Secretary Condoleezza Rice and Minister Grigol Vashadze delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Rice. Good morning. I am very pleased to welcome here my colleague, Georgian Foreign Minister Vashadze, to sign the United States-Georgia Charter on Strategic Partnership.

Georgia is a very important partner of the United States, a valued partner. Our relationships rest, of course, on shared values of democracy, on security, on economic prosperity. And this Charter underscores the principles and outlines a way to advance our relationship and our cooperation in defense, trade, energy security, strengthening democratic institutions, people-to-people contacts, and cultural exchanges.

The United States supports and will always support Georgia's sovereignty and its territorial integrity, as well as its Euro-Atlantic aspirations and its integration into the institutions of the Euro-Atlantic. The pace of Georgia's integration with NATO should depend on the desires of Georgians themselves and on Georgia's ability to meet NATO standards.

As a friend and a partner of the United States, we are committed to helping Georgia realize the aspirations of those who gathered in Tbilisi five years ago to demand peaceful change. The Rose Revolution captured the imagination of the world and inspired others seeking freedom. And I know that this Charter will help our two nations realize our shared goals of creating a more secure, democratic, and prosperous world.

I am so pleased to have you here. I know that we will have a very short time to work together. You left a very good and comfortable life to work for your country. I'm going back to a very good and comfortable life after having worked for mine.

Foreign Minister Vashadze. And we'll still continue our friendship.

Secretary Rice. And we will continue our friendship, because the relationship between Georgia and the United States is one that has grown over the last eight years of the President's Administration. But I want you to know, and I want the Georgian people to know, that they will always have a friend in the United States of America.

Thank you.

Foreign Minister Vashadze. Thank you, Madame Secretary. This is a historic day for my country. This is a historic day for my nation. The Charter we're going to sign shortly strengthens close strategic partnership between Georgia and the United States, and stressing that countries undersigning this legal instrument, this legal document, share a vital interest in strong, prosperous, independent, sovereign, and territorially integral Georgia.

This is something Georgian nation has been aspiring to and this is the stepping stone which will bring Georgia to Euro-Atlantic structures, to membership within NATO, and to return to family of Western and civilized nations.

We are very proud that we live to this day. And we would like to stress that we appreciate what the United States has been doing for us. And we understand that this document and our strategic partnership brings not only rights, but also obligations to Georgia to be responsible ally, to be democratic, open, and liberal society. And I think together with American help and American advice, we will reach that goal.

Secretary Condoleezza Rice was interviewed by the Washington Post Editorial Board in Washington, DC

Q. Well, I'll take the privilege of starting with our favorite subject. What do you think—what have we learned from the latest pipelines discussion between Russia and Ukraine and Europe? And is this one different from the last one, and do you see the Russians learning anything different?

Secretary Rice. Well, I think we, and perhaps more importantly, Europe, have learned the (inaudible) fundamental fact again, which is energy independence is going to be very key for Europe. Europe shouldn't be treated as a pawn somehow in disputes, whether commercial or otherwise, between Ukraine and Russia. And as long as Ukraine is so dependent on Russian and/or Ukrainian gas and oil, then unfortunately I think you're going to have these spikes from time to time.

I think we also see that the pattern that has been there for a while of Russia using oil and gas as a kind of political weapon has not subsided. In fact, maybe it's intensified. I suspect that they'll get through this and they'll find some resolution, although it's been up and down the last couple of days as to whether there is a resolution or isn't a resolution.

But long-term, if there is not going to be the capacity for what should be purely commercial transactions to have a political cast and a political character, then there's going to have to be greater energy independence by the Europeans, which would then incent Russia to be less aggressive in the use of oil and gas as a political element to their policy.

And so I don't think the lessons are new, but they're just reinforced by this latest situation.

Q. And do you think—some people posit that lower gas prices will make Russia less aggressive, or as in some, the opposite, with trouble at home they may be more aggressive. Do you have any— and external policies that are not more liberal or more reaching out to Europe in the way that we had hoped. But it may well be a second-order link. I really do think— maybe it's that I'm getting ready to go back and be an academic that I'm not willing to make the link so definitive because I do think there are potentially other arguments for Russian external behavior that clearly, to me, do link to how Russia's internal course is (inaudible).

United States, France Sign Protocol to Income Tax Treaty

The Treasury Department today announced that United States Ambassador to France Craig Roberts Stapleton and French Minister of Finance Christine Lagarde signed a protocol updating the current income tax treaty between the United States and France.

In a ceremony held in Paris, the two officials signed a Protocol that makes several significant changes to the existing U.S.-France income tax treaty. The agreement provides for the elimination of source-country taxation of certain direct dividends as well as the elimination of source-country taxation of cross-border royalty payments.

The Protocol also provides for mandatory arbitration of certain cases that cannot be resolved by the competent authorities within a specified period of time, strengthens the treaty's provisions preventing so-called treaty shopping (the inappropriate use of a tax treaty by third-country residents), and updates the rules for the exchange of taxpayer information between the tax authorities of each country.

Message to the Congress of the United States

In accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.), I transmit herewith an Agreement between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Russian Federation Extending the Agreement Between the Government of the United States and the Government of the Russian Federation on Mutual Fisheries Relations of May 31, 1988, with annex, as extended (the “Mutual Fisheries Agreement”). The present Agreement, which was effected by an exchange of notes in Moscow on March 28, 2008, and September 19, 2008, extends the Mutual Fisheries Agreement until December 31, 2013.

In light of the importance of our fisheries relationship with the Russian Federation, I urge that the Congress give favorable consideration to this Agreement at an early date.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Secretary David Miliband delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Rice. I'm not sure that—I know that there's an argument that there's a causal kind of relationship between high oil prices and aggressive Russian behavior, and low oil prices and non-aggressive Russian behavior. I'd love to do the actual social science experiment and see if you could demonstrate that over time in a way that is systematic, because I don't know that that's the case.

I do think that there's a very strong link between internal Russian policies that are more authoritarian and external Russian policies that are more aggressive, if that's the word that you want to use. And that link, I think, is established over a long period of time. And to the degree—in other words, it may be a second-order link. To the degree that higher oil and gas policies tend to push Russia toward more statist policies internally, which tend to have a more authoritarian cast, a kind of Russia Inc., then I think you'd probably start to see a link between internal policies that are—that have an oil and gas element,

Secretary Clinton. Hello. I'm delighted to welcome back to the State Department a friend and someone with whom we have a very positive working relationship, Foreign Secretary David Miliband. Our two countries have stood side by side confronting global challenges for a very long time, and we've just had a substantive, broad-based discussion about a number of issues that are facing both the United Kingdom and the United States and the world.

I think it is fair to say, and I would underscore this, that we share fundamental values and important fundamental objectives. It ranges across the fight against terrorism and combating the spread of weapons of mass destruction, to working together to solve the current global financial crisis and ensure that the benefits of a renewed global economy are spread widely. We've worked together and will continue to deepen our working relationship in combating poverty and disease, and confronting global climate change.

I also want to thank the Foreign Secretary and Her Majesty's government for the sacrifice and commitment of the British troops who put their lives on the line day in and day out. I'm particularly grateful for the work that they do in Afghanistan, and we're going to be working closely together in the weeks and months ahead along with our other NATO allies to enhance our support for the people of Afghanistan.

We're working together also in Pakistan. And as you know, the President and I have appointed a special representative to that region because we see those two countries as linked together. And we want to forge a positive relationship, and we know that the United Kingdom shares that approach.

We have pledged again to join efforts to achieve a comprehensive solution to the conflict in the Middle East, and our combined effort and energies will be directed to that end.

You know, it's often said that the United States and Great Britain have long enjoyed a special relationship. Well, it is certainly special in my mind, and one that has proven very productive. Whoever is in the White House, whichever party in our country, this relationship really stands the test of time. And I look forward to working with the Foreign Secretary.

Foreign Secretary Miliband. Well, Madame Secretary, thank you very much for your very kind remarks and for your hospitality today. I'm obviously delighted to be here on the day after you were sworn in as Madame Secretary, as Secretary of State, and three months to the day since America voted for change, and two weeks to the day since President Obama issued his clarion call, not just to the American people but to the global community, to come together to tackle shared challenges. And now, we get down to business, and that's what we've done, I think, today. Our discussions have been detailed, substantive, friendly, and also, I think, focused on results, because that's what brings us together. We're interested in the means, but in the end, it's the ends that count.

I've come here today with a very strong commitment from our Prime Minister to work with President Obama, to work with you, and to work with all of your colleagues across the whole range of issues that bring us together. And what's become clear to me, reading your confirmation hearing and everything that you've said, and knowing your own history, is that we are joined by very strong shared values and very strong shared objectives, and strong determination to find the right means to achieve them.

At each stage, we have, I think, in our discussions today, followed what the President and the Prime Minister committed themselves to, which was to renew and refresh the special relationship, and that is certainly our commitment. The shared values and shared priorities are in—are needed in some very difficult areas. We've had a very good discussion. And I met Senator Mitchell earlier today to talk about the Middle East peace process, both the short-term issues of making sure that the commitments in Resolution 1860 are fulfilled—the humanitarian access, the action against arms smuggling—but also keeping alive the critically important long-term vision of two states, Israel and Palestine, living side-by-side in security, which is so essential to regional stability.

We've talked also about Afghanistan and Pakistan, the new approach that you and Senator—and Ambassador Holbrooke want to bring to that domain. We've talked also about the importance of the Iranian nuclear issue, your commitment to engage with other countries in making clear to Iran the costs of its current course, but also making clear to Iran that if it's willing to accept its responsibilities in the international community, it will be a welcome member of the international community exercising its rights as well as its responsibilities, I think is a very important message.

I've also taken the opportunity to brief the Secretary on the G-20 preparations for the economic summit in April, which the Prime Minister will be chairing, and we look forward to very strong American commitment and representation there. I think it's also important to say that we look forward to further discussions on critical issues in Africa, where we have strong shared interests on climate change, and we've also discussed today the very worrying humanitarian situation in Sri Lanka.

I'd also, just by way of conclusion, like to say that I think all of the European foreign ministers who come here this week will be very—bringing a very strong message. We have heard what you and your— and the Obama Administration have said about the commitment to work with allies. But we also know that allies have to step up to build a strong working relationship. And I think that all the European foreign ministers who have come here don't just come with great expectations; they also come with a recognition that we all have to work better to make the international community achieve more. And your commitment to sharing the burdens and the responsibilities of international leadership and cooperation is something that strikes a very strong chord with us and a commitment that we want to follow through.

Madame Secretary, on a personal note, I hope you know the admiration and respect with which you are held in the United Kingdom. The record of public service and achievement that you have built up is a unique résumé to bring to the task of bringing—being America's chief diplomat. For many years, you have not just been an ambassador of America; you've been an ambassador for America and everything good that it stands for in the world. And I look forward to working very, very closely with you in the months and years ahead to make sure that our shared aspirations for a safer, more secure, more just planet are delivered.

Thank you very much, indeed.

Foreign Secretary Miliband.—or for me? I think that the great beauty of the American system is that it manages to combine change and continuity. And the— every four years, the ritual of American democracy is, I think, an example to the wider world. And I think that there are some areas where there's obviously change, but there's also other areas of continuity. And the most important thing, I think, from the UK's point of view is that we want the strong partnership that we have, often in very, very difficult places, to be carried forward with verve and drive and determination. And I'm sure that that verve and drive and determination will come from the Secretary of State.

Q. Madame Secretary, how important is it that European allies step up to (inaudible) on Iran?

Secretary Clinton. Well, I think that the Foreign Secretary said it very well, that we view Iran as a challenge; and it is one that is not directed solely at the United States or even at our European allies, but indeed, the larger region and the world. We are going to be working within the Administration to devise our approach to Iran, and working closely with Her Majesty's government and the work that the Foreign Secretary and others have already done.

You may know that Under Secretary Bill Burns will be attending the P-5+1 meeting that will continue to discuss the approach that the international community will take toward Iran. It is clear that, as the Foreign Secretary said, Iran has an opportunity to step up and become a productive member of the international community. As President Obama said, we are reaching out a hand, but the fist has to unclench. And we will see how we proceed together toward a policy that we believe represents the objectives that we share vis-à-vis Iran.

So I thank you all for, you know, being here to record the slight change, but more than that, the continuity in the special relationship. Thank you all very much.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. Well, good afternoon. I'm very pleased to be here today with Foreign Minister Steinmeier. We have had an excellent and broad discussion. Germany is one of our closest allies, and we greatly value opportunities like today to discuss the issues that affect our nations and the international community as a whole.

I conveyed to the Foreign Minister this afternoon our deep appreciation for everything Germany has done for the people of Afghanistan and for its continued commitment to this important effort. As President Obama has made quite clear, we need our closest allies, like Germany, to help us ensure the success and stability of the Afghanistan nation at this very important moment.

We also discussed Iran. The United States and Germany must work together to ensure that Iran fulfills its obligations to the international community. President Obama has signaled his intention to support tough and direct diplomacy with Iran, but if Tehran does not comply with United Nations Security Council and IAEA mandates, there must be consequences. The United States, Germany, and our EU partners must coordinate closely to obtain the best possible outcomes.

We also discussed the situation in the Middle East and the importance of coordination between our countries to ensure that the ceasefire that is being worked toward in Gaza is sustainable.

