Secretary Hillary Clinton and Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jabr Al-Thani delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. Good morning, everyone, and Happy New Year. It's good to see you here, and I'm especially pleased that I get to welcome His Excellency the Prime Minister back to the State Department. I hope you've all had a chance to rest and enjoy the holidays, and I know that there's a big agenda in front of us which His Excellency and I have been discussing. It's very important that this meeting be held at the beginning of this new year so that we can immediately get to work on the many matters that concern us.

Qatar is a friend and an ally of the United States, and the partnership between our two countries is a model of the new beginning based on mutual respect and mutual interest that President Obama called for in Cairo.

So today we not only discussed a wide range of important issues, but also how to deepen and broaden our partnership.

Among the matters that we consulted on, the situation in Yemen is a top concern. How can we work together and with others to stabilize Yemen, assist in securing its borders and providing for its people in combating al-Qaida. The instability in Yemen is a threat to regional stability and even global stability, and we're working with Qatar and others to think of the best way forward to try to deal with the security concerns. And certainly, we know that this is a difficult set of challenges, but they have to be addressed.

I also thanked the Prime Minister for Qatar's efforts to facilitate an end to the crisis in Darfur and to promote security and stability in the broader Middle East as well as Africa.

We both have a shared mutual interest in moving toward a comprehensive peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. We both share the goal of an independent and viable Palestinian state, and we are committed to doing what we can to help re-launch peace negotiations that would lead to a two-state solution. We believe that President Abbas is a partner for peace and can help deliver that to the Palestinian people.

The Prime Minister and I discussed the future of Iraq. It's important that Iraq be reintegrated back into the larger region and that it go through this next electoral cycle and create greater stability among the various constituents within the country.

We discussed the importance of international solidarity and dealing with Iran, particularly with respect to its nuclear program and its compliance with various obligations under the United Nations

Security Council, the IAEA, the NPT, et cetera.

And finally, let me express our appreciation to His Excellency and to His Majesty the Emir and his country for their actions in combating hunger and poverty and disease across the region and the world.

We have a lot of work ahead of us, but I thank you, Your Excellency, for your friendship, for your candid thoughts on so many important matters, and I look forward to continuing our dialogue in the year ahead.

Prime Minister Al-Thani. Thank you very much, Madame Secretary. Happy New Year, and I am very glad in the first working day to be here with Madame Secretary. And as Madame Secretary mentioned, we discussed all the issues which it is important for both countries, and I just want to highlight that about two or three issues. One of them is Yemen, is very important the stability of Yemen and unity of Yemen, and we think that the situation in Yemen, there is only one solution to be solved through a peaceful manner by trying to find a way to solve this problem in a peaceful way.

The second thing is about the Middle East track and the Palestinian-Israeli peace process. We are hoping that this peace process could start again and it have to start an agenda and endgame. We are looking to see where is the endgame, and I really thank Obama and Madame Secretary Administration for their efforts which bring hope again to us to continue this process. There will be difficulties and there will be up and down in this process. We know this. But the most important things is how we can do a unity governments between the Palestinians so they can concentrate how to deal in the peace process, and also the Israeli and the Palestinian have to know that the solution to solve this problem is by a dialogue. And a dialogue is a very important that there is no games in this dialogues because we know Jerusalem is a very important part, we know the settlements there is a problem, we know the water, we know peace—land-for-peace, you know, that's the main elements which all the international arena and all the countries agree in it in Madrid process. So I hope that both sides realize that they have to work together. All of us, we are ready to help. All of us rely in United States helpful and involving in this process. I think that's a very important matter for the region.

The other problem if we are talking about Iran, and we hope that this problem could be solved through diplomatic means. We wish stability in the region, and the stability will not come unless we realize that we have to comply with the international law and comply also in how to solve the problem by dialogue.

Thank you very much, Madame Secretary.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you so much, Your Excellency.

Mr. Crowley. We'll begin with Elise from CNN.

Q. Happy New Year, Madame Secretary, Your Excellency.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you.

Q. On Yemen, Madame Secretary, what can you say about the—the latest you can say about the terror threat to the U.S. Embassy? And given the longstanding concerns the U.S. has had about Yemen and to the Embassy itself, what is the U.S. prepared to do, as you say, to help Yemen combat their growing terrorist problem?

And given the Embassy's discussions with Mr. Abdulmutallab's father, how much blame do you think the State Department bears for not highlighting the fact this gentleman had a visa and could come to the U.S. at any time, or pulling the visa?

And Your Excellency, if I might just ask you to follow up on your comment. You said that there's only one solution to Yemen, and that's trying to help in a peaceful way. Could you expand on what you—what that means and what you think the region and the U.S. can do to help Yemen? Thank you.

Secretary Clinton. Those are a lot of questions, Your Excellency.

Prime Minister Al-Thani. It is.

Secretary Clinton. Let me start with Yemen. As you know, the U.S. Embassy in Sanaa closed January 3rd. It remains closed today. That is in response to ongoing threats by al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula—so-called AQAP—that have been ongoing. They certainly predate this holiday season and they are aimed at American interests in Yemen.

On December 31st, we sent what's called a warden message to American citizens in Yemen to remind them of the continuing threat of terrorist actions and violence against American citizens and interests. And as always, we remind U.S. citizens to maintain a high level of vigilance and to practice enhanced security awareness.

Now, the United States commends Yemen for the recent actions it has taken to disrupt the AQAP networks, and we are reiterating our commitment to assist in those efforts. We review our security conditions constantly and will make a decision on reopening the Embassy when the security conditions permit.

With respect to what happened with the terrorist on the plane coming into Detroit, we are not satisfied. We are conducting an internal review. The President has called for a whole-of-government review. Based on what we know now, the State Department fully complied with the requirements set forth in the interagency process as to what should be done when a threat is—or when information about a potential threat is known. But we're looking to see whether those procedures need to be changed, upgraded. And that is my goal as Secretary—to do everything I can to make sure that not only American citizens, but all people traveling on airlines of any nationality can arrive at their destination safely.

So we will be meeting with the President tomorrow to go over our internal reviews to hear what others in our government also have concluded and to take whatever additional steps are necessary.

Prime Minister Al-Thani. Thank you. As you know, this is the fifth or the sixth war in Yemen. And for that reason, we know that this problem have to be solved through dialogue. As you know, Doha hold the last dialogue between the Houthis and the Yemeni governments and there is an agreement been signed. And we hope that we go back and find a way to solve this problem through meaningful dialogue and dialogue which can give the lead for the state of Yemen because we support the unity of Yemen, and that's a very important role.

But it's very important also not to spread our power or our efforts to these kind of things, and we have to concentrate on the terrorism and how we can fight the terrorism in our region and in other so we don't export it somewhere else.

Mr. Crowley. Mina from Al-Sharq Al-Awsat.

Q. Thank you so much. Happy New Year. Madame Secretary, if I can start by asking about Yemen, a follow-up question on Yemen. What do you hope to get out of the meeting in London at the end of the month? And what can the GCC countries play specifically—what role can they play specifically?

And Your Excellency, if I may, regarding the peace talks on—the Middle East peace talks, are there any conditions on the ground now that give you further hope that there can be successful talks with an endgame? We're hearing different reports of the possibilities of a quicker resumption of talks. Thank you.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you very much, and Happy New Year. I think that the meeting at the end of the month in London is an opportunity for nations that can play a role in helping to stabilize Yemen to come together and discuss steps that each of us can take individually and collectively. Obviously, Qatar has played an ongoing role, as other GCC nations have. This is in that region; the spillover effects from instability directly impact the neighbors.

Obviously, we see global implications from the war in Yemen and the ongoing efforts by al-Qaida in Yemen to use it as a base for terrorist attacks far beyond the region. So we're going to listen and consult with those who have long experience in Yemen, such as Qatar does—both His Majesty, His Excellency, and others—and work together to try to encourage the government to take steps that will lead to a more lasting period of peace and stability.

As His Excellency said, there have been numerous conflicts in Yemen. They seem to just get worse and worse with more players involved now. And it's time for the international community to make it clear to Yemen that there are expectations and conditions on our continuing support for the government so that they can take actions which will have a better chance to provide that peace and stability to the people of Yemen and the region.

Prime Minister Al-Thani. Happy New Year, and can you remind me again about your question?

Q. It's regarding the peace talks—sorry.

Prime Minister Al-Thani. Yeah.

Q. Regarding the peace talks in the Middle East and are there conditions on the ground now for successful talks. Thank you.

Prime Minister Al-Thani. Well, there always will be difficulty in the peace process. We have a long history in the peace process, and this history should not let us down or not let us—our morale to be down. I think we have to continue and push. As I said, there is no magic solution. All of us know the right solution for these conflicts. And now, it's the parties have to take a decision to move to that, and especially the Government of Israel, in my opinion, they have to move and comply with the international and United Nation resolution and Madrid agreement—very important for them to know that this cannot be continued, and it's an opportunity with this Administration to bring us together to a long-lasting peace between us and Israel.

Mr. Crowley. Arshad from Reuters.

Q. Secretary Clinton, on Iran, President Obama said last year that you'd have a pretty good sense by the end of year whether Iran was seriously interested in pursuing dialogue about its nuclear program. There aren't a lot of signs that they are, and there are no signs that I'm aware of that they're interested in carrying out the agreement on low-enriched uranium that was reached in Geneva.

One, from your point of view, is the LEU deal dead? Two, even if the door to talking about the LEU deal is still open, is the Administration now closer to imposing targeted sanctions, particularly on companies or individuals that have ties to the Revolutionary Guard Corps?

And lastly, do you not perceive a danger that additional sanctions could play into the hands of the hardliners, who often make the argument that they are engaged in a struggle with foreign forces and try to rally people around them that way?

And they've made that argument even as they've been crushing the protests recently.

Secretary Clinton. Arshad, we remain committed to working with our international partners on addressing the serious concerns we have regarding Iran's nuclear program. Now, our approach, as you know, has always proceeded on two tracks; we have an engagement track and a pressure track. And as I've said, the results of our efforts to engage Iran directly have not been encouraging. We're disappointed by their response to the proposal for the Tehran research reactor. And the Iranian Government announced a deadline to receive a positive response to their unacceptable counter-offer. So yes, we have concerns about their behavior, we have concerns about their intentions, and we are deeply disturbed by the mounting signs of ruthless repression that they are exercising against those who assemble and express viewpoints that are at variance with what the leadership of Iran wants to hear.

Now, we've avoided using the term “deadline” ourselves. That's not a term that we have used because we want to keep the door to dialogue open. But we've also made it clear we can't continue to wait and we cannot continue to stand by when the Iranians themselves talk about increasing their production of highenriched uranium and additional facilities for nuclear power that very likely can be put to dual use.

So we have already begun discussions with our partners and with likeminded nations about pressure and sanctions. I can't appropriately comment on the details of those discussions now, except to say that our goal is to pressure the Iranian

Government, particularly the Revolutionary Guard elements, without contributing to the suffering of the ordinary Ira[nian]s who deserve better than what they currently are receiving.

Iran is going through a very turbulent period in its history. There are many troubling signs of the actions that they are taking. And we want to reiterate that we stand with those Iranians who are peacefully demonstrating. We mourn the loss of innocent life. We condemn the detention and imprisonment, the torture and abuse of people, which seems to be accelerating. And we hope that there will be an opportunity for Iran to reverse course, to begin engaging in a positive way with the international community, respecting the rights of their own citizens. But we're going to continue on our dual-track approach.

Q. Happy New Year. Thanks. Happy New Year to both of you. I'd like to ask you, actually both of you, Madame Secretary and Your Excellency, whether there have been any progress or anything new regarding Middle East peace process guarantees that the Arab countries have asked for. And also, have you discussed aid to the Palestinian Authority? And I mean U.S. aid to the Palestinian Authority. Thank you.

Secretary Clinton. Well, thank you very much. Yes, we have discussed aid to the Palestinian Authority. The United States has continued to provide significant aid to the Palestinian Authority. We also discussed the commitment that the United States and Qatar share toward a re-launch of the peace process and negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. We are going to do all that we can to try to bring that about. There are many complexities of this extremely difficult situation, but we reaffirmed our commitment to keep working at this.

We know that the Palestinians deserve a state to fulfill their aspirations. The Israelis deserve security to live peacefully side by side with their Palestinian neighbors. The Arab nations have made a very positive contribution in the peace initiative of the Arab League and others. So we're going to be even more committed this year, and we're starting this new year with that level of commitment and we're going to follow through and hopefully we can see this as a positive year in this long process.

Prime Minister Al-Thani. Well—

Q. Hold on. If you could please answer in Arabic, Your Excellency?

Prime Minister Al-Thani. Okay, I will answer in Arabic, Madame Secretary. That's easier for me. Difficult for Madame Secretary.

Secretary Clinton. I'm not that good.

Prime Minister Al-Thani. Madame Secretary, with regard to the letter of guarantees that you—was asked of the Arab countries, as you know, Qatar today chairs the current Arabic committee for another round and we have given a letter to that effect to the U.S. Administration right after the UN meetings. We are still awaiting a response from the U.S. Administration and we have—this response will be very important to us as it will give us a clear idea about the U.S. perspective on the peace process and how the U.S. sees the endgame, or what is called as the endgame.

With regards to the issue of assistance, as you know, Qatar has always given assistance to the Palestinians and Qatar shall continue to give similar assistance to the Palestinians.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you all very much.

Prime Minister Al-Thani. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. Good morning, everyone. It is a personal pleasure and, of course, an honor to welcome back the foreign minister to the State Department, representing a country that is such a valued ally and partner of the United States. Over the past 10 years, His Majesty King Abdullah has carried on the vision and spirit not only of his late father but of the Jordanian people. And under King Abdullah's leadership, Jordan has continued to be a key partner in the pursuit of peace and progress in the region and around the world.

So today, as we have in all of our previous meetings, the minister and I discussed a wide range of issues. I want to begin, though, by stating publicly what I had told the minister. I expressed both our condolence for the loss of life that was unfortunately both American and Jordanian, and I expressed appreciation for Jordan's commitment to combating violent extremism at home and abroad.

This is a struggle that unites people of faith, people of peace, people of conscience everywhere. Terrorists have targeted our cities and our citizens and they must be met with unwavering resolve. I well remember visiting the hotels in Amman that had been bombed in 2005, walking through the wreckage, visiting the innocent children, men, and women who had been targeted at weddings. I will never forget what I saw there, as I will never forget what I have seen elsewhere. And the United States, Jordan, and our partners around the world stand shoulder-to-shoulder in this fight.

We also share a commitment to seeking a comprehensive peace in the Middle East based on a two-state solution. We are working with the Israelis, the Palestinian Authority, Jordan, and the Arab states to take the steps needed to re-launch negotiations as soon as possible and without preconditions, which is in the interests of everyone in the region. The United States believes that through good faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state based on the 1967 lines with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israeli security requirements.

Both the United States and Jordan are concerned about recent activities in Jerusalem. The United States recognizes that Jerusalem is a deeply important issue for Israelis and Palestinians, for Jews, Muslims, and Christians around the world. And we believe it is possible to realize the aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians for Jerusalem and safeguard its status as a symbol of the three great religions for all people.

On this and other pressing challenges, the partnership between our countries provides a solid foundation for the pursuit of peace and progress. I look forward to continuing to work closely with the foreign minister, with Jordan's new government, and with His Majesty as we broaden and deepen our partnership and our friendship.

Foreign Minister Judeh. Thank you very much, Madame Secretary. The pleasure and honor are all mine. I am extremely happy to be here at the State Department again and to have this opportunity to have this overreaching exchange of views with Secretary Clinton. And I said back in August when I had the pleasure of seeing Secretary Clinton here that the relationship between Jordan and the United States can best be described as a true partnership, not just a friendship. And I think that this relationship has withstood the test of time and the numerous challenges that we've had in our part of the world and globally, and I think that the relationship gets stronger by the day.

This last year, Madame Secretary, we celebrated, as you well know, the 60^th year of the exchange of diplomatic relations between Jordan and the United States, and again, this reflects the solid relationship that both countries enjoy. Our partnership is a strategic and solid one based on common values and a shared vision of a comprehensive lasting peace, coexistence, and prosperity in the Middle East, and our firm belief in combating the many challenges that we face around the world.

I thank you, Madame Secretary, for referring to the tragic loss of life that we saw in Afghanistan and, of course, elsewhere as a result of our ongoing and joint, in fact, collective global war on terrorism. Thank you for referring to the 2005 hotel bombings in Jordan. We must not forget that we too in Jordan were and are still a target, and that we will not waver or be deterred in our determination to combat terror, terrorism, and terrorists and—wherever they are. In 2005, we said very clearly that we will not wait for the terrorists to perpetrate their heinous crimes; we will try to uproot them before they get to the implementation stage of their planning.

And our presence in Afghanistan today is twofold: Number one, to combat terrorism and the root causes of terrorism, but also to help out in the humanitarian effort that is needed there. And I would like to say that our presence in Afghanistan will be enhanced and increased in the coming phase. This is something that is ongoing. Jordan was one of the first countries there. We are not only part of a network of countries that are trying to assist Afghanistan and Afghanis, but also trying to combat terror and terrorism. But we're also there to defend Jordan's national interests and defend—to defend Jordanians and safeguard them against this growing threat.

So, Madame Secretary, we continue to look forward to working with you and with other governments in combating terror and terrorism.

On the peace process in the Middle East, I had very good discussions with the Secretary, and this morning I had good discussions with Senator Mitchell as well, and their respective teams. And we agreed on the need to re-launch serious negotiations between Palestinians and Israelis, negotiations that are bound by a timeline and a clear plan with benchmarks to end this lingering conflict, to establish an independent sovereign and contiguous Palestinian state along the June ‘67 lines in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem and Gaza living side-by-side with a safe and secure state of Israel.

It is also vital to achieve a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace on the basis of the internationally agreed upon terms of reference and the Arab Peace Initiative that will ensure a secure and collaborative regional order. We are all in agreement that there are serious difficulties, but we hope that 2010 will see the continued and much needed leadership role that the United States can play in this regard.

And once again, I would like to remind of the important issues that we tackle—final status issues that include refugees and Jerusalem. Everything should be subject to negotiations. And when it comes to Jerusalem, as the Secretary very correctly pointed out, Jerusalem is potentially a flashpoint and it is so sensitive to all the followers of the three great monotheistic religions. But most importantly, actions on the ground in Jerusalem can turn into provocative and antagonizing actions to the followers of the three great religions. So it's very important to try and avoid unilateral action in Jerusalem. Everybody is in agreement that Jerusalem is to be discussed in final status negotiations as—I'm talking about East Jerusalem, of course—as occupied Arab territory.

There is a growing sense of urgency to move forward in the talks and to achieve tangible progress, therefore creating a more enabling political environment that would allow us to address, collectively and more adequately, all the regional and global challenges before us today. Absent a successful resolution of the conflict, we will witness further regional instability and divisions that extremists will exploit not only in the Middle East, but worldwide. And I'll refer to what I said earlier about the global war on terror.

As I told Madame Secretary, under the leadership of His Majesty King Abdullah II, Jordan is fully committed to working hand-in-hand with our partners in the region and ready to assist the United States in its efforts to achieve a regional peace, which is not only in the national interests of the Palestinians and the Israelis and the Arabs, but also of the United States of America. We will spare no effort in doing all we can to ensure the success of this endeavor and to fully support U.S. leadership and ensuring negotiations move fast towards reconciliation on the basis of the two-state solution as part of a comprehensive peace.

Thank you so much, Madame Secretary. I look forward to continuing our good work together in the future.

Q. Good morning to both of you. Madame Secretary, let me start with you. Senator Mitchell said yesterday—he talked about a two-year timeframe. Some news report talks about the first nine month will concentrate on borders and Jerusalem, and the refugees will be discussed later. Can you confirm this is the thinking of the Administration? And secondly, the Palestinians saying that they are not going to come to the negotiation unless it is a total freeze on settlement, including Jerusalem. The Israeli ambassador, he is saying that basically they don't believe in timeframe. How you are going to bridge the gap between the two sides?

Secretary Clinton. Well, I think what Senator Mitchell rightly said is that he wants to move as quickly as possible, that there is an urgency that we certainly feel, but there has to be a negotiation on all of the final status issues. And as Minister Judeh and I discussed earlier, resolving borders resolves settlements; resolving Jerusalem resolves settlements. So I think we need to lift our sights, and instead of being—looking down at the trees, we need to look at the forest. Where are we headed together? We know what a final resolution will have to include: borders, security, Jerusalem, refugees, water. We know what the elements of this two-state solution must include.

