Excerpts of Remarks by Secretary of State Clinton and German Foreign Minister Westerwelle, January 20, 2012Footnote 1
Secretary Hillary Clinton and Minister Guido Westerwelle gave these remarks in Washington, DC
Introductory Remarks Omitted
Secretary Clinton. Guido and I discussed Afghanistan. We obviously are very committed to the path forward for a stable, peaceful Afghanistan. We are deeply regretting the bad news about the four French soldiers killed earlier today in the second attack on French soldiers this month. That follows the deaths yesterday of six U.S. Marines in a helicopter crash. So let me express, on behalf of all Americans, are deepest condolences to the families of both those French and American soldiers. We know what a personal loss that is and how important it is we work toward our goal of security and long-term stability.
I want to thank Guido once again for hosting the Bonn conference on Afghanistan last month and the continuing bravery of German soldiers who serve with such distinction as the third largest national contingent in our NATO-ISAF forces.
We're looking forward to our work in May in Chicago at the NATO summit, where we will advance several NATO priorities. Let me say clearly the United States is fully committed to maintaining a force posture in Europe that meets our enduring commitment to European security and our collective defense obligations to our NATO allies. We are grateful to Germany for hosting the U.S. military for many years, and we will be maintaining a close relationship going forward. We recognize that the transatlantic partnership is absolutely indispensable to our own security and well-being.
We are also focused on economic security, and we both recognize and appreciate greatly Germany's leadership role in resolving the debt crisis facing Europe. I can only imagine how challenging this is. And as I conveyed to the minister, the United States stands in support of Germany as it leads the way for all of the Eurozone countries to regain their economic footing and to implement measures that will restore sustainable and balanced growth.
We discussed at some length our nation's shared concerns regarding Iran and the steps it has taken toward furthering its nuclear weapons ambitions. We are both firmly committed to the dual-track approach, pressure to bring about meaningful engagement by Iran on its program, and we are closely coordinating as we implement sanctions.
We talked about so many things. We talked about North Africa, Egypt, Syria, the Middle East, and so much more. So as always, we have a very comprehensive agenda to cover, and I appreciate your being here for us to continue the conversation.
Foreign Minister Westerwelle. Thank you so much, Madam Secretary Hillary. Ladies and gentlemen, first of all, I would like to express my gratitude for the hospitality for the warm welcome here, and in this specific and special case also for the wonderful and delicious birthday cake we just had a few minutes before. Don't be jealous, it was really delicious.
And I would like to say that this is, of course, not only an expression of our close collaboration, it is also an expression of our wonderful and very personal relationship. The United States is our most important partner and ally behind Europe. Close cooperation across the Atlantic is essential in times of global changes and enormous political challenges, so we discussed, of course, the deeply worrying situation in Syria. The regime of President Assad must be stopped urgently. We support the efforts by the Arab League to solve the crisis, and we agree that the United Nations Security Council must take a clear position to condemn the violence by the Syrian regime.
On Iran, I have informed my colleague, Madam Secretary, about the discussions in the European Union on new sanctions. The government in Tehran keeps violating its international obligations on the transparency of its nuclear program. We have no choice but to pass tough new sanctions that address the financial sources of the nuclear program. One this is clear, the door for serious dialogue remains open, but the option of nuclear weapons in Iran is not acceptable to both of us.
And I want to repeat what I said to my colleague and friend in the last hour before. I think it is important for all of us to see that a nuclear option is not acceptable of Iran. And this is not only our raison d'être, to protect Israel. It is also a question of the balance in the region, and it's also unacceptable if we look to the situation and the nonproliferation necessity worldwide. So I think this is a serious situation, but we will stand united to give a common and clear and, unfortunately, tough answer, because a nuclear option for Iran is not acceptable—not for the region, not for the world.
We also discussed the situation in the transformation countries of the Arab Spring. There are enormous political and economic challenges, and we have to support a successful transformation. I explained our transformation partnership program, which we designed in Germany and what was introduced in our European policy, and I think it is successful. But we all know we have to see and we have to differentiate from country to country, and I think this is necessary that we do not think one answer fits all, one size fits all. I think it is necessary to give specified answers and differentiated answers.
We also discussed the preparation of the NATO summit in Chicago in May. Of course, this is important for us. We both want a successful NATO meeting in Chicago, and we're looking forward to this. Once again, we are looking forward for all the hospitality of the Government of the United States of America. And of course we want this summit to become a success and we will work hard for this.
We also discussed—and this is what I wanted to underline because it is important not only for your discussions, but it's a crucial time for us in Europe, of course, like you all know—we also discussed the debt crisis in Europe. I know that some in the United States paint a dark picture of an old continent unable to solve its problems. First of all, allow me in an ironical remark. We finished socialism with the support of the United States of America 20 years ago, and we know that we have to show solidarity. This is our desire and our destiny. As Germans, we know that Europe is not only the answer to the darkest chapter of our own history; it is also our life insurance in times of globalization. And I think it is crystal clear that Germany is committed to Europe and to the Eurozone, and we will show solidarity on the one hand, but on the other hand we also will ask for structural reforms because both is the answer to this present crisis.
Well, thank you so much for the hospitality and I, unfortunately, also want to say a few words to this latest attacks and the killings of our soldiers and our friends in Afghanistan. I am shocked by the tragic death of the French and the American soldiers in Afghanistan. I would like to express my sympathy and my deepest condolences in the name of the Federal Republic of Germany to all the families and to the relatives. But also it's clear tragic setbacks such as this must not stop our engagement for peace and reconciliation in Afghanistan.
Thank you, Hillary. Thank you so much
Q. Hi, Madam Secretary, Mr. Minister. A question on Iran, if I may. Iran in recent days has expressed some willingness to return to talks on its nuclear program. Just today, Lady Ashton released a letter she sent to the Iranians in October in which she calls on them to take some concrete steps for confidence building. First question would be: What exactly are those steps that you're looking for the Iranians to take? And second, do you take them at their word this time that they're willing to fully engage?
And if I may Madam Secretary, in our way of asking two questions—you've made a decision not to testify on the Keystone XL pipeline next week. Can you explain why you don't want to do that? Thank you.
Secretary Clinton. Well Kirit, first let me say that we're going to miss you. I understand this may be the last time I get two, three, or four questions from you. But we wish you well as I think you head off to Moscow, which will be an exciting assignment, from all indications.
With respect to Iran, first let me say that we have a very strong partnership with the EU, and we expect to see the EU taking some additional steps to keep the pressure on Iran in the coming days. And I believe that we're making it clear to Iran, as the minister said, that its pursuit of nuclear weapons and its needless provocations such as the threats regarding the Straits of Hormuz, place it on a dangerous path. Iran does have a choice to make. It can come back to the table, as we have consistently made clear to them, and address the nuclear program concerns that the international community rightly has or face increasing pressure and isolation.
I want to underscore we do not seek conflict. We strongly believe the people of Iran deserve a better future. They can have that future. The country can be reintegrated into the global community, able to share in the benefits when their government definitively turns away from pursuing nuclear weapons.
Last October, on behalf of the E-3+3 member nations, of which both Germany and the United States are two, High Representative Ashton did send the Iranians a letter saying that we are open to negotiations if Iran is serious about addressing the nuclear program without preconditions. We stand by that letter. The EU did make it public earlier today, and we await Iran's response. And I think it's been very important that the EU has kept this open channel. And we all are seeking clarity about the meaning behind Iran's public statements that they are willing to engage, but we have to see a seriousness and sincerity of purpose coming from them.
And with respect to what we expect of them, I think we've made the letter public. They know we want to see them coming to the table to seriously engage about the future of a program that is prohibited under their obligations pursuant to the NPT and in light of Security Council resolutions. So we will await their response.
With respect to the Keystone XL Pipeline, as you know, on Wednesday, the Department of State recommended and President Obama agreed that the presidential permit for the proposed pipeline should be denied. That decision was based on the fact that the State Department did not have sufficient time to assess whether the project was in the national interest as a result of the limited timeframe set forth by Congress. And as the President said yesterday, this announcement is not a judgment on the merits of the pipeline, but the arbitrary nature of a deadline that prevented the State Department from gathering the information necessary to approve the project or to make other decisions with respect to it and protect the American people.
The Department's denial of the permit application does not preclude any subsequent permit application or applications for similar projects, and we are following our normal procedures and actually sending the official that actually knows something about this issue in great depth and has been leading our efforts, Assistant Secretary for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs Kerri-Ann Jones, to the Congress to testify.
Q. (Inaudible) on Iran again. You didn't say what those specific steps you wanted to see were from Iran. Can you tell us what those are?
Secretary Clinton. Well, we won't know until we know whether they're serious about engaging with us.
Q. You don't have anything in mind already?
Secretary Clinton. Oh, yeah. We do. They have to give up their nuclear weapons program. They have to be—they have to be willing to come to the table with a plan to do that.
Q. The confidence-building measures were specifically referenced in the letter—
Secretary Clinton. Well, confidence-building measures would—I'm not going to go into any more detail. I appreciate your efforts to get me to do so. But I think what's important is that confidence will start with their conveying a seriousness of purpose to engage with us and our partners in the E-3+3 process. That would build confidence, and then the additional steps will await the actual resumption of negotiations.
Foreign Minister Westerwelle. If I may add just a few words to this, because I agree to this answer a hundred percent. But I just want to explain with my words for the German Government and, of course, as a representative of the European Union here. This letter is important because it underscored and underlines our dual-track strategy. On the one hand, it is necessary to show the Iranian Government that we are united and that we do not accept any option for nuclear weapons in the hands of the Iranian Government. That's the one point. But on the other hand, second, it is also necessary to show that we are ready for dialogue, but we are ready for serious dialogue and substantial talks. Just to meet for show, that this meeting would be misused for propaganda, is not what we want to do. And therefore, I think this letter of Cathy Ashton is exactly expressing what our strategy is not only in Europe, together.
Ms. Nuland. Last question. Hanni Husch of ARD.
Q. Thank you, Madam Secretary, Herr Minister. Secretary, what exactly does the American Government expect from the German Government in solving the European debt crisis? Mr. Westerwelle made it perfect clear today that printing more money is not the answer.
And allow me, out of fairness, a second question. A follow-up on Afghanistan. Mr. Sarkozy is considering the withdrawal of his troops. Is that the right answer?
Secretary Clinton. With respect to the second question, I am in great sympathy with what happened to the French soldiers. It was terrible, and I can certainly appreciate the strong feelings that are being expressed.
We are in close contact with our French colleagues, and we have no reason to believe that France will do anything other than continue to be part of the very carefully considered transition process as we look at our exit, as previously agreed upon in Lisbon.
I think with respect to the Eurozone debt crisis, look, it's not going to surprise you to hear me say that the United States cares deeply about what happens with this crisis. We have a great stake in the health and vitality of the European economic markets. European growth is essential for our growth. It's essential for global growth. And we are—we know from our own experience that moving from crisis to recovery depends on rebuilding confidence and getting the economy to start moving again, producing jobs, producing growth. And Germany has been at the forefront of shaping the strategies to move Europe forward.
And as the minister said, there's a lot of hard work ahead. We're not going to stand over here on the other side of the Atlantic and second-guess the tough questions that you have to answer in Europe. But we think that our European partners, led by Germany, have laid a solid foundation on which to build a recovery. I know President Obama and Chancellor Merkel speak often about this. I know that the minister met with Secretary Geithner earlier today. So we are encouraging German decision making, German confidence building, German leadership, because it's in the interests not only of Europe but of the United States as well.