We discussed a broad range of issues, including what we see as the need to work constructively and develop a common approach with Russia in the coming months on issues like Afghanistan, Iran, Georgia, and others.

You know, the longstanding and enduring German-American relationship is close and firm. And as our meeting today made clear, we rely on Germany's support and assistance to face global challenges together. And so it is my sincere hope— and my delight that I was able to welcome the Foreign Minister here today. I look forward to working with him on a personal basis and on behalf of our two countries to make the kind of progress that he and I and we all share and hope to see occur. Thank you so much.

Foreign Minister Steinmeier. Madame Secretary Hillary, I would like to thank you very much, most warmly, for the kind reception here in Washington. When a German foreign minister comes to the United States, it's for one thing always, visiting friends, and secondly, it's to assure you that Germany, the German population, has not forgotten that the freedom and security of Europe is, to a great deal, thanks to the help of America.

We today discussed the transatlantic ties, the relations between Germany and the United States, and this is not the first time that I've been underscoring that it is my impression we must not let this good transatlantic relationship become a routine, but indeed breathe life to it every day and fill it with life. And therefore, I'm particularly grateful, Hillary, that you also agree that this transatlantic relationship needs also to embrace a number of themes that are there for us to reflect on.

Hillary, I think it was 12 or 18 months ago that I spoke at Harvard University, and in my speech I touched on a number of tools and instruments in foreign policy that are there for us to use. And also, in that respect, I talked of—I talked about smart power. Now, at the time, roughly a year ago, I could not possibly foresee that today we are talking to an American administration that, in many points, agrees with our stance and that agrees that we need to embrace those new opportunities not only to reduce the severity of international conflicts, but in some cases, also find a resolution.

In your introductory words, you touched on a number of international conflicts that will keep us preoccupied in the days and weeks to come. And one of them includes, obviously, Afghanistan, but also Iraq. And the news that we're hearing today from the Middle East is also telling us that the ceasefire there is still very fragile.

And after the news that has been communicated yesterday by the satellite launch in Iran, we also have to understand now that we are facing there in that country technical capabilities that really urgently require an intensified dialogue between us in the weeks and months to come. On the topic of Iran, therefore, it is very important that we work together, be it in the E-3+3 format or the 5+1 format— something that our staff will continue to work on instantly.

It is with particular pleasure, Hillary, that I note that one theme has returned to the transatlantic agenda, and that is the issue that has been banned quite for unjustified reasons in the past, namely disarmament and arms control, especially given the current situation around arms control treaties like START or the Conventional Forces in Europe. I think we as foreign ministers have to engage in a dialogue in order to make disarmament and arms control a reality, rather than letting it erode. And it's a particular pleasure that in the form of the new American administration, I now see a very good interlocutor in those efforts.

Other items on the transatlantic agenda are questions like climate protection, energy, security and not least of all, food security.

And also, there's one theme on the transatlantic agenda that is quite involuntarily there, I should say, and that is how we deal with the financial crisis in the current situation. And I understand—it is my firm belief—that the means that we take to combat this crisis are very similar in the United States and in Germany and are perceived equally.

I talked today to the senators, and I've made it very clear that we are sharing a sorrow that there be new protectionist tendencies worldwide that will do us no good, because I am convinced that both the United States and its economy, as the European and German one, are depending on open markets, on open exchange, and closed markets will be no help at all in this given situation.

And finally, Hillary, once again, thank you very much indeed for the very detailed and intense conversation we had today. And it would be a great pleasure to welcome you to Berlin as soon as possible.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you. Maybe—yes.

Q. Madame Secretary, Stephan Bachenheimer from Deutsche Welle TV. You mentioned that Germany is very important, an important partner, in particular, with regard to Afghanistan. What is on your wish list? What would you wish from Germany to contribute, knowing that the German parliament is rather stubborn?

Secretary Clinton. Well, in our discussion today, we talked about the range of needs that Afghanistan has. Our government is undergoing a policy review with respect to our policy on Afghanistan. Our Special Representative Ambassador Richard Holbrooke will be in the region next week, and then we will discuss with our friends about what we all can do together. And I appreciate Frank's very constructive advice about what is possible and how we can ensure that our approach toward Afghanistan will be as unified and constructive as we can make it.

Q. Nicholas Kralev of Washington Times. Madame Secretary, do you have a comment on the Iranian missile launch today? And are you concerned about reports that Russia might have pressured Kyrgyzstan not to allow the United States to use the base in Kyrgyzstan for operations in Afghanistan? Thanks.

Secretary Clinton. Well, we are obviously concerned about Iranian behavior on a very broad base. It's not limited to any one event or activity. And as you know, we're undergoing a comprehensive review of how best to approach Iran and how to influence its behavior going forward.

And I think you'll find that there is increasing commonality among the United States, our European allies, friends in the Gulf and the Middle East that we need a more effective and united approach toward Iran. And I think that's—that's our goal. And I was very pleased in the conversation with the Foreign Minister to hear some of his thoughts about how that could be achieved.

Q. (Inaudible.) Was Guantanamo on your talking list today?

Secretary Clinton. I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you.

Q. Was Guantanamo on your agenda today?

Secretary Clinton. I explained to the Foreign Minister that we are following the President's direction with an executive order that he signed on his first day in office to close Guantanamo in a year. There are a number of steps that have to be taken and studies that have to be conducted. But we're not in any way at a point where we're prepared to explain, in any detail, all of the actions that we intend to undertake. It's a very intensive effort that has been undertaken. I understand the concerns that Germany and other nations have, but it is not timely for us to come to Germany or any country with any specific request yet. And I—you want to add anything to that, Frank?

Foreign Minister Steinmeier. All I can add to that—indeed, the United States is currently in a process of devising the next steps that lead to the closure of Guantanamo. And therefore, it is not—it is not yet the case that any official request has been made to a third country. And all I can say is that we're going to respond to any such formal requests only once they have been made.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Minister Bernard Kouchner delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. I was delighted to welcome Foreign Minister Kouchner here today. We've had a very useful and productive discussion on a wide range of topics, first over a private lunch, and then with our various aides.

I just want to reiterate that the United States is committed to our transatlantic alliance. This is an alliance that is one of the oldest and closest that the United States has in the world. We appreciate France's leadership, especially during its recent EU presidency. And I want to publicly thank President Sarkozy for his leadership working with the United States to achieve a ceasefire in Georgia. And I thank you as well, Mr. Minister, for the very broad-based efforts that France has undertaken to address the global financial challenges. Our alliance is rooted in common values, and we have put that alliance to work in support of security, justice, and opportunity.

We discussed a number of the difficult situations that confront us in the world. We will continue to coordinate closely in the Middle East and cooperate on Gaza, humanitarian aid, and the never-ending pursuit of a just and secure peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

You know, the United States is also very proud and grateful to have France as a coalition partner in our efforts to strengthen the Afghan people's efforts to build a better future. The minister is very familiar with Afghanistan, and we spoke of his longstanding work in that country, going back many years, on behalf of the people. And I was particularly impressed with his description of the hospital that the French have built in Kabul, which is now being run by the Afghan people themselves.

We'll continue to work closely as we close the Guantanamo detention center. And on behalf of our mutual concerns regarding Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons, we're going to use smart diplomacy together to engage the international community. And we will do so, including Russia as a cooperative partner, because we intend to forge a more constructive relationship.

So, Mr. Minister, there is much ahead of us on global financial reform, on making sure that we forge an even closer working relationship. And I, on a personal level, look forward to working with you and advancing our shared objectives of liberty, peace, and prosperity around the world.

Foreign Minister Kouchner. Madame Secretary, I am very happy and honored to see you here today, to see you again here today in your new position, which, of course, makes the two of you—the two of us colleagues.

Of course, we saluted the election of President Obama, and although we are not always a hundred percent in agreement, our friendship, friendship between our two countries, is a very sound friendship. It's an old friendship and it's a friendship that has a lot of future to it.

So we talk about a lot of subjects. We were (inaudible) the world with some consideration, but mainly on Middle East— pardon.

So on Middle East, we are really very anxious about the situation of the people of Gaza, and we were in agreement together with Madame Secretary of State to make pressure on both side to open the crossing. The Gaza people, they need so-called humanitarian assistance. And we'll do it together another time, even if this is difficult, because we are facing—all of us—the electoral process in Israel and the idea—very important idea of Abu Mazen, the president of the PLO, the Palestinian Authority, to set up—to try to set up a government of national unity. And we are, of course, supporting Abu Mazen, and we must strengthen him, but it will take some times.

Meanwhile, we must access to the people—we must accede to the people— sorry. For the rest, we were at complete agreement to support the Egyptian initiative, and you know that some talks are now—have been developed in Cairo in between the Hamas delegation, the PLO delegation, and we are waiting for the result of that with a very great support to the Egyptian. And there is a meeting in the—I think the—yes, the second day of February, yes, in Cairo, and I hope we'll get better support to Gaza people before this date.

We were talking about Afghanistan. We are talking about Darfur. We are talking about Guantanamo, and thank you for having closed this—I don't know how to use—prison of Guantanamo. And with our friends of the European Union, we accept the idea of having a common position, if it is possible, European position, because you know that with Schengen, if one country accept one of the prisoner, he would be able to travel all—in all the places, in 22 countries—or 24 countries in Europe.

Afghanistan, it is a burden for us, but we need to succeed. We have to succeed in Afghanistan in offering support to the democratic elected government and to develop the access to the people. Afghanization is the word. For that, we need to secure the places, and with Madame Clinton we were talking a lot about that.

No, I know that I have to speak French. I'll answer questions in French.

Q. Talking about Afghanistan, we have Ambassador Holbrooke going to the region. What does he want to accomplish on this trip? Does the decision by Kyrgyzstan not to—well, to actually close the Manas air base make it difficult for the U.S. to get in the troops that will be necessary in Afghanistan?

And if you would, one more in that region, speaking of—

Secretary Clinton. Three questions.

Q. Yes. Well, is the U.S. considering resuming military cooperation with Uzbekistan?

Secretary Clinton. Well, Jill, first, let me say that Ambassador Holbrooke is on his way. He will be stopping in London and already has met with the Foreign Minister and the Prime Minister. He's on his way to Munich where he will have dinner tomorrow with Minister Kouchner. And then he will be going to Pakistan and Afghanistan and, I believe, also has a stop in India.

These will be for consultative purposes. He has a very vigorous schedule of meetings and he's attempting to cover as much ground as possible. He's already done an enormous amount of work here in the United States in preparation. And we will await what he will report. There is an ongoing policy review process that he is co-chairing out of the White House, and we're in the beginning of a very in-depth but expeditious consideration of the way forward.

That's why I appreciated my friend, Bernard, being here because he has a lot of experience in Afghanistan. He actually was serving as a doctor for many years during the Soviet invasion, during the most difficult periods of the conflicts against the Russians by the Mujahideen. And so he has personal hands-on experience that he will share not only with me, but with Ambassador Holbrooke. So this is going to be an in-depth effort as set forth by the President so that the President will have the options available to him to make the decisions that he thinks are the best for our country, for the people of Afghanistan, and for our allies and friends.

With respect to the base, the Defense Department is conducting an examination as to how else we would proceed that will not affect whatever decisions we make. It's regrettable that this is under consideration by the Government of Kyrgyzstan and we hope to have further discussions with them. But we will proceed in a very effective manner no matter what the outcome of the Kyrgyzstan Government's deliberations might be. And with respect to Uzbekistan, that's an area that is more properly addressed at this moment to the Defense Department.

Q. Mr. Minister, did you speak in details about a French-American cooperation about Afghanistan? Could you be more precise about that?

And Madame Secretary, congratulations for your nomination. What's your reaction when Newsweek this week is saying Afghanistan could become President Obama's Vietnam?

Foreign Minister Kouchner. Yes, we talked a lot about Afghanistan because it is a very serious issue. But we are determined. We are determined to continue to help, to continue on the path to help Afghanistan and the people of Afghanistan, as we have already done.

And actually, we don't speak enough of the successes that the allies have had in Afghanistan, yes, but the success for the population of Afghanistan, you know, in terms of education, health, and organization of their own agriculture, which is still tentative in a way, but they have irrigation projects and there is progress that has been accomplished in Afghanistan. For instance, there are 2 million young girls who go to school in Afghanistan, and Mrs. Clinton was kind enough to recall here my own involvement in Afghanistan. Let me tell you, when I was there, it was impossible to even dream that 2,000—2 million, I'm sorry, little girls who go to school.

Foreign Minister Kouchner. Of course, I don't know that—Madame Secretary, that Afghanistan will be the hardest and the most important task of President Obama's, but there are other problems. Of course, there's a financial crisis that is spreading around the world that have touched our American friends and have touched us in France as well.

However, I think that the key word about Afghanistan is what I call “Afghanization.” That means we must give the people in Afghanistan control of their own destiny in the sense that with the progress that has been made already, it's there. They have elected their own government. They have a parliament that has been elected, with women in the parliament, two members, which we didn't dream of some time ago. So we need to make it known to the Afghan people that they are in control of their own progress and their own future, and that they have something to look forward in terms of their family and their future in one of the poorest countries of the world, where 80 percent of the population works in farming. I think that this is what we need to do.

