PM EST
Remarks at Press Availability
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
U.S. Embassy London
London, United Kingdom
February 21, 2015

SECRETARY KERRY: Good afternoon, everybody. Appreciate everybody’s patience. Well, good evening, everybody. It’s a pleasure for me to be back in London, and I’m very grateful to my friend Philip Hammond, foreign secretary of the U.K., not just for his hospitality but for his partnership in wrestling with some very difficult issues today.

The United States and the United Kingdom have a long tradition of great cooperation, and frankly, that tradition was reinforced today and it continues. Under President Obama and Prime Minister Cameron’s leadership, our two nations are helping to articulate the path forward in many areas of concern for the global community. And this evening I want to focus on a number of them that we discussed here today.

First, the foreign secretary and I reviewed the progress in degrading and ultimately defeating Daesh. Throughout our history, we have faced significant threats together – genocide, aggression, chaos, dictatorship, the battle against fascism and tyranny. Today we’re asked away to a new campaign against a new kind of enemy. The battlefield is very different and the weapons are different, so the strategies that we employ have to be different too in order to overcome that enemy.

I am confident that based on the choices we are making we will degrade and ultimately defeat Daesh. And in my judgment, there should be no question about that. Working together, we have brought together a coalition of more than 60 countries and it is growing still. We’ve seen progress in Iraq. Daesh was defeated at Kobani. Territory is now being taken back. The Iraqi army is beginning to stand up. Their communications, the communications of Daesh, have been disrupted. Their ability to be able to move in convoys has been disrupted. Their supply lines are being disrupted. The transportation networks they utilized are being disrupted.

And so we have started this great enterprise. We’re engaged and we’re coordinating. But obviously, there is a lot more to be done. We understand that, and that’s what we talked about today. Toward our common goal of unity and action, President Obama hosted a summit in Washington this week that brought together leading figures from local and national governments, from civil society and the private sector, people from all around the world who came together, including a robust U.K. delegation led by Home Secretary Theresa May. We’re very grateful for her contribution .

Our goal with the summit was really very simple: to expand the global conversation, and more importantly to listen to each other, share best practices, learn the lessons where things haven’t worked particularly well if they haven’t, and clarify an action agenda that identifies, shares, and deploys those best practices in preventing and countering violent extremism.

In this effort, frankly, we decided – and I think everybody agreed on this yesterday and the day before – there’s a role for every country. There’s something for everybody to be able to do in this.

Together, we committed to help countries that are at immediate risk to be able to grow stronger and to be able to fight back. And Philip Hammond and I discussed some of the things we could do to accomplish that today.

We also committed to interrupt financial flows so that the terrorist become as bankrupt in financial terms as they are in any kind of ideology or program or morality. We committed to stop the recruitment into the terrorist ranks and to work very hard in order to be able to deprive terrorists of the access that they have to those who are disillusioned or disconnected to their particular countries or societies.

We committed to help areas of the globe that are on the front lines or the ones that are next in line as targets, and particularly those that might be subject to the potential of terrorist infiltration. We also committed to work hard to create greater opportunity of positive role models for young people everywhere, and we committed to teach skills and work to improve the economies of many countries where there is a ready pool for the potential of terrorism in order to reduce the numbers of people who might be attracted to the misguided appeals that have brought, frankly, too many people to the battlefield.

Now, make no mistake: The rise of violent extremism remains a challenge for everyone, and it is particularly a challenge to global rule of law. Foreign Secretary Hammond and I agreed that we believe we have made the right initial choices, that we are on the right path, we are confident about the future, but we’re also realistic about those places where we still need to do more to meet the challenge. The reason we are confident is, frankly, because the terrorists have absolutely nothing positive to offer anyone and because nations are coming together across every boundary, every boundary – the boundaries of territory, the boundaries of creed, of religion, of ideology, of governance – in order to move forward in the name of decency, civility, and reason.

Foreign Secretary Hammond and I also discussed the egregious Russian and separatist violations of the February 12th Minsk agreement in Ukraine which embraced the September agreements and set forth a very clear path for what was needed to be done to be able to put a cease-fire in place and begin to live up to those agreements.

One of the most egregious violations is obviously the assault, the full-scale assault on the city of Debaltseve and the violations of the cease-fire in the resupply of the separatists by Russia. Let me be clear: We know to a certainty what Russia has been providing, and no amount of propaganda is capable of hiding these actions. And for anyone who wants to make gray areas out of black, let’s get very real. The Minsk implementation agreement is not open to interpretation. It’s not vague. It’s not optional. It’s called for a complete cease-fire that was to take effect on the night of February 15th with full OSCE access to the conflict zone, and the pullback of all heavy weapons from the line of contact.