Foreign Minister Westerwelle. Please allow me some words especially, of course, to the American journalists here, because I think for me it is very crucial and it's very important that you understand our point of view. We think a debt crisis cannot be solved and cannot be answered by making it easier to take up new debts. So we think it's necessary that we have structural reforms. So for us, it's always a combination, solidarity, and Germany showed a lot of solidarity. We put on the table for solidarity in the European Union 200 billion Euro. If I would compare this to the economy and to the size of the economy in the United States of America, this would be S1 trillion. So we have to compare the sizes of our economy and we have to compare, of course, the size of our countries.
So I think this underlines it and make it crystal clear that Germany knows their own responsibility, and all these programs are supported by a majority in the German Bundestag of all party lines around about 70 or 80 percent. So I think this is a clear signal.
But on the other hand, please understand us. If we just put money into the window, if we just put money on the table and we wouldn't ask for structural reforms, we wouldn't solve the cause of crisis. So structural reforms which increases the competitiveness in the countries in the European Union are essential. And I mean, we do not ask for anything more as Germany, as Germans, than what we delivered in the last 10 years by our own structural reforms. And this is the reason, together with the programs of the last two years, why Germany is so, with all modesty, successful in the European Union. So it's a combination of both. We think it's a debt crisis; it morphed into a confidence crisis; we have to answer both with solidarity but also with structural reforms. This is our combination.
And about Afghanistan, I just want to express one thing. Of course, we all feel sympathy with the families, with the victims, and we understand these discussions very well. You do, we do. But we should never forget why we are in Afghanistan. And Afghanistan may never become a safe haven for terrorists worldwide again, and this is the reason why we are there. We really are full of sympathy and we want to express our deepest condolences, but we think we have to continue because we have to protect our own security and our own freedom and way of life in the Western community.
Thank you so much.
Secretary Clinton. Thank you.
Remarks by Secretary of Defense Panetta, February 4, 2012Footnote 2
Secretary Leon Panetta gave the following remarks in Munich, Germany
Introductory Remarks Omitted
Secretary Panetta. Today I'd like to discuss how we in the United States see our relationship with Europe evolving in light of the new strategic guidance for defense that was released just this last month by the U.S. Department of Defense. The reason we developed this guidance is clear. We are at a strategic turning point after both a decade of war and a decade in which there has been very substantial growth in the U.S. defense budget. And like most nations on this continent, America faces a fiscal crisis that has resulted in legislatively mandated defense budget reductions of $487 billion over 10 years.
And as difficult and tough as it is to achieve these savings, we view this as an opportunity to shape the U.S. military force, a force we need not just for now but in the future. By implementing this new guidance, we will ensure that the United States military remains the strongest in the world and is fully capable of defending the interests of the United States and the interests of our allies.
We do not want to repeat the mistakes of past drawdowns by cutting across the board and hollowing out the force. And unlike past drawdowns, when threats that we were confronting receded, we still confront a number of serious threats in the world. There is still a war in Afghanistan. We confront the threat of terrorism, nuclear proliferation in North Korea and Iran, turmoil in the Middle East, rising powers, cyber attacks. We designed a strategy to deal with these threats.
Let me summarize the key elements of the new U.S. defense strategy. First, the United States military will be smaller and we will be leaner. That was something, frankly, that was going to happen under any circumstances by virtue of the drawdown that we were involved in. But what we wanted to stress was a force that would be agile, that would be flexible, that would be rapidly deployable, and that would be technologically advanced. It must be a cutting edge force for the future.
Second, we will enhance our presence in Asia Pacific and the Middle East, where we see the greatest challenges and the greatest opportunities in the 21st century.
Third, we will maintain a robust presence in Europe and elsewhere in the world by investing in existing alliances, by helping to make them stronger, by developing new partnerships, and by developing new innovative rotational deployments that will give us the capability to have a presence not only in Europe, but in Africa and Latin America and elsewhere.
Fourth, we will ensure that we can quickly confront and defeat aggression from any adversary, any time, any place. It is essential that we have the capability to deal with more than one adversary at a time, and we believe we have shaped a force that will give us that capability.
And fifth, we will protect and prioritize key investments—key investments in technology and new capabilities from special operations forces to cyber and space and unmanned systems, as well as our capacity to surge, adapt and grow as needed. That means we must maintain a strong National Guard and a strong Reserve and a strong economic base.
For Europe, the U.S. defense strategy reaffirms the lasting strategic importance of the transatlantic partnership with the United States. Although it will evolve in light of strategic guidance and the resulting budget decisions, our military footprint in Europe will remain larger than in any other region in the world. That's not only because the peace and prosperity of Europe is critically important to the United States, but because Europe remains our security partner, our security partner of choice for military operations and diplomacy around the world. We saw that in Libya last year and we see it in Afghanistan every day.
Drawing on the lessons of a decade of war, a robust and effective network of alliances and partnerships is absolutely an essential element of this strategy's vision for the future U.S. military. As part of the strategy, we are therefore deeply committed to strengthening transatlantic security partnerships and institutions, including NATO.
Much as changing strategic and fiscal realities have offered the United States the opportunity to build a force for the future, I believe that today's strategic and fiscal realities offer NATO the opportunity to build the alliance we need for the 21st century, an alliance that serves as the core of an expanding network of partnerships across the globe in support of common security objectives. But it is an alliance that remains rooted in the strong bonds of transatlantic security cooperation and collective defense.
Let me lay out how we intend to strengthen transatlantic security cooperation by describing what European allies and partners can expect from the United States and our new defense strategy.
First, we will focus on the most pressing security challenges by investing in ballistic missile defense capability for Europe in response to the emerging threats beyond Europe. As part of the European Phased Adaptive Approach and NATO's missile defense capability, we have established a radar system in Turkey. We will be stationing SM-3 missiles in Romania and Poland. And we will deploy four BMD—ballistic missile defense-capable ships, Aegis ships to Rota, Spain. President Obama has made clear that the United States is firmly committed to building a missile defense system in Europe. The new defense strategy and our budget priorities reflect that commitment.
Second, we will invest in shared capabilities that will ensure NATO remains the strongest and most capable military alliance on earth. To address intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance shortfalls, some of which the Libya operation exposed, NATO has agreed as of yesterday to fund the new Alliance Ground Surveillance system.
I want to thank the secretary general and all of my fellow defense ministers in NATO for having made that very important decision, that is in many ways the foundation of smart defense. For that reason, we in the United States have protected funding for AGS in our new defense budget. Safeguarding critical capabilities was a core objective of our budget and strategy review of the United States, and it is important that we send a strong message that we remain committed to this system and bolstering NATO's cutting edge capabilities.
Third, we will employ innovative approaches to strengthen security cooperation, even as we reduce the numbers of U.S. troops and dependents that are permanently stationed in Europe. We will maintain two brigades garrisoned in Europe in addition to moving forward with the missile defense deployments that I've already detailed, establishing an aviation detachment in Poland and taking steps to enhance the responsiveness of special operations forces in the region.
As we reduce the end strength of our land forces overall, we will remove two heavy, fixed brigades that are currently garrisoned in Europe—two brigades that, I might point out, have spent most of their time in the war zone and not here. We selected these legacy brigades for transition because they are the least adaptive to the complex challenges we face and we expect to face alongside our European partners.
We made this decision only after ensuring that our force posture adjustments will not weaken our ability to meet our commitment to the security of Europe or our Article 5 responsibilities.
Today, I can announce that the United States will make a new commitment to the security of our NATO partners by reinvigorating our contribution to the NATO Response Force that we value so much. The NRF was designed to be an agile, rapidly deployable, multinational force that can respond to crises when and where necessary. The United States had endorsed the NRF but has not made a tangible contribution due to the demands of the wars—until now.
In the coming months, we will identify a U.S.-based brigade from which we will provide the United States land force contribution to the NATO Response Force, and we will rotate a battalion-sized task-force to Germany for exercises and training. Not only will this open up new opportunities for U.S. troops to train and exercise with our European counterparts, it will ensure NATO has the capability to conduct expeditionary operations in defense of our common interests. But to fully realize the goal of a strong and agile NRF, we need the support of other Alliance members.
In all, the steps Europe can expect from the United States amount to a vote of confidence from Washington in the future of the Alliance, especially in a period of fiscal austerity. Let me now suggest the steps that Europe can take in order to cast a similar vote of confidence.
First, we must all continue to invest in national defense and in shared responsibilities and capabilities of NATO in order to best manage the security challenges of the future. Approaches like “Smart Defense” help us spend together sensibly—but they cannot be an excuse to cut budgets further. This is the view that I shared with my fellow NATO defense ministers this week, noting that as we move towards the Chicago summit, Smart Defense should be part of a longer-term plan to invest in a NATO force for 2020 that is fully trained and fully equipped to respond to any threat and defend our common interests.
Second, what emerged from a series of meetings with my NATO counterparts this past week was a recommitment to finishing the job in Afghanistan. Our bottom line, as the foreign minister pointed out, is in together, out together. As an Alliance, we are fully committed to the Lisbon framework and transitioning to Afghan control by 2014.
Our discussions included considerations of how ISAF will move from the lead combat role to a support, advise and assist role as Afghan Security Forces move into the lead. We hope Afghan forces will be ready to take the combat lead in all of Afghanistan some time in 2013, as we complete the final tranches of areas that we transition to Afghan control. But, of course, ISAF will continue to be fully combat capable. And we will engage in combat alongside the Afghans as necessary thereafter.
We are making progress in Afghanistan. As General Allen pointed out in a report to my NATO colleagues, violence is down, the insurgents have lost momentum. The transition to Afghan security responsibility has begun. The second tranche of areas that was transferred to Afghan control represents the fact that over 50 percent of the Afghan population is now under Afghan control and security.
The key to the success of this transition rests on a continued commitment by the international community to the long-term development of the Afghan National Security Forces. To sustain sufficient security, the ANSF requires adequate financial support, support that is consistent with our commitments that have been made, commitments made by the international community at the Bonn Conference last December.
I recognize that we face intense pressure to reduce the support given the budget constraints that we all face and that all ISAF nations are facing. But even as we will work to find ways to reduce ANSF costs over time, and we will—and we have—we cannot shortchange our commitments. We cannot shortchange the security that must be provided by the Afghan army now and in the future. We cannot count on other nations to fill the gaps. We must do everything we can to support this force.
Over a decade of war from the mountains of Afghanistan to the shores of Tripoli, this alliance has proven its relevance in the security challenges of the 21st century. We have in many ways moved closer to realizing a vision for the Atlantic community that was articulated by President John F. Kennedy. He indicated this vision nearly 50 years ago in the same year of the first-ever Munich security conference.
In 1962, President Kennedy envisioned that one day the United States could partner with a revitalized Europe, and I quote, “on a basis of full equality in all the great and burdensome tasks of building and defending a community of free nations,” unquote.
We are closer than ever to achieving that vision. But to do that, we must meet the great and necessary tests of the 21st century together. And we must draw strength from our common values, our common interests and our common purpose to forge a better and a safer world and to give our children a better life. That is our dream. It is also our mission.
Thank you very much.
Remarks by Secretary of State Clinton, February 5, 2012Footnote 3
Secretary Hillary Clinton gave the following remarks in Sofia, Bulgaria
Secretary Clinton. Well, thank you very much. I wish to thank Ambassador War-lick and the Embassy for arranging this meeting, and I am honored to be meeting with so many leaders from Bulgaria's Roma community. And I think that the men and women around this table remind us of the lessons that history has borne out again and again, that discrimination anywhere, against anyone, diminishes the human dignity of us all, that persistence does eventually win out over prejudice, and that talent only needs the opportunity to thrive.