So we have—for those reasons, we have decided that we continue to work together. Afghanization is not an easy task. I mean, there are issues of security and other, but with our allies, we have decided that this is the way to go and we will make progress in that direction.

Q. Oh, on the Vietnam, whether Afghanistan is going to become the Vietnam—that's not my question. I was asked to—ask you to answer your portion of the question, Madame Secretary.

Secretary Clinton. Oh, I have nothing to say to that.

Q. Okay. To Foreign Minister Kouchner, Tony Blair says that Hamas should be brought into the peace process. Do you agree with that?

And Secretary Clinton, do you see a way of dealing with Hamas within a unity government? And then finally, what is your view on Russia's plan to open up to the Bushehr plant by year end?

Foreign Minister Kouchner. Hmm. Okay. Well, Hamas, you know, we said several times we have no official talk with Hamas. It is, for the time being, impossible. Why? Of course, we have indirect talk in supporting the Egyptian initiative. We were obliged to go through—I mean, the Turks, and the Norwegian people, the Russian, et cetera. And of course, the Egyptian, mainly the Egyptian, because they are talking to Hamas.

Why aren't we talking officially to Hamas? Because they are not part of the peace process. And we'll certainly talk to them when they would start to talk to the Palestinian themself, to PLO, and certainly, when they would accept the peace process, the signatures of PLO on the Israeli-Palestinian documents and mainly the Arab initiative of peace. That's the answer.

But certainly, this is part—and Tony Blair was right in saying so. In Gaza, if you are not setting up a sort of common task force to get access to the people or this government of national unity, it will be difficult, I know—we know that.

Secretary Clinton. And I would only add that our conditions respecting Hamas are very clear: We will not in any way negotiate with or recognize Hamas until they renounce violence, recognize Israel, and agree to abide by, as the foreign minister said, the prior agreements entered into by the PLO and the Palestinian Authority.

Q. And on Bushehr, Madame Secretary?

Secretary Clinton. We'll get back to you on that.

Q. Madame Secretary, on a more personal note, a couple of years ago when you were a lawyer, you went to a trip to France as a member of the French-American Foundation. I was wondering what kind of memories you keep of that trip and what your impression of France, where you returned many times after that.

Secretary Clinton. I have been to France many times, and I always have a good impression. I enjoy visiting in France. I have—in fact, I met the foreign minister's wife many years ago on a trip to France back—longer than either Christine or I would care to admit.

And during the trip that you're referring to that was sponsored by the French-American Foundation, I visited a number of facilities that were really impressive in the way that France provides for preschool care for French children, and came back and made the argument in writing and in many speeches that we could benefit from that kind of commitment to our own young children.

So I not only have enjoyed my time in France, but I have learned a lot from my visits and from my ongoing associations with friends. And I look forward to returning whenever I have the opportunity.

Vice-President Joe Biden delivered these remarks in Munich, Germany

Vice President Biden.. Mr. Ambassador, thank you very much. Ladies and gentleman, it's an honor to be back in Munich. I've attended this conference many times as a United States senator, and three of my congressional colleagues are here with me today. But I am honored to be back here, as well, as the Vice President of the United States, representing a new administration and, hopefully, a new day.

Today I am especially honored to represent this administration. And we've gone through the oldest of our traditions: that is the peaceful transfer of power. And now, I bring the regrets of two friends who are usually here. But because we are still grappling with legislation relating to our so-called stimulus package to deal with our economic issues—both Senators John McCain and John Kerry were hoping to join my three House colleagues here today, they are usually here, but they send their regrets.

I come to Europe on behalf of a new administration, and an administration that's determined to set a new tone not only in Washington, but in America's relations around the world. That new tone is rooted in a strong bipartisanship to meet these common challenges. And we recognize that these challenges, the need to meet them, is not an opportunity—not a luxury, but it's an absolute necessity. While every new beginning is a moment of hope, this moment—for America and the countries represented in this room—it is fraught with some considerable concern and peril.

In this moment, our obligation to our fellow citizens is to—in our view—put aside the petty and political notion that— to reject the zero sum mentalities and rigid ideologies, and to listen to and learn from one another, and to work together for a common prosperity and security of all of us assembled in this room. That's what, in our view, this moment demands. And that's what this new administration is determined to do.

For 45 years, this conference has brought together Americans and Europeans—and, in recent years, leaders from beyond the Transatlantic community—to think through matters of our physical security. But this year, more than ever before, we know that our physical security and our economic security are indivisible. We are all confronting a serious threat to our economic security that could further spread instability and erode the progress we've made in improving the lives of all our citizens.

In the United States—like many of you—we're taking aggressive action to stabilize our financial systems, to jumpstart our economy, and, hopefully, lay a new foundation for growth in the 21st century. Working with the Congress, we'll make strategic investments that create and save we believe 3 to 4 million jobs, and in the process, boost our competitiveness in the long run.

Our plan includes doubling the production of alternative energy over the next three years; computerizing our citizens' medical records to drive down cost; equipping tens of thousands of our schools and colleges with 21st century classrooms, laboratories and libraries; expanding the broadband across America; and investing once again in science, research, technology—all the things that spur innovation. We're looking—we're also working to stabilize our financial institutions by injecting considerable amounts of capital, purchasing some assets and guaranteeing others. These remedies are going to have an impact, as you all know, far beyond our shores, just as the measures all of you are taking will be felt beyond your borders, as well.

And because of that, to the greatest extent possible, we're going to have to cooperate to make sure that our actions are complementary, and to do our utmost to combat this global crisis. The United States is trying to do its part. And President Obama looks forward to taking our message to the G20 meeting in London in April.

And even as we grapple with an economic crisis, we're also—have to contend with a war in Afghanistan now in its eighth year, and a war in Iraq well into its sixth year. And we have to recognize, as mentioned by both the Chancellor and President Sarkozy earlier today, that there are other forces that are shaping this new century: The spread of weapons of mass destruction and dangerous diseases, endemic disease; a growing gap between the rich and poor; ethnic animosity in failed states; and a rapidly warming planet and uncertain supplies of energy, food, water. The challenges to freedom and security from radical fundamentalism must be added to that list, as well.

In meeting these challenges, the United States will be guided by this principle —and the principle is: There is no conflict between our security and our ideals. We believe they are mutually reinforcing.

The force of arms won our independence, and throughout our history the force of arms has protected our freedom.

That will not change. But the very moment we declared our war of independence, at that moment we laid out to the world the values behind our revolution and the conviction that our policies must be informed, as we said at the time, by a “decent respect for the opinions of mankind.”

Our Founders understood then, and the United States believes now, that the example of our power must be matched by the power of our example. And that is why our administration rejects a false choice between our safety and our ideals. America will vigorously defend our security and our values, and in doing so we believe we'll all be more secure.

As hard as we try, I know—I know— that we're likely to fall short of our ideals in the future, just as we have in the past. But I commit to you, this administration will strive every day—every day—to honor the values that animate American democracy and, I might add, that bind us to all of you in this room.

America will not torture. We will uphold the rights of those who we bring to justice. And we will close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay.

But tough choices lie ahead. As we seek a lasting framework for our common struggle against extremism, we'll have to work cooperatively with nations around the world—and we'll need your help. We'll need your help. For example, we will ask others to take responsibility for some of those now in Guantanamo, as we determine to close it. Our security is shared. And so, too, I respectfully suggest, is our responsibility to defend it.

That's the basis upon which we want to build a new approach to the challenges of this century. America will do more, but America will—that's the good news. The bad news is America will ask for more from our partners, as well.

Here's what we'll do, and what we hope our partners will consider. First, we'll work in a partnership whenever we can, and alone only when we must. The threats we face have no respect for borders. No single country, no matter how powerful, can best meet these threats alone. We believe international alliances and organizations do not diminish America's power—we believe they help advance our collective security, economic interests and our values.

So we'll engage. We'll listen. We'll consult. America needs the world, just as I believe the world needs America. But we say to our friends that the alliances, treaties and international organizations we build must be credible and they must be effective. That requires a common commitment not only to listen and live by the rules, but to enforce the rules when they are, in fact, clearly violated.

Such a bargain is the bargain we seek. Such a bargain can be at the heart of our collective efforts to convince Iran, for example, to forego the development of nuclear weapons. The Iranian people are a great people; the Persian civilization is a great civilization. But Iran has acted in ways that are not conducive to peace in the region or to the prosperity of its own people. Its illicit nuclear program is but one of those manifestations.

Our administration is reviewing our policy toward Iran, but this much is clear: We will be willing to talk. We'll be willing to talk to Iran and to offer a very clear choice: Continue down the current course and there will be continued pressure and isolation; abandon the illicit nuclear program and your support for terrorism, and there will be meaningful incentives.

Second, we'll strive to act preventively, not preemptively, to avoid whenever possible, or wherever possible the choice of last resort between the risks of war and the dangers of inaction. We'll draw upon all the elements of our power—military and diplomatic, intelligence and law enforcement, economic and cultural—to stop crises from occurring before they are in front of us. In short, we're going to attempt to recapture the totality of America's strength, starting with diplomacy.

On his second full day in office, President Obama, went to our State Department, where he stressed the centrality of diplomacy in our national security. The commitment can be seen in his appointments, starting with the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton. It can be seen in the President's decision to name two of America's most tenacious diplomats—Senator George Mitchell and Ambassador Richard Holbrooke—to contend with two of the world's most urgent and vexing and complex challenges: the need for a secure, just, and lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians, and the imperative of stopping the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan from providing a haven for terrorists.

In both these efforts, America seeks your partnership.

Senator Mitchell just completed his first trip to the Middle East. Above all, he went to listen. In the near term, we must consolidate the cease-fire in Gaza by working with Egypt and others to stop smuggling, and developing an international relief and reconstruction effort that strengthens the Palestinian Authority, and not Hamas. Neither of these goals can be accomplished without close collaboration among the United States, Europe, and our Arab partners.

Then, we must lay the foundation for a broader peacemaking effort. In the past— well, look at it this way—it's long time passed for us to secure a just, two-state solution. We will work to achieve it. And we'll work to defeat extremists who perpetuate the conflict. And in building on positive elements of the Arab Peace Initiative put forward by Saudi Arabia, we'll work toward a broader regional peace between Israel and its Arab neighbors, and we'll responsibly draw down our forces that are in Iraq in the process.

The United States will continue to work for a stable Afghanistan that's not a haven for terrorists. We look forward—we look forward to sharing that commitment with the government and the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan, and with all of our allies and partners, because a deteriorating situation in the region poses a security threat not just to the United States, but I would suggest somewhat presumptuously, to every one of you assembled in this room.

President Obama has ordered a strategic review of our policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan to make sure that our goals are clear, and that they are achievable. As we undertake that review, we seek ideas and input from you and all of our partners. And we genuinely seek those ideas. I've already had bilateral meetings. I'll have the opportunity to meet with the President of France and others this afternoon. I had an opportunity to meet with the Chancellor this morning. We are sincere in seeking your counsel.

As we undertake this review, there's a lot at stake. The result must be a comprehensive strategy for which we all take responsibility—that brings together our civilian and military resources, that prevents terrorists a safe haven, that helps the Afghan people develop the capacity to secure their own future. But no strategy for Afghanistan, in my humble opinion, can succeed without Pakistan. We must all strengthen our cooperation with the people and government of Pakistan, help them stabilize their Tribal Areas, promote economic development and opportunity throughout their country. In the case of my government, we feel it's urgent to move from a relationship that was transactional to one that is based upon a long-term relationship.

Thirdly, America will extend a hand to those who, as the President said, will unclench their fist. The United States of America does not believe, our administration does not believe, in a clash of civilizations; there is nothing inevitable about that. We do see a shared struggle against extremism—and we'll do everything in our collective power to help the forces of tolerance prevail.

In the Muslim world, a small—and I believe a very small—number of violent extremists are beyond the call of reason. We will, and we must, defeat them. But hundreds of millions of hearts and minds in the Muslim world share the values we hold dearly. We must reach them. President Obama has made clear that he will seek a new way forward based on mutual interest and mutual respect. It was not an accident that he gave his very first interview as President of the United States to Al Arabiya. That was not an accident.

To meet the challenges of this new century, defense and diplomacy are necessary. But quite frankly, ladies and gentlemen, they are not sufficient. We also need to wield development and democracy, two of the most powerful weapons in our collective arsenals. Poor societies and dysfunctional states, as you know as well as I do, can become breeding grounds for extremism, conflict and disease. Non-democratic nations frustrate the rightful aspirations of their citizens and fuel resentment.

Our administration has set an ambitious goal to increase foreign assistance, to cut extreme poverty in half by 2015, to help eliminate the global educational deficit, and to cancel the debt of the world's poorest countries; to launch a new Green Revolution that produces sustainable supplies of food, and to advance democracy not through the imposition of force from the outside, but by working with moderates in government and civil society to build those institutions that will protect that freedom — quite frankly, the only thing that will guarantee that freedom.

We also are determined to build a sustainable future for our planet. We are prepared to once again begin to lead by example. America will act aggressively against climate change and in pursuit of energy security with like-minded nations.

Our administration's economic stimulus package, for example, includes long-term investments in renewable energy. And we believe that's merely a down payment. The President has directed our Environmental Protection Agency to review how we regulate emissions, start a process to raise fuel efficiency, appoint a climate envoy—and all in his first week in office, to demonstrate his commitment.