So far, Russia and the separatists are only complying in a few areas selectively, not in Debaltseve, not outside Mariopol, and not in other key strategic areas. And that is simply unacceptable. If this failure continues, make no mistake: There will be further consequences, including consequences that would place added strains on Russia’s already troubled economy. We’re not going to sit back and allow this kind of cynical, craven behavior to continue at the expense of the sovereignty and integrity of another nation. And I am confident that the United States and the United Kingdom and others are prepared to stand up and take the measures necessary to add to the cost of these actions.

Foreign Secretary Hammond and I also discussed the concerns that we share about the continued viability of the Palestinian Authority if they do not receive funds soon. If the Palestinian Authority ceases or were to cease, security cooperation – or even decide to disband as a result of their economic predicament, and that could happen in the near future if they don’t receive additional revenues – then we would be faced with yet another crisis that could also greatly impact the security of both Palestinians and Israelis. And that would have the potential of serious ripple effects elsewhere in the region.

So we’re working hard to try to prevent that from happening, and that’s why we’ve been reaching out to key stakeholders in order to express these concerns but also to try to work together to be able to find a solution to this challenge.

Finally, Foreign Secretary Hammond and I discussed the P5+1 nuclear negotiations with Iran. Our governments remain in lockstep with our international partners on the importance of cutting off Iran’s pathways to the potential of a nuclear weapon. And will travel to Geneva tomorrow to meet with Foreign Minister Zarif to see if we can make progress in these talks. A unified P5+1 has put on the table creative ideas to achieve our objective, and now we will find out whether or not Iran is able to match its words about its willingness to show that its program is fully peaceful with the verifiable actions and verifiable decisions that are necessary to accomplish that goal.

Finally, I meant to say a moment ago we also discussed Syria today. The challenge of the Assad regime, which continues to drop barrel bombs on innocent civilians, the challenge of a country that is continuing to be torn apart by this violence. The jihadis who are attracted to Syria because of Assad’s presence and the extraordinary spillover of impact on Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, the region, as a consequence of the numbers of refugees that continue to be created by this violence.

So it is our hope that with good effort over the course of the next weeks and months, we might even be able to find a way to have a greater impact on finding the negotiated path, which is the only ultimate path which will resolve the question of violence and restore stability and integrity to a potentially unified, secular, and stable Syria.

With that, I would be happy to take some questions.

MS. HARF: Great. The first question is for Rosiland Jordan of Al-Jazeera. I’m going to bring the microphone to you.

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. First on Ukraine, you described in general terms what came out of your discussions with Foreign Minister Hammond. How likely is it, first, that more economic sanctions and travel bans are going to be imposed? How long is the U.S. willing to wait to see whether the Minsk cease-fire of the past week actually is going to take full effect? Why is it realistic to think that even more economic sanctions are going to persuade Vladimir Putin and his government to change course? Their economy has now been rated at junk bond status and they still seem to be intent on spreading their influence using separatists and Russian troops.

And finally on Ukraine, is it time to give the Ukrainian military lethal weapons so that they can better defend their own territory, especially given that there isn’t a NATO commitment to Ukraine’s security?

And then on the Iran nuclear talks --

SECRETARY KERRY: I’ve got to get a pencil here to write all those questions down. (Laughter.) I need a piece of paper, actually. You’ve got a few more questions there than (inaudible).

QUESTION: Regarding the talks, sir –

SECRETARY KERRY: On what now?

QUESTION: On Iran.

SECRETARY KERRY: We’re Iran now?

QUESTION: Yes, we’re on Iran. Will the U.S. and Iran actually achieve a political framework for a deal by March 31st? How urgent in your estimation is the sentiment on both sides to achieve this deal? Does the fact that the U.S. Energy Secretary Dr. Moniz and his Iranian counterpart, Dr. Salehi, to discuss the technical issues mean that the really tough stuff is getting worked out and that everyone is getting very close to this deal?

And then we have to look at the prospect of what you and the President have said in the past: “No deal is better than a bad deal.” If there is no deal by March 31st, is the U.S. willing to walk away from the table, leave behind the efforts of the JPOA, and essentially reestablish the status quo regarding Iran’s nuclear program?

SECRETARY KERRY: Okay. So let me begin with the last of the questions with respect to Ukraine and then I’ll deal with the other questions on Ukraine. With respect to lethal weapons, we’ve made it very, very clear that that is a discussion that it taking place in Washington both in the Congress as well as in the Administration. No decision has been made by the President at this point in time, and I think we have to see what happens in the next few days with respect to the events that are taking place now on the ground.

With respect to the events that are taking place now on the ground, I think I’ve spoken to them in the course of my opening comments very, very clearly. But the fact is that yes, sanctions are being considered because there are a number of more serious sanctions that yet remain available to the European Community and the United States and others who are sharing in the implementation of these sanctions.

And they are having an impact; there is no question about it. Now, it may not have yet succeeded in presenting President Putin with a choice that he’s been willing to make, but I am confident that in Russia generally there will be an increasing amount of questioning of the course that he is on should additional sanctions be implemented. And there are some yet very serious sanctions that can be taken which have a profound increased negative impact on the Russian economy.