Americans have learned these lessons over the course of our history. As you may well know, we have had many challenges to include every member of our society, regardless of their race or their ethnicity or any other characteristic that set them apart or made them a member of a minority group, and we are the stronger for it.
Here in Europe, one of the pieces of unfinished business is the full integration of the Roma people into the societies and nations where they reside. For too long, Roma citizens have been marginalized and isolated, prevented from contributing their talents and participating in their societies. This is a critical matter of human rights, and it affects millions of men, women, and children across the continent.
I'm also very troubled to see anti-Roma violence and protests, which in some places are increasing and getting worse. It's also an error for any society not to fully educate every child, and in too many places Roma children attend subpar, usually segregated, schools. And what is the result of that? Well, then Roma people themselves begin to feel apathetic, uninvolved, and then that continues the cycle, which has to be broken.
So I think that building better understanding between Roma and non-Roma communities is very important. I remember visiting with Roma children at the Faith, Hope, and Love Center during my visit to Bulgaria back in 1998. Seeing their spirit and intelligence shining through the adversity that they had experienced in their young lives was a highlight of my trip. So helping to promote and protect the inalienable human rights of Roma everywhere is a long-standing personal commitment of mine, and it is a stated foreign policy priority of this Administration.
Today, I am proud to announce that the United States will join the Decade of Roma Inclusion as an official observer. This commitment is admirable by European governments, and it will help improve opportunities for Roma to participate in the political, social, economic, and cultural lives of their communities. Bulgaria is a founding member of this initiative, so I'm very pleased that I could announce the United States joining this effort here in Sofia.
I also want to commend the Government of Bulgaria for their Roma integration strategy and urge that they work together with the Roma communities and other people of interest to implement the plans that have been adopted.
Now, there's a moral reason why supporting the rights of the Roma people is the right thing to do, but there's also, in today's 21st century economy, economic reasons. Countries that don't fully integrate women or minorities of any kind will not have the economic growth in GDP that is possible and will face the loss of human potential.
So I'm looking forward to hearing from our guests today, to hear of their experience and their ideas about what we together can do that will really put into action the commitment that I wish to make clear today to Roma people, to civil society groups, and to governments working on this issue across Europe, that the United States is very concerned and interested and will stand with you as a partner.
Thank you very much.
Remarks by President Obama and Danish Prime Minister Thorning-Schmidt, February 24, 2012Footnote 4
President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt gave the following remarks at the White House
President Obama. Well, I want to welcome Prime Minister Thorning-Schmidt to the White House and to the Oval Office. This is the first time that we've had a chance to meet, but obviously we've been very impressed with the first five months of her prime ministership. I shared with her how much Michelle and I appreciated the extraordinary hospitality that was shown to Michelle and I when I visited Copenhagen in the past. And I also wanted to just say how much we appreciate the great alliance and partnership that we have with the Danish people on a whole range of international issues.
Obviously, most recently, the operations in Libya could not have been as effective had it not been for the precision and the excellence of the Danish armed forces and their pilots. But that's fairly typical of the way that Danes have punched above their weight in international affairs.
In Afghanistan, I thanked the Prime Minister for the extraordinary contributions of Danish troops in the Helmand area. They operate without caveat, have taken significant casualties, for which obviously all of us extend our condolences to the families that have been affected. But because of the outstanding work that's been done by Danish soldiers in Afghanistan, we're seeing great progress in the areas where they operate.
We had a chance to talk about the economy. As we were exchanging notes, it turns out that, like folks here in the United States, everybody in Denmark wants to talk about the economy all the time, and jobs and growth. And we agreed that there has been some progress in resolving the sovereign debt issues, that there has been some progress with respect to the agreements between the EU and the IMF and Greece, the new government in Italy, new governments in Spain and Portugal are all making significant progress, but that there's a lot more work to do. And we will be consulting closely with Denmark.
And we exchanged ideas on how we can ensure not only economic stability in Europe but also growth in Europe, because if Europe is growing then that benefits the U.S. economy as well. And we emphasized other additional ways that we can encourage trade and reduce economic frictions between the two sides of the transatlantic relationship.
In preparation for our meeting in Chicago, at NATO, in my hometown, we talked about the transition that was already agreed to in Lisbon, when it comes to putting Afghans in the lead in security over the next several years. And we are going to be consulting with not only Denmark but our other allies in making sure that that is a smooth transition and one that is sustained, where we continue to help the Afghan government to support its own sovereignty and effectively control its borders.
We also discussed the extraordinary counterterrorism cooperation that's taking place between our two countries. And I thanked the Prime Minister for the excellent work that her intelligence team has done. We are in constant communication on a whole host of issues. The Danes are very much one of the leaders when it comes to counterterrorism, and are obviously familiar with the significant threats that are posed by terrorism. So we appreciate that very much.
And we had a chance to talk about a wide range of international issues, including the situation in Syria. And I have to say that all of us who've been seeing the terrible pictures coming out of Syria and Homs recently recognize it is absolutely imperative for the international community to rally, and send a clear message to President Assad that it is time for a transition, it is time for that regime to move on, and it is time to stop the killing of Syrian citizens by their own government.
And I'm encouraged by the international unity that we are developing—the meetings that took place in Tunisia that Secretary Clinton attended. And we are going to continue to keep the pressure up, and are looking for every tool available to prevent the slaughter of innocents in Syria. And this is an area where I think the Prime Minister and I deeply agree—it's important that we not be bystanders during these extraordinary events.
At the same time, there are other threats in the region, including the situation in Iran. And I thanked the Prime Minister and the Danish government for their leadership role in applying the toughest sanctions we've ever seen coming out of the EU. Difficult sanctions to apply, but we both agree that we're making progress and they are working in sending a message to Iran that it needs to take a different path if it wants to rejoin the international community, and that there is a expectation on the part of the world that they abide by their international obligations when it comes to their nuclear program.
So the final thing we talked about was the fact that we both have two daughters; they're roughly the same ages. We traded notes. The Prime Minister's daughters are slightly older than Malia and Sasha. She assures me that they continue to behave themselves, even well into their teenage years. So I'm encouraged by the report.
Prime Minister Thorning-Schmidt.
Good.
President Obama. And I thank you very much. I hope that you have a wonderful stay while you're here, and we look forward to working with you again in the near future.
Prime Minister Thorning-Schmidt.
Thank you, Mr. President. And thank you so much for your kind words. And the Danish people have a very strong sense of closeness to the United States, and we always have had that sense. We have close economic, political ties with each other. But not only that, we exchange tourism, students, ideas, and culture. But perhaps most important of all, we have—we share common values. And I think in a turbulent time, this is very, very important.
So basically, the friendship and the alliance between our two countries is in very good shape right now. And I thank you for that.
As you said, we discussed the current situation. Denmark holds the presidency of the EU right now, and we talk about the debt situation most of the time, in Europe. I conveyed the message to the President that I am convinced that we will see ourselves through this crisis. We have now put some very important measures in place. We have fiscal conservation, we have reforms, and we have focus on growth and jobs right now.
In doing that, in this endeavor, I think a closer transatlantic relationship will be important. We are dependent on each other and we should have closer trade with each other, and I think that would be part of creating sustainable growth in our own countries.
As you were saying, Mr. President, we also have close ties in terms of security. It is clear—it has been for a long time—that Danish soldiers are serving alongside American soldiers in Afghanistan, and I used the opportunity today to thank you and the American people for the great effort you have put in Afghanistan. It is greatly appreciated worldwide. And I know that the Danish people really appreciate the global leadership that you and your people have taken also within that context.
I look forward, of course, to coming back to the States, to your hometown, Chicago, to participate in the NATO summit. And what we will be discussing there is Afghanistan, of course. One of the major issues there is transition to the next phase in Afghanistan, and where—what we want to see is the Afghans taking responsibility for their own security. And we are, in Europe, with all the Danish leadership, trying to gather donors in this—in securing that the Afghans are capable of taking over their own security.
We have some great samples of our alliance. We have worked together, again, in Libya, where we made sure that Libya came out on a path of democracy. And I think, again, the Americans showed leadership in that context.
Another area that we discussed, as you've said, was Syria, which is quite the opposite situation. It is horrendous what we see in Syria right now. But I think it is also very, very true that we have worked together in that area. We must continue that endeavor, and just today we have seen that, of the leadership of the League of Arab States, there has been a step forward in trying to put pressure on Syria, which is very, very important. The same goes for Iran.
Another area in security where we work together is in terms of piracy, and I used the opportunity of thanking sincerely the President for the courageous operation that led to the freeing of two aid workers that worked for the Danish Refugee Council. They are now safe because of the Americans. Thank you for that.
So basically our security—our cooperation in terms of security are very great indeed.
I will finish here just by saying that I think our meeting here today has confirmed the friendship and the alliance between our two countries. There's a lot we can do that—you're always welcome to come to Denmark—and I think it is very, very important that we have these kind of meetings to renew the friendship, and this is what you've done today.
Thank you.
President Obama. Thank you very much, everybody.
Remarks by Secretary of State Clinton, February 24, 2012Footnote 5
Secretary Hillary Clinton gave the following interview via telephone
Q. Hello, Mrs. Secretary. I am Ilir Ikonomi with the Voice of America, and I have a few questions on the agreement today.
Secretary Clinton. Oh, well, thank you, Ilir. I'm delighted to talk to you. I think this is a very, very, significant step forward for Kosovo.
Q. Yes. This is what I wanted to ask you. What is the importance of these two agreements reached today in Brussels?
Secretary Clinton. Well, I want to begin by saying how committed the United States is to Kosovo's strengths and enduring partnership with us. And we are fully committed to her independence, her territorial integrity, her sovereignty. And I commend the government, under Prime Minister Thaci, for its constructive attitude and hard work in the EU-facilitated dialogue with Serbia. The United States has supported this process from the beginning, and we know that this is a tough political choice, but it is going to move the people of Kosovo closer to European integration, and we think that's very much in the interest of all Kosovars.
Q. Mrs. Secretary, there have been concerns—and there still are in Kosovo—that the agreement on the representation of Kosovo with a footnote which makes reference to the Resolution 1244 of the Security Council—this might jeopardize the gains achieved so far, the independence and the territorial integrity. What do you make of that?
Secretary Clinton. Well, I disagree with that. I actually think that this will assist in increasing the number of countries that already recognize the Republic of Kosovo, because it will remove an excuse that there's no progress between Kosovo and Serbia. The United States and the 85 other countries who already recognize your independence and sovereignty and territorial integrity will actually have a stronger argument, that as Kosovo is moving toward European integration we are looking to the future.
And please remember that UN Security Council Resolution 1244, in fact, paved the way to Kosovo's independence. It required Serbia to remove security forces. The International Court of Justice carefully considered 1244, and the whole world knows the conclusion, which we firmly agree, that Kosovo's declaration of independence does not violate Resolution 1244. So I actually think this is a very smart, very clever, and very brave decision on the part of the government, because it will move Kosovo closer to Europe, and it will increase the number of countries that will recognize it.
Q. But Mrs. Secretary, do you think there is the need of some safeguards against any conditions that Serbia might come up with in the future that might prevent Kosovo from joining the European Union in the future? Because this is a major concern today in Kosovo.
Secretary Clinton. Well, I think that Kosovo is closer to joining the European Union by doing this then you would be if you did not, because it very much has a recognition on the part of the European Union that Kosovo will be moving towards its own candidacy, something that was not possible in the past, because, remember, there are five European countries that do not recognize Kosovo. And the United States believes that today's events significantly advance Kosovo's European aspirations, that it further solidifies your status as an independent nation. Kosovo will now sit at the table as an equal partner with the ability to speak with your own voice. So I think that there are so many positive advantages for Kosovo in this agreement that I am very encouraged.