As America renews our emphasis on diplomacy, development and democracy, and preserving our planet, we will ask our allies to rethink some of their own approaches—including their willingness to use force when all else fails.

When it comes to radical groups that use terror as a tool, radical states who harbor extremists, undermine peace and seek or spread weapons of mass destruction, and regimes that systematically kill or ethnically cleanse their own people, we must stand united and use every means at our disposal to end the threat that they pose.

None of us can deny or escape the new threats of the 21st century. Nor can we escape the responsibility to meet them.

And we are not unmindful in the United States how difficult it is to communicate these notions to our public who don't want to hear much of what needs to be said.

Two months from now, the members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization will gather to celebrate the 60th year of this Alliance. This Alliance has been the cornerstone of our common security since the end of World War II. It has anchored the United States in Europe and helped forge a Europe whole and free. Together we made a pact, a pact to safeguard the freedom of our people founded on the principles and the documents referring to democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of law. We made a commitment to cooperate, to consult, to act with resolve when the principles we defended are challenged.

There is much to celebrate. But we there's much more to be done. We must recommit our shared security and renew NATO, so that its success in the 20th century is matched in the 21st century.

NATO's core purpose remains the collective defense of its members. But faced with new threats, new realities, we need a new resolve to meet them and new capabilities to succeed. Our Alliance must be better equipped to help stop the spread of the world's most dangerous weapons, to tackle terrorism and cyber-security, to expand the writ of energy security, and to act in and out of area more effectively. We continue to develop—we will continue to develop missile defense to counter the growing Iranian capability, provided the technology is proven and it is cost-effective. We'll do so in consultation with you, our NATO allies, and with Russia.

As we embark on this renewal project— as we like to think of it—the United States, like other allies, would warmly welcome, and we do warmly welcome, the decision by France to fully cooperate in NATO structures. That's the main reason the President got our speech. You were supposed to say nicer things about me when you got the speech, Mr. President. That's a joke.

In a recent discussion with President Sarkozy, President Obama underscored his strong support for France's full participation in NATO, should France wish it. France is a founding member of NATO and a major contributor to its operation. We would expect France's new responsibilities to reflect the significance of its contributions throughout NATO's history, and to strengthen the European role within the Alliance.

We also support the further strengthening of European defense, an increased role for the European Union in preserving peace and security, a fundamentally stronger NATO-EU partnership, and a deeper cooperation with countries outside the Alliance who share our common goals and principles. The United States rejects the notion that NATO's gain is Russia's loss, or that Russia's strength is NATO's weakness. The last few years have seen a dangerous drift in relations between Russia and the members of our Alliance. It is time—to paraphrase President Obama— it's time to press the reset button and to revisit the many areas where we can and should be working together with Russia.

Our Russian colleagues long ago warned about the rising threat of the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Today, NATO and Russia can, and should, cooperate to defeat this common enemy. We can and should cooperate to secure loose nuclear weapons and materials to prevent their spread, to renew the verification procedures in the START Treaty, and then go beyond existing treaties to negotiate deeper cuts in both our arsenals. The United States and Russia have a special obligation to lead the international effort to reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world.

We will not agree with Russia on everything. For example, the United States will not—will not recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent states. We will not recognize any nation having a sphere of influence. It will remain our view that sovereign states have the right to make their own decisions and choose their own alliances. But the United States and Russia can disagree and still work together where our interests coincide. And they coincide in many places.

This conference started in the shadow of the Cold War. Now it takes place in a new century with new threats. As one great poet, an Irish poet, once wrote about another circumstance, he said: “All is changed, changed utterly: a terrible beauty has been born.” Well, all changed, changed utterly. And we must change, too, while remaining true to the principles upon which this Alliance was founded. And we must have the common courage and commitment of those who came before us to work together, to build together, to stand together. In sharing ideals and searching for partners in a more complex world, America and Europeans still look to one another before they look to anyone else. Our partnership has benefitted us all. It's time—it's time to renew it. And President Obama and I look forward to doing just that.

Thank you for your indulgence.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Minister Karel Schwarzenberg delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. I am delighted today to welcome Foreign Minister Schwarzenberg to the Department of State. The minister and I just had a wide-ranging, good discussion about global, European, and bilateral issues. The Czech Republic is an important ally of the United States and, of course, our two nations share a strong commitment to defense, development, and human rights. And we are dedicated to strengthening our transatlantic alliance.

I also welcomed the foreign minister in his current European Union presidency role. The U.S. and Europe have great responsibilities in the world, especially at this time of global challenges and opportunities. And the United States appreciates Czech leadership on such key issues as Afghanistan, energy security, and the Middle East.

It was also a pleasure for me to particularly thank the Czech Republic for being at the forefront of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, with a commitment of 500 troops and leadership of the Logar Provincial Reconstruction Team. Europe and the United States, the Czech Republic and the United States, we have a big, important agenda before us. And I'm confident, as I told the minister, that our shared values, our common objectives, our commitment to freedom will continue to strengthen and deepen our partnership. So it's a great personal pleasure for me to welcome the foreign minister here today.

Foreign Minister Schwarzenberg.

Well, I would like to say that this is, for me, great honor and pleasure to be one of the first visits to Secretary Clinton. I do think we have a certain luck because it coincides that the new Administration started vigorously its work, and the Czech presidency of the European Union is at its beginning.

And the fact that at one side, the Czech Republic is probably the country that Americans have the most sympathies in all of Europe, and we are staunch allies of the United States on one side, as is American—your Administration changed not only America, but the world. It is an important start—motivation to work together to rejuvenate the process of (inaudible), which, after all—I mean, there are—NATO becomes 60 years old, we all became older, and we sometimes stuck too much to the routine. And now, there's a change, a chance to make a real change, to rejuvenate the relation, to invigorate it, and to start together to tackle the enormous problems we have in the world. Some were mentioned by Secretary Clinton.

And of one thing—I'm sure that if we stick together, if the cooperation between the United States and the European Union goes with a new attitude (inaudible), we can really achieve something in the world to make it and to change it to the better. Thank you so much.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you, Minister.

Q. Thank you, Madame Secretary, and Mr. Minister, if you want to jump in as well. On the Israeli elections, you've said you're looking forward to working with the new government, but certainly some of the candidates would make it easier to advance some of the goals that you've been talking about on a deal with Israeli and Palestinians. Could you talk about what's at stake at this election, in terms of U.S. and European foreign policy?

And on Iran, there does—there definitely seems to be an interesting dance going on between the U.S. and Iran. Last night, after President Obama's comments about engaging Iran, President Ahmadinejad said that Iran would hold talks based on mutual respect. Your review notwithstanding, what do you think is going on here, and are you heartened by the Iranian messages that they've been trying to send to the U.S.?

Thank you.

Secretary Clinton. Well, as to the Israeli elections, I'm going to wait to find out what the people of Israel have decided.

As to Iran, we have been very clear that, as the Vice President discussed in Munich over the weekend, as the President said again last night, there is an opportunity for the Iranian Government to demonstrate a willingness to unclench their fist and to begin a serious and responsible discussion about a range of matters.

We still persist in our view that Iran should not obtain nuclear weapons, that it would be a very unfortunate course for them to pursue. And we hope that there will be opportunities in the future for us to develop a better understanding of one another and to work out a way of talking that would produce positive results for the people of Iran.

Q. Czech television. Madame Secretary, this is a question about missile defense. Does your Administration have a, kind of like, plan to be presented—a clear plan, including timeframe, to be presented at NATO summit?

And on both of you, is there still an option to abandon this project if there would be a kind of diplomatic agreement with Iran or with Russia?

Secretary Clinton. Well, as the Vice President also said in Munich, we are first and foremost very grateful to the Czech Republic, to the government and the people, for working with us to try to deter the threat from Iran. If we are able to deter that threat, it will be, in some measure, due to the courage of the Czech people in stepping up and being a partner to provide a strong defense in Europe against Iranian aggression that would certainly be present were they to obtain nuclear weapons.

There are technical issues concerning missile defense that you—that you know well. We had a very good discussion about our hopes to work together—the European Union and the United States— in dissuading the Iranians from pursuing nuclear weapons. But if the Iranians continue on this path, certainly one of the options for free countries like the Czech Republic, other Europeans, and the United States, is to defend ourselves. So this is one of those issues that really will rest with the decisions made by the Iranian Government.

Q. Madame Secretary, there is a prospect looming on the Korean Peninsula of possible military clashes between the two Koreas, as a result of some actions that the North has taken in the past couple of weeks. And there are some reports that Chinese fishing boats are being pulled out of the area in case something happens. You're going to Asia next week.

Can you tell us what can you do to make sure that such a situation doesn't occur? And more broadly, what is your expectation on that trip? What do you hope to—what message do you hope to convey to not only the government, but the people of Asia?

Secretary Clinton. Well, I am going to Asia to reassert our commitment to our allies and partners in Asia, to work on a range of issues with Japan and South Korea, China, and Indonesia, as well as reaching out to the rest of East Asia.

And clearly, with respect to North Korea, our position remains the same. We intend to pursue the Six-Party Talks. We expect that—with our partners in those talks to continue a policy that would lead to the denuclearization of North Korea and the end of any proliferating activities by North Korea.

We are hopeful that some of the behavior that we have seen coming from North Korea in the last few weeks is, you know, not a precursor of any action that would up the ante, or threaten the stability and peace and security of the neighbors in the region.

But again, North Korea has to understand that all of the countries in East Asia have made it clear that its behavior is viewed as unacceptable. And there are opportunities for the government and people of North Korea were they to begin, once again, to engage through the Six-Party Talks, through other bilateral and multilateral forums. And we're hopeful that we'll see that in the weeks and months ahead. But I know of the continuing concern on the part of the other members of the Six-Party Talks with respect to North Korea's attitude in the last weeks, and I'll be talking with our counterparts to determine the most effective way forward. Thank you. Last question?

Q. Czech daily newspaper. Madame Secretary, do you think that the current financial crisis could anyhow delay the plans for development and deployment of the missile defense systems?

Secretary Clinton. Well, our concerns about missile defense are primarily technical. There may be some economic factors. But we've always seen this as primarily a technical challenge. Obviously, we expect any system that we deploy to be able to operate effectively to achieve the goals that are set. And as I have said earlier, our concern, the concern of other nations within the broad geographic area that could be affected by an Iranian missile, you know, are looking for ways to deter and end that behavior.

But you know, we have to be realistic, you know. Our slogan can be “hope for the best, but plan for the worst.” I think that's a realistic approach that we should be taking, and that's why I admire the Czech Government. I know that that was a difficult decision. I understand that. But the Czech people won their freedom and do not want to be intimidated by the specter of, you know, nuclear weapons in the hands of unfriendly regimes. So I think that what the Czech Government and the Polish Government did in saying, you know, we want to be prepared in the event that we are unable to persuade, dissuade, deter, the Iranians from pursuing nuclear weapons makes a great deal of sense.

Now, the timing and the, you know, actual deployment, those are largely technical matters. And as the Vice President said, which I underscore, if we are able to see a change in behavior on the part of the Iranians with respect to what we believe to be their pursuit of nuclear weapons, you know, then—you know, we will reconsider where we stand. But we are a long, long way from seeing such evidence of any behavior change.

Mr. Minister, do you want to add anything?

Foreign Minister Schwarzenberg. No. I'd have to agree with what you have said. And I think the most necessary thing is that as with Iran, as to other dangers in this world, we need to stick together and we can rely on each other.

And just I would like to add one thing. It was a special pleasure for me—the meeting today with Secretary Clinton, whom I had the honor and pleasure to meet before already in Prague when she visit my former chief, President Havel. And I already was impressed by her great energy. Now to see her as Secretary of State of the United States is a special pleasure.

Secretary Robert Gates was interviewed in a roundtable in Krakow, Poland

Secretary Gates. I'm just going to say a quick word and then take your questions. I think we had a very good set of meetings today. The focus was principally on Afghanistan: first in the operations session this morning—or early this afternoon— and then—or at the lunch, I guess—and then in the late afternoon session, which was a meeting of all of the contributing nations in Afghanistan. A lot of focus on the run-up to the Afghan elections in August and the importance of added security, what more people can do, but also on the civilian side.

I think it was a good exchange of views. We got this evening a report from Minister Wardak in terms of his view of the situation. And my personal view was it was very important to hear from him. It's very important to hear from the Afghans, their perspective on how things are going because it's fundamentally their fight and we are helping them. And the more we see them in leadership, the better it is.

Talked a little bit about—in my bilateral meetings with a number of people—about the review of U.S.-Afghan policy and strategy that is going on, stressing the inclusiveness of that effort. There will be Afghan and Pakistani teams coming to the U.S. to work with us on it. I think Ambassador Holbrooke will be going to Brussels to meet with the North Atlantic Council and the participating nations that are not in NATO are also being consulted. So it's a very inclusive process that includes our allies, not only our allies in NATO but people in the region and our other partners.

So why don't I just stop there and take your questions? Yeah.

Q. Mr. Secretary—of the Czech Republic. With regard to the missile defense and all these considerations like economic factor and technology and diplomacy tools, Iran and Russia, do you think it could be expected that the U.S. would retreat from the treaty signed with Poland and the Czech Republic?