So I think Senator Mitchell was being very prudent in saying these are hard issues. They require a lot of back and forth between the parties, guarantees and assistance from the rest of us who are trying to move this forward. So it might take as much as the time he mentioned, but obviously we hope to be moving much more expeditiously. But first, we have to get negotiations re-launched. Nasser and I can stand here and talk about what we would like to see happen, but at the end of the day there are two parties that have to make it happen. So our goal is to persuade the two parties to get into this very in-depth negotiations on all of these issues as soon as possible.

Secretary Hillary Clinton delivered this statement in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. The United States urges the immediate and unconditional release of the dozens of members of the Mourning Mothers group who, according to reports, were violently dispersed and arrested by Iranian security forces during a peaceful vigil in Tehran on Saturday, January 9. These women, whose children have been killed, detained, or have gone missing in post-election violence in Iran, were exercising their universal right to peaceful expression, as they do every Saturday in a park not far from where Neda Agha-Soltan was killed on June 20. They have reportedly done nothing more than peacefully express their grief and seek accountability from their government. As a woman, a mother and a person of conscience, my heart goes out to them and their families. If the Iranian government wants the respect of the international community, it must respect the rights of its people. It must govern through consent, and not coercion.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Abubakr al-Qirbi delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. Good afternoon. I am pleased to welcome the foreign minister to the State Department today. We've had a very open and productive conversation about a number of important issues. Our two nations are working together as partners to improve Yemen's capacity to deliver vital services, control its borders, conduct effective counterterrorist activities, improve services to the people of Yemen.

We face a common threat from those violent extremists who target civilians without mercy or remorse. Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula has killed dozens of Yemenis in recent years, including seven soldiers who died guarding the United States Embassy during an attack by suicide bombers on September 17th, 2008. We have seen al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula kill tourists in Yemen, Yemeni security officers, and being involved in the training and equipping of the perpetrator on the attempted Christmas Day airline bomber.

Now, to combat this growing threat, the United States will intensify its cooperation with Yemen on both security and development. We will work with other partners and like-minded countries. Yemen has demonstrated a willingness and a capacity to take action against al-Qaida and other extremist groups, and the United States commends these actions.

We also discussed how we could deal more effectively with the internal stresses inside Yemen. These are matters for Yemen to resolve through dialogue and political cooperation, but we along with others will stand ready to assist. We will gather in London next week to discuss these efforts at a conference called for this occasion.

I am pleased to note that USAID recently signed a three-year umbrella assistance agreement with the Government of Yemen which we hope will amount to the delivery of $121 million in development and economic assistance to the country. However, the success of this investment depends upon Yemen's ability to make the tough choices necessary to improve the capacity to govern, to reform its economy, to protect human rights, to combat corruption, and create a better environment for business and investment.

So again, let me thank the foreign minister for this visit and to pledge our cooperation in the years ahead on behalf of Yemen.

Foreign Minister al-Qirbi. Thank you very much, Madame Secretary, and thank you for this opportunity to meet and to address many of the challenges faced by Yemen and how we can see that the relation between our two countries moves forward.

I am very pleased and glad to say that with the new Administration, we have seen a greater understanding to the challenges faced by Yemen and the willingness to help Yemen. And with President Barack Obama and Your Excellency, I am sure that you will achieve our objectives of seeing a stable, united Yemen and a strong Yemen.

Yemen has stressed a number of issues in this meeting—first of all, our commitment to continue the fight against terrorism and against radicalization, the other important challenge in our part of the world, that our fight against terrorism has an important component to it, which is now clearly understood, and that is the development. And Yemen has, in its development program over the last few years, had undertaken rather courageous decisions on reforms. And the lack of achievement is due to the fact that Yemen did not have the resources to implement these reforms.

I am glad that with this sort of support we are getting from the United States, it will make it easier for us to move forward, and we hope that the London conference will come to strengthen our capabilities in implementing a lot of the reforms and the—achieving the economic growth. I am here again to stress that we will continue to work with the U.S. Administration and with our partners on development, and will hope we will see further improvement of the relation between our two countries.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you, sir.

Foreign Minister al-Qirbi. Thank you very much.

Mr. Crowley. The first question from CNN, Elise.

Q. Thank you. A question for both of you about the upcoming meeting next week: Madame Secretary, you've said in recent weeks that the U.S. is eager to help Yemen, but that there would be kind of conditions or expectations placed on that. What kind of conditions and expectations are you looking for?

And Mr. Minister, you've said today and in the past that Yemen didn't have the resources that it needed to institute some of the reforms in counterterrorism and development that it wanted to do. What makes you think that this time, you could be assured that the international community will help you implement and that you can count on this type of assistance?

And I was wondering, for both of you, if you had spoken about the fact that over the last few years, the U.S. has been concerned that some people on the FBI most wanted list have been in Yemen and have not been apprehended. Madame Secretary, did you bring this up? And Mr. Minister, did you give assurances that all wanted terrorist sus pects would be taken care of? Thank you.

Secretary Clinton. Well, Elise, let me start by saying that as the minister said, we have worked hard this past year to develop a constructive and positive relationship with Yemen around both security and development. I can't speak to what has gone on prior to that, but we believe strongly that we've seen from the Government of Yemen a very active and effective commitment to combat the radical extremists, particularly al-Qaida, in the Arabian Peninsula in the last months. That is, from our perspective, a very positive sign that we are building on.

There is also an awareness on the part of both the United States and Yemen that our relationship cannot be just about the terrorists. As critical as that is to our security and our future and to the stability and unity of Yemen, the best way to really get at some of these underlying problems that exist is through an effective development strategy. President Salih has a 10-point economic plan, and we have made clear that we have expectations and we have the right to work with the Government of Yemen as we do provide development because we want it to go for the benefit of the people of Yemen. We want to see results on the ground. We're seeing results in the counterterrorism efforts and we want to see similar results when it comes to development.

But I believe that the foreign minister and other high officials in Yemen understand that. They're committed to this new course and we want to assist them in being successful.

Foreign Minister al-Qirbi. Thanks, Excellency.

Let me answer your first part of the question. We believe that donors who have committed billions of dollars in 2006 in the London donors conference have realized now that delay in implementation—and the delay in implementation is not the fault of the Yemeni Government. It is actually the mechanism by which different funds in the GCC countries and others dispense these funds. So it is a bureaucratic problem as well as one of technical aspects to it.

The lost time over the last three years, I think, got Yemen to what it is now, the economic situation that we are facing. So I hope the London conference will address these issues in order to avoid repeating this mistake that happened in the past. We feel that donors realize the importance of the stability of Yemen and its unity, and this is what we bank on in London conference this time is that there will be a serious look at the needs of Yemen for development and it will be addressed. And then we can look at the processes after that.

Regarding the terrorists who are in Yemen, I can assure you that those who are in the hands of the government are apprehended and some of them have been prosecuted. Of course, there are some who are at large and these are being pursued by our security forces.

Q. Thank you. Madame Secretary—

Secretary Clinton. Yes, sir.

Q. You called it a common threat. What are the exact steps that you required the Yemen Government to take to make sure that this threat is not really threatening them and us and here?

And Mr. Foreign Minister, it seems that there is a very high sensitivity to talk about foot soldiers of America and Yemen. Why do we have this very high sensitivity to this issue, and what do you really need from Washington?

Secretary Clinton. Go ahead, sir.

Foreign Minister al-Qirbi. Well, I think the sensitivity is not only in Yemen; it's also in the United States. There are people in the United States who believe that the fight against the terrorists should be undertaken by the countries themselves and not by American soldiers. And I think this is the right policy if you look at it from the experience in the past. What we need is really to build the capabilities of our counterterrorism units, make them more effective, train them, provide them with the equipment, and they will do the job. And this will be to the benefit of both countries with less problems and less cost.

Secretary Clinton. And we agree with that. I mean, that is what we are committed to doing, working with the Yemeni Government, assisting them, providing them the support that they seek to defend their own country, to prevent outside forces, inside secessionists, other elements that are threatening the stability and the unity of the Government of Yemen. You know very well that the Houthis attacked Saudi Arabia back in November.

So this is a conflict that has ramifications beyond the borders of Yemen, but it must be solved within the borders of Yemen.

Thank you.

Q. Thank you.

Foreign Minister al-Qirbi. Thank you very much.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and President Masoud Barzani delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. Well, it is indeed an honor for me to welcome President Barzani here to the State Department. President Barzani had excellent discussions with both President Obama and Vice President Biden at the White House yesterday. And we will cover a number of important issues as part of our strong support of the Kurdish Regional Government and the Kurdish people as part of a unified Iraq.

President Barzani. Thank you very much, Madame Secretary, for this opportunity. Thank you very much, Madame Secretary, for this warm welcome. Certainly, as you rightly mentioned, yesterday we had very good and productive meeting with Mr. President and Vice President. I am confident that our meeting today would be also conductive. And I would like also to assure you, Madame Secretary, that we are committed to a federal democratic Iraq. And we will continue in coordinating with you, Madame Secretary.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you all.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Shaikh Khalid bin Ahmed Al Khalifa delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. Good afternoon, everyone. I am delighted once again to meet with the foreign minister of a very valued partner of the United States, Bahrain. Our two nations enjoy a timetested relationship based on mutual interest and mutual respect. And our meeting today was another opportunity for us to discuss many of our common concerns.

We are working together as partners to spur economic recovery and create new opportunities for our people. As part of the broader engagement between the United States and countries such as Bahrain and Muslim communities across the world, we have launched efforts to encourage entrepreneurship, innovation, and economic diversification, and Bahrain is a prime example. We often point to this country as a premier banking and investment center, playing a vital role in the region and the world's economic future.

We greatly appreciate the hospitality that Bahrain shows our Navy and its contributions to regional security and stability. We work closely together on challenges such as piracy and violent extremism that threaten peace-loving people across the world.

On the topic of regional security, let me also note the concerns raised by Iran's refusal to engage with the international community on its nuclear program, which continues to violate IAEA and Security Council requirements. We have pursued a policy of consultation and engagement. We've worked with partners in the Gulf and through the United Nations with other countries to offer Iran a clear choice between isolation and meeting its international obligations. Iran's response to our efforts has been inadequate and we have begun considering further appropriate measures that might convince Iran to reconsider its nuclear program and engage with the international community.

The United States and Bahrain both seek stability in the Middle East. We share a goal of realizing a two-state solution and promoting comprehensive peace. And we appreciate Bahrain's interest in fulfilling the promise of the Arab Peace Initiative. That is a tangible demonstration of a commitment to a better future for all of the region's people.

The United States is working with the Israelis, the Palestinians, and our Arab partners to re-launch meaningful negotiations as soon as possible and without preconditions. We believe that through good faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israeli security requirements.

We recognize as well that Jerusalem is a deeply important issue to Israelis and Palestinians, to Jews, Muslims, and Christians everywhere. And we believe it is possible to reach an outcome that both realizes the aspirations of all parties for Jerusalem, and safeguards its status for the future.

So again, on so many issues, only a couple of which I've mentioned here, it is such a pleasure meeting with and working with the foreign minister. And our partnership, sir, is a real commitment to the kind of future that we want for our two countries. So thank you again.

Foreign Minister Al Khalifa. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Secretary. Good afternoon, everybody. It's wonderful to be back in Washington, D.C., and to meet once again with my dear friend, the Honorable Secretary of State Ms. Hillary Clinton. This meeting gave us the opportunity to discuss a whole range of issues of mutual interest and concern in a typically warm and friendly American atmosphere.

The Kingdom of Bahrain and the United States of America share a historic, deeprooted, and multifaceted relationship. We appreciate the pivotal role the United States plays in upholding the security and stability of such a vital region to the whole world. In this context and against this backdrop, we explored ways and means to further enhance our evolving partnership, a partnership that serves our common interest of regional security and stability, and where every step taken, where every step taken to defend the region is a positive, collaborative measure built on a history of joint defense cooperation that spans several decades for the benefit of the region at large.

The Kingdom of Bahrain has always called for a region free of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. To that end, we believe that the current situation surrounding the Iranian nuclear file should be resolved in a peaceful manner, in accordance with the Security Council resolutions and in complete adherence to the rules and regulation of the IAEA in a fully transparent manner. Furthermore, we discussed how the Gulf region could benefit from the use of nuclear power for peaceful civilian purposes in a safe, secure, and efficient manner.

We also reaffirmed our commitment to a durable and lasting peace in the Middle East. Bahrain appreciates the leadership of the United States on this issue and its commitment to achieve a peace based on a two-state solution that will bring all countries in the region to a mutually beneficial peace accord. It is imperative that we explore every option there is and not limit ourselves to what we have today, while at the same time working closely with the Palestinian Authority under the leadership of President Mahmoud Abbas to realize a capable and effective Palestinian state.

On Yemen, we discussed our participation in the London conference which was held last week and explored ways to assist Yemen in overcoming the numerous challenges it faces in order to be able to confront the most salient threats of extremism and terrorism.

Finally, Madam Secretary, while I express my sincere appreciation to you personally and to your very able team, I would like to commend your efforts, continued commitment to your allies and partners; your candid thoughts are on so many important matters. I look forward to continuing our constructive cooperation. Thank you very much.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you, sir.

Foreign Minister Al Khalifa. Sure.

Q. Secretary Clinton, in your opening statement, you described Iran's responses to date as inadequate. Looking at what Iranian President Ahmadinejad said yesterday, both about the nuclear file and about the detained Americans in Iran, do you regard his—do you see no reason, not a scintilla of a suggestion, that his comments about a willingness to turn over Iranian low-enriched uranium might actually be genuine? Do you think this is just a ploy, the way Iran has often made conciliatory gestures when it sees sanctions coming down the track?

And on the hikers, can you absolutely rule out any possibility of a trade, swap, exchange—any kind of a quid pro quo under which Iran and the United States would mutually release citizens in their custody?

Secretary Clinton. Well, as you know, Arshad, the IAEA made a good faith offer regarding the Tehran research reactor. Iran initially accepted the arrangement but has not followed through and, in fact, seemed to move toward rejecting it. The deal is still on the table. If Iran wishes to accept it, we look forward to hearing about it from the IAEA because that's the appropriate venue for them to file an official response.

With respect to the hikers and other American citizens detained inside Iran, it is hard to know what the Iranian president meant from these press reports of his comments. As we've said before, if the Iranian Government has questions about any Iranian citizen in the United States, there are official channels that Iran can utilize in addressing any concerns it might have, namely through the Embassy of Pakistan in Washington.

And as we have said repeatedly, we call on Iran to release all the American citizens that they have currently detained. We believe they are being unjustly detained and they should be released without further delay. We also are very committed to making it clear to the Iranians that they should do so on humanitarian grounds, since the detentions of our citizens is baseless. So there are no negotiations taking place between the United States and Iran. We believe they should unilaterally release our detained citizens.

Q. Do you think it was a ploy to (inaudible)?

Secretary Clinton. I'm not going to characterize it.

Q. Thank you. If I can stay on Iran, Secretary, there have been recent reports in recent days regarding CENTCOM and American military support for your allies in the region, for antimissile systems specifically. What kind of assurances can you give your allies? And is this also in reaction to the Iranians not yet going for the negotiation option?

And Shaikh Khalid, if I may, also on Iran, what do you hope the next weeks and months will bring? The tensions continue to surmount in the region. How concerned are you about this, and are you looking for assurances from the U.S.?

Thank you.

Secretary Clinton. Well, as the foreign minister said in his remarks, we have a long history of joint defense cooperation. Bahrain is a very valued ally and partner. That goes back many years. There's nothing new about that. We will continue to work with Bahrain to ensure that they have the defense capabilities that they need. And we highly appreciate the hosting of the Navy, which, of course, is one symbol of America's commitment to our allies and friends in the Gulf.

Certainly, we have to be cognizant of the changing atmosphere in the Gulf and the actions that Iran has taken, and its refusal to abide by the obligations of the Security Council and the International Atomic Energy Agency.

So we will work with our allies and our friends, and we will continue to send a strong message to Iran that they have an opportunity to truly act in a way that builds confidence and not raise concerns within the region.

Foreign Minister Al Khalifa. Yeah. Regarding whether we need new assurances or—from the United States, the answer is no. We are partners, we are allies for decades, now working together. And the presence of the Fifth Fleet in Bahrain, the cooperation over many matters over the last decades to safeguard the region and to ensure stability and security is a testament to that. So the United States commitments to its allies and partners is evident, it's clear, and it's been continuing, built on a very clear history together. So we're not seeing anything new, nobody's sabre-rattling here, nobody is being belligerent to anyone in the region. It's just a purely defensive measure for the benefit of the whole world, for the region being so important to the whole world.

Secretary Hillary Clinton delivered this statement in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. The United States condemns the series of bombing attacks against Shi'a pilgrims in Iraq over the past week. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families. Attacking men, women and children engaged in religious pilgrimage is reprehensible and exposes the cynical immorality of the terrorists who seek to replace Iraq's hardwon progress with violence and intimidation.

They will not succeed in breaking the will of the Iraqi people. Iraqis are committed to realizing the promise of their democracy. There is no better rebuke to those who traffic in terror.

Secretary Robert Gates delivered these remarks in Ankara, Turkey

Q. Good morning sir. My name is Murat Yetkin and I work for Radikal. Perhaps you would like to tell us about your contacts with the Defense Minister and the Chief of the General Staff. We're interested on the cooperation in Iraq and against terrorism, including the PKK.

Secretary Gates. Both meetings ran long. As a matter of fact, at the meeting with the Defense Minister we spent a good bit of time talking about Afghanistan, about missile defense, NATO missile defense, and the militaryto-military relationship between the two countries. Virtually all of my time with the Chief of the General Staff was spent discussing Afghanistan and efforts against the PKK.

Q. Any details—did you ask more troops?

Secretary Gates. No, I didn't ask for more troops. I told both of them how impressed we have been by Turkey's contribution in Afghanistan and how important it is. It is a varied role—there' are about 1700 troops, 2 provincial reconstruction teams, several operational mentoring and advising teams and command of regional command capital, Kabul. So it's a very diverse set of responsibilities and we are very pleased to have Turkey in Afghanistan working with all of us as partners.

Q. Metahan Demir from Hurriyet newspaper. We are wondering about the details of your talks regarding the fight against the PKK because it has been on the agenda in Turkey for a long time and Turkey has been suffering from this terrorism for a long time. Also it was on the agenda in the past, as you may remember—cooperation with the United States. Could you detail, or give us any specific information, about what kind of new cooperation was discussed between the two sides, during these talks, against PKK? Any further operation to capture the leading names of the organization? Or, any joint operation in Northern Iraq in the future?

Secretary Gates. Well, I don't think any purpose would be served in sharing with you any information about any operations that may or may not be considered. I will tell you that in 2007, President Bush directed that more assistance from America be given to Turkey's fight against the PKK. It fell on me to implement that beginning in 2007-2008 in terms of significant additional intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities and other kinds of equipment.

We have continued that. I offered during my visit here to, when I return to Washington, to see if there are more capabilities that we can share with Turkey in terms of taking on this threat. When General Odierno was here there was discussion of an action plan going forward. So I think what we are seeing is a further intensification of the cooperation in an effort to deal with this threat. I would also say, as the General told me, the ultimate solution to this is simply not killing everybody. In that vein, I met with President Barzani of the KRG in Washington last week. We talked about the importance of the KRG putting pressure on the PKK to abandon violence as a political tool. So, I think there's a broad range of cooperation and we talked about ways in which it can be further expanded.

Q. What is Turkey's role in your planned missile defense project, or what did you discuss?

Secretary Gates. What I described in Istanbul and what we talked about here was: the United States considers the phased, adaptive approach that the President announced last year, as America's national contribution to a NATO-wide missile defense. The NATO foreign ministers in December underscored the importance of missile defense for the alliance in light of the proliferation of ballistic missiles. Poland and Romania have both agreed to host missiles, and the discussion—I won't get into the specifics—but the discussion here in Turkey, here in Ankara, was about what role Turkey might play in the context of a NATO missile defense. We basically discussed what some of the possibilities were and those discussions will be ongoing.

Does somebody want to ask their first question?

Q. Regarding Iran, in your discussions did the idea come up of Turkey as a mediator with Iran?

Secretary Gates. Well, we really didn't discuss it in that context. I basically talked about President Obama's efforts to engage with the Iranians over the past year. I participated in the first official US government meeting with the new Iranian government in October of 1979. I told the PM that I've watched successive administrations reach out to Iran. But I have never seen an administration reach out in as principled and comprehensive way as President Obama has done. And the response has been quite disappointing. We had hoped that the Tehran Research Reactor proposal offered a way out of the current situation in a way that would be satisfactory to all of the parties. There is no objection to Iran having a peaceful nuclear program under appropriate IAEA safe guards and in compliance with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

Unfortunately, they are violating the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and they've rejected the Tehran Research Reactor proposal. Now, they've come back and I hear that they are offering some kind of other deal on the Tehran Research Reactor.