Q. But precisely these five European countries that have not recognized Kosovo, that you just mentioned, is this a concern to you?
Secretary Clinton. Oh, of course it's a concern. We want every country to recognize Kosovo. But we also know that it will take time and we've been making steady progress, which we will continue. But I believe that by being a presence, able to sit at the table with these countries, able to participate in regional events and forums—that increases the likelihood that we will obtain recognition.
Q. Mrs. Secretary, thank you very much, and thank you for your time.
Secretary Clinton. Well, thank you very much. I am enthusiastic about the progress that Kosovo is making and very pleased that this important political decision will move Kosovo closer to European integration. And I encourage the people of Kosovo to stand behind the decision, support the progress that is being made. It's come so soon after celebrating your fourth anniversary as an independent state. And I am looking forward to continuing to work with the government and the people on even better things in the future.
Q. Thank you.
Secretary Clinton. Thank you.
Remarks by Secretary of State Clinton, March 2, 2012Footnote 6
Secretary Hillary Clinton gave the following remarks in Washington, DC
Secretary Clinton. Good morning. I am delighted to welcome you to this historic first official meeting in what I hope will become continuous engagement between the European Court of Human Rights and the United States Supreme Court. Today's conference provides an important opportunity for justices and scholars to address issues that affect these two courts and judicial systems the world over.
The United States and Europe share deeply rooted, common convictions about the importance of advancing democracy, the rule of law, and fundamental human rights. Courts around the world increasingly look to the decisions of these two courts for guidance, making your engagement all the more crucial.
Your work reinforces democracy and promotes the rule of law. It guarantees free elections, and clears political space for the freedom of association, expression, and religion. It combats discrimination. These are values we can all agree on—because they are part of who we are.
I look forward to hearing about how this dialogue between our own Supreme Court and its European counterparts can find ways to strengthen our common purpose. Today's conference marks an important milestone in that learning process, and I hope this dialogue can continue with the support of the U.S. government in the years ahead.
Excerpts of Remarks by Secretary of State Clinton and Polish Foreign Minister Sikorski, March 7, 2012Footnote 7
Secretary Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski gave the following remarks in Washington, DC
Secretary Clinton. Well, hello, everyone. And it's a delight once again to see my counterpart and friend, and to welcome Minister Sikorski here to the State Department. Poland is a very good friend and a trusted ally. We have deep historical and cultural ties that we cherish. Poland has just completed its tenure as the president of the European Union, where, once again, it demonstrated its leadership. It's a model and a mentor for emerging democracies; a force for peace, progress, and prosperity around the globe. And the foreign minister and I had a great deal to talk about, but these conversations will continue in our Strategic Dialogue among our officials later this week.
I just want to touch on a few highlights. Before I begin, let me once again offer our sincere condolences on behalf of the United States for Saturday's tragic rail accident. Our thoughts and prayers are with the families and loved ones who lost their lives. And as we have already offered, we stand ready to assist in any way.
We are also deeply concerned about the people of Syria, who continue to endure a brutal and relentless assault at the hands of the Assad regime. The minister and I discussed the latest developments, and I expressed our deep appreciation for Poland's diplomatic role representing the United States in Damascus. And I want especially, Minister, to express our appreciation for the personal efforts of your ambassador in assisting U.S. citizens.
The regime's refusal to allow humanitarian workers to help feed the hungry, tend to the injured, bury the dead marks a new low. Tons of food and medicine are standing by while more civilians die and the regime launches new assaults. This is unacceptable, and we agree completely with the great majority of the international community. The regime must, as it promised last November, withdraw its forces, release political prisoners, permit peaceful protests, and allow international journalists to do their job, which is to tell the truth.
Through the Friends of the Syrian People group and other avenues, we are working to increase our pressure on the regime to end its attacks on civilians and to allow humanitarian access everywhere, as well as for it to meet its commitments under the Arab League Plan. It is past time for all Syrians to break with Assad and stand against this bloodshed and for a better future. It is also past time for those nations that continue to arm and support the regime to bring an end to the bloodshed. We urge all nations to work together to support the democratic aspirations of the Syrian people.
Given its own history, Poland understands better than many how important and difficult it is to stand up to tyranny. Poles remember the difficult choices they had to make, and they value their hard-won freedom. And I want to applaud the leadership of Poland during this tumultuous last year. They've shared their experience and their wisdom with representatives from many countries that are struggling on the path toward democracy. And I want also to acknowledge that through the leadership of Poland at the Community of Democracies, they have provided tangible support for civil society, connecting activists and officials with veterans of previous transitions. We will continue to work closely with Poland to see what more we can do.
We also discussed a wide range of common concerns from Iran to Belarus. We are working closely with Poland on many security matters. And once again, let me thank the Polish people, and particularly their troops serving in Afghanistan, for their service and sacrifice. We also agree that the new missile interceptor that Poland will host, as well as a new American aviation detachment to be stationed in Poland, will be cornerstones of our mutual security commitments. And we look forward to the Chicago summit.
So we covered a lot of ground, and I thank you for your leadership and your thoughtful analysis of the issues before us, Minister, and I look forward to continuing to work with you.
Foreign Minister Sikorski. Thank you. Thank you, Hillary for those words and for having me here. Always a pleasure. And I hope next time we'll see each other in Warsaw. Thank you for the condolences. Likewise, we regret the death of the American journalist Marie Colvin, and I am pleased that our diplomats were able to be helpful in taking her body out of Syria.
I agree with you that the democratization agenda is something that Poland and the United States can most effectively and fruitfully do together, because promotion of democracy is something that both of our nations feel in their bones. It's not our policy, it's what we are. And we are doing it in both the southern and the eastern neighborhood of the European Union.
As you mentioned, we discussed Belarus, and we've drawn plans to collaborate even more closely on monitoring developments in Belarus. We are also following the development of the situation in the Ukraine very closely. And we hope that Ukraine creates political conditions for a bigger and more intimate relationship with Europe and the West as a whole.
We're coming up to the Chicago NATO summit, and we've exchanged ideas on smart defense and on what we can do together to maintain the security of Europe even while the United States cuts its defense budget and cuts its troops—troop commitment to Europe. And there are things that we can usefully do like activating the NATO response force and exercising in Poland. And we are looking forward to your air detachment coming for the first time to Poland on a permanent basis later this year.
We also have a great deal of business in common, and we are looking forward to the Polish American business summit. And it's not just the energy field; there are other fields where more can be done. And of course, we follow the recent election and the future of our relations with Russia, an important neighbor of Poland's.
So again, thank you for a good conversation which shows that our alliance is strong and has a great future.
Q. Madam Secretary, Vladimir Putin looks to be returning to the presidency. You had some critical comments about the first round of voting. Can you tell us what you thought about the second round of voting in Russia and any hopes that the completion of that process might lead to some movement on Russia's position regarding Syria?
Secretary Clinton. Well, I think as the OSCE made clear, there were a number of concerns about this latest electoral process that should be investigated and addressed. And we also remain concerned about the arrests of peaceful protesters, which occurred again on Monday. But the election had a clear winner and we are ready to work with President-elect Putin as he is sworn in and assumes the responsibilities of the presidency.
We are going to be looking for ways to enhance cooperation on a range of difficult issues. You mentioned one of them, Syria. I talked with Foreign Minister Lavrov yesterday; I will be seeing him in New York on Monday. We continue to believe that Russia should join the international community and play a positive role in trying to end the bloodshed and help create the conditions for a peaceful democratic transition. And we will continue to speak out where we think appropriate, because as Radek said, this is not what we do, it's who we are. We believe in democracy, we believe in human rights, we believe in the values that should underpin any great society in the 21st century, and that means for us that we recognize there has to be a lot of internal dialogue within Russia going forward so that the Russian people's aspirations can be fully realized as well.
Q. Madam Secretary, Minister Sikorski, I'm pretty sure it wasn't the main topic of your discussion, but President Barack Obama in 2010, during official trip of President Bronislaw Komorowski to Washington, promised to include Poland into Visa Waiver Program by the end of his presidency. I would like to ask, what concrete steps have you taken to fulfill this promise? And Madam Secretary, can you assure Poles that they will be able to travel to the United States without visas by the end of this year?
Secretary Clinton. Well, first, let me say we know this is an issue of tremendous importance to the Polish people, but it's also very important to the American people because of our close ties and the many family relations. Later this year, the minister and I will be joining our presidents in Chicago, which I think has the largest Polish population outside Warsaw in the world.
So this is a matter of great concern and commitment. And as you rightly said, President Obama has expressed his support for the pending legislation in the Congress that would create broader participation in the Visa Waiver Program. We are working very hard with Congress to try to get that legislation through. I will be very honest with you. We have strong support and we have strong opposition, and so we need to work together to redouble our efforts. And we have to make sure that Poland can do more right now to move toward what the existing standards are, and then hopefully, if the legislation is passed, to be able to get in position and take advantage of it, including an agreement on data sharing, which we have with 20 other EU countries.
So I know the President pledged that this would be done before the end of his presidency, and probably that will be a little longer than the end of this year. But we are going to continue to work very hard to see that it is accomplished.
Q. Thank you, Madam Secretary. You talked about Syria and increasing the pressure on the regime. Beyond just increasing the pressure, can you talk about tangible ways that you're working on to help the opposition? Specifically, Secretary Panetta had just told a congressional panel that you're looking to provide technical assistance and humanitarian assistance. If you could flesh that out a little bit? And there has been a call by many senators to arm the opposition and get militarily involved. I'm wondering if you could—do you feel a lot of pressure on the Hill to do that? And if you could speak to whether you feel that that's in the offing. Thank you.
Secretary Clinton. Well, Elise, we have pressure coming from all directions, not only one direction. But what we're trying to do, and I think the President was very clear on that in his press conference yesterday, is to do everything we can to support the opposition, which is not yet as unified and focused either inside or outside Syria as we hope it could become.
We are working to build a stronger international coalition of support for taking action on the humanitarian level, on the political transition that needs to come in Syria. And we believe that it is a matter of time—we can't put an exact timeframe on when—but we think that Assad and his regime will not be able to survive. So we do think it's appropriate to help the opposition, but where we're focused on is how we help them be more unified, communicate more clearly, have a message to all their Syrian counterparts who are not yet convinced that it's in their interests for Assad to go. And I think that it's—we recognize it's a challenging situation. But I don't know that it's useful for me to go into any greater detail than what the President said yesterday and what Secretary Panetta and General Dempsey are testifying to publicly today.
Q. Madam Secretary, there are opinions that after recent Vladimir Putin's win in the Russian presidential elections, Russia might even harden its line on anti-missile—American anti-missile defense in Europe. Would the United States be willing to make any concessions to accommodate possible Russian concerns in this matter?
Secretary Clinton. We have been very clear that missile defense is a matter for NATO. NATO has made a decision. We believe that it is in all of our interest to carry forward and implement that decision. Poland, as you know, was the first country to commit to hosting an element of the European missile defense architecture. It was the first to bring into force a basing agreement. Poland's support for the Phased Adaptive Approach is a strong pillar within the NATO collective security commitment, and we are going full speed ahead. We have every intention and we've taken every action to demonstrate our seriousness.