Secretary Gates. Well, I think that as the vice president said in Munich, we continue to be very concerned about the Iranian missile threat, particularly as they continue work on what we believe are weapons of mass destruction. Their launch of a satellite shows that they are increasing their ability to build missiles or rockets with considerable range. And both in the context of cost effectiveness and technology, we will continue to move forward. But we are also going to work with our allies. We have a NATO commitment that was made at Bucharest by all of the heads of government. And we also are very interested in continuing to pursue our efforts to persuade the Russians to partner with us in this endeavor. And my hope is that now, with the new administration, the prospects for that kind of cooperation might have improved.

Q. Following on that, Mr. Secretary, your Polish counterpart said after the meeting today that he had wanted to hear from you whether the U.S. planned to go forward with partnership with Poland and that he hoped that that would happen. What is your view about whether the current structure of the missile defense program should continue as it is?

Secretary Gates. Well, I think again—I think the key is keeping in mind what the threat is. And the reason that we are pursuing—have pursued a third site is because of the Iranian missile programs. I told the Russians a year ago that if there were no Iranian missile program, there would be no need for the missile sites. So one approach would be to see if we can get better Russian cooperation in dealing with some of the activities that are going on in Iran.

The fact is that between the economic crisis, Afghanistan, and Iraq, the administration has not yet reviewed where it is on a whole range of issues, including relationships with our allies, the missile defense program, the relationship with the Russians. These things are all, in many respects, tied together, including Iran. And so I think the answer is, we're just asking. What I told the defense minister today was they just have to give us a little time to review these things.

Q. Mr. Secretary of Defense, there have been lots of talk about the new strategy in new U.S. administration. You have been part of the old and new administration. Can you explain this strategy, if not the overall strategy, at least the military part of it?

Secretary Gates. Well, I think that first of all there was a recognition toward the end of last year even in the Bush administration that we needed to take another look at our strategy. And in particular, the conclusions there were we needed to think in shorter terms than 20 or 30 years from now. We needed to think in terms of how do we improve, help the Afghan people and government improve the security and social situation, governance situation in Afghanistan over the next three to five years. And what are realistic attainable goals? So I think that those are some of the same questions that are being asked as part of the strategy review that's underway by the new administration. And essentially, the old administration handed off its review to the new administration as—to be one of the elements involved in the more comprehensive review by the new administration. And so I think that it really is focused on how, how can, how can we help Afghanistan, we and our partners, in the nearer term, in terms of not only their security but in terms of governance, in terms of economic development and so on? And the review is still underway. I expect it will take several more weeks, in part because we are trying to be inclusive and get the views of everyone. And so we'll just have to wait and see when the review is done what the conclusions are.

Q. On the question of supply lines for Afghanistan, Kyrgyz's party today voted in the mid-afternoon from the U.S. that they have to close the base at Manas in six months. What is your sense, Mr. Secretary, of how great a loss that would be? And can you please update us on planning for alternative routes?

Secretary Gates. Well, as I have said, it's a—Manas is important, but it's not irreplaceable. And we are going to continue to work the problem with the Kyrgyz. We have not resigned ourselves to this being the last, the last word. We are clearly—as I said, we have looked at alternatives and have been talking to a number of different, a number of different countries, and you know, I think, I think we are speaking now, for myself, since the Department of Defense will have to pay the bill, I think we are prepared to look at the fees and see if there is justification for a somewhat larger payment. But, but we're not going to be ridiculous about it. It's—we're prepared to do something that we think is reasonable. So I haven't written us off yet, and my hope is that we can walk this back with the Kyrgyz and continue the arrangement. As I say, it is, it is an important base, but it's not so important that we're going to waste taxpayer dollars paying something that's exorbitant.

Q. Martin Arigoto with El Pais, from Spain. You started your—in your position just a couple of years ago. I sat in this kind of informal meeting in Seville at the time, and I remember vividly that that moment was considered a big success, having something like 35,000 soldiers in Afghanistan, because Europeans—(inaudible)—saw this and finally we decided to put—there were some—everybody was happy. Now we are on the brink of arriving to 80,000, and we are not sure what is going to happen. What is going to happen? What has changed in these two years? Were we too frivolous in our strategies that we need to change because after five years fighting, we were unable to find the right strategy—(inaudible).

Secretary Gates. No, I don't think so, I think that the circumstances—in many respects, the circumstances have changed. During the period of 2000, we began to see a significant upsurge in—or a growth of violence in Afghanistan to new levels beginning about 2006. And when I first came to the job, to this job in December of 2006, what we were anticipating was a new Taliban surge, or a new Taliban offensive in the spring of 2007.

And we decided that it would become our offensive instead, and so I extended an American brigade, I added another American brigade, but what we also saw during this period during the mid-part of the decade was the Pakistanis arriving at some of these agreements on the, on their side of the boarder in Waziristan and some of these other places that actually gave the—they basically stopped fighting these guys, and it gave them, in essence, a safe haven. And what we have seen is a steady increase in violence, really since that time.

And so you have—the main circumstance that has happened, I think, has been that, that you have seen a safe haven, to a considerable extent, for the Taliban, and they've been joined not only by al Qaeda but by sort of affiliated groups, groups like Gulbaddin Hekmatyar and the Haqqani network, that are all now working together. And they're coming across the border and creating problems, and so we've been pleased to see the Pakistani military come back to that area over the last year and begin working it. But there's, there's no question that the level of violence has increased steadily for the last two or three years, and so I think the circumstances have changed.

And one of the problems that we have had is that as that violence has increased, we have had—we have increased the number of troops fairly substantially. In fact, our NATO and non-NATO partners have increased their troop contribution by about 15,000 over the past 15 months or so, 18 months. And we have increased, obviously steadily increased our presence as well. What we have not had, though, is particularly in the south, enough troops to be able to hold onto areas where we had cleared the Taliban out before. And so what we are doing with this troop increase is that we hope that this will create a situation in which we can have a more or less continuing presence with our Afghan partners, the Afghan national army in particular, in terms of bringing security to the population, first in the lead-up to the election and then after that, because without that kind of security, economic development is very difficult.

So I think it—what we have seen is, circumstances changed on the Pakistani side of the border, there was a safe haven, the Taliban and others used that as an opportunity to begin coming back. Frankly, the difficulties that the Afghan government has faced in getting services and things to the people have probably contributed. There have been huge increases under the current Afghan government, there have been significant increases in health care and the building of schools, in the number of children going to school, especially the number of girls going to school. So there have been a number of advances, but the security situation has just gotten more challenging, and that's what we're dealing with.

Q. Dr. Gates, yesterday you spoke of asking the allies for more civilian contributions to the Afghanistan war effort. I wonder if you had a chance to talk to any of them about that, and I wonder if in response, today or separately, did they give you any indication of what they want to see out of the strategy review, what kind of input—what they would like to see the strategy be?

Secretary Gates. I think that the short answer to your answer is no. We really didn't discuss the content of the review, either in the larger sessions or in my bilateral meetings. But I did, in my remarks at the larger meetings, talk about the importance of contributions, and contributions very soon, particularly in the security arena, to try and get additional capability there before the elections to provide security so the Afghan people can vote in August. But I talked about more of a contribution in terms of governance, in terms of economic development, rule of law, all of these things where we can help—where we can partner with the Afghan government and help make it more effective.

Q. Secretary, John Hutton this morning said he'd not been asked for any— to send any more troops to Afghanistan. Will you be asking—

Q. John Hutton, Secretary, U.K. secretary of defense, said he'd not been asked to send any more troops to Afghanistan. Will you be asking him to send any more troops and how do you feel that our troops—the British troops have done—(inaudible)?

Secretary Gates. I don't believe that we have made any specific asks at this point. I think one of the subjects that is being pursued in tandem with the Strategic Review is, what precisely do we want to ask different countries to do? And so I think that may come, but we have not done it yet.

Q. And how do you feel the British have performed in the South?

Secretary Gates. I think the British have done tremendously. They've been very courageous; they've been out there. I think that British soldiers—I mean, all of—particularly those who—let's face it, most of the toughest fighting is going on in RC-South, and all of the nations down there, I think, have done of tremendous job and shown tremendous courage—the British, Canadians, the Australians, the Danes, the Dutch. I just think that they're—the Poles—have made a terrific contribution.

Q. Mr. Secretary, how receptive do you think NATO partners have been to your expression of the need for further security forces—(inaudible, background noise)—and what bearing did Minister Wardak—(inaudible)—have on that issue—(inaudible)?

Secretary Gates. Well, again, I haven't really had an opportunity to talk with very many people about the specifics, but I would say, just based on the comments that others made at the table, I think that there is a shared belief that we need to do more in terms of providing security in the run up to the Afghan election. There is very strong support for the expansion of the Afghan army. There was a lot of talk today about what more we could all do in terms of helping train the Afghan national police.

I think all of us see the Afghan national army and the Afghan national police as, really, being the institutions that, over time, take leadership of this struggle for Afghan security. And we're already partnering particularly with the ANA in a lot of our operations. But I think that there was a—particularly with respect to the police, I think, more than I have heard in the past—there was an expression of the importance of helping train and expand the Afghan national police.

Q. And Minister Wardak—what did he say about the current situation?

Secretary Gates. Well, I think that he and Ambassador Kai Eide have both made reports late this afternoon, and I would say that both reports were very realistic. I thought they were balanced. Minister Wardak, as always, expressed the gratitude of the Afghan people for the help they're getting from all the different countries and entities around the world. And I think his focus, clearly, is on the expansion of the Afghan national army and getting that done as quickly as possible. And I think everybody, including him, believes they're ahead of schedule on that.

Q. (Inaudible). Mr. Secretary, whether there was an agreement on missile defense—(inaudible)—already signed the declaration of—(inaudible)— with Poland. And if the project for missile defense is put on hold or cancelled, will the United States be ready to implement the declaration in its full text?

Secretary Gates. I think, in fact, the next—I think, and if I remember correctly, the next consultative meeting that was set up by that will take place between now and the NATO summit, and we will have the first high-level security group meeting later this year. So the answer is yes.

Q. Secretary, how does the global financial crisis color your deliberations—the overall deliberations as the first defense minister—(inaudible)— when the economy has changed quite as much as it has?

Secretary Gates. Actually, there was less focus on—less mention of that today than I would have expected. There have been a few people—I won't name names—but there have been a few who've said that they are not cutting back on their commitment but they are unable to increase their commitment as much as they would like because of budgetary pressures. A number of these ministers of defense are taking some pretty good budget cuts. But what I found impressive, actually, today, was, by inference at least, the fact that people aren't using the economic crisis as an excuse to cut back on their contributions or to walk away from their commitments in Afghanistan, which I found very encouraging, frankly.

Q. (Inaudible.) I was wondering, part of the change of strategy in Iraq was arming local militias; do you think this is an option for Afghanistan, too? And secondly, what, in concrete terms, could be done to change the situation in the tribal areas in Pakistan?

Secretary Gates. Well, I think that the—in the first place, taking the second part of your question—the Pakistani army has been in the fight in along that border. They have taken a lot of casualties. They have been fighting steadily for a number of months. And I think that they have clearly, as we would say, be in the fight. In terms of the—what was the first part of your question again?

Q. Arming local militias.

Secretary Gates. Oh, I think what we want to be very careful about—first of all, there are very significant differences between Afghanistan and Iraq, and trying to apply lessons from one to the other too precisely, I think, is not very helpful. On the other hand, it is clear that, as I suggested today, that we not only need to continue working with the central government in Kabul, but we also need to do a better job of working with the provincial and district governments in Afghanistan.

The last thing the Afghans want is for us, in some way, to recreate warlords. And so the question is, how can you engage the local population in defense of their own population—of their own schools and things like that? And that's what we're exploring, I think, with our Afghan partners. And how do you tie whatever that is to the central government, to the provincial government, so that it's not sitting out here as a warlord coming along—as a new kind of warlord. So I think we're very mindful of that history and determined to do our best to avoid it. But I think there does need to be outreach at the local and provincial level, as well as cooperation at the national level.

Q. But how would you do that in practice? Is this kind of a neighborhood watch program?

Secretary Gates. Well, frankly, we're still working it. I mean, as was the case, I think—and now, I am going to draw a parallel to Iraq—you know, one of the things you don't have to worry about in either country is arming anybody. And so this is really more of a matter of how you partner with people and how you engage with them. And I think that General McKiernan and Minister Wardak and others in the—and the interior minister—are all working together to figure out what's the best way to try and do this.

Q. Mr. Secretary, I would like to return to Manas for a moment: You said that your working the problem with the Kyrgyz government; are you also working the problem with the Russian government, and if so, what is your sense of what the Russians may be interested in?

Secretary Gates. I think the way I'd prefer to leave it right now is that we are talking to a number of governments about access. And that includes the Russians.

Q. But the Russians specifically with regard to access to Manas?

Secretary Gates. I'm not sure that we have directly engaged the Russians on Manas, yet.

Q. (Inaudible)—from Polish radio RMF FM. Mr. Secretary, let me ask you about the future of the alliance: Is the U.S. administration ready to support this year the candidate from new NATO members for a post of secretary general?

Secretary Gates. I will give you an honest answer, and that is I have not had one word of conversation with my colleagues in the American government about that subject yet.