My view is that is a discussion that the Iranians would better hold with the IAEA, than at the Munich conference. Or, in press conferences by President Amadinejad. If they are prepared to take up the original proposal of the IAEA P5+1 of delivering 1200 kilograms of their low enriched uranium, all at once, to an agreed party—I think there would be a response to that.

But the reality is they have done nothing to reassure the international community that they are prepared to comply with the NPT or stop their progress towards a nuclear weapon. Therefore, I think that various nations need to think about whether the time has come for a different tact. The IAEA P5+1 has always had a dual track approach. Engagement would be tried first and if that didn't work, then pressure would be applied. The purpose of the pressure would be to bring Iran back to the negotiating table to negotiate seriously about constraining this program. So, that's where we are.

Q. Two questions. The Prime Minister and President Obama in December talked about missile defense (inaudible) and about Turkey. Secondly, has the US made any requests from Turkey for your withdrawal from Iraq—especially the use of the Incirlik base?

Secretary Gates. With respect to the later, as far as I know, there have been no requests made. We are still looking at various options in terms of our draw down. With respect to the first, we continue to look at what kind of capabilities we can provide to Turkey. This, unfortunately, has to be seen against the backdrop of America's continuing involvement in two wars—one right on Turkey's border, in terms of completing our efforts and our responsible drawdown in Iraq. And, obviously Afghanistan where there is a huge demand for intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance.

I have reaffirmed for the Prime Minister all of the commitments that have been made up to this point and told both him and the friends I talked to this morning, that when I go back, I will see if there is something more we can do as well.

Q. Mr. Secretary, if you don't mind, I will ask this question in Turkish due to its strategic importance to the Turkish people. Thank you for coming to Turkey and for this opportunity. Two days ago one of your well-known names came, Odierno, and he was named in the press as the “sackman general” because of the traumatic events of 2003 in Sulaimaniye in Northern Iraq. He is still called that when he visits. You were (inaudible) there then. Do you have a word to say to the Turkish public about those sad events? Or, now as the Defense Secretary, do you have anything to say about the events at that time and the events when American soldiers put bags over the heads of Turkish soldiers?

Secretary Gates. Well, all I can say is that I was not Secretary of Defense at the time. I was president of Texas A&M University and not exactly preoccupied with what was happening here. I don't know the details of it. As I said, I was more preoccupied with hiring a new football coach in Texas. I think that General Odierno's reputation speaks for itself. He has my highest confidence. He has the president's highest confidence. We all put the highest possible importance on our relationship with Turkey, our bi-lateral relationship with Turkey, and our cooperation and our respect for the Turkish people and, above all, respect for Turkey's soldiers.

Q. There is continuing discussion and debate about Turkey's slide from the West. Some say that Turkey is changing its axis towards the East. What is your view?

Secretary Gates. I think that Turkey is in a unique position. It is a member of the NATO alliance and is the southeastern anchor of the alliance. It is geographically located in the Middle East but also in Central Asia. It has historic and cultural ties with Central Asia so I think Turkey is in a very good place to work with all different parties on a variety of different issues where it has special access in a sense of a place at the table, if you will, from Europe to Central Asia to the Middle East. I think that Turkey's taking that on and playing a constructive role in all of those areas is a very positive thing.

Q. Mr. Secretary is Turkey doing enough in relation to Iran and secondly, what role do you see for Aegis ships in the Black Sea in relation to the missile defense plan?

Secretary Gates. First of all, I think Turkey is a valuable interlocutor when it comes to Iran. I think that it is important they speak to the Iranians in a way that is difficult for us. So, I think that there are potential opportunities there. But, I think that there needs to be a common understanding of the very broad concerns that exists throughout the United Nations about Iran's ongoing programs. I have the impression that there is that understanding here in Turkey. We will continue to work with them going forward. I'm actually not sure whether I want to talk about the deployment of Aegis ships is going to be at this point.

Q. On the subject of the PKK, their one by one killing is not a solution you said, was there any offer from the Turkish side in your discussions in Istanbul or Ankara?

Secretary Gates. Well, I think, frankly I feel that the PM's initiative with a view to trying to identify those people in the PKK who are prepared to rejoin society and abandon violence and to reach out to them is a very positive thing. It helps to separate those who are willing to abandon violence and become part of society, from the hard core who will not abandon violence and who have to be dealt with in other ways. So, I think that that initiative—and it was my impression this morning that the Chief of the General Staff agrees with that. I don't want to get in to any internal issues here, but it seems to me that that is a useful initiative of the part of the Turkish government and has promise.

Q. A follow-up with your question. Did you ask Turkey to deploy some radar systems regarding a missile defense system on Turkish territory?

Secretary Gates. We have talked about that in the past with Turkey and the Turkish government has asked us a number of questions. I would say we are in dialogue about that and no decisions have been made by anybody. It's important to say that even these conversations have been in the framework of a wider NATO wide missile defense system in which other NATO allies would participate as well. As I said, there have been discussions but nobody has made any commitments.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassim Al Thani delivered these remarks in Doha, Qatar at the U.S.-Islamic World Forum

Introductory Remarks Omitted

Secretary Clinton. It is time, as President Obama said in his speech in Cairo, for a new beginning based on a commitment to open dialogue and equal partnership, a new beginning that confronts the tensions between us and commits all of us to doing the hard work necessary to resolve them, a new beginning that acknowledges we each have a role and a responsibility in solving the common problems we face.

Now, in the eight months since the President's speech, many around the world have answered that call. But others worry that the United States' commitment is insufficient or insincere, that we have not fully embraced the spirit of mutual respect and partnership, or that we will fail to translate that spirit into the concrete steps needed to achieve real and lasting change in the world.

Now, I understand why people might be impatient. But building a stronger relationship cannot happen overnight or even in a year. It takes patience, persistence, and hard work from all of us.

It is important to remember that President Obama's vision was not one of a single country seeking to write a new chapter on our own. It was a call for all of us to take responsibility for retiring stereotypes and outdated views and for bringing a renewed sense of cooperation to.

It is this convergence of policies and principles that I would like briefly to talk to you about tonight.

The first and critical area is our ongoing efforts to advance a comprehensive peace in the Middle East—one that brings peace for Israelis, Palestinians, Syrians, and Lebanese, as well as the full normalization of relations between Israel and the Arab states. Central to these efforts is the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict based on a two-state solution.

I fully understand the importance that this issue holds for people not only in this region, but around the world. It is also important to me. Every day, we see the human cost of the conflict: the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, the daily indignities endured by Palestinians after decades of occupation, the constant threat of violence that Israelis bear, as well as the opprobrium that comes with years of trying to protect her citizens.

This conflict is an obstacle to security, prosperity, and opportunity for Palestinians, Israelis, and all nations in the region. And the goal of a comprehensive peace is fully in the interests of the United States. So, we are committed to our role in ensuring that negotiations begin and succeed. That is why President Obama appointed George Mitchell as Special Envoy for Middle East peace during his first week in office, and why Senator Mitchell has made monthly visits to the region. This is hard work. Some of you in the audience know that from firsthand experience. But our resolve is strong, and we are determined to settle this conflict once and for all.

I know people are disappointed that we have not yet achieved a breakthrough. The President, Senator Mitchell, and I are also disappointed. But we must remember that neither the United States nor any country can force a solution. The parties themselves must resolve their differences through negotiations. And the United States stands ready to play an active and sustained role, and to support the parties as they work to resolve all permanent status issues including security for Israelis and Palestinians, borders, refugees, and Jerusalem.

We support a two-state solution, with Israelis and Palestinians co-existing peacefully and with mutual security. We believe that through good-faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israeli security requirements.

And we recognize that Jerusalem is a deeply important issue to Israelis and Palestinians, to Jews, Muslims, and Christians everywhere. We believe it is possible to reach an outcome that both realizes the aspirations of all parties for Jerusalem, and safeguards its status for the future.

For our part, the United States has encouraged Israel to stop the growth of settlements to preserve the chance for a two-state solution. We do see the current Israeli settlement moratorium as a positive step in this direction, and we look for further steps. The United States' policy on settlements has not changed; we do not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.

We have encouraged the Palestinians to pursue their home-grown plan to build their institutions, end incitement, improve security, to lay the foundation for a future stable, democratic Palestinian state. We are supporting President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad in their efforts to build, train, and reform their security forces, and we commend their progress to date.

The principle of shared responsibility extends to Israel's Arab neighbors, as well as countries around the world. We all have an obligation to support this effort by helping to make real the benefits that peace can bring. The region and the international community can make clear to the Israelis, Palestinians, Syrians, and Lebanese that we support comprehensive negotiations that produce results. The 2002 Arab Peace Initiative is vital to our efforts to promote a comprehensive peace. And it lays out a vision of a better future for all the region's people. It is time to renew its spirit today and move to specifics.

A second issue that demands our cooperation based on the principles I've outlined is Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons.

In his inaugural address, President Obama endorsed a new era of diplomatic engagement, including with those nations who have at times been hostile to the United States. We have proven our willingness to engage. For example, we are resuming high-level contacts with the Syrian government. And we are preparing to send an Ambassador back to Damascus for the first time since 2005.

We have pursued extensive efforts to reengage with Iran, both through direct communication and through greater participation in multilateral efforts. Our goal has been, that after 30 years of hostile relations with Iran, we need to begin to build a more constructive relationship.

Our position regarding Iran's nuclear program is simple. We believe that all states, including Iran, start with the same rights and the same responsibilities. And according to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, nations have the right to nuclear power so long as they accept the responsibility of demonstrating unequivocally that their programs are used solely for peaceful civilian purposes.

But Iran has consistently failed to live up to its responsibility. It has refused to demonstrate to the international community that its nuclear program is entirely peaceful. And last year, the world learned of a secret nuclear facility near the city of Qom. The IAEA Board of Governors responded with a resolution criticizing Iran that received wide support.

In October, in our continuing efforts at engagement, the United States, for the first time, joined the so-called P-5+1 in meeting with Iran in Geneva. These were the highest level discussions between the United States and Iran in more than 30 years. We went to Geneva with the hope that Iran would seize the opportunity to begin to resolve our differences, and to pursue greater political and economic integration with the international community. We joined Russia, France, the United Kingdom, China, and Germany to endorse an offer to provide Iran with fuel for the Tehran Research Reactor, which creates medical isotopes for medical treatment. This offer demonstrated a good-faith commitment to working with Iran toward a future civil nuclear program for peaceful purposes.

Iran agreed in principle, but then refused the IAEA's terms. Now, Iran has announced that it will increase its enrichment activities to produce up to 20 percent enriched uranium, in violation of successive United Nations Security Council resolutions. And its explanation doesn't add up. It could have the very enriched uranium it says it seeks by accepting the international IAEA offer. So this has only deepened the international community's doubts about Iran's nuclear intentions, along with increasing isolation of Iranian government.

Furthermore, since the meeting in Geneva in October, Iranian officials have refused every offer to meet on its nuclear program. So these actions, understandably, have caused us to wonder: What does Iran have to hide? Why is Iran refusing to live up to its international obligations, which would lead to political and economic integration with the international community that would actually benefit the Iranian people?

Iran leaves the international community little choice but to impose greater costs for its provocative steps. Together, we are encouraging Iran to reconsider its dangerous policy decisions.

We are also making steady progress with our plan to responsibly end the war in Iraq, in partnership with the government and people of Iraq. Our combat troops were out of Iraq's cities by the end of last June, as we planned. We are on track to meeting our deadline of ending our combat mission by the end of this August. This month, the number of American troops fell below 100,000 from a high of more than 170,000, and that number will continue to drop as we take all of our combat troops out of Iraq.

As we decrease our military presence, we're bolstering our long-term civilian relationship. Iraq and the United States have signed a Strategic Framework Agreement that includes partnerships in education, science and technology, trade, and agriculture. And we are providing support leading up to the national elections next month.

Iraq's journey to democracy has not been easy. Just in the past few weeks, brutal attacks have killed dozens of people. But those attacks have failed to deter the determination of the Iraqis to hold their elections. And the next months are sure to be testing. Many countries can and should help Iraq through its challenges, and to reintegrate Iraq fully back into the region. Iraq does have the potential to become a force for regional stability and prosperity.

Two other issues regarding global security and violent extremism deserve greater explanation: the prison at Guantanamo Bay, and the new security regulations for international flights landing at American airports.

In one of his first acts as president, President Obama directed that the detention facility at Guantanamo be closed, recognizing that Guantanamo had become a symbol of the wrong way to make America more secure. Now, we had hoped that this task would be completed within a year. That has proven impossible. But we will close Guantanamo. And we will close it in a way that is both responsible and consistent with basic standards of justice. Our progress has been slow because this is difficult. It depends in part on the willingness of other nations to take in detainees, and we are very grateful to those nations that have already done so, and we ask others to please considering doing so, in order to help us expedite the closing of Guantanamo.

As to our new airline security regulations, they have raised legitimate questions that need to be considered within the larger reality. All responsible nations have a stake in stopping extremists who would use violence, who would seek to exploit the ease and freedom of global air travel. So we all have to work together to strengthen airport security, while treating people fairly and respectfully. This is a difficult balance to strike. And the United States, like many countries, are still working to find the best way to ensure the safety of all travelers while also preserving their dignity. The current situation is far from ideal, and we are regularly reviewing our security measures and we will modify them as circumstances and the risks of attack warrant. I can only ask for patience and understanding from travelers in the meantime.

Because airline security is a small piece of a larger issue. Without security, no community can thrive. But security requires more than strong borders, safe skies, or friendly neighbors. True and lasting security takes root in places where people have the opportunity to find jobs, to be educated, to raise healthy families, and benefit from the scientific and technological breakthroughs that have transformed the way we live in the 21st century. When these opportunities are absent, frustration and anger often follow.

So that's the fourth issue I wish to address: opportunities for young people. In many parts of the world today, from Latin America, to Africa, to Asia, including many Muslim-majority countries, people under 25 make up more than half the population. They deserve the chance to make their mark on the world and be a part of positive change.

President Obama and I believe that education and innovation are the currency of this century. That's why he announced a new era of engagement with Muslim communities to expand educational opportunities, support entrepreneurs, and promote advances in science and technology. Our goal is to identify excellent ideas and successful projects in Muslim communities and then invest in them, help to scale them up, and to connect innovators and entrepreneurs, so that they can support and enhance each other's work.

We are creating a Global Technology and Innovation Fund, which we will launch this spring, that will provide hundreds of millions of dollars in capital to small and medium-sized businesses throughout the Middle East, Asia, and Africa. In April, President Obama will host a two-day Summit on Entrepreneurship in Washington, which will bring together innovators and entrepreneurs and business people from 50 countries on 5 continents, along with their American business counterparts, to work to establish a network that can support these kinds of advances.

And to promote science exchanges, we have launched our science envoy program. One of our envoys, Dr. Ahmed Zewail, a Nobel Prize-winning chemist, has already visited Egypt and Turkey. And another, Dr. Elias Zerhouni, a former director of America's National Institutes of Health, is here at this forum.

To extend the benefits of past breakthroughs to more people, we are working closely with the OIC to eradicate polio. We are collaborating with Qatar and others to create economic opportunity to fight hunger, poverty, and disease. And I especially want to highlight Qatar's initiatives to boost food security and output through hydroponics, innovative agricultural techniques, solar-powered desalinization of water for irrigation. That can prove to be a model for many parts of the world.

We have to continue to expand and strengthen outreach to students. And that is why we have increased funding for educational exchange programs for Muslim students. NASA, our space program, has partnered with the Arab Youth Venture Foundation in Dubai to give Arab and American engineering students the chance to work together on NASA missions. And we encourage higher-education partnerships like those between American universities in the U.S. and Qatar and the UAE, which benefit students and faculty on both sides.

These demonstrate our commitment, but our scale of success depends upon whether we can work closely with other governments, particularly governments willing to invest to build sustainable economies that are based not only on natural resources, but on the energy and ingenuity of the people.

And we want more partnerships with the private sector, universities, foundations, and people-to-people engagement. Our Special Representative for Muslim Communities, Farah Pandith, who leads our engagement with Muslims worldwide, not just in the places you would expect it, but in Europe, as well, is here today. And we are very pleased that President Obama announced our Special Envoy to the OIC, Rashad Hussein, who is also here, who will help drive progress across the range of issues that the OIC addresses.

But beyond any of these programs or partnerships—beyond national security or economic growth—we have to look at the intangible rights endowed to all human beings that provide a strong foundation for broad-based progress and greater understanding. And that is the fifth and final issue that I wish to address. Among them are the right to practice the religion of your choice freely; to have a say in your government and be treated fairly under the law; and the right to equality for women and girls. Like many nations, the United States cherishes these rights, in part because we've had our own challenges in protecting and advancing them. And we seek to be a partner to people in other countries as they strive to obtain these rights for themselves.

This year, we rejoined the United Nations Human Rights Council. And one of our first acts was to work with Egypt on a Freedom of Expression resolution—a much-needed declaration of principle at a time when that freedom is jeopardized by new efforts to constrain religious practice. Respect for different faiths is essential to the success of pluralistic societies, as is the right to speak freely. So we stand for the vigorous defense of both freedom of religion and expression, and believe that the best way to promote tolerance and respect for all religions is through legal protections against discrimination and hate crimes, along with outreach to minority religious groups, and public education campaigns. That is why we are now working with countries on the Human Rights Council to put forth an affirmative agenda that will help make these principles a reality.

Democratic reform advances these freedoms and many others. And it, too, is a critical element of progress. We share the belief that people can best fulfill their potential when they have a say in the decisions that shape their lives; when they are free to share and access information; speak, criticize, and debate, including on the Internet, which has become a vital tool for activists for democracy and women's rights.

We supported and will continue to support those who build the foundations of democracy: transparent and trustworthy institutions, the rule of law, a vibrant civil society that shines a light on government abuses and those overlooked corners of society where the powerless and disenfranchised can be found.

But none of this can—or should—be imposed from the outside. It must emerge from citizens themselves. And as nations strive to build and strengthen governments that reflect the will of their people, grounded in their own traditions, they can count on the United States to be their partner.

The power of conversation has been proven time and time again to me. Wherever I go, whether it's Pakistan, Indonesia, or Iraq, I ask for an open dialogue and I invite honest criticism. And that's exactly what I have gotten.

People ask hard questions about my country's policies, about our intentions, even our basic values. And I listen. And then I respond. Sometimes I correct what I believe are false statements. Sometimes I offer explanations or alternate views. Sometimes I agree with the questioner. And others I disagree passionately. And in almost every instance, I come away convinced that we've reached greater understanding. And that understanding serves as the base for whatever else we expect to do together.

Open and rigorous dialogue helps create the conditions for change. That's what the President did in Cairo. That's what we are doing here in Doha. But on its own, dialogue is not enough. Both President Obama and I believe that our policies must match our principles, and that it is results, not rhetoric, that matter in the end. And that is why I look forward to working with all of you in the weeks and months ahead to build, strengthen, and advance our understanding and our partnerships, on behalf of our countries, on behalf of all people everywhere.

Thank you very much.

Q. I am delighted that the U.S. and the Egyptian Government have reached an agreement on the declaration for freedom of expression. I want to tell you we have freedom of expression in Egypt. The question is freedom of the expression, that is what is lacking. And I think—as a man on the run, because he dared to speak his mind, and now he is (inaudible) in court in Egypt. Six cases are pending against him. And I may say, speaking also for my colleague, Amar Ibrahim, who has the same last name, and who was in prison at the same time I was in prison, both of us were in prison for the same freedom of expression that we practice but, as I said, freedom of the expression that is lacking.

So, what is the U.S. stand on the rise of (inaudible) in the Muslim world, this is a U.S.-Muslim world forum. And since you have mentioned Egypt, and go to Egypt, and (inaudible) as well, and from my colleague, who asked me to—if I—whoever gets recognized will speak on each other's behalf, we have the same last name—Amar Ibrahim and Tad Ibrahim, and we are both victims of our own government.

So I would like you to please comment on that, and (inaudible) speak for both of us with the Malaysian Government and with the Egyptian Government. Thank you.

Secretary Clinton. And I appreciate the position that both of you have taken on behalf of human rights, political rights, civil society, democracy, the pantheon of rights that we do support. And we raise that at every session that we have. And, obviously, as a friend to both of your countries, we hope that there will be a greater awareness of the importance of supporting these rights within society.

We don't have any magic wands that we can wave, but we will continue to provide financial support to civil society activists, to human rights activists. We will continue to fund education and dialogue programs. We will continue to state, as we have on numerous occasions, that we don't think it's in any country's interest to stifle the free expression of its people. And we can only hope that, both because of the courage of the people inside, like yourself, and your brother Ibrahim, from Malaysia, that there will be more fertile soil for these changes to take root.