Now, we've also made it clear that we would love to cooperate on missile defense against mutual threats with Russia. That is not only a U.S. position, that is also through NATO that we have sought to discuss this at the NATO-Russia Council. Thus far, we've not seen a lot of movement, but we are going to continue to press that with the Russians and hope that there will be an agreement at some point that could be in both of our interests. But Russia has no veto over what we do in NATO. Our commitment is to our NATO allies, to our Article 5 collective security obligations, and missile defense is an integral part of that.
Excerpts of Remarks by President Obama and British Prime Minister Cameron, March 14, 2012Footnote 8
President Barack Obama and Prime Minister David Cameron gave the following remarks at the White House
Introductory Remarks Omitted
President Obama. We've just finished up a very good discussion, and it was a reminder of why I value David's leadership and partnership so much. He appreciates how the alliance between our countries is a foundation—not only for the security and prosperity of our two nations, but for international peace and security as well. David shares my belief that, in a time of rapid change, the leadership of the United States and the United Kingdom is more important than ever. And we share the view that the future we seek is only possible if the rights and responsibilities of nations and people are upheld. And that's a cause that we advanced today.
At a time when too many of our people are still out of work, we agree that we've got to stay focused on creating the growth and jobs that put our people back to work, even as both our countries make difficult choices to put our fiscal houses in order. Between us, we have the largest investment relationship in the world, and we've instructed our teams to continue to explore ways to increase transatlantic trade and investment. And I very much appreciate David's perspective on the fiscal situation in the eurozone, where both our countries—our economies, our businesses, our banks—are deeply connected.
We moved on to discuss Afghanistan, where we are the two largest contributors of forces to the international mission and where our forces continue to make extraordinary sacrifices. The tragic events of recent days are a reminder that this continues to be a very difficult mission. And obviously we both have lost a number of extraordinary young men and women in theater. What's also undeniable, though—and what we can never forget—is that our forces are making very real progress: dismantling al Qaeda; breaking the Taliban's momentum; and training Afghan forces so that they can take the lead and our troops can come home.
That transition is already underway, and about half of all Afghans currently live in areas where Afghan security forces are taking responsibility. Today, the Prime Minister and I reaffirmed the transition plan that we agreed to with our coalition partners in Lisbon. Specifically, at the upcoming NATO summit in my hometown of Chicago, we'll determine the next phase of transition. This includes shifting to a support role next year, in 2013, in advance of Afghans taking full responsibility for security in 2014. We're going to complete this mission, and we're going to do it responsibly. And NATO will maintain an enduring commitment so that Afghanistan never again becomes a haven for al Qaeda to attack our countries.
We also discussed the continuing threat posed by Iran's failure to meet its international obligations. On this we are fully united. We are determined to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. We believe there is still time and space to pursue a diplomatic solution, and we're going to keep coordinating closely with our P5-plus-1 partners. At the same time, we're going to keep up the pressure, with the strongest U.S. sanctions to date and the European Union preparing to impose an embargo on Iranian oil. Tehran must understand that it cannot escape or evade the choice before it—meet your international obligations or face the consequences.
We reaffirmed our commitment to support the democratic transitions underway in the Middle East and North Africa. British forces played a critical role in the mission to protect the Libyan people, and I want to commend David personally for the leadership role he plays in mobilizing international support for the transition in Libya.
We also discussed the horrific violence that the Assad regime continues to inflict on the people of Syria. Right now, we're focused on getting humanitarian aid to those in need. We agreed to keep increasing the pressure on the regime—mobilizing the international community; tightening sanctions; cutting the regime's revenues; isolating it politically, diplomatically, and economically.
Just as the regime and security forces continue to suffer defections, the opposition is growing stronger. I'll say it again: Assad will leave power. It's not a question of if, but when. And to prepare for that day, we'll continue to support plans for a transition to support the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people. More broadly, we recommitted ourselves and our leadership to the goal of global development.
Along with our international partners, we've saved countless lives from the famine in the Horn of Africa. David, you've done an outstanding job in bringing the international community to support progress in Somalia, including lifesaving aid. At the same time, we're renewing our commitment to improve maternal health and preventable deaths of children, and supporting the Global Fund for AIDS, TB and Malaria so that we can realize our goal, and that's the beginning of the end of AIDS. And let me say that it's a tribute to David's leadership that the UK will be playing a leading role in the global partnership to strengthen the open government upon which human rights and development depend.
Finally, I'm very pleased that we're bringing our two militaries, the backbone of our alliance, even closer. As I told David, I can announce that next month, we intend to start implementing our long-awaited defense trade treaty with the UK. This will put advanced technologies in the hands of our troops, and it will mean more jobs for workers in both our countries. And we're moving ahead with our joint initiative to care for our men and women in uniform.
For decades, our troops have stood together on the battlefield. Now we're working together for them when they come home—with new partnerships to help our wounded warriors recover, assist our veterans transition back to civilian life, and to support our remarkable military families.
So, David, thank you, as always, for being such an outstanding ally, partner and friend. As I said this morning, because of our efforts, our alliance is as strong as it has ever been. And Michelle and I are very much looking forward to hosting you and Samantha at tonight's state dinner. I look forward, as well, to welcoming you to Camp David and my hometown of Chicago in May, to carry on the work upon which both our nations and the world depend.
So, David, welcome, and thank you.
Prime Minister Cameron. We've had excellent discussions today, and it was great that our teams had time to join those talks as well. And, Barack, thank you, because there are some countries whose alliance is a matter of convenience, but ours is a matter of conviction. Two states, as I said this morning, united for freedom and enterprise; working together, day in, day out, to defend those values and advance our shared interests.
That has been the fundamental business of this visit and we've just made important progress on four vital areas: Afghanistan, Syria, Iran, and economic growth. And I want to take each in turn.
First, Afghanistan. Recent days have reminded us just how difficult our mission is and how high the cost of this war has been for Britain, for America, and for Afghans themselves. Britain has fought alongside America every day since the start. We have 9,500 men and women still serving there. More than 400 have given their lives. And today, again, we commemorate each and every one of them.
But we will not give up on this mission because Afghanistan must never again be a safe haven for al Qaeda to launch attacks against us. We won't build a perfect Afghanistan, although let's be clear, we are making some tangible progress with more markets open, more health centers working, more children going to school, more people able to achieve a basic standard of living and security. But we can help ensure that Afghanistan is capable of delivering its own security without the need for large numbers of foreign troops.
We are now in the final phases of our military mission. That means completing the training of the Afghan forces so that they can take over the tasks of maintaining security themselves. That transition to Afghan control, as agreed at Lisbon, is now well underway. And next year, as the President said, in 2013, this includes shifting to a support role as Afghans take the lead. This is an advance of Afghan forces taking full responsibility for security in 2014. And as we've always said, we won't be in a combat role after 2014. At the same time, we will also back President Karzai in working towards an Afghan-led political settlement.
Second, a year on from the United Nations Security Council resolution on Libya, we agreed we must maintain our support for the people of the Arab world as they seek a better future. And let me just say, in response to what you said, Mr. President—Barack—about Libya, that I'm very proud of the action that Britain and France and others took, but let us be absolutely clear. None of that would have been possible without the overwhelming support and overwhelming force that the United States provided in the early stages of that campaign—exactly what you promised you would do—that actually made that intervention possible and has given that chance—that country a chance at prosperity and stability and some measure of democracy.
Most urgently now in Syria, we are working to get humanitarian aid to those who need it. And Britain is today pledging an additional £2 million in food and medical care. At the same time, we must properly document the evidence so that those guilty of crimes can be held to account, no matter how long it takes.
Above all, we must do everything we can to achieve a political transition that will stop the killing. So we must maintain the strongest pressure on all those who are resisting change at all costs. We'll give our support to Kofi Annan, as he makes the case for the transition. And we are ready to work with Russia and China for the same goal, including through a new United Nations Security Council resolution.
But we should be clear. What we want is the quickest way to stop the killing. That is through transition rather than revolution or civil war. But if Assad continues, then civil war or revolution is the inevitable consequence. So we will work with anyone who is ready to build a stable, inclusive, and democratic Syria for all Syrians.
Third, we've discussed Iran's nuclear program. The President's tough, reasonable approach has united the world behind unprecedented sanctions pressure on Iran. And Britain has played a leading role in helping to deliver an EU-wide oil embargo. Alongside the financial sanctions being led by America, this embargo is dramatically increasing the pressure on the regime.
Now, we are serious about the talks that are set to resume, but the regime has to meet its international obligations. If it refuses to do so, then Britain and America, along with our international partners, will continue to increase the political and economic pressure to achieve a peaceful outcome to this crisis. The President and I have said nothing is off the table. That is essential for the safety of the region and the wider world.
Fourth, growth. Both Britain and America are dealing with massive debts and deficits. Of course, the measures we take in our domestic economies reflect different national circumstances, but we share the same goals—delivering significant deficit reduction over the medium term and stimulating growth.
One of the keys to growth is trade. The EU and the U.S. together account for more than half of all global trade. Foreign direct investment between Britain and America is the largest in the world. It creates and sustains around a million jobs each side of the Atlantic, and it provides a strong foundation for bilateral trade worth nearly $200 billion a year. So deepening trade and investment between us is crucial and can really help to stimulate growth. Barack and I have agreed to prioritize work ahead of the G8 on liberalizing transatlantic trade and investment flows.
So we've had some very important discussions this morning, and I'm looking forward to continuing our talks at the G8 and the NATO summit, and to visiting you, Barack, at Camp David and in your hometown of Chicago. Who knows what sport we will be able to go and see there?
As Barack has said, the relationship between Britain and America is the strongest that it has ever been. And I believe that's because we're working together as closely as at any point in our history. And together, I'm confident that we can help secure the future of our nations and the world for generations to come.
Thank you.
Q. And to Mr. President, can I ask you both whether you have any information about an apparent car bombing at Camp Bastion this afternoon? And on the general Afghan question, why do you think it is that people feel that you talk a good game but they don't buy it? Why do you think it is that the British and American people look at a situation that they think is, frankly, a mess—they see terrible sacrifice, they see two men who are unable to impose their wills—and they just are not persuaded by your arguments?
Prime Minister Cameron. Well, first of all, on what has happened at Camp Bastion, it is very early, details still coming through. Obviously, we'll want to examine and investigate exactly what has happened before making clear anything about it.
But the security of our people, of our troops, security of both our nation's forces is absolutely the priority. And if there are things that need to be done in the coming hours and days to keep them safer, be in no doubt we will do them.
On the broader issue of Afghanistan, I would make this point—if you compare where we are today with where we've been two, three years ago, the situation is considerably improved. I think the U.S. surge and the additional UK troops we put in, particularly into Helmand Province, had a transformative effect. The level of insurgent attacks are right down. The level of security is right up. The capital of Helmand Province, Lashkar Gah, is now fully transitioned over to Afghan lead control. The markets are open. You're able to do—take part in economic activity in that town, which simply wasn't possible when I first visited it several years ago.
So, look, it's still a very difficult situation. There are many challenges we have to overcome. But what's happening in Afghanistan today is quite different to the situation we had three, four, five years ago.
Do I think we can get to a situation by the end of 2014 where we have a large Afghan national army, a large Afghan police force, both of which are pretty much on track—and that with the Afghan government, they're capable of taking care of their own security in a way that doesn't require large numbers of foreign troops, and that country isn't a threat in the way that it was in the past in terms of a base for terrorism? Yes, I think we can achieve that.
Now, it's been very hard work. The sacrifices have been very great. But we have to keep reminding ourselves and everybody why we are there, what we are doing. You have to go back and remember that the vast majority of terrorist plots that were affecting people in the UK, people in the U.S., came out of that country and that region. That's why we went in there; that's why we're there today.