Q. And what's your opinion?

Secretary Gates. I think that we want the best possible candidate, and the one that will have the broadest support within the alliance. There's a lot that needs to be done. I'm a strong supporter of headquarters reform in the alliance, in terms of allowing the secretary-general, giving the secretary general more authority to move money and people around. So we need a strong executive. And—but I have not had a single discussion about it at this point.

Q. Mr. Secretary, now that President Obama has decided to increase troops in Afghanistan, and so Afghanistan was his first priority, his dedication now will be towards reviewing the strategy in Iraq, and when should we expect a decision regarding further withdrawals in Iraq?

Secretary Gates. Well, the review of— in Iraq—the review of our strategy and approach in Iraq is underway, and frankly I don't know when it will be done, but I presume sometime next month, maybe earlier. It's hard to tell.

Q. To follow up on one of your answers, one of the criticisms in Afghanistan, the operation, has been a lack of unity of command between the NATO forces and the U.S. forces. Can you talk about whether or not, number one, that has come up in your discussions today, but also just give us your view on how additional American forces—but, as you would make also some additional NATO capabilities, could be brought together to bear in a more effective way, since there has not been a unity of command in some areas, and also if you can address the caveat issue, which has come up many, many times. How do you crack that?

Secretary Gates. Last fall, I made a change in the command structure. And double-hatted—General McKiernan not only as a commander of ISAF, but also as commander of all U.S. forces Afghanistan. And so he now has under his authority virtually all of the forces inside Afghanistan, and frankly, since I made that move, I have not heard a single complaint from any of our allies about command problems or difficulties with respect to unity of command.

With respect to—and so I think that problem has largely been addressed. With respect to caveats, it continues to be a problem. We've been singing this song ever since Riga, and it—and every meeting, we say, we really wish you guys would take your caveats off. At the Bucharest Summit last year, some countries did either remove their caveats or diminish their impact. But there are still a number, and I can't remember if General Craddock used a number today, but there are still something like 40 or 50 caveats among the different nations that have them. And it's obviously a complication.

Q. Mr. Secretary, how does the troop-buildup coming out in Afghanistan affect the importance of Manas and how much you might be willing to pay for it, and do you believe that missile defense is technologically feasible and cost effective?

Secretary Gates. Well, I—first of all, that's a twofer, isn't it?

Q. Yes, it was. Thank you for noticing.

Secretary Gates. I think—I think that the, the thinking and planning that has been done in terms of alternative networks takes into account the increase of U.S. troop levels and the requirements that they will impose over and above what we already have. With respect to missile defense, I think that because that's such a leading question—and because this issue hasn't been reviewed by the administration yet, I think I'll punt.

Q. You give evaluation and—(inaudible)—of that one—you were saying that there is no—(inaudible)—in the structure—the military structure of the command, that there—(inaudible).

Secretary Gates. Correct.

Q.—but—(inaudible)—are trying to emphasize the civilian side of the operation, and in that field, there is no connection at all between the military side of the civilian side of the operations— (inaudible).

Secretary Gates. Actually—

Q. What is your thinking about that?

Secretary Gates. Actually, that's not right. There is a connection, and it is Ambassador Kai Eide. And he has—he has developed a very close relationship, a very good relationship with General McKiernan, and I think that we have—because Ambassador Eide has finally been given substantial additional resources, both people and money, by the U.N., just in recent months, his ability to do the job that he was given, that he was asked to take on, has significantly been improved and enhanced. And so I think—I think you're seeing a significant improvement in the coordination of the civil-military arena.

Part of the problem that ambassador Eide is, he doesn't know what everybody's doing. The countries that are engaged in the—not on the military side, on the civilian side, he doesn't know who is spending what kind of money on what kind of projects. So that they're—so that he can do the kind of coordination and sharing of best practices and so on that we—that he would like to do.

I'm a big admirer of Eide, and I think that he's been given a very tough job, and I think he's doing it with a great deal of patience and a great deal of skill. And I am very encouraged. I met with General McKiernan the other day, before I left Washington, and he was talking about his relationship Eide and how they're working together closely. I met with Eide here today, and he said the same thing on the military side. So I'm actually more encouraged—quite a bit more encouraged about this civil-military coordination than I was even as recently as the Budapest meeting last fall.

Secretary Robert Gates delivered these remarks in Krakow, Poland

Secretary Gates. Let me start by thanking Poland for hosting this gathering. And let me also thank my fellow ministers for productive meetings these past two days covering many issues, from headquarters reform to Alliance capabilities. Our main focus was Afghanistan—the greatest challenge we face, and a clear threat to international stability. As we've learned, this will not be an easy fight, or a short one, but I'm convinced that NATO and other partner nations are committed to meeting the challenge and meeting it squarely.

During our meetings we all agreed that we must intensify our efforts to bring security and stability to Afghanistan and to ensure that the Afghans were capable of sustaining themselves. It is, after all, their country, their fight and their future. In the near term, it is critical that the alliance provide enough troops to ensure that the August elections are credible. Part of the reason President Obama chose—(inaudible)—upwards of 17,000 additional U.S. troops to the theater.

We also must accelerate the growth and size and capability of the Afghan National Army and police, a key goal that still requires more resources from member nations. At the same time, we cannot neglect the need for a long-term increase of civilian contributions and the necessity to improve coordination between civilians and military components.

On that note I have been greatly encouraged in recent days by conversations about the strong relationship between Ambassador Kai Eide and General McKiernan. I also believe that President Obama's comprehensive review of our strategy, which will be undertaken with our allies and rely heavily on their input, will yield concrete, attainable objectives that will then focus and guide our overall strategy.

As you know, our discussions were largely in preparation for the April meeting of the heads of state, the 60th anniversary of NATO. Looking back over those six decades, it is clear that the alliance has faced many challenges and met them. I believe we are facing a very tough test in Afghanistan, but I have no doubt that we will rise to the occasion, as we have done so many times before. Thank you.

Q. Mr. Secretary, Uzbekistan issued the formal eviction notice—excuse me, Kyrgyzstan issued the formal eviction notice today for the Manas base. Yesterday you seemed to indicate that there was still some hope that the U.S. could retain use of that base. Do you think today that no means no? And also, is there a new deal for resupplying through Uzbekistan?

Secretary Gates. I don't want to get into specifics on alternative routes, but I continue to believe that this is not a closed issue, and if there remains the potential at least to reopen this issue with the Kyrgyzs and perhaps reach a new agreement. If we're not able to do that on reasonable terms, then, as I have suggested, we are developing alternative methods of getting resupply and people into Afghanistan.

Q. Thank you. The question is about Ukraine. The former president of the United States supported Ukraine integrity to NATO. Will Mr. Obama support Ukraine to take part in alliance? Thank you—I mean in that way Bush did it.

Secretary Gates. I think that the alliance—all the alliance members, including the heads, in Bucharest last year acknowledged that Ukraine, at some point, would be in NATO. We are now proceeding on a path in that direction. The annual national plan that is being put together by the Ukrainians is an important step on that road. I think it's become clear that the—it was clear at the foreign ministers' meeting in December that this is a long path in front, and quite frankly, there needs to be greater unanimity of view in the Ukrainian government itself about the next steps, not to mention the resources for modernization of Ukraine's military.

And so I think that all of the members of the alliance have made this commitment. They made it at Bucharest, and the path forward was made out in December, and I don't think that the new administration has a significant quarrel with the path that was laid out at the December foreign ministers meeting.

Q. Yes, thank you. (Inaudible)—Associated Press. Secretary Gates, Mr. Hoop Scheffer said he thinks the NRC should be used also to discuss conflicts with Russia—so, in other words, that meetings ought to be resumed. Do you share this view, and when should this happen?

Secretary Gates. I think that—I mean, the NATO-Russia group exists. I think that everyone has assumed that it will resume being a venue for dialogue between the alliance and Russia. I think the question is at what point that happens. And, frankly, the Obama administration has not yet looked comprehensively at its policies with respect to Russia, and so I think our position on that, on what that ought to happen, is not yet settled. I would, though, reiterate what Vice President Biden said in Munich, that this administration does believe the time has come to reset the relationship with Russia and move forward.

Q. Canadian Television. You've spoken about increase in the civilian component to the Afghan mission. I wonder if you would find it acceptable for those nations that aren't able or unwilling to send more troops—whether that would be a suitable alternative. And in the Canadian context, if the Canadian mission is set to end in 2011, could you see an increased civilian role being a replacement in—

Secretary Gates. I think that all of the nations who are engaged in Afghanistan ought to contribute what they can contribute. A number are doing both. We are doing both. The Germans are doing both, in a significant way. The British are doing both—both the civil and the military side. We are making a substantial addition to the military side, and if other countries are unable to transfer their military commitment but they are willing and able to make a contribution on the stability side, on the development side, those contributions would be very welcome.

I think it's also a point worth making that, you know, the review that the administration has underway is going to be a— it's not only a comprehensive review in Afghan strategy, it's an inclusive review that includes our allies, non-NATO partners and others. It includes the Afghans and the Pakistanis and others. And in parallel with that, we will be developing what we believe other nations might be able to contribute. And so I think a point worth making is that our new president has not yet asked anybody for anything. We are trying to develop, through this review, what those needs are most likely to be, and at that point, I believe before the NATO summit, we will be making those requests, but as yet they're not resolved.

Q. Thank you. Mr. Scheffer said that NATO supports territorial integrity of Georgia, but still the Russian bases are on the territory of Georgia. After adopting the USA-Georgia charter, how do you think it will strengthen cooperation with Georgia, its defense and security system, or not?

Secretary Gates. Well, we have a continuing security relationship with Georgia. We're involved in training. We are involved in military reform in Georgia. So this is an ongoing relationship and it is a relationship that we are pursuing, both bilaterally and within the framework of our NATO allies, and through the vehicle of the U.S.-Georgia Commission. So I think it's proceeding as we had planned.

Q. Thomas Larsen from the Danish newspaper Politiken. There is a lot of talk here in Europe really now about who's going to be the next secretary general from NATO. When would you like to see this issue resolved, and what do you think about the possible candidacy of the Danish prime minister, Mr. Rasmussen?

Secretary Gates. I have a lot of respect for the prime minister. I also have a lot of respect for the defense minister. But there are a lot of capable people, and I would hope that we would have this resolved in time for the NATO summit so that there could be agreement there. Frankly, I think that what's important, from my standpoint, is simply that we have somebody who has the broadest possible support across the alliance, and, frankly, somebody who has the executive experience to run a very large and complex organization.

Q. For the Italian Television, Mr. Secretary, do you believe the new U.N. report about the Iranian nuclear activity will accelerate the United States' plans for an anti-missile defense system?

Secretary Gates. I haven't read the U.N. report yet so I'm not really in a position to comment, but I think that, as I have said before, the primary reason for the third site in Europe is to deal with the Iranian missile threat, and the fact that they have just launched a space satellite I think is indicative of the continuing and steady progress that they are seeing in developing these missile capabilities. So I think we need to take that into account, along with their continuing unwillingness to go along with the U.N. Security Council resolutions, with respect to enrichment.

Q. (Inaudible)—Report. Mr. Secretary, I would like you to say how many countries have, until now, declared to improve troops in Afghanistan, and if you could give examples of countries who are that. The second thing is this casts the issue—the subject of a missile defense project and the new attitudes of the American government towards this subject, and what could you explain about it? Is America going to continue the project in Poland? And the third thing—

Secretary Gates. No, no. First of all, I think there are 46 countries that have— over 40 countries are engaged in Afghanistan right now. And countries are making new commitments on a fairly steady base on both the civilian and the military side. And as I indicated in answering an earlier question, I expect that there will be significant new commitments on either the civilian or the military side in connection with the NATO summit.

We did talk about missile defense in my talks with Prime Minister Tusk and Defense Minister Klich. I basically told them that we needed some time for this administration to review the plans for the third site, to look at it in the context of our relationship with both Poland and the Czech Republic, our relationship with the NATO alliance, the commitments we have made as members of the alliance in terms of European missile defense, and also in the context of our relationship with the Russians. And we need to look at all of that, and I simply asked the Polish leaders for a little time for the administration to be able to do that.

Q. (Off mike.)

Secretary Gates. Well, the president is confronting an economic crisis. We're going through an Afghan review. We are going to be—we're also involved in a review of a way forward in Iraq for American forces. My hope would be that these other issues can be taken up very soon.

Q. Mr. Secretary, you mentioned the desire for NATO countries and nonNATO countries to contribute more on the civilian side. Did you make any specific requests? Did you press your colleagues on specific things they could contribute? Did you get any commitments over the last few days?

Secretary Gates. I did not make any specific requests of any specific country. There have been some new commitments made on both the civilian and the military side over the last couple of days. About 20 countries—19 or 20 countries announced at one point or another in the meetings that they would be increasing their contribution either on the civilian or the military or the training side, so I consider that a good start as we begin to look toward the summit.

Q. Mr. Secretary, my name is— (inaudible)—with the Luxembourg Report, the largest newspaper in Luxembourg. Why does the United States feel that there is a need for a new strategic concept that is to be launched at the summit in Strasbourg—(inaudible)?

Secretary Gates. It's been 10 years since the NATO strategic concept was last—was promulgated, and frankly I think a great deal has happened in the world over the last 10 years. And I think that the idea of taking a fresh look at it makes all kinds of sense.