It is a difficult balancing act for the United States, because we do want to encourage change from within, which we think is the most lasting change. When we walk away from a country, when we sanction a country, when we give up on a country, it's rare that we see change.

So, all during the Cold War, for example, where the old Soviet Union had missiles pointed at us, and we had missiles pointed at them, we never stopped talking to them, but we also never stopped supporting human rights dissidents, the whole panoply of democratizing influences. And that is what we are going to continue to do in countries around the world.

Q. Thank you very much. If I may, before I ask the question, Madam Secretary, I want to speak on behalf of my brother and sister religious leaders. I—before I ask the question, I want to associate with the very gracious remarks of our distinguished chairman, Strobe Talbott, when he sent his regards to President Clinton, by saying that we religious leaders also send our prayers that the Lord may grant the President many, many—a perfect recovery, and many, many continued happy, healthy, and effective years of service.

Madam Secretary, my colleagues are standing to express their solidarity with the question that I am about to ask. During this conference, the religious leaders have been addressing the moral imperative of bringing peace to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In this context, we have especially been concerned about the critical issue of the suffering of the people of Gaza.

Would you talk to the question of how the United States can become more proactive in resolving this tremendous humanitarian crisis? Thank you very much.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you very much, Cardinal, and thank you all for standing to show your support, as leaders in the faith community.

As I said in my remarks, the humanitarian suffering in Gaza is very deeply concerning. And we have made a number of statements and provided a lot of money through the Palestinian Authority to try to alleviate the suffering. We have pushed the Israelis to end the—to increase the trickle to a flood of goods into Gaza. And I hope that we are going to see some progress. In meeting with the Emir and His Excellency, the Prime Minister, as well as earlier with Prime Minister Erdogan, there are so many countries standing ready to help the people of Gaza rebuild. And we just want the chance to be able to do that.

I do think, though, it is important to recognize that the comprehensive peace that we seek between the Israelis and the Palestinians is the best answer to everything. It is what will hopefully resolve the conflict and create opportunities for people to pursue their own dreams and ambitions. And to do that, we need partners who are committed to renouncing violence, to ending, in this case, rocket attacks into Israel territory.

We could do so much, and the Palestinian people are so immensely talented at living under the most difficult circumstances. They have such an enormous untapped potential, and we want to try to help unleash that. But, in order to do so, there has to be both sides of the equation satisfied: the security for the Israelis; ending the bomb and rocket fire, and all the rest of it; and respect and recognition for the needs of the people of Gaza and the West Bank.

That is what I am committed to in the short term. We hope to alleviate the suffering. But in the medium term, we want to see the people of Gaza empowered to make decisions for themselves. And that means without interference or without objection from any political entity, but instead, on their own, choosing their own path.

Remember, violence preceded the suffering in Gaza with a violence—as the Palestinian Authority uses it—a violent coups d'etat, instead of working in the elected parliament that represented both Hamas and Fatah and other minor parties. There was a takeover of Gaza, and then it was used as a launching pad. And it's just historically so painful.

And yet, if we are looking backward in our rearview mirror, we can't go forward. So, let's try to alleviate the suffering in Gaza, let's try to get comprehensive peace negotiations underway. Let's try to get them resolved. Let's stand by the Palestinians and the Israelis, as they do this hard work, and try to, once and for all, put this truly behind us.

Prime Minister Al Thani. Yes. First of all, I thank the Christian community and—for this question. It is a very important question. It touches all our hearts. I have no doubts the good intention of the President Obama and Secretary Clinton about their intention about Gaza. And I remember when we talked about it in Washington, I know that she is not accepting seizing the people and leaving them like this.

This is a very important problem for all of us, to see 1.5 million at siege. Yes, there is problem. Maybe we agree, maybe we don't agree how the problem started. But that's not the question now. The question now is how we build the houses for these people. We build their schools, we build their hospitals. We send them their needs, medical needs, food needs. I think this is a very important thing.

If we don't do this, we build more hate against us, against the United States, against our allies in Europe. And I think the only way—okay. The problem cannot be solved today between Hamas and Fatah. That is another problem. But also, the policy which may be done by some of our regional brothers or friends, or Israel, which says let us show the good example of how the West Bank live in prosperity and Gaza (inaudible), so we can change the mood of the people. The mood of the people cannot be changed under pressure. The mood of the people can be changed (inaudible) how we can treat them well as a human being.

We were talking about the human rights. Human rights. Now they are living more than one year without home, a lot of families with children, with women, old and young. We should not accept this by all means, even if we have differences. But I am sure all the world—of course, United States has the means to move in this aspect, and let us try to diffuse some of the hate, and build the houses, build the schools, build the hospitals. And later we talk about what mistakes been done, who did this, who did that. This is another question. Of course we might not agree with their opinion, how they would like to solve the problem between the Israelis and themselves.

We in Qatar feel the only way—and this is long time ago, and we have been criticized for this because for a long time we have an office here, Israeli office here, and our also consulate in Gaza. And for a long time we have been concerned about this relation. But we believe in peace. We believe that the only way to solve this problem, to talk to the Israelis, and they talk to us as Arabs, and we try to solve it according to the Security Council resolution, according to your speech, Madam Secretary, which you say about (inaudible) with some swap. Both sides have to accept the swap.

But we cannot put in condition that will not let these people eat or live as we live, as a human being, until this problem is solved. Because that will make them more stubborn, and we will build more hate for no reason. So I—my advice, my sincere advice, all of us have to work to let these people live like us. Thank you very much.

Mr. Talbott. We have gone a bit over the scheduled time, and to very, very good effect. Before bringing the session to a close, Madam Secretary, I want to underscore the resonance that I am sure, first of all, many passages in your remarks had tonight. But one in particular, and it had to do with the point that you made about the dilemma that our colleagues in the U.S. Government face as they try to balance security, particularly airplanes and airports, with respect for the dignity of our visitors, and fairness.

I have only been in Doha for a couple of days. I have had about 12 conversations with people who you see in front of you who have experienced the downside of that dilemma. And I think that the sensitivity that you expressed, both to the problem, but also the way in which you explained the reason why the problem comes about, will help instill in them—I hope it will instill in them—the patience that you are asking for.

Because, in due course, it would be great to have one of these forums back in Washington, D.C. And I hope everybody will have an easy time getting there, including because of the weather.

But, in any event, do you want to say something on this?

Secretary Clinton. Well, look. There are so many concerns that we can't even get to. But I think that, on this particular issue, we are going to do everything we can to re-evaluate it and to consider it. And we ask the cooperation from everyone else, particularly around the departure of passengers from any one of your countries. Because you never know who might be on the plane. It might be someone in your family or someone in my family. And that is our only goal here, is to maintain the safety and security of airline travel. But we recognize, as I said, that that causes some very unfortunate feelings among many people. So I am not surprised you have heard a lot about it.

And finally, just let me say, look, we believe that we actually have so much more in common than what separates us. The real challenge is how we work together to solve these common problems that we face, whether it's Gaza or airline security or Iran. But that is what we're committed to try to do. And as His Excellency, the Prime Minister said, we are not always going to agree. We are not always going to disagree. We ought to narrow the areas of disagreement, enhance the areas of agreement, and look for ways to try to solve problems in between. And that's what we are committed to doing.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Saud Al Faisal delivered these remarks in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Foreign Minister Saud. (Inaudible) these issues and other international issues of interest to our two countries. It's worthy of note that these consultations covered the vital regional issues and the other international issues of interest to our two countries. It's worthy of note that this week marks the passing 65 years since the first meeting between the leaderships of our two countries was held. His Majesty King Abdul-Aziz al Saud, the founder of modern Saudi Arabia, met His Excellency President Franklin Roosevelt. The two leaders laid the foundation of Saudi-U.S. relations which are based on mutual respect, the promotion of joint interests, and joint efforts to serve the United Nations pursuit for achieving international peace and security.

These principles have helped our two countries to steadfastly confront all challenges and to take significant steps to consolidate bilateral relations and to move toward a significant strategic stage, according to an institutional framework and through direct contacts between concerned bodies in both countries and signing civil agreements and memos of understanding in all fields of scientific, economic, security, and military cooperation.

Of course, among the most salient results of this cooperation is the (inaudible) increase of Saudi students in the United States from 3,000 students to about 25,000 during the last few years. Also, there is an increase in the volume of trade and investment and the visits of Saudi and U.S. nationals at both official and (inaudible) levels. Together with the advent of businessmen, this has increased the burden of our consular missions who are required to issue more and more visas and who sometimes face media campaigns calling for its expediting and facilitating measures. In this connection, I raised the issue of tightening the travel measures against Saudi nationals. I noticed that the U.S. Government has sympathetic understanding of the Saudi viewpoint and the Saudi concern in this regard, and that the tightening of measures applies to all travelers to the United States and emanates from our keenness to achieve a balance between security measures and respect of civilian freedoms and basic rights.

Within the framework of considering regional and international issues, the peace process received particular attention. We (inaudible) and reviewed current efforts. We actually appreciate the prompt movement of the U.S. Administration to resuscitate the peace process and to treat the major issue of conflict within the framework of the two-state solution which aims at (inaudible) autonomous and viable Palestinian state. We also believe that Israeli settlements are illegal and illegitimate. The Kingdom believes in the importance of launching the peace process comprehensively to treat all the main issues of the conflict simultaneously, according to specific terms of reference and a clear-cut time schedule taking into account that the step-by-step policy and the confidencebuilding (inaudible) strategy have failed to accomplish their objectives. This is mostly evidenced by the current Israeli Government's refusal to resume negotiations starting from the negotiations steps that were taken by the previous government.

Our talks also considered the Iranian nuclear issue. The Kingdom reiterates its support of the P-1+5 or the 1+5 group to solve the crisis peacefully through dialogue, and we call for a continuation of those efforts. We also call upon Iran to respond to these efforts to remove regional and international suspicions towards its nuclear program, particularly since the efforts of the group secure or recognize the right of Iran and all the states in the region to peacefully utilize nuclear energy according to the criteria and the measures of the International Atomic Energy Agency and under its surveillance and supervision.

The Kingdom also stresses the importance of regional and international efforts being focused on having the Middle East and the Gulf region being totally free from all weapons of mass destruction, notably nuclear weapons. It also stresses the criteria that the standards must apply to all states in the region without exception, including Israel's nuclear program. History testifies that any weapon that enter the region has been used.

We also discussed the current situation in Yemen and we welcomed the Yemeni Government's decision to observe a ceasefire in north Yemen. We hope that all parties will abide by this decision in order to make peace and stability prevail in the brotherly country and to direct our efforts towards consolidating Yemeni national unity and achieving the country's development and prosperity.

We also discussed the situation in Afghanistan in the light of the current London conference. In the light of the recent London conference, we stressed the importance of having military efforts accompanied by civilian efforts (inaudible) helping Afghanistan to develop its infrastructure and to achieve its social and economic development, and to support national reconciliation among those citizens. This is the only way to save Afghanistan from that state of despair and frustration and insecurity—a state that has been exploited by terrorist organizations to achieve their wishes—objectives.

Our joined security efforts have substantially helped to combat terrorism. These efforts must be continued and intensified to completely eliminate this hateful world phenomenon and to eradicate it completely. For its part, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is determined to continue the policy of combating terrorism in all its security, ideological, and financial aspects. It has actually achieved a considerable amount of success in thwarting several terrorist operations domestically and also in preventing other terrorist operations from being launched from its territory. These achievements have been made thanks to God's help and the support of all Saudi people, all Saudi citizens who support all these efforts to eradicate this alien type of culture which is alien to the culture of the Saudi people.

We also discussed the situation in Iraq.

We hope that the forthcoming elections will realize the aspirations of the Iraqi people to achieve security, stability, and territorial integrity and to consolidate its national unity on the basis of equality among all Iraqis irrespective of their beliefs and sectarian differences and to protect their country against any foreign intervention in their affairs.

Once again, I welcome Her Excellency the Secretary and I am pleased to give her the floor.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you very much. I am delighted to be here today with the foreign minister and to have had this opportunity for a very active day of consultation and conversation, both with the foreign minister and with the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, His Majesty King Abdullah.

The United States and Saudi Arabia have long shared a partnership. As the foreign minister said, it goes back 65 years this week to another meeting between our President and the Saudi King. It is a partnership that is both durable and dynamic. It is built on mutual respect and mutual interests, and it is crucial to our shared hopes for the future. I am pleased to have had this opportunity to both reaffirm that partnership and discuss how we can broaden and strengthen it.

There are many, many important issues that we discussed together today. And last night, I reaffirmed at the speech that I gave at the United States-Islamic World Forum President Obama's vision of renewed partnership and shared responsibility. Tomorrow, I will have the privilege of meeting with Saudi citizens in Jeddah, including women, students, business leaders, civil society advocates, to explore further the bonds between our people and the common aspirations that we all share: security for ourselves and our communities; a better life for our families; and the chance for all children to live up to their God-given potential.

A pillar of this broad engagement is the idea that we must take shared responsibility. We face common challenges, as the foreign minister said. We discussed Afghanistan and Pakistan, the extremist groups who operate from bases there who have killed people of many faiths in many countries. Both the United States and Saudi Arabia have been targeted, so we know what is at stake. And I want to extend my appreciation to the Kingdom for the effort that it has undertaken to combat terrorism everywhere.

Our two nations also share the goal of a comprehensive peace in the Middle East. The King and foreign minister and I discussed how best to re-launch credible and productive negotiation on Middle East that will achieve both parties' aspirations. The 2002 Arab Peace Initiative is vital to the efforts necessary to promote a comprehensive peace and it lays out a vision of a better future for all of the region's people. It is time to renew its spirit today and to move towards specifics.

The United States believes that through good faith negotiations the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state based on the 1967 lines with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israeli security requirements. We believe it is possible to reach an outcome that both realizes the aspirations of all people for Jerusalem and safeguards its status for the future.

While encouraging negotiations, the international community must also support the work of President Abbas, Prime Minister Fayyad, and the Palestinian Authority to build the Palestinian economy and institutions necessary for a viable and independent Palestinian state that provides security, rule of law, and essential services to the Palestinian people.

We also discussed Iran's increasingly disturbing and destabilizing actions. For the past year, the United States has led an unprecedented effort to launch a new relationship with Iran. With our partners, we have sought to meet with Iran to chart a path for a fully peaceful nuclear program within international safeguards. But Iran has refused to reciprocate, and since October has refused every offer to meet with the P-5+1 representatives on its nuclear program. Now, Iran has informed the IAEA that it will start producing higher grade enriched uranium. This announcement is a provocative move in defiance of the United Nations Security Council resolution. The Iranian Government knows that this risks creating more regional instability and will result in increasing isolation.

International solidarity is critical in dealing with Iran. We are working actively with our regional and international partners in the context of our dual-track approach to prepare and implement new measures to convince Iran to change its course. We will also continue to speak out against the ongoing human rights violations in Iran, which we have seen again this past week.

And we also discussed the importance of our continued cooperation on Yemen. When Prince Saud and I attended the January 27th London meeting on Yemen, we agreed with those present to coordinate our assistance to help the Yemeni Government implement needed political and economic reforms. The Government of Yemen presented at that conference its own plan for national economic development. We look forward to supporting that plan. We want to help the government promote security and minimize the threat from violent extremists within its borders. We also discussed a provision of reconstruction aid to Yemen's war-ravaged northern region now that a ceasefire has been announced, which we hope will hold.

So on these and many other fronts, the dialogue and partnership between the United States and the Kingdom provides a foundation for progress. I am very pleased to have the foreign minister as a partner as we work to strengthen the ties between our nations and our people. And again, I want to thank him and His Majesty for the gracious hospitality showed to me and our entire delegation, including the traveling members of the American press who were included in an absolutely wonderful lunch that the King hosted for us. Thank you again for all of this warm welcome that has been provided to us.

Foreign Minister Saud. I hope they remember it.

Q. Your Royal Highness, first of all, let me pass along our gratitude at being included today. Please pass that along to His Majesty. And two questions for you.

The first is, as the U.S. seeks to build international support for sanctions against Iran, there's been a lot of talk about the role that Saudi Arabia could play by reassuring the Chinese that it will guarantee a reliable supply of oil in the event that there were some disruptions in the global oil supply. I wonder whether you have conveyed that message to the Chinese Government. And if you haven't conveyed it, do you think it makes sense for Saudi Arabia to take that step?

And then one quick follow-up, if I may. Secretary of State Clinton said earlier today that the United States would pledge to defend its friends and allies in the region from Iranian aggression. This has been characterized by some as the creation of a security or a defense umbrella for the region. Do you think that the notion of a security umbrella makes sense for the Persian Gulf? Would you feel comfortable with such an arrangement?

Foreign Minister Saud. Well, you put your finger on the threats that face the nation—the region because of the position that Iran has taken not to come out forthrightly and accept the proposal that would have resolved this dispute to the benefit of all, allowing Iran to produce atomic energy and providing the safety and the security of the region.

As I said in my statement, the inclusion of atomic weapons in the region is dangerous because historically we have seen that there has been no weapon introduced to the region, but as (inaudible) how destructive or inhumane in its use. So things are not going to remain static. Proliferation is not something that one can look at lightly. You allow for proliferation to happen here, the genie jumps from another place. And so Iran, if it continues on the line that is continuing, will provide the impetus for further proliferation and, God forbid, see the region full of atomic weapons. So this is a threat that we do not want to even conceive, let alone do something about it. We think that the United Nations Security Council and the permanent members have a specific and special responsibility in this matter.

Saudi Arabia and its relations with China, of course, are a close relationship, and especially the economic sphere (inaudible) produces of oil that is exported to China. But it is not a matter of just Saudi Arabia and China; we have to come with a real plan to prevent the proliferation of atomic weapons in the region. This is why we put our proposal that the region be free, declared free of atomic weapons and weapons of mass destruction. We believe that is the right approach.

Sanctions are a long-term solution. (Inaudible) we can judge. But we see the issue in the shorter term, maybe because we are closer to the threats than that. So we need immediate resolutions rather than gradual resolution to this regard.

I am sure the Chinese carry their responsibility as one of the five permanent members of the United Nations very seriously and they need no suggestion from Saudi Arabia to do what they ought to do according to their responsibility.

Sorry for the long-winded response.

Q. (Inaudible) for targeting the airplanes by al-Qaida (inaudible) by the al-Qaida (inaudible) the cooperation between Washington and Riyadh in combating against terrorism. And so how do the United States evaluate and see the efforts (inaudible) by the security forces in Saudi Arabia in this regard?

Secretary Clinton. Well, the United States and Saudi Arabia have a shared experience with terrorism and a shared determination to protect our people from those who, as the foreign minister said, would use terrorism to undermine the security or the financial or the physical well-being of the people of either of our countries. And I think it's a challenge that we all have to meet. The foreign minister called terrorism an alien culture, and I think that's exactly right. I've never heard it called that before, but I think he very accurately describes what is an effort to intimidate people, to frighten people, to create conditions in which people do not feel safe in their own homes or going to a market or a movie theater or a volleyball game or a mosque. And no country can tolerate that. We owe our citizens the protection that they deserve.

So we do look to the Kingdom to advise and guide our efforts. We cooperate together, as we do with many other countries. And I think that increasingly, the terrorists are being seen for what they are, as aliens, no matter who they pretend to represent. They are trying to go into societies and wreak fear and danger in ways that must be combated, and the United States is committed to doing so and working with other leaders and countries like Saudi Arabia who share that commitment.

Q. Thank you. Mr. Foreign Minister, earlier today, Secretary Clinton warned that Iran's Government was being taken over by a shadowy force, the Revolutionary Guards, that could lead to a military dictatorship in Iran. Do you agree with her statement, and how do you think Iran's growing power affects what Saudi Arabia has called the traditional equilibrium in the region?

And then for Madam Secretary, how would you assess the state of women's rights in Saudi Arabia?

Foreign Minister Saud. (Inaudible.) which is a very extremist policy (inaudible) it is important (inaudible) if we want security for the region, it requires an Iran at peace and happy with itself. And we hope that that situation will be solved soon, but it is a matter of calming down—but it is now a matter of extremism. I think it will be a difficult time for the region in the future.

Secretary Clinton. Let me just add to the foreign minister's comments. I think that the change in Iran from democratically elected governments, whether one agreed with them or not, which had the support of the Iranian people, to what we see today is very dramatic and troubling. And increasingly, more and more aspects of Iranian society—security apparatus, the economy—are being controlled not by the clerical leadership, not by the political leadership, but by the Revolutionary Guard. I share the foreign minister's hope that this is not a permanent change, but that instead the religious and political leaders of Iran act to take back the authority which they should be exercising on behalf of the people.