It's not some selfish, long-term strategic interest. It's simply that we want Afghanistan to be able to look after its own security with its own security forces so we are safe at home. That's the key. That's the message we need to keep explaining to people. But I think what we're trying to do by the end of 2014 is achievable and doable.
President Obama. I concur with everything David said. The only thing I would add—you asked why is it that poll numbers indicate people are interested in ending the war in Afghanistan. It's because we've been there for 10 years, and people get weary, and they know friends and neighbors who have lost loved ones as a consequence of war. No one wants war. Anybody who answers a poll question about war saying enthusiastically, we want war, probably hasn't been involved in a war.
But as David said, I think the vast majority of the American people and British understand why we went there. There is a reason why al Qaeda is on its heels and has been decimated. There's a reason why Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants are not in a position to be able to execute plots against the United States or Great Britain. There is a reason why it is increasingly difficult for those who are interested in carrying out transnational operations directed against our interests, our friends, our allies, to be able to do that—is because the space has shrunk and their capacity to operate is greatly diminished.
Now, as David indicated, this is a hard slog, this is hard work. When I came into office there has been drift in the Afghanistan strategy, in part because we had spent a lot of time focusing on Iraq instead. Over the last three years we have refocused attention on getting Afghanistan right. Would my preference had been that we started some of that earlier? Absolutely. But that's not the cards that were dealt. We're now in a position where, given our starting point, we're making progress. And I believe that we're going to be able to make our—achieve our objectives in 2014.
Q. It is a special relationship. On Iran, do you believe that the six-power talks represent a last chance for the country to diffuse concerns over its nuclear program and avert military action?
And, Prime Minister, on Syria, how are you approaching the Russians to get them on board for a fresh Security Council resolution? And do you believe President Bashar al-Assad ought to be tried as a war crime—a war criminal?
Thank you.
President Obama. As David said, we have applied the toughest sanctions ever on Iran, and we've mobilized the international community with greater unity than we've ever seen. Those sanctions are going to begin to bite even harder this summer. And we're seeing significant effects on the Iranian economy.
So they understand the seriousness with which we take this issue. They understand that there are consequences to them continuing to flout the international community. And I have sent a message very directly to them publicly that they need to seize this opportunity of negotiations with the P5-plus-1 to avert even worse consequences for Iran in the future.
Do I have a guarantee that Iran will walk through this door that we're offering them? No. In the past there has been a tendency for Iran in these negotiations with the P5-plus-1 to delay, to stall, to do a lot of talking but not actually move the ball forward.
I think they should understand that because the international community has applied so many sanctions, because we have employed so many of the options that are available to us to persuade Iran to take a different course, that the window for solving this issue diplomatically is shrinking.
And as I said in a speech just a couple of weeks ago, I am determined not simply to contain Iran that is in possession of a nuclear weapon; I am determined to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon—in part for the reasons that David mentioned. It would trigger a nuclear arms race in the most dangerous part of the world. It would raise nonproliferation issues that would carry significant risks to our national security interests. It would embolden terrorists in the region who might believe that they could act with more impunity if they were operating under the protection of Iran.
And so this is not an issue that is simply in one country's interests or two countries' interests. This is an issue that is important to the entire international community. We will do everything we can to resolve this diplomatically, but ultimately, we've got to have somebody on the other side of the table who's taking this seriously. And I hope that the Iranian regime understands that; that this is their best bet for resolving this in a way that allows Iran to rejoin the community of nations and to prosper and feel secure themselves.
Prime Minister Cameron. Thank you. On Syria, when you see what is happening in Homs and elsewhere, I think we need to appeal to people's humanity to stop this slaughter, to get aid and assistance to those who've been affected, and to ratchet up the pressure on this dreadful regime.
But in the case of Russia, I think we should also appeal to their own interest. It's not in their interest to have this bloodied, broken, brutal regime butchering people nightly on the television screens. The irony is that people in Syria often felt that the Russians were their friends, and many in the West they were more suspicious of.
Now they can see people in the West wanting to help them, raising their issues, calling for the world to act on their problems. And we need to make sure that Russia joins with that.
So it's going to take a lot of hard work. It's going to take a lot of patient diplomacy. But I think it's actually in Russia's interest that we deal with this problem, that we achieve transition, and that we get peace and stability in Syria. And that's the appeal that we should make.
On the issue of holding people responsible—I do. They're not a signatory to the ICC, but what is being done in Homs—and I've spoken personally to one of the photographers who was stuck in Homs, when he got out to the UK—what he witnessed, what he saw is simply appalling and shouldn't be allowed to stand in our world.
And that's why Britain and others have sent monitors to the Turkish border and elsewhere to make sure we document these crimes, we write down what has been done so that no matter how long it takes—people should always remember that international law has got a long reach and a long memory, and the people who are leading Syria at the moment and committing these crimes need to know that.
Q. On the serious subject of Syria, you say you want Assad to go. You wanted Qaddafi to go, and he didn't for a long, long time. So could you just answer specifically, have you discussed today the possibility of a no-fly zone? Have you discussed how you might implement it? Have you discussed how you would degrade the Syrian defenses? Have you discussed time scales on any of those issues?
Prime Minister Cameron. What I'd say, Tom, is that our teams work incredibly closely together on this issue, and the focus right now is, as I said, on trying to achieve transition, not trying to foment revolution. We think that the fastest way to end the killing, which is what we all want to see, is for Assad to go. So the way we should try to help bring that about is through diplomatic pressure, sanctions pressure, political pressure, the pressure that Kofi Annan can bring to bear. That is where our focus is.
Of course, our teams, all the time, as I put it, kick the tires, push the system, ask the difficult questions—what are the other options, what are the other things that we could do? And it's right that we do that. But they're not without their difficulties and complications, as everybody knows. So the focus is transition and all the things that we can to do bring that pressure to bear. And that has been the focus of our discussions.
President Obama. I'd echo everything that David said. Our military plans for everything. That's part of what they do. But I was very clear during the Libya situation that this was unique. We had a clear international mandate; there was unity around the world on that. We were able to execute a plan in a relatively short time-frame that resulted in a good outcome.
But each country is different. As David just mentioned with respect to Syria, it is a extremely complicated situation. The best thing that we can do right now is to make sure that the international community continues to unify around the fact that what the Syrian regime is doing is unacceptable. It is contrary to every international norm that we believe in.
And for us to provide strong support to Kofi Annan, to continue to talk to the Russians, the Chinese and others about why it is that they need to stand up on behalf of people who are being shelled mercilessly, and to describe to them why it is in their interest to join us in a unified international coalition—that's the most important work that we can do right now.
There may be some immediate steps that we've discussed just to make sure that humanitarian aid is being provided in a robust way, and to make sure that a opposition unifies along principles that ultimately would provide a clear platform for the Syrian people to be able to transition to a better form of government.
But when we see what's happening on television, our natural instinct is to act. One of the things that I think both of us have learned in every one of these crises—including in Libya —is that it's very important for us to make sure that we have thought through all of our actions before we take those steps. And that's not just important for us; it's also important for the Syrian people—because, ultimately, the way the international community mobilizes itself, the signals we send, the degree to which we can facilitate a more peaceful transition or a soft landing, rather than a hard landing that results in civil war and, potentially, even more deaths—the people who are going to ultimately be most affected by those decisions are the people in Syria itself. All right?
Thank you very much, everybody. Enjoy the day. See some of you tonight.
Remarks by Secretary of the Treasury Geithner March 20, 2012Footnote 9
Secretary Timothy Geithner gave the following remarks before the House Financial Services Committee
Secretary Geithner. Chairman Bachus, Ranking Member Frank, and members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today on developments in Europe. Europe is a key strategic and economic partner of the United States, and we have an enormous stake in the success of European efforts to restore financial stability and secure growth. The U.S. recovery is getting stronger, but the strength of our recovery will depend in part on events beyond our shores, as we saw last year when U.S. growth was buffeted by headwinds from Europe.
Since that time, European leaders have taken a series of steps to address the crisis and we are encouraged by the progress to date. We hope Europe will build on that progress with additional actions to calm the financial tensions that have been so damaging to global economic growth and put in place a stronger framework of policies and institutions to make the European Monetary Union viable over the longer term and help the member countries to strengthen economic growth.
The European Policy Response
With our encouragement and the support of the IMF, Europe's leaders have put in place a comprehensive strategy to address the crisis. This strategy has the following key elements:
Economic reforms in the member states to restore fiscal sustainability, restructure the banking systems, and improve competitiveness and growth prospects;
Institutional reforms, including the “Fiscal Compact,” that establish stronger disciplines on the fiscal policies of the member states to limit future deficits and debt as a share of GDP;
A coordinated strategy to recapitalize the European financial system, with government guarantees of funding; and A “firewall” of funds to provide financial support to governments that are undertaking reforms to help assure access to financing on sustainable terms.
These efforts by governments have been reinforced by a substantial amount of support from the European Central Bank.
The European economies at the center of the crisis have made very significant progress.
The causes of the crisis were years in the making and were very different across the continent.
After the establishment of monetary union in 2000, interest rates across the union fell significantly, with rates converging toward Germany's. This was accompanied by a substantial rise in borrowing. In Greece, government spending and borrowing rose dramatically. In Portugal, Spain, and Ireland private debt expanded. And in all these countries, as well as Italy, the competiveness of the private sector eroded significantly relative to Germany.
With the exception of Greece, fiscal profligacy was not the primary cause of the crisis.
In Ireland and Spain, the governments actually ran fiscal surpluses, while the private sector borrowed too heavily, inflating a housing bubble. Italy's large public debt is a legacy of a different era. By the early 1990s, the country embarked on serious fiscal consolidation, maintaining primary surpluses (i.e. the government's total revenues exceeded total expenditures, excluding interest payments on debt) between 1992 and 2008.
As the crisis intensified, however, public deficits expanded everywhere, and fears of cascading defaults by government, the collapse of the financial system, or the unraveling of the euro itself caused a broader financial panic across much of the continent, with the governments of many countries losing the ability to borrow at sustainable interest rates without support.
Over the course of the last eighteen months, the countries in crisis have put in place very tough and far-reaching reforms to address the underlying causes of the crisis.
Greece has reduced its structural budget deficit, which measures the underlying deficit adjusted for the effects of recession on revenues and expenditures, by nearly 12 percentage points of GDP since 2009, according to the IMF. Ireland, Portugal, and Spain have reduced their structural deficits by between 4.5 and 5 percentage points over the same period. In Italy, where the structural deficit expanded by much less, the government has shaved off 1¼ percentage points of GDP. Each of these governments has further plans in place to move closer to a sustainable fiscal position over the medium term.
These fiscal reforms are only part of the solution. The harder challenge is to address the erosion in competitiveness and restore reasonable rates of economic growth, a challenge made more difficult by the fact that in a monetary union, the member states do not have their own monetary policies or currencies that can adjust, and in Europe today there is no mechanism for fiscal transfers to help cushion economic shocks.
The five countries at the center of the crisis are also putting in place measures to restore competitiveness. The Italian government has begun to implement reforms to improve the business environment, and developed plans to reform the country's labor laws. Spain has introduced reforms to increase the dynamism of its private sector. Greece, Portugal, and Ireland have also introduced a range of competitiveness-enhancing reforms, including plans for privatization, and labor market reforms and pension reductions.
And these countries are also acting to restructure and repair their banking systems. Spain is restructuring its financial sector, reducing the number of savings banks from 45 to 15. In Ireland, bank recapitalization of €70 billion is now complete and the deleveraging of the system—which aims to reduce banks' loan-to-deposit ratios by almost 20 percent over three years—is proceeding as planned.