Last question. Yes, sir?

Q. (Inaudible)—Television, Pakistan. The ministry of Pakistan has signed a deal with the Pakistani militants in Swat Valley—and a lot of criticism is coming from Washington particularly Mr. Holbrooke is criticizing that, and there are some voices in Afghanistan that have been saying the same, along the line that there should be some operation or some sort of discussion with Taliban locals. If Pakistan succeeds in that particular area to pacify the militant activity, will the United States allow the Afghans to make a similar type of agreement?

Secretary Gates. Well, we have said all along that ultimately some sort of political reconciliation has to be part of the long-term solution in Afghanistan. And so I think that if there is a reconciliation, if insurgents are made to put down their arms, if the reconciliation is essentially on the terms being offered by the government, then I think that we would be very open to that. There is going to have to be some political component of reconciliation before this all ends.

Thank you all very much.

Secretary Hillary Clinton, President Fatmir Sejdiu, and Prime Minister Hashim Thaci delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. Good morning. I was delighted to welcome President Sejdiu and Prime Minister Thaci and Foreign Minister Hyseni to the Department of State. I congratulated the president and the prime minister for Kosovo's progress in its historic first year as an independent state. And it is a great privilege and honor to see the many accomplishments of Kosovo since the terrible time of repression and war 10 years ago.

The president and prime minister and I discussed the economic and political tasks ahead and the need to provide an increasingly secure and prosperous life for the people of this country. The president and prime minister outlined their vision of a multiethnic democracy at peace within itself and with its neighbors. The vision is reflected in Kosovo's flag, whose stars represent the different peoples—Albanians and Serbs, Roma, Bosniacs, Turks, and others—who have their home in Kosovo.

I emphasized that the United States, working with our European partners, will continue to extend strong and substantial support for the world's youngest democracy. I am just absolutely delighted, Mr. President and Mr. Prime Minister, to welcome you to Washington.

Mr. President.

President Sejdiu. Thank you once again, Madame Secretary. I would like to thank you—

Secretary Clinton. Can we just stop one second? Why don't we bring Ms. Osmani out, and she can use a microphone out here, so that when the president finishes we'll have consecutive translation; otherwise, none of the press will be able to hear a word that that the president says. President Sejdiu. Okay, good.

Secretary Clinton. So if we could get Ms. Osmani—in fact, Ms. Osmani, come stand—is there a microphone there that'll work? Or here. Come stand with me.

This young lady is the chief of staff to the president. She did an excellent job interpreting for us when we had our meeting. So we'll have the president speak, and then we'll have Ms. Osmani speak.

Ms. Osmani. Thank you, Madame.

President Sejdiu. Once again, I would like to thank you, Madame Secretary, for this great opportunity to have discussions with you for the challenges in front of us and for the developments in our country, and to extend the gratitude of the people and the institutions of the Republic of Kosovo for the continuous support that the United States of America have given continuously to the Republic of Kosovo.

Without the role of the United States of America, Kosovo and its people would not have achieved this point of very important development and progress, and this has been a constant role of support that was given by all the administrations of the United States of America.

Of course, we had a brief discussion about the developments that have happened in Kosovo during the past year. We marked the first anniversary of the independence of Kosovo, the anniversary of the happiness of the children and the people of the Republic of Kosovo. This has been a year of Kosovo's chance to prove itself as a democratic, multiethnic state, a state for all its citizens despite of their ethnicity. And it is a year where Kosovo has proved itself as a good neighbor for all the other countries around and its approach for good, neighborly relations with the countries.

We had the chance to express our vision that Kosovo is essentially interested to become a part of the European Union and NATO, and with a special bond and a special friendship that will continue forever with the United States of America. Kosovo has so far been recognized by 55 countries throughout the globe, and we were delighted to get a confirmation from the United States of America that we will continue to get their support in also getting the recognition from other countries, and also the support for a speedy economic development of our country, and the support for our vision to create a country which is democratic and a country for all its citizens. As I always say, God bless America and its people. We truly believe and we have faith in the United States of America, in President Obama and Secretary Clinton and her team, and all the people of the United States. We know that we will never be left alone. Thank you very much.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Mr. Prime Minister.

Prime Minister Thaci. Dear Madame Secretary Albright—

Secretary Clinton. It's all right. I'm still new.

Prime Minister Thaci. Madame Secretary Clinton, the people of Kosovo shall forever remain grateful, and the memories of your support to them will always remain fresh in their minds. They shall always remain grateful for your help, the help of the American people, and the help of the U.S. Government. We are very proud for the common work, the common progress that we have achieved. A few days ago, we marked the first anniversary of the independence of our country; of course, a year with a lot of progress, but with a lot of challenges at the same time.

We have been recognized by 55 countries and we have faith that a lot of more recognitions will come. We have installed good governance, which is transparent, multiethnic, and effective. At the same time, we are building a democratic order, a state that has privileged treatment and an affirmative approach towards all the minority communities. In the very near future, we expect Kosovo to become a member of the International Monetary Fund as well as the World Bank. We are building our state and respecting the territorial integrity of our country.

The independence of Kosovo has brought more peace, more stability, and more regional cooperation and a lot more of European perspective. On behalf of the Government of the Republic of Kosovo, I would like to once again extend the gratitude for the support that you have given to Kosovo. I would like to thank you for your position on Kosovo and for the position of President Obama on Kosovo. The relations between the United States of America and the Republic of Kosovo will always remain excellent, Kosovo and its people vow in front of the United States of America and its people.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you so much, Mr. Prime Minister.

Prime Minister Thaci. Thank you very much, Madame Secretary. Thank you.

Mr. Wood. The first question from Sylvie Lanteaume of AFP.

Q. I have a question for both President Sejdiu and you, Madame Secretary. Mr. President, the UN Yugoslav war crimes court today acquitted the former Serbian president who was accused of war crimes in Kosovo. Are you disappointed?

And Madame Secretary, Ambassador Feltman is meeting today with the Syrian Ambassador to Washington. Are the relations warming with the—

Secretary Clinton. I'm sorry. I couldn't hear what you said.

Q. Ambassador Feltman is meeting today with the Syrian ambassador to Washington. So I wanted to know—

Secretary Clinton. Oh, I'm sorry. I couldn't understand what you were asking. Ambassador Feltman—

Q. Yes. And so I wanted to know if relations are thawing with Damascus.

President Sejdiu. Of course, we at all times have full trust in the verdict of the International Court, but at the same time, I have—I must emphasize that each and every court case needs to be analyzed in the best way possible. Enormous crimes, crimes against humanity took place in Kosovo, in Bosnia, and Croatia. And these murders were—crimes were committed by people who were leading the politics at that time. We call these murders with premeditation. Of course, there was always a person that led all of these genocidal policies against our country, but there were also those that were complicit to the crimes that were committed.

Unfortunately, parallel to the very high number of victims that Kosovo suffered as a result of the war, there is also a very high number of people, over 2,000 people, that are still missing in Kosovo, and their families know nothing of their whereabouts. For the families of those who lost their loved ones and who are missing their loved ones, the only spiritual thing that would help them get—feel better would be justice for those who committed the crimes.

Secretary Clinton. As to your second question, we have regular interaction with the Syrians as a part of our normal diplomatic efforts. You know, it is too soon to say what the future holds. Obviously, we are working very hard, as is our Special Envoy, George Mitchell, to engage with not only the Israelis and the Palestinians, but all of the neighbors in the region and beyond. And we are going to pursue the commitment that we stated when we appointed our special envoy to try to bring parties together for peace and stability in the Middle East.

Q. My apology on my voice. Madame Secretary, what's your view on Belgrade's destabilizing behavior and obstruction toward the consolidation of a new democracy in Kosovo? What will be future assistance of United States on building a practical democracy and economic development in Kosovo, and in helping the process of recognizing Kosovo's independence from countries that they did not yet?

And I'm sorry—

Secretary Clinton. Yes.

Q.—for the Kosovo delegation. Mr. President and Mr. Prime Minister, we see you again at the Department of State within a very short time, meeting with the Secretary of State. I wanted to ask whether this means that this is another confirmation of the U.S. Administration for the support given to Kosovo.

Secretary Clinton. Well, let me answer your question by starting with the question you asked the President and the Prime Minister. Support for Kosovo is bipartisan. It has been continued now into three administrations, starting with my husband, President Clinton, President Bush, and now President Obama. And as I told both the president and the prime minister, the United States stands with and behind Kosovo, and will continue to work with your country.

To that end, we are very pleased that 55 countries have recognized Kosovo, and we are encouraging many others to do so. We think it is in the best interests of many countries throughout the world to recognize this new democracy and to support it.

I also admire the way the president and the prime minister have proceeded in dealing with the remaining challenges posed with territorial integrity on your borders, internally, in dealing with your neighbors, particularly Serbia. I think that the very calm and reasoned, careful approach has earned Kosovo a lot of appreciation and admiration throughout Europe and beyond.

So as we deal with these problems, we will work with Kosovo. We will continue to help Kosovo try to resolve the remaining challenges that you face. But I think by any fair measure, the last 10 years has been miraculous, and the last year of independence has been a real tribute to the leadership and the people of Kosovo, which is evolving into a multiethnic democracy. The president told me something I did not know, that since independence, not one Serb has left Kosovo, and in fact, others have returned. It's that kind of confidence building and trust building that is essential to the future success of Kosovo, and I compliment you.

Prime Minister Thaci. The support from the United States of America has been extraordinary at all times. We shall never forget the support, the strong support from President Clinton in 1998 and 1999, who with all its potentials, did everything that was possible in order to stop the crimes against our people and to have them all returned to their homes. Secretary Clinton was a person who herself visited the refugees from Kosovo in the '90s, and the memories of her visit will always remain fresh in the minds of our people. The people of Kosovo very much (inaudible) and are thankful for the continued support, as well as the strong position from President George W. Bush, who said enough is enough, and this is what happened.

Now we are marking the first anniversary of the independence of Kosovo, and the fact that now we are standing close to Secretary Clinton is yet another sign that the support of the United States of America and its commitment towards Kosovo will continue. All the progress that we have achieved was a common progress, and we are committed and we pledge that we will continue to do so.

President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Gordon Brown delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Introductory Remarks Omitted

Q. Thank you, sir. I'd like to ask you about the letter that you've written to the Russian President about the antimissile shield in Eastern Europe. Can you talk about why sort of a quid pro quo seemed like the smartest approach?

President Obama. You know, I think that the report that was in The New York Times didn't accurately characterize the letter. What we had was a very lengthy letter talking about a whole range of issues from nuclear proliferation to how are we going to deal with a set of common security concerns along the Afghan border and terrorism. And what I said in the letter is the same thing that I've said publicly, which is that the missile defense that we have talked about deploying is directed towards not Russia, but Iran. That has always been the concern, that you had potentially a missile from Iran that threatened either the United States or Europe.

And what I said in the letter was that, obviously, to the extent that we are lessening Iran's commitment to nuclear weapons, then that reduces the pressure for, or the need for a missile defense system.

In no way does that in any—does that diminish my commitment to making sure that Poland, the Czech Republic and other NATO members are fully enjoying the partnership of the Alliance and U.S. support with respect to their security.

So the way it got characterized I think was as some sort of quid pro quo. It was simply a statement of fact that I've made previously, which is, is that the missile defense program, to the extent that it is deployed, is designed to deal with not a Russian threat, but a Iranian threat.

Q.—response have you received from Russia?

President Obama. We've had a good exchange between ourselves and the Russians. I've said that we need to reset or reboot the relationship there. Russia needs to understand our unflagging commitment to the independence and security of countries like a Poland or a Czech Republic. On the other hand, we have areas of common concern. And I cited two examples: the issue of nuclear nonproliferation and the issue of terrorism. And at this point, I think we probably have some potential common concerns on the world economic front, as well.

So my hope is, is that we can have a constructive relationship where, based on common respect and mutual interest, we can move forward.

Prime Minister Brown. Nick.

Q. Nick Robinson, BBC News. Mr. President, it's often been said that you, unlike many of your predecessors, have not looked toward Europe, let alone Britain. Can you just respond to that comment? And also, the Prime Minister is talking to you about a global new deal today. Will that actually help hard-pressed American consumers?

And if I may briefly put a question to the Prime Minister.

President Obama. Well, first of all, the special relationship between the United States and Great Britain is one that is not just important to me, it's important to the American people. And it is sustained by a common language, a common culture; our legal system is directly inherited from the English system; our system of government reflects many of these same values. So— and by the way, that's also where my mother's side of my family came from.

So I think this notion that somehow there is any lessening of that special relationship is misguided. Great Britain is one of our closest, strongest allies and there is a link, a bond there that will not break. And I think that's true not only on the economic front, but also on issues of common security.

And in our conversations here, we talked not only about the need to coordinate around economic policy, but also I expressed to the Prime Minister America's extraordinary gratitude for their support in our efforts in Afghanistan, and the young men and women of Great Britain who have made enormous sacrifices there. Although there was a debate, obviously, around the issue of Iraq, nevertheless, whether you are for or against the war here in the United States, the recognition of Great Britain's friendship and standing tall with us during that period is something that will never be forgotten.

And so rest assured that the relationship is not only special and strong, but will only get stronger as time goes on.