It's a very difficult environment for normal politics to take place by Iranian standards. And in many conversations with experts on Iran, with exiles from Iran, with former prisoners in Iran, the message is very clear that the space keeps shrinking for either religious or civilian leadership. And something else is filling that space, and so far as we can tell, it's the expanded power of the Revolutionary

Guard.

Now, with respect to women in Saudi Arabia, I am delighted that I'll have a chance to meet with and talk to a number of women tomorrow when I'm in Jeddah. I am particularly pleased that I have in my life a number of women who are from the Kingdom who grew up here, whom I know personally. And I want to publicly recognize the efforts of His Majesty the King for the emphasis on education, the commitment to provide opportunities for young women to pursue their interests. And I am very anxious to hear directly from women themselves. I don't want to second-guess or in any way substitute my observation for their experience, because the experts in women in the Kingdom are the women themselves. But I am very excited by many of the positive developments that I have read about and been told about over the last several years under His Majesty's leadership.

Q. (Inaudible) my question is to His Royal Prince. Iran (inaudible) controls (inaudible) and this can threaten the economical interests and (inaudible) can create crisis with the Iranian authority. What is the stand of the oil-exporting countries with regard to this announcement, and why is your (inaudible) measures that you can take to establish some sort of international stand against Iran?

Foreign Minister Saud. If this is true, this is considered an act of war—this announcement will be received as an act of war and this (inaudible) concerned with the (inaudible) other than it would be threatening the international peace and security and to be hazardous action to be taken by the Iran authority. We hope that this announcement (inaudible) false, but if it is true, it would be very hazardous and threatening.

Thank you.

Secretary Hillary Clinton delivered these remarks at Dar Al-Hekma College in Education City, Doha, Qatar at a Townterview hosted by Al Jazeera

Secretary Hillary Clinton delivered this statement in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. The United States welcomes the ceasefire in the conflict between the Government of Yemen and the Houthi rebels. We understand that a mediation commission representing all parties is monitoring compliance with the terms of the ceasefire and beginning the urgent process of reconciliation and reconstruction needed to bring this conflict to a permanent end.

The United States remains concerned about the humanitarian situation in the area, including the approximately 250,000 Yemenis displaced by the fighting. To assist displaced Yemenis, the United States has thus far provided $19.3 million during fiscal years 2009 and 2010. We urge other donor nations to support international relief agencies.

The United States supports a unified, stable, democratic and prosperous Yemen. We have significantly increased assistance to address the political, economic and security challenges that Yemen faces, and the President requested further increases in his recent budget proposal. We will continue to cooperate with international partners, including through the Friends of Yemen process, to ensure that the Yemeni people enjoy the benefits of political, economic and social reforms and achieve their long-term development goals.

Secretary Hillary Clinton was interviewed in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia by Adel Al-Ghamdi of Channel 2

Q. Secretary Clinton, what procedures might be taken from the United States Government to end the visas problems concerning the Saudi students? I know the number actually have reached up to 25,000 late visa. What steps might be taken to solve that problem?

Secretary Clinton. Well, this is a matter of great concern to me because I want to have even more students coming from Saudi Arabia to the United States, and I'd like to see students coming from the United States to Saudi Arabia. So you're right; we are now back up to the levels we were before 9/11, but I think we should do even better than that. I discussed that with His Majesty The King and other officials here in the government, and we're going to look for more opportunities to increase educational exchanges.

Q. Secretary Clinton, you know, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has accomplished great success in fighting terrorism and preventing some of the terrorist operations before it was launched. How do you see the necessity of the joint security effort and the cooperation between Riyadh and Washington in the coming future concerning this field?

Secretary Clinton. I think that the United States and Saudi Arabia, along with other nations, face a common enemy. Saudi Arabia has been a victim of terrorism, as has the United States. Our cooperation is essential to keeping both of our countries safe. And we're very grateful for the close partnership that we have with the kingdom, and we are every day asking what more we can do, because we want to do everything possible to give the sense of security that our citizens deserve, and also work with other nations so that they too can work against the scourge of terrorism.

Secretary Hillary Clinton was interviewed in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia by Indira Lakshmanan of Bloomberg

Q. All right. We're here on February 16th in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Secretary Clinton, thank you so much for making the time to speak with us today.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you very much, Indira.

Q. So here in the Persian Gulf, you have issued your harshest critique yet of Iran, referring to it as being on the road to a, quote, “military dictatorship.” Does that risk angering Iran and making the government less likely to rein in its nuclear program? Why use such strong language?

Secretary Clinton. Well, I think it's descriptive. It is reflective of our analysis of what seems to be going on inside Iran. We are working with the international community to prepare sanctions that will be targeted at the Revolutionary Guard. And the reason for that is because they have assumed greater and greater responsibility—not just in the security sector and not just for the nuclear program, but in the economic and political arenas as well.

And I think it's important for countries that are still evaluating what to do about Iran, who still may have in their mind that it's a democracy, but for a flawed election, and that the human rights abuses which are going on against peaceful demonstrations are a passing phenomenon, that we see the ground shifting. And increasingly, the Revolutionary Guard seems to be filling the space that should be held under the Iranian system by either the clerical or the political leadership.

Q. So is it also a message to people inside Iran in one way?

Secretary Clinton. Well, I think if they're able to hear it, it might help them to know that others of us on the outside see what they're experiencing—the increasing use of the militia, which is under the control of the Revolutionary Guard, the very harsh judgments, the passage of a law which makes it criminal and subject to the death penalty to, quote, “wage war against God,” which basically gives total discretion to the security people to arrest, detain, and even execute anyone. I mean, these are all very disturbing trends and—

Q. Some of your message seemed to almost be directed at the clerical or political leadership itself though, the way you phrased it, saying that whether sanctions will have effect will, in a way, depend on whether they're willing to reassert control. So in a way, you're sending a message to them.

Secretary Clinton. Well, if—again, if they're open to it, I don't know whether they would be, but from our perspective and talking to many experts on Iran, people who have been in the country recently, people who have even been detained, people who are outside but have followed Iran closely, the general conclusion is that there is something happening so that the political and the clerical leadership don't seem to be able to make the decisions.

I mean, one of the explanations you could offer for the failure of Iran to respond positively to President Obama's offer of engagement, which many experts believe, and I'm sure you wrote about it and covered it, would be responded to in some way—the failure of response may very well be because the decision makers are now predominantly coming from the Revolutionary Guard.

Q. So you're not concerned that your strong language is going to backfire?

Secretary Clinton. Indira, we have to say what we believe. We believed more than a year ago that it was in America's interest and it was a very important potential to test that the President's very public and private overtures to the leadership in Iran would be reciprocated. And despite the President's best efforts and our willingness to engage and our desire to come up with ways of handling the nuclear program with our Tehran research reactor proposal and so much else, has, as you know, not been reciprocated.

Q. So the sanctions are the effort right now. Now, China, which is Iran's biggest trading partner, can veto any UN sanctions. And you've said the Chinese are coming along on their view on sanctions. What evidence do you have that they're willing to cooperate, especially when tensions with the U.S are high over the Dalai Lama visit, Google, Taiwan arms sales?

Secretary Clinton. Well, we have a very comprehensive relationship with China, and it encompasses many different issues. We will continue to have disagreements. That's the way it is between any two countries, particularly two with such complex global interests and relationships as we have. But I think that the Chinese are being made aware by many countries, not just the United States, of the real threat that a nuclear-armed Iran would present to this region. And it is this region from which China derives most of its oil. And it is very dependent for its energy on the countries of the Gulf.

If this region is destabilized, if the anxieties that countries feel about Iran's intensions spill over into some kind of conflict, if there's an arms race that would be uncontrollable, that's not good for China. So I think that the broader view that is being considered is one that is causing China to ask some questions.

Q. I'd like to get in one last question. Since your last speech last month about internet freedom, there have been some further crackdowns. Iran blocked the internet ahead of protests last week, and it said that it would be blocking access to Google Mail in Iran. Have you talked to Google about this?

And what do you think U.S. companies should be doing in cases like this? Also, the United States Government is funding efforts to help people get around web censorship and web firewalls.

Secretary Clinton. Yes, we are.

Q. Are there risks to that? Tell us a bit about that.

Secretary Clinton. Well, first of all, we believe strongly that internet freedom is freedom of expression in the 21st century. It is a principal way by which people communicate, and you can see the importance of it by the fact that many governments are trying to prevent their citizens from expressing themselves or obtaining information that would be critical of the government.

So we're doing all we can to stand for the principle of internet freedom, to make it part of our foreign policy agenda. And many American companies are working very hard to provide continuous service to subscribers in whatever country they might be, despite government efforts to block. And I think it is important for us to keep those lines of communication open. It's the only way people can get information out so that those of us on the outside can know what's happening inside Iran, for example. So we're going to continue to do what we can, and we're going to hope that the private sector is a very strong partner in those efforts.

Q. And funding the efforts that the U.S. Government is doing?

Secretary Clinton. We have—for several years, we have tried to think of ways that we could support innovation on the internet, coming up with new ideas. I announced in my speech on internet freedom a fund for innovation and new technology that could be utilized. I mean, some of the best ideas are coming not just from the big companies, which are always in the forefront, but the small garage-type companies where people are coming up with ways to circumvent obstacles on the internet. And we want to encourage that.

Look, I mean, nobody is happy with everything that's on the internet. (Laughter.) That goes without saying. I mean, goodness, if our country looked at everything that was said about us and took it seriously, we'd probably be a little concerned ourselves. But we know the give and take of the public forum, whether it's a soapbox that somebody stands on or a letter that somebody writes or an internet blog, people have the right to express their views. And government should be proving people wrong or should be providing competing information into the marketplace of ideas.

Q. Thank you so much for your time today, Secretary Clinton.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you. Good to talk to you.

Secretary Hillary Clinton was interviewed in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia by David Gollust of Voice of America

Q. Madam Secretary, thanks for giving us some time as you complete a visit to the Gulf. You've spoken on this trip about an accumulation of power by the Revolutionary Guard Corps in Iran following the election last June. And I'm wondering if you could discuss what you think the implications of this are for (1), the people of Iran, and (b), the effort to persuade Iran to be transparent about its nuclear program.

Secretary Clinton. Well, David, I don't think it's good news either for the people of Iran or for the international community. Our observation is that increasingly, the Revolutionary Guard is assuming greater responsibility not only for the security apparatus that exists in Iran, but also for political and economic decision making. They control the militia that is often used to route and harass and heat and otherwise go after peaceful protestors. So it appears as though the space for decision making for the clerical and political leadership is shrinking, and that for the Revolutionary Guard seems to be growing.

Partly as a result of our analysis of this, we are focusing our sanctions to be targeted at the Revolutionary Guard. They are deeply involved in the commercial and business and investment activities of Iran. They own major institutions like the airport, for example. So there's a lot that they're doing which is very troubling. And I think it's clear that as they gain in power, repression of the people of Iran increases, kind of belligerence and negativity is even more prevalent.

And therefore, as we move towards sanctions, we want to send a clear message that it's not about the Iranian people; this is about the Revolutionary Guard.

Q. Are you also, in a way, daring the clerical and political authorities there to retake some of the ground that has been taken?

Secretary Clinton. Well, I'm making an observation that it appears that they have ceded that responsibility. When President Obama began his process of engagement toward Iran, many experts—and you may have covered some of them—said that they thought there would be a response, that after 30 years, it was time for Iran and the United States to begin talking and try to resolve some of our outstanding differences. And despite the President's best efforts privately and publicly, there has not been a response.

And I think that the failure to respond in an open way—“ Let's start talking, here's a channel we can use, yes you want to talk about the nuclear program, but we want to talk about the other 10 things”—I mean, you know how that would go. Maybe it was caused by the intervention of the election which has caused such internal turmoil within Iran, which has given even more impetus for the Revolutionary Guard assuming major responsibility. I can't describe what the reasons might be fully since obviously, I don't have all the information. But you can observe the trend.

Q. Would you say outreach dialogue is at a dead end with Iran?

Secretary Clinton. We're never going to close the door. We're not going to remove the outstretched hand. But as President Obama said, you have to unclench your fist in order to shake that hand. We've always had a two-track strategy and we've always talked about pressure and sanctions, going back from the very beginning of our engagement in the so-called P-5+1 process.

And back in September at the United Nations General Assembly, the foreign ministers of the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, China and the United States—we all signed an agreement which clearly referred to the dual track, the track of pressure and sanctions. So now, we think that time has arrived and we're going to the Security Council.

Q. In your Doha speech, you spoke without qualification that Iran is in a pursuit of nuclear weapons. Does that reflect a higher degree of confidence within the United States that that is indeed their intention?

Secretary Clinton. I think it reflects maybe my years of living and common sense. Why would you hide a facility at Qom? Why would you refuse the offer of engagement on the Tehran research reactor? Why would you order, in defiance of the international community, the enrichment of uranium? I mean, there's just so many questions that have no satisfactory answers.

Q. And just one more. You've also spoken on this trip about your hopes or the possibility of a breakthrough on the Israeli-Palestinian track. What gives you optimism about that given the record of the last few years?

Secretary Clinton. Well, I think it's imperative to remain optimistic about resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict because so much rides on it—the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people for a state of their own, the legitimate desire of the Israelis for security, the end of the conflict which would create a different relationship between Israel and its Arab neighbors. I mean, there's so much that the world looks to when it hopes for an end to this conflict. And I think that the parties know that. I have dealt with numerous Israeli prime ministers and Palestinian leaders over the last two decades. And no matter how conservative the Israeli prime minister starts out, eventually, as we saw years ago with Begin or with Sharon or with Olmert, they move toward realizing that it is in Israel's interest to achieve the two-state solution.

And I think for the Palestinians, they realize that leaving a vacuum invites violence. And they're the party that is willing to negotiate for the two-state solution. They are opposed by those who will not negotiate. So the failure to negotiate doesn't make them stronger, but leaves open the door to other forces. So both parties have so much in their own interests at stake, and that's why I think that we'll move back toward negotiations.

Secretary Hillary Clinton was interviewed in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia by Cyba Audi of Al Arabiya

Q. Hello, Madam Secretary. Welcome to Jeddah. It is my pleasure as well to welcome you on to Al Arabiya.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you so much. I'm happy to be here.

Q. Madam, let me ask you to start with, your tour focuses on sanctions on Iran. Does that mean that a military strike is off the table?

Secretary Clinton. Well, what we are focusing on is trying to change Iranian behavior, and the international community has been united in trying to send a message to Iran that it is time for it to clarify its intentions. And obviously, we don't want Iran to become a nuclear weapons power, but we are not planning anything other than going for sanctions.

We want to try to get the strongest sanctions we can out of the United Nations Security Council, again both to influence Iranian behavior, but mostly to influence their decision making, which we think is key to whether or not they are going to abide by the international rules and regulations that they have adopted.

Q. Yet the military buildup continues and some observers feel your comments, especially yesterday about Iran moving closer to a military dictatorship, may be some form of verbal escalation.

Is it?

Secretary Clinton. No, it's an—in my view, an explanation. People say to me all the time, what happened to Iran? I mean, we haven't had good relations with them for 30 years and they have obviously not been willing to change their views toward us. But when President Obama came in, he was very clear that he wanted to engage, and that's what he's been trying to do—reaching out to the Iranian people, reaching out to the Iranian leadership. And you have to ask yourself, why, when so many experts thought that there would be a positive response to President Obama's outreach, has there not?

And the growing body of opinion is that something has changed within Iran, that the Revolutionary Guard is assuming more and more control over the security apparatus, the nuclear program, as well as commercial enterprises.

Q. Yes.

Secretary Clinton. And that's alarming, because you can deal, even if you have deep differences with elected leaders, even if you disagree with what they are doing to their own people, as we do in Iran. But when the military and the security forces begin to assert control and seem to be pushing the elected and the clerical leadership out of the way, that raises some serious issues.

So we are talking to our friends in the Gulf countries that you know very well and you cover who are understandably disturbed by what they see happening. Iran funds terrorism, they have funded actions against many of the countries in the region. So there's a feeling that they need to be better defended, and we're certainly going to help people who wish to be better defended, as are other countries who are helping. But our goal is to try to change the behavior and to use sanctions and pressure to do so.

Q. So what has the reaction been from your allies here in the region now that you're talking to them? You also saw Erdogan in Doha. So what has been the responses that you've heard?

Secretary Clinton. Well, certainly, the Saudis are supporting what we're trying to do. They understand what's at stake. Others such as Prime Minister Erdogan are still working very hard, and I appreciate all the efforts that the prime minister, the foreign minister, and other Turkish officials are making to try to convince the Iranians to cooperate.

But at the end of the day, it's up to the Iranians. They have a choice to make. Are they going to abide by the Security Council resolutions, the rules of the International Atomic Energy Agency? Are they going to reassure their neighbors that they do not have these nuclear weapons ambitions or not? That's the question.

Q. Forgive me for going back to the military option—military strike option. Admiral Mike Mullen warned yesterday in Israel that—warned of (inaudible) military action. Why would he be talking about military action when you keep talking about discussions and, you know, prioritizing discussions with Iran? It's a bit confusing to observers.

Secretary Clinton. I think it's because he wanted to make clear that that was not what the United States was planning to do, that we are pursuing sanctions. But there are many countries—not just one country—there are many countries in the region who are very worried about Iran's actions. And there may well be those who think, well, we have to do something to—

Q. Yeah.

Secretary Clinton. —protect ourselves. We believe the better approach is to join at the international community, to work together toward sanctions, to exert maximum pressure on the Iranians, and to try every way we can to change their thinking.

Q. So is he in Israel to try and dissuade Israel from any military action against Iran at the moment?

Secretary Clinton. Well, I think he was making a general comment, and as I say, I don't think it's about any one country.

Q. Okay. Also, your aide, Jeffrey Feltman, had alluded to enlisting the help of Saudi Arabia and convincing China to accept or agree to the sanctions. What are you expecting there? How is Saudi Arabia going to help?

Are you expecting Saudi Arabia to get indeed to China energy, supplies? Should they stand against Iran and therefore lose their energy supplies from that corner?

Secretary Clinton. Well, I think that the Saudis can certainly speak for themselves about what they intend to do. But the foreign minister made very clear yesterday that he expected the Chinese to fulfill their responsibilities as one of the Permanent Five members of the Security Council. And we believe that that means that the Chinese will join with the rest of us on the Security Council in voting for these sanctions.

Q. You talked about crippling sanctions. What form will these sanctions take?

Secretary Clinton. Well, we're looking at how we can target sanctions at the Revolutionary Guard.

Q. Okay.

Secretary Clinton. Because it is our assessment that increasingly, they're making the decisions, and they are deeply involved in the economic life of Iran. And therefore, we're looking at individuals and we're looking at institutions and businesses that are connected to the Revolutionary Guard to be very targeted, but very strong in trying to affect them.

Q. Should you impose these crippling or stifling sanctions and be—succeed in actually stifling Iran, do you guarantee stability in the countries around Iran where Iran has influence?

Secretary Clinton. Much of this is speculative, because of course, we don't know how Iran is going to respond. But it is our assessment that there is an opportunity still to try to convince Iran not to pursue nuclear weapons. And we've tried engagement, we've tried persuasion, we've tried fact-based argument.

Q. And none of it really worked in the past. Why do you think sanctions would work now?

Secretary Clinton. Because I think there's an internal turmoil going on inside Iran. I think there are many different voices vying for prominence. And I think some of those voices are more concerned about the Iranian people than others. They don't want to see sanctions. They don't want to see the end to their democracy. They don't want to see the rise of an unelected body or a non-clerical body, namely the Revolutionary Guard, assuming all of this power.

So I don't think we know all of the effects that could come from the international community standing together—not just the United States, but all of us saying this cannot be permitted. And we are trying to talk to the Iranian people and the Iranian decision makers.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Defense Minister Ehud Barak delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. It's a great personal pleasure for me to welcome back my friend and the Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak. The defense minister and I will be discussing a number of issues. Certainly, as he knows and as we have made clear many times, the President and I are deeply committed to a comprehensive peace beginning with a re-launch of meaningful negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians as soon as possible. We believe a two-state solution is the best way to end the conflict and guarantee peace, security, and prosperity for Israelis and Palestinians alike.

We will also be discussing the situation in Gaza. The people of Gaza deserve hope for a better future, and making sure that they have that hope is in both the interests of the Israelis and the Palestinians. Minister Barak and I will discuss the need to do more in this regard while keeping in mind very real Israeli security concerns: the stranglehold that Hamas is attempting to place on life in Gaza and Gilad Shalit's captivity by Hamas.

And we will also, I am sure, Minister, discuss Iran. We have pursued a dualtrack approach to Iran. We remain committed to a diplomatic, peaceful resolution. But as the recent IAEA report makes clear, Iran is not living up to its responsibilities, and we are working with our partners in the international community to increase pressure on Iran to change course.