For these economic reforms to work, policymakers in the Euro Area will have to be careful to calibrate the mix of financial support and the pace of fiscal consolidation. The reforms will take time and they will not work without financial support that enables governments to borrow at affordable rates and keeps the overall rates of interest across the economy at levels that won't kill growth.
Economic growth is likely to be weak for some time. The path of fiscal consolidation should be gradual with a multiyear phase-in of reforms. If every time economic growth disappoints governments are forced to cut spending or raise taxes immediately to make up for the impact of weaker growth on deficits, this would risk a self-reinforcing negative spiral of growth-killing austerity.
These economic reforms have been aided by actions by the ECB, which has lowered interest rates, undertaken purchases of sovereign debt in secondary markets, and provided critical funding and liquidity support for the European banking system. Last December, the ECB introduced the three-year Long-Term Refinancing Operation (LTRO) and broadened eligible collateral. Through its two lending operations in December and February, the LTRO has allotted over €1.0 trillion to hundreds of banks.
In addition, the European Banking Authority (EBA) has conducted a series of stress tests with new disclosure requirements for the banking systems of the entire Euro Area and required banks to raise capital and take other steps to build stronger financial cushions against the economic downturn and to reflect the higher risks of the assets they hold. European banks have raised more capital, but they have also been selling assets and cutting bank lending to help meet the new capital requirements, which is adding to the financial headwinds now slowing growth.
European leaders have worked with private bondholders and the IMF to restructure and reduce Greece's government debt. Fears of a disorderly Greek default played a significant role in fueling the fires of the crisis across Europe over the past two years, and Europe's leaders have, as a result, worked to contain the risk of contagion from Greece and to insulate the rest of Europe from the impact of the solutions necessary in Greece.
This mix of economic reform and financial measures has helped calm financial tensions. The cost of borrowing has fallen sharply for Italy and Spain. Concerns about bank funding problems have eased. But Europe is still only at the initial stages of what will be a long and difficult path of reform.
The most important unfinished piece of the broader financial strategy is to build a stronger European firewall to provide a backstop for the governments undertaking reforms. The existing €440 billion European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) has made commitments totaling €192 billion. Europe's leaders have decided to establish another fund called the European Stabilization Mechanism (ESM) to succeed the EFSF starting in July 2012. They are in the process of reviewing options for expanding the combined financial capacity of these funds so that they can make clear to financial markets that they have the financial resources available on a scale that is commensurate with future needs in the event the crisis were to intensify.
The European financial crisis has already caused significant damage to economic growth in the United States and around the world, and we have a strong interest in a successful resolution of the crisis.
The Euro Area accounts for about 18 percent of global GDP. It is a major source of financing for many emerging economies. It accounts for about 15 percent of U.S. exports of goods and services, but a larger portion of exports of many or our trading partners. When growth slows in Europe, it affects growth around the world. And when the fears of a broader European crisis have been most acute, as they were in the summer and fall of 2011 and during the spring and summer of 2010, financial markets fell around the world, damaging confidence and slowing the momentum of the global recovery.
Our financial system has relatively little exposure to the five European economies at the heart of the crisis, but we have significant financial and economic ties to Germany and France and the continent as a whole.
We have worked very closely with Europe's leaders over the past two years, and with the members of the IMF, to help support a stronger European response to the crisis.
The Federal Reserve's dollar swap lines with the ECB, the Bank of Canada, the Bank of England, the Bank of Japan, and the Swiss National Bank have played a critical role alongside the ECB's direct efforts. European banks borrowed heavily in dollars before the crisis, and many lost the ability to borrow in dollars as the crisis intensified. The Fed's swaps made it possible for Europe's banks to borrow dollars from their central banks, which has helped avoid a more rapid deleveraging, reducing the impact on financial conditions in many countries where European banks had lent heavily.
The IMF has also played an important role in Europe. The IMF has provided advice on the design of reforms, a framework for public monitoring of progress, and support for programs in Greece, Ireland, and Portugal in partnership with Europe, which has assumed the majority of the burden. These actions have helped limit the damage from the crisis to the United States and to economies around the world.
It is in the interest of the United States that the IMF is able to continue to play a constructive role in Europe. IMF resources cannot substitute for a strong and credible European firewall and response, but they can help supplement the resources Europe mobilized on its own.
The IMF has substantial financial resources available today, and it has the ability, as it has demonstrated in the past, to mobilize temporary resources if that were necessary to help contain the damage from a further intensification of the crisis in Europe. For these reasons, we have no intention to seek additional U.S. resources for the IMF. The IMF has played a critical role in every major postwar financial crisis, while consistently returning to the United States and other IMF members any resources—with interest—that it has temporarily drawn upon.
Conclusion
We are encouraged by the progress that our European colleagues have made over the last few months. We hope they are able to build on these efforts in the coming weeks and months to put in place a more durable foundation for financial stability and economic growth. We do not want to see Europe weakened by a protracted crisis. We will continue to work closely with them, and with the IMF, to facilitate further progress.
Remarks by President Obama and Russian President Medvedev, March 26, 2012Footnote 10
President Barack Obama and President Dmitry Medvedev gave the following remarks in Seoul, South Korea
President Medvedev. So I would like to start by saying, once again, that together with my friend and colleague Barack Obama, we had a very substantial discussion of different issues of our agenda of bilateral cooperation between the United States and Russia.
I told Barack that despite the fact that reset that has been largely debated over the past three years get different assessments, I still believe that it was an extremely useful exercise, and we probably enjoyed the best level of relations between the United States and Russia during those three years than ever during the previous decades. And we managed to achieve a lot in various areas. First and foremost, that was the New START Treaty that was signed. And we also managed to establish close cooperation on the most sensitive international issues.
And I would like to especially thank the U.S. President for his huge work and huge support in Russia's accession to the WTO. In my view, that was an extremely important topic, and I hope that we will be able to achieve similar successes in resolving remaining issues, such as the revoke of Jackson-Vanik amendment.
Lots remains to be done, of course, in terms of trade and economic relations. We need to bring them to the new level through increasing the volume of trade and raising the general level and pace of cooperation. And I believe that it would serve the interests of the U.S. companies and the U.S. citizens, especially now that the global economy is experiencing the turbulent times.
We, of course, as usual, discussed various international issues, including the most difficult ones, such as Syria. Yesterday, I had a very good meeting with the special envoy of the U.N. Secretary General, Mr. Annan, and like I told the U.S. President, we believe that his mission is very good and we hope that he will be able to reach good results, and to somewhat appease, at least initially, the situation, and would help to establish communication between various public groups and forces that exist in Syria. And yesterday, I expressed my every support to Mr. Annan.
Anyways, we need to make sure that we not end up in greater problems than we already have, and that the threat of the civil war is averted, that it does not become reality, and that this mission would lead to dialogue between all the groups that exist in the country and government authorities.
Of course, we also spoke about the situation in the Middle East. We touched upon the Iranian nuclear program, the North Korean nuclear program, other sensitive issues—Afghanistan cooperation. So I guess we touched upon all main issues and gave all main positions.
Of course, we also spoke about the missile defense. I believe we still have time; time hasn't run out. And now we need to discuss and cooperate on various aspects on European missile defense. I believe such discussion could be more active. Now, in my view, time has come for discussions between technical aspects and, of course, we remain at our own positions, both the United States and Russian Federation. But I believe we still have time to agree on a balanced solution, and I believe that the good experience Barack and myself have gained while working on the START Treaty will help us and be very useful when finding solution to this very difficult problem.
And of course, Barack, I would like to take the opportunity to say how much I enjoyed the cooperation we had with you. And I believe that it really was the highlight of the previous years. And due to the high level of cooperation, we managed to resolve various complicated issues bilaterally—national agenda. And I hope that the same high level of our relations will remain between the United States of America and the Russian Federation when the new President steps in office.
And I would like to—I already invited you to visit Russia. I understand that this year will be difficult for you, since it's an election year. But still, I hope that you will be able to come. I already invited you to my hometown, St. Petersburg, so I would like to take the occasion to reiterate my invitation on behalf of myself and President-elect Vladimir Putin.
President Obama. Thank you. Well, first of all, let me just say that the last three years of my work with President Medvedev has been extremely productive. And he listed some of the achievements that have resulted from this work—the New START Treaty reduces our nuclear stockpiles in ways that can help create greater peace and security not just for our countries but for the world, and is consistent with our obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Russia's ascension into the WTO can open up trade and commerce between our two countries that can create jobs and economic growth for both Russians and Americans. And as Dmitry mentioned, we think it's going to be very important for us to address Jackson-Vanik so that American businesses can fully take advantage of an open and liberalized Russian market.
It is true that there have been times where we have had to manage tensions between our countries, and that's to be expected. Obviously, there are always tensions between countries, and that's certainly true given the long history of the Cold War between our two countries. But what I think we've been able to do is to ensure that rather than look backwards, we've been looking forwards.
Sorry, translator, I forgot you were there. I got on a roll.
Moving forward, we've got more work to do between our two countries. Dmitry identified some areas of continued friction—missile defense being an example. And what we've agreed to is to make sure that our teams, at a technical level, are in discussions about how some of these issues can be resolved.
The bilateral presidential commission that was chaired by Foreign Minister Lavrov and Secretary of State Clinton, will be working actively around a number of the trade and commercial issues, not only with respect to WTO but how we can more vigorously expand the kind of investment and the kind of cooperation on the economic front that can benefit both Russia and the United States.
On the international front, we agreed that, as two of the world's leading powers, it's absolutely critical that we communicate effectively and coordinate effectively in responding to a wide range of situations that threaten world peace and security.
So on Syria, although there had been some differences over the last several months, we both agree that we should be supportive of Kofi Annan's efforts to try to end some of the bloodshed that's taking place within Syria and move towards a mechanism that would allow for the Syrian people ultimately to have a representative and legitimate government that serves their interest.
On Iran, we agree that the P5-plus-1 talks with Iran that should be announced soon offer us an opportunity to resolve diplomatically the critical issue of ensuring that Iran is abiding by its international obligations, that will allow it to rejoin the community of nations, and have peaceful uses of nuclear energy while not developing nuclear weapons.
And with respect to North Korea, we are going to be both sending messages to North Korea that they should not go forward with this missile launch, which would violate existing U.N. Security Council resolutions. And our hope is, is that we can resolve these issues diplomatically.
So let me just say that at a time of great challenges around the world, cooperation between the United States and Russia is absolutely critical to world peace and stability. And I have to say that I could not have asked for a better partner in forging that strong relationship than Dmitry. I am confident that in his new role he is going to continue to have an outstanding influence in world affairs and help to continue to deepen and improve the relationship between our two countries.
I wish him all the best. And I would love to visit St. Petersburg. He is absolutely right that my next visit to Russia will undoubtedly be after my election.
Good luck, my friend.
Remarks by Secretary of State Clinton and Estonian Foreign Minister Paet, March 27, 2012Footnote 11
Secretary Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Urmas Paet gave the following remarks in Washington, DC
Secretary Clinton. Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the State Department and a very warm welcome to my friend and colleague, the foreign minister of Estonia. We have been able to work closely together during my tenure, and I've had the pleasure of visiting Tallinn several times. And I'm delighted to have you here so that we can continue the conversation that we started several years ago. And we have just finished a very comprehensive discussion.
Over the last 20 years, Estonia has grown from a newly independent democracy to an important and respected voice in the international community, and the friendship between our two countries has only grown stronger. We look to Estonia as an important ally, a leader in promoting stability across the Euro-Atlantic area, a partner we can count on from the battle space in Afghanistan to cyber space. We share a wide range of concerns that we stay in close touch with each other about.