I have said persistently, as President Obama has, that we’re not seeking to hurt the people of Russia, who regrettably pay a collateral price as a result of these sanctions, and we’ve tried to target them as effectively as possible to be able to have an impact on the decision making of those in government itself. But increasingly, there will be an inevitable broader impact as the sanctions ratchet up.

So in the next few days, I anticipate that President Obama will evaluate the choices that are in front of him and will make his decision as to what the next step will be. But there is serious discussion taking place between us and our European allies as to what those next sanction steps ought to be and when they perhaps ought to be implemented. And I am confident that some additional steps will be taken in response to the breaches of this cease-fire and to the process that had been agreed upon in Minsk.

QUESTION: And regarding the Iranian talks?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, regarding the Iranian talks, the presence of Secretary Ernie Moniz is a reflection of the fact that these talks are very technical, and because we are pushing to try to come to agreement on some very difficult issues, it was deemed necessary and appropriate to be able to have our technical people be able to sit with their technical people at the highest level in order to try to resolve any differences that may exist.

I would not read into it any indication whatsoever that something is about to be decided as a result of that. There are still significant gaps. There is still a distance to travel. And with respect to the end date that you asked about, President Obama has no inclination whatsoever to extend these talks beyond the period that has been set out with a feeling that it is imperative to be able to come to a fundamental political outline and agreement within the time span that we have left. And if that can’t be done, that it would be an indication that fundamental choices are not being made that are essential to doing that.

So our target remains, as the President has said, towards the end of March, and I am absolutely confident that President Obama is fully prepared to stop these talks if he feels that they’re not being met with the kind of productive decision making necessary to prove that a program is, in fact, peaceful.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MS. HARF: Great. Our final question is from Nick Childs of the BBC.

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. In view of the Ukraine crisis, the issues of the broader relationship now with Russia, and in particular how NATO as an alliance responds to it, the United Kingdom is one of the few countries within NATO now that currently maintains the 2 percent minimum defense spending level, but at the moment the British Government has no formal commitment to sustain it beyond 2016. With the backdrop of everything that is going on, would you welcome a firmer commitment from the United Kingdom Government to sustain the 2 percent defense spending level into the future, perhaps to encourage others?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, let me just say that I don’t want to inadvertently find myself getting in the way of – in any kind of domestic debate that may be going on with respect to an election that is not too far away. And so I’ll answer it in a way that is straightforward but nevertheless not, I think, different from where we’ve been in the past with respect to this issue.

It is standing policy of NATO, standing policy of the United States, which we have expressed through the years frequently and I have personally expressed recently in Brussels, the importance of all NATO members adhering to the 2 percent level. We’re not looking for some kind of reaffirmation or restatements that go well out into the future or something. What we’re looking for is this year’s budget, and that’s what’s important given what has happened in Ukraine, given the pressures on frontline states and the need to have a shared responsibility in order to meet the overall challenge of sustaining NATO as the vital alliance that it is and has been, and being able to send a message to anybody who were to challenge it that people are prepared to live up to their obligations and not just keep it strong but strengthen it at this particular moment. We’ve engaged in a very significant reassurance plan to a number of countries – the Baltics particularly, Poland, others – who are on the front lines. And I think it’s important for them to know that their fellow members of the NATO alliance are doing their share at the same time.

So we’re very pleased that Great Britain has been and remains a steadfast member and contributor to that alliance, one of the leaders of the alliance, in fact. And we have great respect for the armed force capacity and partnership that Great Britain provides with respect to its military obligations and efforts. And I’m confident that the prime minister and the current government will continue to do that. Thank you.

MS. HARF: Thank you, everyone.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thanks, all. Appreciate it.

QUESTION: Thank you.

U.S. CONDEMNS OPPOSITION LEADER'S DETENTION BY VENEZUELAN GOVERNMENT

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Venezuelan Government Detains Key Opposition Figure
Press Statement
Jen Psaki
Department Spokesperson
Washington, DC
February 20, 2015

The United States condemns the detention of Caracas Metropolitan Mayor Antonio Ledezma by Venezuelan security forces, as well as the systematic intimidation of other leading opposition figures. These actions appear to be a clear attempt by the Venezuelan government to divert attention from the country’s economic and political challenges. Rather than imprisoning and intimidating its critics, the Venezuelan government should focus on finding real solutions through democratic dialogue.

Venezuela’s problems cannot be solved by criminalizing legitimate, democratic dissent. These tactics violate the Venezuelan people’s basic human rights and civil liberties and flout the principles and values set forth in the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man and the Inter-American Democratic Charter.

The Venezuelan government should release those it has unjustly jailed and respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedoms of expression, association, and peaceful assembly. The United States calls on other countries, leaders, and organizations to urge the Venezuelan government to cease these efforts to silence the political opposition and further weaken democratic institutions.

Weekly Address: We Should Make Sure the Future Is Written by Us

NASA VIDEO | MMS MISSION OVERVIEW