So, Minister Barak, it is indeed a pleasure. And we have so many serious matters to discuss together, but there is one matter that I have to raise that I was asked about in a congressional hearing yesterday, and that is trying to get nine containers of gefilte fish from the processing plant in Illinois to Israel in time for Passover. So these are intractable problems; this one we might be able to solve.

Defense Minister Barak. Thank you, Secretary Clinton. I am glad to be here. I can just tell you how much we appreciate the effort made by the Administration under the leadership of the Secretary and with Senator Mitchell at the front line to bring us and the Palestinians into substantial negotiations. We all want to see peace in our region. We understand that we'll have to take tough decisions while not losing eye contact with our security needs and making sure that both sides will be able to live in security and peace.

We also highly appreciate the effort made by President Obama and the Secretary to make sure that sanctions against Iran will become effective and that whatever title it get, get effective, limited in time, consequential, and without losing eye contact with the possibility that in spite of all effort, it will not lead to Iran accepting the international norms. I'm looking forward for fruitful discussion of all issues, including the gefilte fish.

Vice President Joe Biden delivered this statement in Jerusalem, Israel

Vice President Biden. I condemn the decision by the government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem. The substance and timing of the announcement, particularly with the launching of proximity talks, is precisely the kind of step that undermines the trust we need right now and runs counter to the constructive discussions that I've had here in Israel. We must build an atmosphere to support negotiations, not complicate them. This announcement underscores the need to get negotiations under way that can resolve all the outstanding issues of the conflict. The United States recognizes that Jerusalem is a deeply important issue for Israelis and Palestinians and for Jews, Muslims and Christians. We believe that through good faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree on an outcome that realizes the aspirations of both parties for Jerusalem and safeguards its status for people around the world. Unilateral action taken by either party cannot prejudge the outcome of negotiations on permanent status issues. As George Mitchell said in announcing the proximity talks, “we encourage the parties and all concerned to refrain from any statements or actions which may inflame tensions or prejudice the outcome of these talks.”

Vice President Joe Biden and President Shimon Peres delivered these remarks in Jerusalem, Israel

President Peres. Well, I want to express our profound appreciation for your visit, not just because you are the Vice President of the United States and the most senior person to visit our region at the time; because for us you are a stoic friend, a man with profound judgment. You were the youngest senator in the United States.

And from that age, so to speak, you showed friendship, understanding, and judgment, which we appreciate to this day. We think you are coming on a mission of peace. You understand there are two sides to the mission. And I don't see, I think, any contradiction in between being friendly and understanding to the two sides. And since the mission is peace, we are following the same mission.

I want to say that I'm not impressed by the perception of the agreement about the proximity talks, because the situation is both more serious and also maybe more promising. If I compare the present situation with the previous situations, I can see three major changes, which I want to mention briefly.

One, the Palestinians started to build a state. Let's not underestimate it. And we learned from early age, from the early beginning felt that better build a state without borders than negotiate borders within every state, so to this very day, in our declaration of independence, there is no borders. I think if the Palestinians started to negotiate about borders and postponing building a state, its a mistake from their side, because the problem with borders here is there was never a Palestinian state—we didn't have a precedent like we had with the Jordanians and with Egypt and so we didn't have borders as we did have with the Jordanians, Egyptians, Lebanese, and Syrians and also because in that case borders have a holy aspect to it, as well. Jerusalem does not trust a territorial border.

So the effect that the United States, the Israeli government, the Palestinian Authority—all of them agreed to build a state is an innovation and a very promising process that we have to support and enlarge. And I do not see much difficulty in continuing to do so. I think we have to be, all of us, more generous, more compromising and to supply the Palestinians with the necessary means to build their own home.

If it would—we do just that, they would say we are escaping the negotiations. We are not. So the building of a state is not instead of the negotiations, but in addition to it. The negotiations, it's very hard to open it and all of us know there will be—as it is always—a difference between the opening position and the fall-back position. The opening position is tougher and everybody emphasizes the difference. Anyway, I don't know a way—how can you start with the fall-back positions. Even in Hollywood, the happy end is at the end; you don't begin negotiations with the happy end.

So the present declarations on both sides are very careful, and everybody wants to shop as much as he can his own position. And I think we have accepted, as a matter of fact—and I don't think it will save us the difficulties, but lets not see in it the end of the negotiations or the end of the day. That's the second thing that I believe why its better to have it.

The third change which I see is the Iranian presence. I think the tone and extremacy of Ahmadinejad against Israel is a cover up of his own ambition to create hegemony in the Middle East, since he doesn't want to appear as a Shiite or a Sunnite. He wants to appear as an anti-Israel, which gives him an entry to other countries. And that way, everybody is using Israel as an excuse or a cover up for their real positions. I believe the higherups are aware that Iran is a danger to them. More than a thousand years of history in the Middle East—there is thousand years, 900 years the Arabs were under occupation of empires, and Muslims as well. It's only in the last 100 years they have had any independence. And they don't want to give up, rightly so, their independence.

And understand that in the name of religion, Iran is trying to establish a super structure of the Iranians in the Middle East. But at the same time, short of President Mubarak who stood up and some other leaders, they're reluctant to declare their real position because of the conflict between us and the Palestinians. Everybody uses the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a cover up. And I think it's a strange situation over the world that the secret relations are better than the open relations, that the relations among the different intelligence organizations are better than the diplomatic one. The reason is diplomacy covers and intelligence discovers, because today to win the fight against the terrorists is not a victory but a discovery. If you discover them ahead of time, you win it.

But I think we—sorry—we have had many problems in the domain of, I think, terrorists. In our own domain, we are very successful and that should serve as an example. And that is the model of our relations or the relations between Jordan and ourselves. No matter what the political mood is, the two countries decided not to permit terrorists to play on. And the Jordanians are the most quiet border—all the time between us and the Jordanians, understanding that today it's not a total war, but a war against the terrorists.

I want to make a short remark about Iran as I see it. First of all, the United States should lead the Iranian policy—there is nobody else in the world. The United States, with whatever criticism you may have, you are the most serious, the most organized, and the most analytical approach to the Iranian. And we have trust in President Obama. I don't envy neither you nor him. You have inherited an extremely difficult situation worldwide and otherwise. And its easy to give advice. I know it. It's more difficult to face the trials that are coming from uninvited angles, and participation.

I believe that the best policy vis-à-vis Iran, and I'm speaking of—from our perspective—I cannot suggest to do it in my advice—should comprise three major efforts—one, which is major, and that is the moral code. I think moral sanctions are not less important than economic sanctions. A person like Ahmadinejad that calls openly to destroy the state of Israel cannot be a full member of the United Nations. A man that calls for acts in terror and who hangs people in the streets, not just because of the Israeli conflict—and as Hillary described him as a military dictator. I think he should be placed in his proper definition. He cannot go around almost like a cultural hero.

However, President Obama considers Niebuhr as his philosophical preference. I like to listen to the lectures of Reinhold Niebuhr. The subject was the Judeo-Christian heritage. The first six lectures were about Judeo-Christians. I never heard anything more profound or more moving than that. But he said one word which I believe fits the present situation. He says all of us have to stand up against moral corruption. But moral corruption is more dangerous even than financial corruption. And the first code, in my judgment, is to voice a real struggle against the moral corruption. From an Israeli standpoint, we are totally surprised. They try to de-legitimize us.

We're a democratic country. Nobody is being hanged in Israel. We try to make peace. We give back land. We are in a difficult situation, but still on a moral foundation. So he tries to de-legitimize us or you. We are the Satan; he is the Lord. So I think that must be done in a strong and clear voice.

It will also help the people of Iran, the Persians, to continue their struggle to defend their culture. They are ashamed of him. In my judgment, this should be done strongly, clearly, vocally. Then the economic sanctions, which I don't have to advise.

Maybe I would like to see a third point, and that is to surround Iran with an envelope of self-defense—the Palestinians side, as well—against their missiles and nuclear trap. And nobody knows exactly what they're going to do. But self-defense will be an additional weight in limiting the danger of Iran. Again, only you can do it.

That's one point. And I want to say about the Palestinians, there is a way to increase the help to the Palestinians to build their state. I know that our government is ready to continue the dismantling of different checkpoints to free the movement. The Palestinians have never had a state in their history, and now they're beginning to taste what does it mean to build a city or to plan trees or to introduce an economy. On all this, we as the immediate neighbor—you as the guiding the party, and the Europeans, and the Russians, everybody—can participate in helping them to build a state, which I want to say must be affluent. And its not to build another poor state; that would be a mistake. If we are going to build, lets build it a modern state. And I believe that the Palestinians have already leaders. The person that built the city, Bashar Masri, for example, is an extremely intelligent man, up to date—Rawabi is the new city of the Palestinians.

And we have to introduce hi-tech. They cannot make a living just on land. The problem today is not the land, but the level of knowledge. Agriculture went down only to two or three percent. And Israel is an example of making a living out of knowledge, out of hi-tech. We are ready to share. And I believe that they can be providing those of—money. I want to identify immediately. I wont ask from you today money. But I think the Monetary Fund is willing and able to provide serious amounts of money. I spoke with the head of the Monetary Fund. They say that they can support trends; they don't have to support enterprises, contrary to the World Bank. And if the trend is peace, they are ready to invest seriously. In uniting, you have to take them in the picture.

That's number one. Now, in the negotiations itself, I know the mood. I know that among the Palestinians there is mistrust vis-à-vis Israel and our government. We are aware of it. What I'm asking—and why is that? Because there isn't—if Israel would be against a Palestinian state, would we permit you to build an economy, a police force, institutions? Why are we doing it? And I believe that as things will progress, we can handle the responsibilities for security wherever and whenever they will be ready. For example, if Jenin can police herself, our army will be glad to hand over the security to them. And if there are six or seven cities, let's go.

We suggested, like in the road map to recognize the Palestinian state with provisional borders. But the Palestinians didn't like it, and Mubarak told me leave it alone. They are getting angry with it. Okay. So we don't need lines. We don't need—okay, I shall stop here, because—

Vice President Biden. No, I'm anxious—I love hearing you speak. I really do. I've told you, Mr. President, you are the most articulate statesman I have ever known. And I have been around for a long, long time. I always—I always enjoy not only your knowledge, but your wisdom. I mean that sincerely. You know I have told you that over the years.

President Peres. I know. I keep it—

Vice President Biden. Well, let me just briefly respond.

President Peres. Yes.

Vice President Biden. First of all, you know you talked about my being a friend of Israel from the time I was a young senator.

President Peres. What was it, 32?

Vice President Biden. Thirty years old—29, actually. But I arrived at the Senate educated by a righteous Christian, my father, who—we spent our dinner table—we assembled at our dinner table in the evening to have discussions and incidentally eat rather than eat and incidentally have discussions. And—but Israel captured my heart. I make no bones about it. That does not mean I do not understand and have a great empathy for the circumstances of the Palestinians, but Israel captured my heart and my imagination.

And my first visit here as a young senator, I sat before the desk of Golda Meir as she was chain smoking and pulling maps up and down behind me, explaining to me the Six Day War. And there was a young man sitting to my right, his name was Rabin. So I have had the great privilege of not only knowing you, but knowing every Prime Minister and President since the days of Golda Meir.

I think your observation is one that more of the world should understand, because as you pointed out, there is an international attempt to isolate Israel and—right now. And sometimes, we are our own worst enemy and playing into the hands of those who wish to do that. The peace process, as you pointed out, has two components to it, it always has: the actual definition of a state by borders and sovereign immunity and sovereign capabilities, but also the actual stuff of which a state is made. Institutions, everything from security forces to tax collection capability and everything in between. And that is underway.

And I hope—notwithstanding the mistrust you referenced, I hope the beginning of what I referred to as these indirect or proximity talks, I hope it is a vehicle, a vehicle by which we can begin to allay that layer of mistrust that has built over the last several years. Because if you look at the region, there is obviously a great deal more that should be uniting the Palestinians and the Israelis than any time since I've been involved for 36 years. You point out that the great Persian people have had their history besmirched by the presence of the—Mr. Ahmadinejad and the theocracy.

But I would point out, Mr. President, that the moral sanctions you refer to have begun—and need not have been imposed by us, they're being imposed by their own people. The people of Iran are making that argument clearly, engaging in their own form of morally sanctioning their government as we have and as the rest of the world is. I remote—since our administration has come to power, I would point out that Iran is more isolated—internally, externally—has fewer friends in the world. One of the reasons why President Obama insisted on engaging was in the—was with eyes wide open. The hope was that there would be some movement. But the reality was—the reality was so that we could in a sense point out to the rest of the world we need to deal with many of the things you mentioned.

But let me conclude in my very brief response here that I—I think this—we are at a moment of real opportunity. And I think that the—the interest of both the Palestinians and the Israeli people are—if everyone will just step back and take a deep breath—are actually very much more in line than they are in opposition. And when I first came here, my first 10 or 12 trips, the idea that we would speak with certitude about a two-state solution wasn't so obvious. So Id like to focus with you—if we have a chance to speak privately, Id like to focus with you on how we—how we take advantage of this moment for the security of Israel.

I just want to conclude by saying one thing that I know you understand—I know you understand about me and I know you understand it about President Obama—there's absolutely no space between the United States and Israel in terms of Israel's security and our mutual security—none, none at all. That's the basis in which this starts. There's a lot we can do. But I'm really flattered you would see me. And I'm anxious to –

President Peres. We were waiting for you.

Vice President Biden. Well, it's good to be home.

Vice President Joe Biden and President Mahmoud Abbas delivered these remarks in Ramallah, Palestinian Territories

President Abbas. In the name of God the merciful, the compassionate, it is our pleasure to welcome the Vice President, our friend, Joseph Biden, here in Ramallah. This visit comes as an expression of the interest that President Obama's administration has according to the peace process and to achieve the two-state solution.

The establishment of the Palestinian state and the 1967 borders—the decisions that the Israeli government has announced over the past two days and the establishment and the construction of thousands of new units in the Palestinian territories constitute an undermining of the confidence and all the efforts that were exerted over the past months to launch the indirect negotiations. The decision to approve these negotiations was taken with great difficulties within the Arab Committee and the leadership entities of the Palestinian people. And in order to reiterate our intention to support the American efforts to launch the peace process, to revive the peace process, the Israeli resettlement policies and particularly, in Jerusalem, threaten these negotiations and we ask that these decisions are revoked.

I reiterate, Mr. Vice President, our commitment to peace as a strategic option, just and comprehensive, a permanent peace on all tracks, including the Syrian and the Lebanese tracks that would lead to ending the Israeli occupation that started in 1967, based on the roadmap plan, including the Arab Peace Initiative. I would like to address the Israelis' settling. The time has come to make peace, peace under a two-state solution—based on the two-state solution, the state of Israel that lives in peace and security alongside the state of Palestine on the borders of the 4th of June 1967 with its capitol East Jerusalem. And here it is important to speak about the siege that is imposed on Gaza strip that should be lifted in order to provide for the basic needs of our people in Gaza strip in addition to the construction materials that are necessary, because there are 25,000 houses that are in debris and there are hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who live without shelter and need houses. And, therefore, we ask that the Gaza strip is provided with construction materials.

Again, I would like to call out to the Israeli government not to waste this opportunity to make peace. I call upon this government to stop its settlement policies and to stop imposing fights on the ground and to give the efforts of President Obama's administration and Representative Mitchell's efforts the opportunity to succeed. Thank you, Mr. Vice President.

Vice President Biden. Mr. President, thank you very much for your hospitality and for the opportunity to be with you again. I greatly appreciate the time you've given me, you and the Palestinian Authority. I also had the pleasure of meeting earlier this morning with your Prime Minister Fayyad in—here in Ramallah. I must say I admire the courage and conviction of the two of you, whom President Obama and I consider willing partners in the quest for a lasting peace in the region.

Our administration is fully committed to the Palestinian people and to achieving a Palestinian state that is independent, viable, and contiguous. Everyone should know—everyone should know by now that there is no viable alternative to a two-state solution, which must be an integral part of any comprehensive peace plan. The United States considers the goal to be not only in the interest of the Palestinians and the Israelis, but in the United States' interest as well. We also believe that the divide between the Israelis and Palestinians can only be resolved by negotiations. The indirect talks being launched should lead to direct negotiations, which will necessarily reach—which would be necessary to reach an agreement on the permanent status—status issues which you referenced, Mr. President, such as borders, security, refugees, and Jerusalem. And the United States pledges to play an active as well as a sustained role in these talks. It's incumbent on both parties to build an atmosphere of support for negotiations and not to complicate them.

Yesterday—yesterday, the decision by the Israeli government to advance planning for new housing units in east Jerusalem undermined that very trust, the trust that we need right now in order to begin as well as produce—have profitable negotiations. That is why I immediately condemned the action.

As we move forward, the United States will hold both sides accountable for any statements or actions that inflame tensions or prejudice the outcome of talks, as this decision did. The United States strongly supports the Palestinian Authority's efforts to build as well as strengthen its institutions and develop the economy of a state, including Prime Minister Fayyad's two-year institution building plan.

We must find a way to improve the lives of Gazans, as well. The Palestinian Authority offers the possibility of a peaceful, independent, and more prosperous future rather than the false promises of extremists. A historic peace is going to require both the Palestinians as well as the Israelis, as well as their leaders, to be historically bold.

And I promise you, Mr. President, the United States will always stand with those who take the risk that peace requires. Again, Mr. President, I thank you very much for the courage you've shown in moving forward. I thank you for the hospitality you've extended to me and my delegation. And I look forward to seeing you many more times.

Thank you.

President Abbas. Thank you.

Vice President Joe Biden delivered these remarks in Tel Aviv, Israel

Vice President Biden. Mr. President, thank you for that lovely introduction. And thank you for hosting me at such a world-class center for higher learning. It's been a long time since I've been back on campus. I was a mere child, a 31-year-old Senator when I was here the first time. But it's a privilege to be back.

The past few days being back in Israel has been wonderful. It's—it's been an honor to be here, and it's been—I wanted everyone to know with whom I spoke, and all of you to know, the deep friendship and kinship I feel as well as President Obama feels for this magnificent country. I should probably be used to it by now, but I'm always struck every time I come back by the hospitality of the Israeli people. No matter how long I've been away—and I imagine you've experienced this yourself—the instant I return, I feel like I'm at home. I feel like I never left. I feel like things just picked up where they left off the day that I left being here. So please accept my warmest gratitude, as well that of President Obama, who knows as well as I do that the United States has no better friend in the community of nations than Israel. Thank you so much.

Israel's history is a tale of remarkable accomplishment. On a perilous patch of desert with sparse natural resources, you have built perhaps the most innovative economy in the world. You have more start-ups per capita than any nation on the planet, more firms on the NASDAQ exchange than anyone except the United States, and more U.S. patents per capita than any country, including my own. You have cultivated the gifts of 11 Nobel laureates, the great—and as well as those of the great Itzhak Perlman, and in recent years you have Shai Agassi, whose pathbreaking work on electric automobiles began not very far from where I stand.

Israel owes this remarkable and yet improbable success, I believe, to your democratic traditions, to its patriotic and pioneering citizens, and as with my own country, to its willingness to welcome the persecuted and the downtrodden from farflung corners of the globe. All this gives life to Theodor Herzl's famous slogan, which I was reminded of this week while visiting his grave on this 150th anniversary of his birth. He said, “If you will it, it is no dream.”

I had said in a speech in the United States some years ago for which I got some criticism, I said were I a Jew, I would be a Zionist. And it got a lot of national publicity, how could I say that, until I was reminded by my father you need not be a Jew to be a Zionist.

Ladies and gentlemen, just over 60 years ago, Israel's founders gave life to Herzl's dream by willing Israel into being.

Since then, this nation has become more than an undeniable fact, more than just a legacy of age-old ties between a people and a land, though it is both of those things. Your very existence is also a hardwon and inviolable right.

Israel's unique relationship with the United States means that you need not bear that heavy burden alone. Our nations' unbreakable bond borne of common values, interwoven cultures, and mutual interests has spanned the entirety of Israel's history. And it's—it's impervious to any shifts in either country and either country's partisan politics. No matter what challenges we face, this bond will endure. As a result, generations of Israelis and Americans and American-Israelis have kept a foot in each country, enriching both our nations and peoples. I met with some of your leading high-tech leaders earlier, prior to coming to the stage. And they have a foot in both countries, many of them.

While these close relationships span the realm of commerce and education, medicine and technology, culture and the arts, at its core is an ironclad commitment to security—Israel and my own country's. Every day, Israel faces bravely threats no country should have to endure. No parent should their child to schools equipped with air raid sirens in the year 2010. No government should be expected to turn a blind eye while an enemy calls for its destruction.