First, we discussed our shared effort to bring peace and stability to Afghanistan. This has been an important partnership. In addition to providing military personnel, Estonia has given critical support for civilian, humanitarian, and democratic programs, and we will continue to work closely with Estonia as we move toward the Chicago summit. We are both committed to a smooth security, economic, and development transition. So Chicago will be the next stop in this ongoing effort. Despite these challenging economic times, it's more important than ever that NATO allies and partners come to Chicago with concrete commitments to support Afghan security forces beyond 2014.
Just as Estonia has been a strong NATO ally in Afghanistan, the United States takes our responsibilities to NATO very seriously, particularly our Article 5 obligation for collective defense. That's why we strongly support the extension of NATO's Baltic Air Policing Mission on a continuing basis with periodic reviews. A mission such as this underscores the importance of what Secretary General Rasmussen calls smart defense, sharing resources to maximize each partner's contributions.
I also expressed our support to Urmas about Estonia's work in helping countries build effective, free market, and democratic institutions. Estonia has maintained a strong assistance and development program in Eastern partnership countries, particularly Georgia, Ukraine, and Moldova. And in addition, Estonia is increasingly active in the world of e-government, electronic government. From Eastern Europe to Africa to Haiti, governments look to Estonia for guidance on how technology can make them more efficient and effective.
And on that note, I am pleased to announce that the United States and Estonia have agreed to co-chair a new initiative in the Community of Democracies that will use technology to help strengthen democratic institutions. This program that we call LEND, L-E-N-D, the Network for Leaders Engaged in New Democracies, is an online platform that will connect leaders from emerging democracies with former presidents, prime ministers, and others who have helped lead democratic transitions in their own countries. We are particularly focused on working together in Tunisia. When the network is activated later this year, it will help accelerate the exchange of ideas among leaders who have the experience to share, and we're very excited to be co-chairing this initiative with Estonia.
So again, Foreign Minister, thank you for the great work that you do on behalf of your country, and thanks to Estonia for the great partnership we have.
Foreign Minister Paet. Well, thank you very much for the very positive and nice comments. And I also would like to start with thanking—thanking you personally, Hillary, and the United States for friendship and support and cooperation we have done between U.S. and Estonia. And of course, we will continue.
Also for us, when we speak about upcoming NATO summit, it is absolutely important to get clear decisions how to move forward with Afghanistan. Estonia's clear position here is that what concerns military commitment then, of course we, together with our allies, and also going to make next possible steps together with our allies, and what concerns development, humanitarian cooperation, then we're also ready to continue our activities and our support after 2014 together with our partners and allies in Afghanistan.
It's also important to get strong, positive message to countries which want to get NATO membership in foreseeable future, countries like Georgia, Macedonia, Montenegro, and Bosnia-Herzegovina. And of course, once more, to stress the strong security of transatlantic relations, but also strong security of Europe, including Article 5, it is also from our point of view absolutely important as one of the outcomes of Chicago summit.
We're also very grateful for United States for their support to air police mission in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and also thank you for practical participation with your people and aircrafts. It's also clear that step-by-step we should and we are ready to increase the host nation support and to make also for our partners it more convenient and positive to have concrete rotation periods in air policing in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania.
Cyber defense for us also important area where we see good chances to develop cooperation with the United States, but also with other NATO countries. In Estonia we have center for cyber defense accredited by NATO, and here we also see that this center can be—or can give more added value also to NATO cyber security issues and developments already in foreseeable future.
We are glad that also bilateral cooperation, what concerns development cooperation, for example, in Belarus. It works, and we're looking forward to continue with bilateral development cooperation work in Tunisia, for example, and also I'm glad that U.S. participates in our center for eastern partnership in Estonia, supporting and sharing our experience to civil servants from Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, but also many other countries.
And with pleasure we join U.S. in organization called Leaders Engaged in New Democracies, or LEND. We see that there are many countries, including us, which are able and ready to share our experience to countries which want to change and which also want to share the values we are sharing.
So to sum up once more, thank you for friendship and cooperation and always glad to be also here in Washington and in the States. Thank you.
Secretary Clinton. Thank you so much.
Ms. Nuland. We'll take three questions today. We'll start with CNN, Elise Labott.
Q. Thank you, Madam Secretary. On Syria, what hopes do you have that President Assad will make good on his commitments to implement the Kofi Annan plan? And looking ahead towards Istanbul on Sunday, what do you expect to come out of this conference? And in particular, what are you looking for for the opposition to strengthen their message of how they see a post-Assad Syria? Thank you.
Secretary Clinton. Thank you, Elise. As you just referenced, the Joint Special Envoy Kofi Annan and the Syrian National Council both said this morning that it is an important initial step that the Assad regime has written the United Nations to accept the Annan plan. Let me just pause here to say, however, that given Assad's history of over-promising and under-delivering, that commitment must now be matched by immediate actions. We will judge Assad's sincerity and seriousness by what he does, not by what he says. If he is ready to bring this dark chapter in Syria's history to a close, he can prove it by immediately ordering regime forces to stop firing and begin withdrawing from populated areas. He can also allow international aid workers unfettered access to those in need, and he can release political prisoners, permit peaceful political activity, allow the international news media unobstructed access, and begin a legitimate political process that leads to a democratic transition.
Now, as the regime takes steps, which we have yet to see, but assuming it does so, then Kofi Annan has pledged to work with the opposition to take steps of its own so that the bloodshed ends, that there won't be violence coming from opposition forces, that humanitarian aid will be permitted to come into areas where the opposition has been holding, that the true political dialogue will begin, and that all Syrians will be welcomed to participate in an inclusive process. Now that's a lot to look forward to seeing implemented, but given the response that we have had, we are going to be working very urgently between now and Istanbul to translate into concrete steps what we expect to see. And I'm hoping that by the time I get to Istanbul on Sunday we will be in a position to acknowledge steps that the Assad regime and the opposition have both taken. We're certainly urging that those occur.
Specifically with respect to the opposition, they must come forward with a unified position, a vision if you will, of the kind of Syria that they are working to build. They must be able to clearly demonstrate a commitment to including all Syrians and protecting the rights of all Syrians. And we are going to be pushing them very hard to present such a vision at Istanbul. So we have a lot of work to do between now and Sunday.
Ms. Nuland. Next question, Neeme Raud, Estonian Public Broadcasting.
Q. Madam Secretary, thank you very much. My question is about our big neighbor, Russia. Today in the news, we hear news about conversation Mr. President had with Russian President Medvedev. Russia has accused you last year, Mr. Putin personally, intruding into their internal affairs. U.S. Ambassador McFaul was not received very warmly in Russia. At UN, when the talk is about Syria, there is a talk about new Cold War even with Russia. What is the U.S.-Russian relationship at this moment of transition in Russia? Thank you.
Secretary Clinton. Well, I think that we believe that it is a complex relationship. We've seen some positive, concrete accomplishments coming from the so-called reset. We are also engaged in a substantive bilateral dialogue that is quite comprehensive with many levels of the Russian Government and society. So we are committed to engagement with Russia.
Regarding the President's comments in Seoul, he spoke to those himself and made clear that the issues we are dealing with concerning Russia are difficult and complex ones. Technical discussions have been ongoing with Russia over missile defense. That's not a surprise to anyone. We have been consistent, both bilaterally and through NATO, in our invitation to the Russians to participate with us in missile defense. But this is going to take time. And whether or not there can be a breakthrough sometime in the future is yet to be determined, but we certainly look at this as a long-term engagement.
When we negotiated the New START Treaty, we were engaging at the same time in consultations with Congress, of course with all elements of the United States Government, including the Defense Department, with our allies in NATO and elsewhere, because you can't do something as serious as New START or missile defense without full buy-in from our government, bipartisan support in the Congress, and understanding and acceptance by our allies, particularly in NATO. So we will continue this effort. We may be somewhat surprising in our persistence and our perseverance in our engagement with Russia. It will continue with President-elect Putin, as it has with President Medvedev.
But let me hasten to say in the meantime we continue with the deployment of the Phased Adaptive Approach to missile defense that was agreed to at the Lisbon summit. We expect to announce further progress at the Chicago summit. And as the President made clear to President Medvedev in Seoul, we do not see this missile defense system as a threat to Russia; we do not see it as undermining Russia's nuclear deterrent. The interceptors are for defensive uses only. They have no offense capability. They carry no explosive warheads, but they are part of our Article 5 collective defense obligation. That is a clear, unmistakable message that we have sent to our allies and that we continue to reiterate.
So yes, we want to cooperate with Russia on missile defense. We think it is in everyone's interest to do so. But we will continue the work we are doing with NATO and we will be looking to complete that process in the years ahead.
Ms. Nuland. Last question, Andy Quinn, Reuters.
Q. Madam Secretary, if I could turn to Sudan, please. You've seen the statement out of the White House today urging restraint, but I was hoping I could get your analysis of what's really going on there, and specifically how dangerous you feel it is. Are we on the brink of a new civil war? And what is the United States doing now to prevent a possible humanitarian catastrophe in Southern Kordofan? Thank you.
Secretary Clinton. Well, Andy, this is deeply distressing to us, because it was certainly our hope and expectation that with the independence of South Sudan, the newest nation in the world, there would be the opportunity to continue fulfilling the requirements of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement that included resolving border disputes, allocations of oil revenues and other contested matters between Sudan and South Sudan.
As you know, there has been almost continuing low-level violence in Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile, and it is our goal to end the violence and to convince the parties to return to the negotiating table. We believed we were making progress on two contested matters. In fact, there was a summit between President Bashir and President Kiir scheduled for next week to finalize understandings on borders and national citizenship. We want to see that summit held. And we want to see both sides work together to end the violence. We think that the weight of responsibility rests with Khartoum, because the use of heavy weaponry, bombing runs by planes and the like are certainly evidence of disproportionate force on the part of the government in Khartoum.
At the same time, we want to see South Sudan and their allies or their partners across into Sudan similarly participate in ending the violence and working to resolve the outstanding issues. It is becoming a very serious humanitarian crisis. We have been reaching out to the government in Khartoum through international aid organizations. We stand ready on behalf of the United States to provide assistance to people fleeing the violence. It is compounded by the fact that the violence is making it possible for people to get into their fields, and there's already adverse conditions because of drought that are compounded by the unfortunate violence.
So the bottom line is that the Comprehensive Peace Agreement that the United States, Norway, and the United Kingdom helped to broker in 2005 ended a conflict that had cost more than 5 million lives. We have seen the ongoing violence and displacement in Darfur, and now we are looking at an upsurge in violence in two other parts of Sudan. So it is incumbent upon the leaders of both countries to resume negotiations, and the United States stands ready to assist in working out the contested issues.
The final thing I would say—because I've been following this closely and it's been a painful problem to see the deterioration into conflict again—there is a win-win outcome here. South Sudan has oil. Sudan has the infrastructure and the transportation networks to get the oil to market. Because of the feeling on the part of the South Sudan Government that they were being treated unfairly by Sudan, they shut down their oil wells and the pipelines. So the economic condition in both countries is deteriorating. So I would call upon the leaders to look for a way to resolve these very hard feelings. You don't make peace with your friends. There are decades of grievances that have to be overcome in order to work through these very challenging issues. But it is incumbent upon the leaders of both countries to attempt to do so.
Thank you.
Ms. Nuland. Thank you very much.
Foreign Minister Paet. Thank you very much. Welcome to Estonia.