I am here to remind you, though I hope you will never forget, that America stands with you shoulder-to-shoulder in facing these threats. President Obama and I represent an unbroken chain of American leaders who have understood this critical, strategic relationship. As the President said recently, “I will never waver from ensuring Israel's security and helping them secure themselves in what is a very hostile region.”

President Obama has not only stated those words, he has translated that vow into action in his first year in ways both known to the public and not known to you, as Prime Minister Netanyahu eloquently acknowledged the other day when he and I were meeting and had a short press conference that followed. Beyond providing Israel nearly $3 billion in military aid each and every year, we have reinvigorated defense consultations and redoubled our efforts to ensure that Israel's—that Israel's forces will always maintain a qualitative edge.

We lead the fight in international institutions against the insidious campaign to challenge Israel's legitimacy and question its right to self-defense. Since our administration came into office, our militaries have expanded cooperation—not maintained, expanded—cooperation on joint exercises and missile defense. Last fall, more than 1,000 American troops participated in Juniper Cobra ballistic missile defense exercises, the largest such drill to date.

And it should go without saying, but I'll say it anyway so there's no doubt, the United States stands resolutely beside Israel against the scourge of terrorism, from which both of our countries have suffered badly. No one in this audience needs to be reminded of the fear and devastation caused by suicide bombers or by rockets from Southern Lebanon or from Gaza. The band of Israeli territory outside the rocket's range grows narrower all the time. And I, as an American, continue to marvel—continue to marvel at the residents in the region being able to resolutely get up every morning of the communities—other communities that in fact are within the bulls eye, the crosshairs, how you respond to that with defiance and not fear. American support for Israel is not just an act of friendship; it's an act of fundamental national self-interest on the part of the United States, a key component to our broader efforts to secure this region and a wider world, as well as our own security.

Ladies and gentlemen, I've heard it raised occasionally in editorials in this country and others wondering about our resolve. Make no mistake about America's resolve. Make no mistake about America's resolve. We have 200,000 young women and men—we are spending a quarter of a trillion a year. We have had tens of thousands of fallen angels and multiple times more injured in the service of our nation deployed far from home in Iraq and Afghanistan. There, and elsewhere, we are aggressively confronting violent extremism and radical ideologies that threaten not only you and the United States, but our allies as well.

But our approach consists of more than the awesome military might we possess and are willing to use. From the very start, President Obama has called for a new era of diplomatic engagement with both our friends—some of whom we had alienated the previous years—as well as—as well as those who are not viewed as our friends.

In Cairo last June, he launched a new beginning between the United States and the Muslim communities around the world. Later this month, the President will continue this engagement by visiting Indonesia, home of the world's largest Muslim population where he lived as a boy. We are absolutely convinced that this approach will improve not only our security, but as a consequence, your security.

A new generation of Muslims is coming to age, more numerous than its predecessors, more dispersed geographically, and because of technology, more closely connected with each other and with the forces and events that shape the world we share. If we can rollback recent tensions and redirect crude stereotypes—theirs and our own—it will make America safer and our closest allies, like Israel, safer as well in our view.

We are returning an ambassador to Damascus and elevating our diplomatic contacts. We do so with our eyes wide open both to our deep concerns with Syrian actions that has threatened your security and the stability of the region, and also to the hope of a better relationship and peace between Israel and Syria. And we will continue to help strengthen the institutions in Lebanon and work to implement the U.N. Security Council resolutions aimed at ending the flow of weapons to Hizballah and disarming this threat to Israel, as well as to the civilian Lebanese.

With other Arab and Muslim countries, we are revitalizing a partnership in education, science, technology, business, culture; because the best way to counter the lure of extreme ideology is to offer future opportunity. In speaking with your Prime Minister recently, he talked about the high birth rates in neighboring poor countries, including Yemen, and the need for us to provide economic outlets and opportunities so there is an option.

Looming over all our efforts in this region is the shadow cast by Iran, home of a—home of a great civilization and proud people who suffer from a leadership that flouts the will of the world by pursuing nuclear weapons and supporting terrorism and terrorists. Over the past decade, Iran has become more, not less dangerous, building thousands of centrifuges that churn out nuclear material, funding and arming dangerous proxies like Hizballah and Hamas, intimidating both its neighbors as well as its own citizens.

From the moment we were elected, President Obama decided that we needed a new approach. He has sought to engage Iran's leaders for the purpose of changing their conduct, knowing full well how difficult that may be, but also knowing that if they fail to respond, we would be in a much stronger position to rally the international community to impose consequences for their actions.

Iran thus far has refused to cooperate, as the whole world has witnessed. Instead it has engaged in more violations of international obligations, like undeclared enrichment facilities that were recently exposed by the United States, and the decision to enrich uranium to 20 percent to build more—and to build more enrichment facilities, all violations. It rejected a goodfaith offer to exchange its low enriched uranium for fuel that could power a research reactor to produce medical isotopes. And it continues to deploy thugs to lock up and beat down those who bravely take to the streets in a quest for basic justice in their own country.

The Iranian leadership's continuing defiance has set the stage for our efforts to mobilize the world to impose meaningful sanctions that clarify for the Iranian leadership the stark choice: follow international rules or face harsh penalties and further isolation.

You have to acknowledge that today Iran is more isolated with its own people as well as the region and in the world than it has been at any time in the past two decades. The United States is determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, period. I know—I know that for Israel—I know that for Israel, there is no greater existential strategic threat. Trust me, we get that. It's also a threat—the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran is also a threat to the security—short-term, mid-term, and long-term—to the United States of America.

And many other countries in this region and around the world strongly oppose a nuclear-armed Iran. It would threaten them, trigger an arms race in this region, and undermine the efforts to stop the spread of nuclear weapons, which would be a sorry outcome for such a promising beginning of the 21st century. For all those reasons, confronting this challenge is and must be a top national priority for the United States of America.

We are determined to keep the pressure on Iran so that it will change its course. And as we do, we will also be seeking to improve relations between the Israelis and Palestinians. They are connected indirectly, but there is a relationship. We call on Arab states who share a mutual concern about Iran—we call on Arab states to support the effort to bring peace between Palestinians and the Israelis, and to take their own steps forward for peace with Israel.

These are critical goals in their own rights. Their pursuit also denies Tehran the opportunity to exploit the differences between Israelis and Palestinians, and Israelis and the Arab world, and to distract the many countries that stand united against Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons and the support of terrorism. Building peace and security between a Jewish democratic state of Israel and a viable, independent Palestinian state is profoundly in Israel's interest, if you will forgive me for suggesting that.

I've learned never tell another man or another country what's in their own interest, but it seems so—it's also profoundly in the interest of Palestinians. And it's fundamentally in the national security interest of the United States of America.

Ladies and gentlemen, in my experience one necessary precondition for progress is that the rest of the world knows this. There is no space—this is what they must know, every time progress is made, it's made when the rest of the world knows there is absolutely no space between the United States and Israel when it comes to security, none. No space. That's the only time when progress has been made.

And I applaud Prime Minister Netanyahu's recent call for two states for two people, lending a vital voice to what the Israelis, Palestinians, their Arab neighbors all know in their heart to be true. Ladies and gentlemen, the status quo is not sustainable.

It's no secret the demographic realities make it increasingly difficult for Israel to remain both a Jewish homeland and a democratic country in the absence of the Palestinian state. Genuine steps toward a two-state solution are also required to empower those living to live in peace and security with Israel and to undercut their rivals who will never accept that future.

For Israel, then, this is about both preserving your identity and achieving the security you deserve, lasting security.

For Palestinians, statehood will not just fulfill a legitimate and long-sought aspiration common to all peoples; it will restore the fundamental dignity and self-respect that their current predicament denies them. I understand why both sides are skeptical.

We've been down this road before and so have you, which every time makes it a little harder to go down the road again.

But I know—I know that Israel's faith in the prospects for peace have been shaken by the searing experience of withdrawing from Lebanon and from Gaza, only to be rewarded with rocket fire and ambushes across your border. I know you've been frustrated by the unwillingness of some Palestinian leaders to curb incitement and take the risk that peace requires, just as when the West Bank checkpoints proliferate and settlements grow, the Palestinians experience their own crisis in confidence and come to doubt Israeli intentions.

And we all know what happens when cynicism festers—distrust, harsh words, and eventually violence. The cycle of unintended consequences, which has happened more times than I can count, has led you to build more walls that may offer short term relief, but will not bring the sustained security that you seek. This is no way to live. This cycle must be broken.

In the Middle East—in the Middle East that I first visited, peace between Israelis and its neighbors seemed absolutely impossible even to discuss. Those who suggested a two-state solution—and no one did that, actually. But had someone suggested a two-state solution, they would have been considered either demented or dreamers. But then, Israel, Egypt and Jordan all acted boldly to end decades of conflict. Over time, other contacts have emerged between Israelis and Arabs.

And there is now an Arab Peace Initiative that makes an important contribution by envisioning a future in which Israel is secure and at peace with its Arab neighbors. Turning these visions into reality is among the hardest challenges we face, but we have to face it. There is no alternative.

As Prime Minister Netanyahu said, “all sides”—“ all sides need to take action in good faith if peace is to have a chance.” But it's hard, my words, it's hard. While it's always easier to point fingers, it's time for Israeli and Palestinian leaders to acknowledge each others' steps to heed this call, even when more remains to be done—and for the world to do the same thing.

Your Prime Minister is roundly criticized in other parts of the world, but your Prime Minister has endorsed the idea of a Palestinian State. He has removed roadblocks and checkpoints that choked the West Bank. These were difficult decisions—not all that was asked for on the other side, but these were difficult decisions.

It was also difficult for the Palestinian Authority to take a step that it has to take to combat incitement and reform the institutions it's reforming. Of an even greater note, it's building an effective—for the first time a genuinely effective security force to uphold law and order, in my view, with the potential to do it throughout the West Bank and throughout the Palestinian territories.

President Obama and I believe that—believe that in President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad, men who I've known for a long time, Israeli leaders finally have willing partners who share the goal of peace between two states and have the competence to establish a nation. Their commitment to peace is an opportunity that must be seized. It must be seized. Who has there been better to date, to have the prospect of settling this with? But instead, two days ago the Israeli government announced it would advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem. I realize this is a very touchy subject in Israel as well as in my own country. But because that decision, in my view, undermined the trust required for productive negotiations, I—and at the request of President Obama condemned it immediately and unequivocally.

Now, some legitimately may have been surprised that such a strong supporter of Israel for the last 37 years and beyond, but 37 years as an elected official, how I can speak out so strongly given the ties that I share as well as my country shares with Israel. But quite frankly, folks, sometimes only a friend can deliver the hardest truth. And I appreciate, by the way, the response your Prime Minister today announced this morning that he is putting in place a process to prevent the recurrence of that sort of that sort of events and who clarified that the beginning of actual construction on this particular project would likely take several years—a statement he put out. That's significant, because it gives negotiations the time to resolve this, as well as other outstanding issues. Because when it was announced, I was on the West Bank. Everyone there thought it had meant immediately the resumption of the construction of 1,600 new units.

Look, folks, as we move forward I promise you this: The United States will continue to hold both sides accountable for any statements or any actions that inflame tensions or prejudice the outcome of these talks. The most important thing is for these talks to go forward and go promptly and go forward in good faith. We can't delay, because when progress is postponed, extremists exploit our differences and they sow hate.

These indirect talks everyone knows are just that, indirect talks, indirect negotiations. The only path, though, to finally resolving the permanent status issues, including borders, security, refugees, and Jerusalem are direct talks. Our administration—but you've got to begin. The process has to begin. Our administration fully supports this effort led by our Special Envoy, Senator George Mitchell, a seasoned negotiator and a proven peacemaker in whom the President, the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and I have complete and utter confidence.

We believe that through good-faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree to an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state based on the ‘67 lines with agreed swaps and Israel's goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israel's security requirements.

Many challenges remain. Gilad Shalit is still in captivity and we pray every day for the day when he will come home and be reunited with his family. Ladies and gentlemen, incitement against Israel continues as do attacks on the legitimacy of Jewish ties to this ancient land.

And the ongoing threat from Gaza still in Hamas's grip, and from Hizballah in Southern Lebanon, remind us that your security is far from assured. Meanwhile, though, our policy and our concerns about Israel's settlements remain unchanged. And while Hamas has condemned Gaza's populace to misery and hopelessness, Israel too has a responsibility to address their many needs. That's why we're working with the Israeli government to do just that and address some of legitimate needs without—without further endangering Israel's security.

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm a Roman Catholic. And no one—and I'm no expert on the Old Testament. But I know we're gathered today between Purim and Passover, holidays that teach us about salvation and redemption. It was written in the Book of Isaiah that Israel shall be “a light unto the nations.” And yet, for more than six decades, Israelis have often sought but never found the salvation of a lasting peace. And it is very hard—it is very hard to be a beacon for others, when you are constantly at war. To end this historic conflict, both sides must be historically bold, because if each waits stubbornly for the other to act first, this will go on and we'll be waiting for an eternity.

Back home, I am sometimes called an optimist, but I am an optimist about the prospects for peace because I am a realist. And to paraphrase Golda Meir, there is nowhere else to go. There is nowhere else to go. I cannot tell you that peace will come easily, you know better. In human history, it rarely has. But I can promise you, both Israelis and Palestinians, that the rewards for success will be boundless and that so long as well-intentioned people are engaged in this struggle, the United States will be your partner. Thank you. And may God protect you, and may God protect Israel. Thank you very much.

Secretary Hillary Clinton was interviewed in New York City, New York by Andrea Mitchell of NBC

Q. Now you're a secretary of state. So you're not kept from the negotiating table. But here you are with the Middle East just beginning to approach negotiations and Israel announces an expansion of settlements. It was really a slap in the face to the visiting Vice President.

Secretary Clinton. It was, Andrea. And—I've expressed that directly to the prime minister. It was—not just an unfortunate incident of timing but the substance was—something that—is not needed as we are attempting to move toward—the resumption of negotiation. And the United States is a strong supporter of the security of Israel. Always have been, always will be.

We share common values and there is so much that—Israel represents that we support. But we believe in the two state solution. The prime minister has said he believes in it. And we want to see confidence building measures and actions that will—result in the resumption of negotiations and then a move toward the resolution on the final status issues.

Q. But this is a setback and insulting.

Secretary Clinton. It was insulting. And—it was insulting not just to the vice president, who—certainly didn't deserve that. He was there with a very clear message of—commitment to the peace process solidarity with—the Israeli people. But it was an insult to the United States.

I mean the United States is deeply invested in trying to—work with the parties in order to bring about—this resolution. We don't get easily discouraged, so we're—we're working toward the resumption of the negotiation. But we expect—Israel and the Palestinians—to do their part, and not to take any action that—will undermine the chance that we can achieve the two state solution.

Secretary Robert Gates was interviewed Mr. Melhem of Al Arabiya Broadcast

Q. The U.S. provided Saudi with very sophisticated munitions in their fight with the Houthis. I was told the Saudis requested Predator drones and that the

U.S. declined. Why did the U.S. decline?

Secretary Gates. Well, a big obstacle, frankly, is the Missile Technology Control Regime. And armed Predators are covered under that. The United States has sold armed Predators only to two countries at this point, the United Kingdom and Italy.

So there are some significant legal restrictions. We are looking at alternative ways of trying to satisfy the Saudi request.

Q. What about the drones that were given to Pakistan?

Secretary Gates. Well, I'm not going to talk about our military operations in the Afghan area like that. But I would say we use—we clearly use the drones in Afghanistan, but they are all under the auspices of the United States.

Q. How realistic are your hopes that the Arab Gulf states will build a regional defense system, given their reluctance to do so?

Secretary Gates. I think there actually has been a good deal of progress in building a regional network of air and missile defense and also maritime surveillance. The states of the Gulf have common concerns, and the cooperation that they have begun to undertake with one another with our support and help is purely defensive, and I think is a very useful step forward.

Q. Recently the Congress passed a resolution regarding genocide in Turkey. And the Turkish ambassador was withdrawn from Washington, and Turkey threatened to withhold military assistance for the United States. As secretary of Defense, are you worried about this?

Secretary Gates. I am worried about it. I will say that it was just one committee of the House of Representatives that voted this resolution.

We very strongly feel that the resolution is a mistake. Turkey and Armenia are making progress toward a reconciliation. Protocols have been drafted along those lines. That's the process that we think ought to be used. A resolution of this kind could be very damaging to U.S.-Turkish relations, and we certainly hope that the Congress and the House of Representatives take this measure no further.

Secretary Hillary Clinton was interviewed in Moscow, Russia by Kim Ghattas of BBC TV

Q. Madam Secretary, thank you very much for speaking to the BBC here in Moscow. I wanted to start by asking you about proximity talks. It's on everybody's lips. And I'm trying to clarify whether you consider that they've started, or whether that they are going to start soon, when Senator Mitchell goes to the region at the weekend. And will he be discussing core, substantive issues, or is it going to be more talk about talking?

Secretary Clinton. Well, Kim, we hope that we can re-launch negotiations through proximity talks in the very near future. We think this is not an end in itself; it is a means to building confidence, beginning the conversation about substantive matters on the core issues that divide the Israelis and the Palestinians, that will, we hope and expect, lead to direct talks.

The atmospherics for the resumption of these negotiations needs to be a positive and constructive one. Neither party should engage in any activity on a unilateral basis that is provocative and disruptive of this effort. And we anticipate that we will be able to get those launched with Senator Mitchell's good offices, and then eventually move into the direct talks.

Q. But initially, the proximity talks will be about the process, about the framework, and not about substantive issues?

Secretary Clinton. No, no, they will also include substantive issues.

Q. Do you believe that you have a partner for peace in the leadership of the Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu with the kind of coalition that he has?

Secretary Clinton. I do. I believe that Prime Minister Netanyahu is committed to the two-state solution, as he himself has stated. I believe that he understands that the resolution of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians is in Israel's interests, as it's not being done for anyone other than his own people and their future. So, I anticipate that we will have a very active and engaged partner. Similarly, with the Palestinians, as difficult as it is for them, they too want to build a state. They want to have the opportunity to chart their own future.

Now, that doesn't say that it will be easy, because it won't be. There are just many issues, a very deep division between the two parties. But I think both sides see where they want to end up. It's just how we get them to that point.

Q. And the U.S. can't really afford to blink any more, in the face of Israeli stubbornness on East Jerusalem, because the United States lost a lot of credibility last year on the issue of settlements.

Secretary Clinton. I don't think so. I think that the United States pushed very hard for the Israeli Government to take certain actions. And when the Netanyahu Government adopted a moratorium, that was the first time that it ever happened. I think, actually, it's like many negotiations. You push for your maximalist position, knowing you may or may not get there, and then you pull the other side toward you and you reach a decision. And I think that's a fair assessment of what happened last year.

Certainly, for the Israelis, the 10-month moratorium in the West Bank was something that no government before theirs had ever agreed to. So they saw it as a very big concession. Now, it's not anywhere near what the Palestinians want to see, but that's what negotiations are about. You know, sides start very far apart and try to narrow differences and get as close as they possibly can.

Q. On the other hand, you did take a bit of a risk, perhaps, when you escalated the tone with Israel last week. I understand that the relationship is one that is committed and solid, but the tone changed a little bit. And the Israelis could have said, “Well, we never promised restraint on settlements in East Jerusalem.” Do you think that risk is paying off?

Secretary Clinton. I think we're going to see the resumption of the negotiation track, and that means that it is paying off, because that's our goal. Let's get the parties into a discussion, let's get the principal issues on the table, and let's begin to explore ways that we can resolve the differences.

Q. I would like to move on to Iran. Your calendar on Iran sanctions is slipping somewhat. There had been talk of a December deadline. Now it looks like it's going to take at least another month or two to get sanctions at the UN. It doesn't really add up to a lot of pressure on Iran with all these delays.

Secretary Clinton. Well, I don't agree with that. I think that we are on schedule. We are proceeding to garner support and engage in the complex process of drafting a resolution. And I think we're making progress on convincing other countries to join.

But like so much else, you take it a day at a time. And I am very clear that we are going to have a vote in the Security Council, and we are going to do everything we can to make this resolution as strong as possible.

Q. Is it time to shift gears on Iran, and focus on human rights issues? European capitals are considering sanctioning Iran on human rights. Would you do the same?

Secretary Clinton. Well, we are deeply concerned about the human rights situation in Iran, and we have spoken out repeatedly about the actions that we see, which are oppressing the people of Iran and escalating the violence against peaceful demonstrators. So we are going to continue to speak out.

In fact, I think that many countries are coming to the realization that Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons is more troubling because of their attitude on human rights. I mean we think both are equally troubling. And certainly their pursuit of nuclear weapons is something that we were concerned about before these latest crackdowns following the elections of last June. But when you take both together, it paints a very sobering picture.

So, many countries are saying, “Well, we have to do something, because we have a country like Iran that is pursuing nuclear weapons, and the way they treat their people is a real indicator of how they might behave if they had nuclear weapons.”

Q. I would just like to end with a question about foreign policy achievements of the Obama Administration so far, particularly when it comes to engagement. Iran hasn't really engaged. Syria has almost personally insulted you. Burma hasn't budged. China is not quite being as helpful as you would want. I know that it's not exactly the same as Iran and Syria and other countries. But it's not really going very well for the Obama Administration at this stage.

Secretary Clinton. Well, Kim, I couldn't disagree more. On the one hand, you have to have strategic patience when you engage in diplomacy. I don't think anyone expects countries to change overnight. It's hard for individuals to change overnight.

But if you look at how far we have moved our relationship with Russia, it was at a very low level of trust and partnership when the—this Administration came in, and we are working together on many issues now. With respect to the Middle East, I think President Obama's speech in Cairo is still resonating, and people who are in the Arab world, and the broader Islamic world, see the United States reaching out, looking for ways to find mutual interests to build on a better relationship and a better future. I think our work with China to establish a positive, cooperative, and comprehensive relationship is going forward.

I mean there is something to remember here, and it's not just from the vantage point of the United States. Countries, like people, have their own interests. I can't come and tell you how to live your life. I can come and say, “Maybe together we can do some things,” but your core interests and my core interests are not likely to be ever completely the same. So there shouldn't be any surprise in diplomatic engagement when you work with a country on A, B, and C, but they still have a different point of view on X, Y, and Z. But that doesn't mean you stop working on A, B, and C.

I think one of the problems in the past administration was, “Well, if you aren't with me, you're against me.” That is much too simplistic a view of the complexity of the world in which we live. If we can make progress on any of these important matters together, we should pursue it, and we should continue to speak out about our differences and look for ways to narrow those, as well.

Secretary Hillary Clinton, Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov delivered these remarks in Moscow, Russia

Foreign Minister Lavrov. Dear colleagues, we finished the meeting of the Quartet, and I'd like to thank all my colleagues for the work done yesterday and today. We've coordinated an important statement, a statement where there's a frank attitude towards the region, and it contains concrete, specific, future-oriented suggestions to overcome this problem using the possibility of the (inaudible) supported league of our states and other countries that can help. I give the floor to the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to pronounce this statement. Thank you.

Secretary General Ban. Thank you very much, Mr. Minister, (inaudible). I am going to read out the statement for the Quartet principals.

The Quartet principals met in Moscow on March 19th, 2010. They were joined by Quartet representative Tony Blair. We are honing the fundamental principles laid out initial statement in Trieste, Italy, on June 26, 2009. The Quartet welcomes the readiness to launch proximity talks between Israel and the Palestinians. The Quartet emphasizes that the circumstances which made it possible to agree to launch the proximity talks be respected.

The proximity talks are an important step toward the resumption without preconditions of direct bilateral negotiations that resolve all financial status issues, as previously agreed by the parties. The Quartet believes these negotiations should lead to a settlement negotiated between the parties within 24 months that ends the occupation which began in 1967 and results in the emergence of an independent, democratic, and viable Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with Israel and its other neighbors.

The Quartet reiterates that Arab-Israel peace and the establishment of a peaceful state of Palestine in the West Bank and Gaza is in the fundamental interest of the parties of all states in the region and of the international community. In this regard, the Quartet calls on all states to support dialogue between the parties.

The Quartet reiterates this call on Israel and the Palestinians to act on the basis of international law, and on their previous agreements and obligations—in particular, adherence to the roadmap irrespective of reciprocity to promote an environment conducive to successful negotiations and reaffirms that unilateral actions taken by either party cannot prejudge the outcome of negotiations, and will not be recognized by the international community.

The Quartet urges the Government of Israel to freeze all settlement activity, including natural growth to dismantle outposts erected since March 2001, and to refrain from demolitions and evictions in East Jerusalem. The Quartet also calls on both sides to observe calm and restraint, and refrain from provocative actions and inflammatory rhetoric, especially in areas of cultural and religious sensitivity.

Noting the significant progress on security achieved by the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, the Quartet calls on the Palestinian Authority to continue to make every effort to improve law and order, to fight violent extremism, and to end incitement. The Quartet emphasizes the need to assist the Palestinian Authority in building its law enforcement capacity.

Recalling that the annexation of East Jerusalem is not recognized by the international community, the Quartet underscores that the status of Jerusalem is a permanent status issue that must be resolved through negotiations between the parties and condemns the decision by the Government of Israel to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem. The Quartet reaffirms its intention to closely monitor developments in Jerusalem, and to keep under consideration additional steps that may be required to address the situation on the ground.

The Quartet recognizes that Jerusalem is a deeply important issue for Israelis and Palestinians, and for Jews, Muslims, and Christians, and believes that through good faith and negotiations, the parties can mutually agree on an outcome that realizes the aspirations of both parties for Jerusalem, and safeguards this status for people around the world.

Recalling that transformative change on the ground is integral to peace, the Quartet continues to support the Palestinian Authority's plan of August 2009 for building the Palestinian state within 24 months as a demonstration of Palestinians' serious commitment to an independent state that provides good governance, opportunity, justice, and security for the Palestinian people from the first day that it is established, and is a responsible neighbor to all states in the region.

The Quartet takes positive note of Israel's steps to ease restrictions of movement in the West Bank, and calls for further and sustained steps to facilitate the state-building efforts of the Palestinian Authority. The Quartet endorses fully the efforts of the Quartet representative in support of Prime Minister Fayyad state building and economic development program which has seen significant improvement in the Palestinian Authority's performance with respect to security and law and order, and improved economic growth.

The Quartet supports the Quartet representative in his vital efforts to promote change on the ground in aid of the political negotiations. The Quartet further calls on all states in the region and in the wide international community to match the Palestinian community—commitment to state-building by contributing immediate, concrete, and sustained support for the Palestinian Authority, and in this regard, looks forward to the upcoming meeting of the ad hoc liaison committee to coordinate international support for the Palestinian state-building efforts.

The Quartet is deeply concerned by the continuing deterioration in Gaza, including the humanitarian and human rights situation of the civilian population and stresses the urgency of a durable resolution to the Gaza crisis. The Quartet calls for a solution that addresses Israel's legitimate security concerns including an end to weapons smuggling into Gaza. It promotes Palestinian unity based on the PLO commitments and the reunification of Gaza and the West Bank on the legitimate Palestinian Authority, and ensures the opening of the crossings to allow for the unimpeded flow of humanitarian aid, commercial goods, and persons to and from Gaza consistent with the UN Security Council Resolution 1860.

The Quartet takes positive notes that the Israeli Government has just communicated its approval of a number of the UN Secretary General's civilian recovery projects, including a stalled housing project in communities and looks forward to the early implementation. The Quartet condemns yesterday's rocket fire from Gaza and calls for an immediate end to violence and terror and for calm to be respected. The Quartet reiterates its call for the immediate release of Israeli soldier Gilad

Shalit.

Recognizing the significance of the Arab Peace Initiative, the Quartet looks forward to closer cooperations with the parties and Arab League and urges regional governments to support publicly the resumption of bilateral negotiations, enter into a structural regional dialogue on issues of common concern, and takes steps to foster positive relations through-out the region in the context of progress towards comprehensive peace on the basis of UN Security Council Resolutions 242, 338, 1397, 1515, and 1850, and the Madrid principles, including through the conclusion of peace agreements between Israel and Syria and Israel and Lebanon.

The Quartet commits to remain actively involved on all tracks and to encourage and review progress. The Quartet commits to meet regularly and tasks the envoys to intensify their cooperation to maintain contacts with the Arab League committee on the Arab Peace Initiative and to formulate recommendations for Quartet action. The Quartet reaffirms its previous statements and supports in consultation with the parties on international conference in Moscow at the appropriate time, concurrent with direct negotiations.

Thank you very much.

Moderator. Thank you very, very much. Now, the questions. First, Russia Today.

Q. How are you planning to influence Israel to make them take heed of your resolution— of your decisions? Who is this question addressed to?

Foreign Minister Lavrov. Well, if this question is addressed to all of us, I can tell you as follows. The statement has been approved by all the members of the Quartet. We have agreed that we are going to use all the possibilities available to each and every one of us to achieve that Israel and Palestine start indirect talks. We believe that the statement made today outlines very clear appraisals of the situation and identifies the way ahead, first towards indirect talks and after they start towards direct talks between the parties.

As I have said before, we are going to use all the opportunities available to us in order to encourage the parties to start talks on this basis, the basis enshrined in today's statement.

If anyone has anything to add, please, you're welcome.

Secretary General Ban. I'm going to visit—after my visit to Israel and Palestinian Authorities and participate in League of Arab Summit meeting which will be held in Sirte, Libya. On that occasion, I'll engage myself with Arab leaders and brief them about the Quartet meetings as well as my visit to the region. And I would strongly encourage Arab countries to fully support the proximity talks. It is absolutely necessary at this time. These proximity talks which has been facilitated with a lot of challenges to immediately start and continue and eventually lead into the direct negotiations between the parties. That is what I'm going to very closely work together with Quartet principals.

Moderator. Next question. CBS News, please.

Q. Sorry. This is Charlie Wolfson of CBS for the American Network pool. Secretary Clinton, in the wake of Vice President Biden's visit to Jerusalem, you used the word “insulting” for events that took place there. Is the Obama Administration past that phase and—in this relationship with Israel? Do you plan to meet with Prime Minister Netanyahu when he's in Washington? And have you spoken with any of the Palestinian leaders in addition to the fact that you've now spoken with Prime Minister Netanyahu last night?

Secretary Clinton. Well, Charlie, as the Quartet statement makes very clear, we are all committed to the launching of proximity talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Senator Mitchell, who was here for the meeting, will be going to brief more of our European allies and then will be in the region to speak with both the Israelis and the Palestinians. He expects to meet with Prime Minister Netanyahu before the prime minister leaves for the United States.

I expect to see the prime minister when he and I both address the AIPAC conference in Washington. Our relationship is ongoing. It is deep and broad. It is strong and enduring, and we believe that the launch of the proximity talks is very much in Israel's interests as it is in the interests of the Palestinians. And to that end, we hope to see those talks commence as soon as possible.

Moderator. Any other questions, please? The Iranian Information Agency.

Q. I have a question to the Secretary General. The UN-distributed Goldstone Report about the crimes committed by Israel in the Gaza—it's been two years since the events took place. What has been done and what will be done by the UN in order to lift the blockade and improve the life in Gaza?

Secretary General Ban. I have submitted this Goldstone Report to the General Assembly and Security Council. General Assembly has debated on this issue and took a resolution giving us another five months to continue to investigate. It is necessary, again, that the parties concerned to conduct a credible investigation during this period. And we will have another opportunity of discussing this matter.

As you know, I'm going to visit the Gaza on Sunday. That will be the second time for me to visit. I would like to see for myself how the humanitarian situation would be. As this Quartet statement said, we are deeply concerned about this worsening humanitarian situation. In that regard, I would like to ask you to note specifically the points which I have made the Quartet—in the Quartet statement.

The Israeli Government has just approved the very longstanding United Nations humanitarian project. This package includes water and sanitation projects (inaudible), containers to temporarily accommodate (inaudible) schools, and the completion of UN housing projects for 150 units. The Government of Israel has agreed to expand the list of imports to include aluminum for window frames. It's vital now that these steps are speedily implemented. The needs in Gaza remains huge. Arab country—these measures will not meet them all, but I'll welcome a first step.

I will continue to work with the Government of Israel to broaden the scope of our cooperation and to allow civilian reconstruction. The approval of this initial intervention could represent a meaningful beginning on which to build. As the Quartet statement principles stress today, a durable solution requires an opening of the crossings for both humanitarian and commercial goods to and from Gaza. And taking this opportunity, I'd like to sincerely thank the Quartet principals, particularly the United States Government, for their efforts to open up these humanitarian reconstruction materials be allowed. And I will continue to work very closely. Thank you very much.

Moderator. Next question, Reuters, please.

Q. Secretary Clinton, at first blush, did what Prime Minister Netanyahu tell you yesterday suggest that Israel will begin to address U.S. concerns?

And Foreign Minister Lavrov, the Quartet statement today condemns, now the second time in a week, the 1,600 housing units that Israel announced for advanced plans for building in East Jerusalem. Have you heard anything today or at dinner last night that suggests that Israel is going to address that particular issue, or moreover, is going to take steps to try to prevent such announcements from disrupting or making more difficult the process to begin talks?

Secretary Clinton. What I heard from the prime minister in response to the requests we made was useful and productive, and we are continuing our discussions with him and his government. It's one of the reasons that Senator Mitchell will be going back to the region and meeting with him in just a few days.

The goal of the Quartet, like the goal of the United States Government, is to get the proximity talks re-launched. We do not think unilateral actions by either party are helpful and we have made that very clear. And we're hoping to be able to get those talks started because we think it's only through that effort that we can move on to direct negotiations, as the Secretary General made reference to as part of our Quartet statement.

So I think all of us sitting here share the same goal. We all condemned the announcement and we all are expecting both parties to move toward the proximity talks and to help create an atmosphere in which those talks can be constructive.

Foreign Minister Lavrov. The announcement that we adopted today that has just been read out by the Secretary

General contains very clear wordings and language. We underscore that the circumstances conducive to an agreement about proximity talks should be respected. This is a clear language just as clear as other provisions of the statement such as an acceptability of any unilateral action that could prejudge the agreement between the parties themselves regarding the final status issues.

We are convinced that Israel will hear this statement, will understand it correctly, and, as has been said already by the Secretary General and Senator Mitchell, are going to the region, and in their contacts with the parties, they will convey the position of the Quartet in a most clear way. We assume that the parties should take heed of this statement.

Secretary Hillary Clinton was interviewed in Moscow, Russia by Indira Lakshmanan of Bloomberg TV

Q. Secretary Clinton, thank you so much for joining us today. I wanted to start out by asking you about your phone call that you had last night with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. It was the first time that you had a chance to speak with him since last week when reportedly, you gave him a strong message about the U.S. wanting him to freeze the new Jewish housing in East Jerusalem, and also to make some substantive signals towards the Palestinians about the seriousness the Israelis have about peace. What did he tell you he was willing to do?

Secretary Clinton. Well, first of all, the conversation was a very positive one, and I don't want to, by answering the question, let anyone presume what the nature of our conversation was last Friday night. We discussed how we can get the proximity talks going, what the right atmosphere for those talks to be constructive should be. He responded to the points that I had made last Friday and we're continuing our consultations with him and his government.

Q. Is freezing either the settlement that was announced or any further settlements in East Jerusalem something that the Israeli Government is willing to do?

Secretary Clinton. It's not about any one particular action. It is about the overall atmosphere that is necessary to demonstrate clearly and unequivocally the commitment to the negotiations and the outcome of a two-state resolution. We believe strongly that such a path is in both the Palestinians' and the Israelis' best interests, and neither should be taking any actions unilaterally that in any way undermine the potential for the talks to begin and to be resolved successfully.

Q. A joint statement was put out today by the Quartet, which is made up of the U.S., the UN, Russia, and the European Union, which are all dedicated to promoting Middle East peace. And that joint statement really emphasized a lot the importance of the issue of Jerusalem as a final status issue. Now, the U.S. is understood to want these indirect talks that are supposed to start soon in the Middle East to tackle substantive issues such as the final status of Jerusalem.

Is that, again, something that Netanyahu is willing or even able to do, given that his coalition government includes members who don't want to talk about Jerusalem at all, want it to be indivisible, and for the Jewish state?

Secretary Clinton. Well, Jerusalem has always been one of the final status issues. President Obama made that very clear in his speech to the United Nations last September. I have made it clear in every one of my public statements and in any private discussions that I've had with any of the interested parties. And of course it has to be resolved. And in these indirect talks, which we hope to get started soon, all of the issues have to be discussed, including Jerusalem.

Now, ultimately, it will take direct talks and understandings between the Israelis and the Palestinians themselves in order for any decision to be reached. But we think that the proximity talks would be the first step on the path to doing that.

Q. On Iran, I want to ask you, would you think the Iranians are closer to a nuclear weapons capability today than they were when the Obama Administration took office?

Secretary Clinton. Well, it's difficult to place timetables or milestones. We believed that their pursuit of nuclear power included a program that was aimed at producing the potential for nuclear weapons. We still believe that.

But it's not just the United States. The International Atomic Energy Agency, in the most recent report by Director General Amano, raised the same kinds of questions: If their pursuit of nuclear power is only for peaceful purposes, why were they building a secret facility at Qom? If their pursuit is only for peaceful purposes, why would they not accept the joint Russian-French-American proposal to assist them in getting the nuclear fuel they're entitled to for their research reactor that produces medical isotopes?

There is a series of questions like that. It's very difficult saying how far were they a year ago, two years ago, three years ago; were they further ahead seven years ago, then they backed off—because they're such a closed and secret society. But the bottom line is we believe that their actions raised serious questions about their intent. And that intent to pursue nuclear weapons is what the international community is responding to.

Q. Well, I think one of the keys about timing is the fact that we seem to be at a tipping point at this point over the pressure track and the effort to build up some strong sanctions to discourage Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons capability. Now, General Petraeus was up on the Hill this week testifying, saying that an Iranian nuclear weapon was not inevitable. So if it's not inevitable, how do you get China, Turkey, perhaps even Russia, some countries that have been hesitant about backing strong sanctions—how do you get them to cross the finish line if they don't see it as an imminent threat?

Secretary Clinton. Well, I think we're making progress. I think that the constant efforts that not only the United States, but our other partners have undertaken to make the case about the impact that a nuclear-weaponized Iran would have in the region and beyond is getting a receptive audience. It certainly is here in Russia, and I think increasingly, these questions are becoming important for the Chinese to also confront.

We're in the process in the United Nations of trying to design the appropriate mix of pressure on this second track that you referred to, and I think we're making progress, because there is no one who disagrees with our goal. The goal is to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons because of the consequences that that would present to the region and the world.

The discussion is: What is the best way? There are some who still believe that Iran can be dissuaded; that they'll never admit that they stopped their program, but they could be convinced to stop their program, which would have the same effect that we're seeking through sanctions. Others of us believe that the diplomatic efforts that we engaged in have not produced sufficient evidence of a change in behavior by the Iranians, and therefore, we need to put more pressure on them. But everyone shares the same goal. No one believes that a nuclear-armed Iran is in the world's interests.

Q. I guess the question is about how urgent that it seemed to be if Iran does not seem to be advancing down the track of actually getting that capability. But tied to your question—your issue about the negotiation track versus the pressure track, President Obama dedicated so much last year to reaching out to Iran. Is he going to be issuing another Nowruz New Year's message to the Iranians this year as he did last?

Secretary Clinton. Well, I would think so, because it is an effort to reach out to the Iranian people, especially those brave Iranians who are standing up against the oppression and brutality of the government.

But there's something broader at stake here. When President Obama came into office, the fact that the United States had not pursued diplomacy meant that many countries, even our closest allies, were reluctant to take any actions against Iran, because everyone kept saying, “Well, you haven't exhausted the diplomatic approach yet.”

President Obama and I agreed that we should demonstrate our willingness to engage in diplomacy. And in that remark he made in his inaugural address—he would reach out his hand, but the other side would have to unclench their fist—was a very strong message to Iran and to other nations as well.

So a year later, we have participated in the P-5+1 as a full member, which hadn't happened until this Administration. We have reached out directly and indirectly to the Iranian leadership and the Iranian people. And we have seen many other countries taking note of the fact that we were willing to pursue the diplomatic track. I think that strengthens our position when it comes to the pressure track.

Q. Let me ask you—you have elevated internet freedom to be a central pillar of U.S. foreign policy. And as this relates to Iran, I'm wondering if the U.S. is willing to do anything to help the Iranians access information on the internet; perhaps creating some sort of satellite networking from outside of Iran that would allow people inside the country to have faster access to the internet. And how would you deal with the Iranian Government's response to the U.S. trying to get in there and help the internet access?

Secretary Clinton. Well, we are working on that. We are working to try to help information continue to flow freely into and out of Iran as well as within Iran. We have issued a license to a company with technology that would enable that to occur.

Q. Can you tell us a little bit more about that?

Secretary Clinton. Well, we're doing a lot. Let me just put it at that. We're doing a lot because we think it's in the interests of American values and American strategic concerns to be sure that people have a chance to know what's going on outside of Iran. I'm sure that the Iranian authorities will do what they can to block any move we make. And so it's like a chess game. We'll go back and make another move because we think we owe it to the Iranians, particularly during this period when there is so much at stake and the people who are standing up against the increasingly autocratic dictatorial regime need the support of those of us on the outside.