Prime Minister Brown. I'd like to thank President Obama for his welcome, for his hospitality, for his leadership of his country and the inspiration he's giving the world at this very difficult time.

And I've come here to renew our special relationship for new times. It's a partnership of purpose. It's a partnership of purpose that is born out of shared bonds. It's a partnership of purpose that is founded on a determination to rise to every challenge. And I think it's a partnership of purpose that is driven forward now by the need for us all to work together in unity to deal with the world economic problems. And I'm grateful for the conversations I'm having with President Obama about this and about other things. And I'm grateful, too, that Michelle and Sarah will be meeting later this afternoon and I know they'll have an enjoyable time, as well.

President Obama. Absolutely. Okay.

Q. Prime Minister, your chancellor has said overnight that it is our collective responsibility, all of us have to have the humility to accept that over the last few years things have got out of alignment. Is that a form of apology from the government? Are you apologizing for the problems that there have been over the past 10 years in the financial system?

Prime Minister Brown. Well, there's got to be deep regulatory change. We've just been talking, Barack and I, about the need for proper supervision of shadow banking systems, of areas where there was bank practices that were unacceptable, where remuneration policies got out of hand and weren't based on long-term success, but on short-term deals. And these are the changes that we've already announced that we are going to make.

So we've learned from what has happened over these last 10 years. Things have happened in every part of the world that we're having to learn about, as well, and you've got an international financial system that we've now got to show can be brought to work in the public interest.

So every country is learning and every country is taking action. And what we are talking about today is how by us taking action, Britain and America, we can help other countries that join us in making for a more stable and effective financial system.

Caren.

Q. Thank you, Mr. President. The stock market has fallen to lows since— it's not seen since 1997 this week, and an undercurrent of these declines is the fear that your plans to fix the banking sector might not work. And I'm wondering if you could talk about your plans and whether you think you can give reassurances that they will, in fact, work.

And, Prime Minister Brown, I wanted your view on whether you think your two countries have a handle on the banking sector problems that are affecting both your countries.

President Obama. Well, let me say this: I'm absolutely confident that they will work. And I'm absolutely confident that credit is going to be flowing again, that businesses are going to start seeing opportunities for investment, they're going to start hiring again, people are going to be put back to work.

What I'm looking at is not the day-today gyrations of the stock market, but the long-term ability for the United States and the entire world economy to regain its footing. And, you know, the stock market is sort of like a tracking poll in politics. It bobs up and down day to day, and if you spend all your time worrying about that, then you're probably going to get the long-term strategy wrong.

Now, having said that, the banking system has been dealt a heavy blow. It has to do with many of the things that Prime Minister Brown alluded to: lax regulation, massive over-leverage, huge systemic risks taken by unregulated institutions, as well as regulated institutions. And so there are a lot of losses that are working their way through the system. And it's not surprising that the market is hurting as a consequence. In fact, I think what we're seeing is that as people absorb the depths of the problem that existed in the banking system, as well as the international ramifications of it, that there's going to be a natural reaction.

On the other hand, what you're now seeing is profit and earning ratios are starting to get to the point where buying stocks is a potentially good deal if you've got a long-term perspective on it. I think that consumer confidence—as they see the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act taking root, businesses are starting to see opportunities for investment and potential hiring, we are going to start creating jobs again.

One of the things that Prime Minister Brown and I talked about is how can we coordinate so that all the G20 countries, all the major countries around the world, in a coordinated fashion, are stimulating their economies; how can we make sure that there are a common set of principles, in terms of how we're approaching banking, so that problems that exist in emerging markets like Hungary or the Ukraine don't have these enormous ripple effects that wash back onto our shores, and we're providing them with some help in a coordinated international fashion, as well. All those steps, I think, are going to slowly build confidence. But it's not going to happen overnight. And my main message to the American people is to just recognize that we dug a very deep hole for ourselves; there were a lot of bad decisions that were made; we are cleaning up that mess. It's going to be sort of full of fits and starts in terms of getting the mess cleaned up, but it's going to get cleaned up. And we are going to recover and we are going to emerge more prosperous, more unified, and I think more protected from systemic risk, having learned these lessons, than we were before.

Prime Minister Brown. I think President Obama is absolutely right. And I think the history books will record that what he has done in his first, well, nearly 50 days of office has been momentous in setting the means by which we can see the economic recovery happening.

We've had a global banking failure, and it's happened in every part of the world. It's almost like a power cut that went right across the financial system. And we have got to rebuild that financial system. We've got to isolate the bad assets. We've got to underwrite the financial system so that loans can start again to businesses and families. And we've got to get enough lending into the economy so that people— enough credit so that people are able to go about their normal business again.

And that's why we're looking ahead to the G20 in London in April, because a bad bank anywhere can affect good banks everywhere. So we've got to root out the problems that exist in other parts of the world, as well, set principles with the banking system for the future, and make sure that the banks subscribe to lending agreements where they actually increase the lending that is available to citizens in every country.

Q. Tom Bradby from ITV News. Prime Minister, Mr. President, should all governments at this point acknowledge mistakes of policy and regulation in the past? Would that be helpful or unhelpful, in general? And can I just ask you, an awful lot of ink is used describing the individual relationships between Prime Ministers and Presidents. Could I just ask you to describe how at this point you find working with each other?

President Obama. Well, I will say that this is my third meeting with Prime Minister Brown, and I'd like to think that our relationship is terrific. And I'm sure he won't dispute me, in front of me anyway. No, look, I think that the Prime Minister has taken the helm of the British economy at a very difficult time. As he noted, I've just come in recently. But I think that there are a set of shared values and shared assumptions between us: That we believe in the free market, we believe in a government that is not overbearing and allows entrepreneurs and businesses to thrive, but we also share a common belief that there have to be sufficient regulatory structures in place so that the market doesn't spin out of control.

I think, on the international front, we have a shared world view that it is important for us to be true to our values and ideals of rule of law, of a belief in human rights, a belief in our democratic practices, but that we also have to be respectful around the world and to listen and not simply dictate; that in this new world that we live in, that the way to get things done is to build partnerships and alliances, as opposed to acting unilaterally.

So I think both on the economy and both—and on foreign policy, we've got a shared world view that allows us to work together very effectively. And he also has a wonderful family, as I do. So we can always talk about our spectacular lives and our wonderful children.

With respect to the first part of your question, look, I think there is no doubt that, setting aside who's to blame, that in the past there have been some mistakes and lessons learned in terms of how we deal with the financial sector. Globalization can be an enormous force for good. And one of the things that we've talked about repeatedly is that countries in this crisis cannot start turning inward and try to erect protectionist barriers. We should encourage trade. The fact that we have a global capital system allows money to flow to areas that previously couldn't get capital. That allows them to develop and to grow. That can grow the economy worldwide, increase trade, and that potentially benefits everybody.

But what is also true is, is that when you've got trillions of dollars that can now move at the speed of light, when you've got a whole series of unregulated pools of dollars outside of the banking system, but we still have a 1930s regulatory system in place in most countries designed from the last great crisis, that we've got to update our institutions, our regulatory frameworks, so that the power of globalization is channeled for the benefit of ordinary men and women, so that they have jobs, they can purchase a home, they can send their children to college, and prosper and thrive; and that the benefits of globalization aren't just for a small handful of people who are not accountable.

And that's the kind of transformation that we're obviously trying to bring about here in the United States, and I suspect that that's a view that Gordon shares.

Prime Minister Brown. Yes, Tom, I've enjoyed every conversation that we've had, both on the telephone and when we've met. I don't think I could ever compete with you at basketball—perhaps tennis.

President Obama. Tennis, I hear you got a game.

Prime Minister Brown. Yes, we could maybe have a—

President Obama. We haven't tried it yet.

Prime Minister Brown. I don't know if you—I think you'd be better. But there we are.

As far as the common interests that we're pursuing—look, there is the possibility in the next few months of a global new deal that will involve all the countries of the world in sorting out and cleaning up the banking system. And there is the possibility of all the different countries of the world coming together to agree to expansion in the economy that is necessary to both restore confidence and to give people jobs and growth and prosperity for the future.

And there is the possibility of the international institutions for the first time being reformed in such a way that they can do the job that people want them to do, and deal with some of the problems that exist in the poorest countries of the world. And there's a chance, also, that the recovery that we're talking about can be a green recovery, a low-carbon recovery, where each country in different parts of the world can work on this together.

So the opportunities are there. I've said to the President that almost every leader I meet wants the best possible relationship and the most—the highest degree of cooperation for the future.

And so the challenges are momentous and global. The response of leaders around the world is to want to work together. And I believe that we can make a contribution not just to each of our own economies, but make a contribution to the world economy, helping each economy if we can actually work together. And that's why our talk about the G20 is very important. We hope to make progress on April the 2nd.

And as far as regulation, I want the regulatory system to be reformed to meet the needs of our times. When we made changes in 1997, we made changes for the times of 1997. The financial markets have moved global since then, and we need a global means of bringing people together so there's proper supervision of the system. You don't want shadow banking systems. You don't want regulatory tax havens. So we've got to act as a world together to deal with that. And that's one of the things we'll be talking about in April in London.

Q. Can you just talk about the Pakistan terror attack today on the cricket team? You, in particular, Mr. President, have made it clear that you've got to see Afghanistan and Pakistan together. How do you think that the world community can support Pakistan?

President Obama. Well, the details are still coming in, and so I don't want to be too specific. Obviously, we're deeply concerned. But let me just make a general statement. Both Great Britain and the United States share a deep interest in ensuring that neither Afghanistan, nor Pakistan are safe havens for terrorist activity.

And we have coordinated effectively in the past. But the truth is, is that the situation in Afghanistan has deteriorated. The safe havens for al Qaeda remain in the frontier regions of Pakistan. And we are conducting currently a comprehensive review of our policies with respect to Afghanistan, with respect to Pakistan, our coordination with our NATO allies and other members of the international security forces that are there. I will be making a series of announcements prior to the NATO summit that immediately follows the G20 summit, in terms of the direction that the United States would like to go.

What I'm confident in is that our strongest partner in that effort once again will be the United Kingdom and the Prime Minister sitting next to me.

Okay, thank you, guys.

Secretary Robert Gates and Minister Hervé Morin delivered these remarks in Arlington, VA

Secretary Gates. Good afternoon. It's a pleasure once again to welcome Minister of Defense Morin to the Pentagon. When he was last here, a little over a year ago, I remarked that Franco-American relations had entered a new era. That has been borne out by the cordial and candid meetings we have had since then, including today's.

Minister Morin and I discussed many aspects of our relationship, in particular the mission in Afghanistan and the NATO summit next month. France will be co-host, along with Germany, and the meeting will be held on their border. It is a choice of location with great historical significance, for this will be NATO's 60th anniversary.

Since the founding of the Transatlantic Alliance, we have seen a Europe transformed, with independent democracies replacing captive nations in Central and Eastern Europe, and a democratic Germany re- incorporated into the heart of Europe.

France, which has contributed so much to the transformation of Europe, is becoming more integral to NATO. Americans are glad that that is the case, and I look forward to ever closer cooperation with the minister and the French government on a broad range of issues.

Mr. Minister, thank you very much for being here today.

Minister Morin. Well, just a word, if you will, confirming what my friend Robert Gates was saying.

We have known each other for almost two years. So we're an old marriage of sorts. And we did indeed discuss the strategy for NATO in Afghanistan.

We also mentioned—(inaudible)—of the Iranian nuclear program and its impact on the rest of the world. And of course, I felt an obligation to mention a future call for tender, regarding an American tanker.

I reminded my counterpart that opening had to take place in both directions, that you can't be a supplier of military equipment while at the same time thinking that their reciprocity was not possible.

Also we of course mentioned a topic which, for the French and Americans, is really something that we approach in a very similar manner. And that is the construction of defense, for Europe, and the fact that Europeans need to take at least partially control of their defense.

I say “partial” because of course it is a long way between now and the situation where Europe would be able to guarantee its own safety by itself.

So that would be for our conversations. Thank you.

Q. Over the past year, France has expressed a desire to reintegrate NATO. Is this something that you discussed? Where do we stand? Is this already something that has been solved? And if so, what are the terms?

Secretary Gates. I think that this is a matter that is still under discussion in the French government, and that's probably a question better directed to Minister Morin.

All I can say is that as we contemplate the possibility of France's full participation, in the alliance, we welcome it with open arms.

Minister Morin. I've already answered this question 20 times. I mean, do you want me to answer for 21st time? I get the feeling I'm repeating myself over and over and over. And now you get my feeling.

Should I ask that question again? No, no, no.

Q. President Obama said today that he had sent a letter to Russia, regarding missile defense. Are you trying to essentially put Russians on the spot here and say, you know, all right, go ahead and do something to lessen the Iranian threat, and we will then take away the missile defense program that Russia so detests?

And are you concerned at all about the message this sends, to Poland and the Czech Republic, not to have a final answer from the U.S. yet, as to whether you will in fact go ahead with the commitments you've already made in those countries?

Secretary Gates. I told the Russians a year ago that if there were no Iranian missile threat that there would be no need for the third site in Europe, the third missile defense site in Europe.

I don't think at all that this is trying to put the Russians on the spot. I think it is trying to reopen a dialogue and say, we are open to talking with you, about how we address this problem and how we can move forward. And obviously one approach would be, if we can persuade the Iranians not to go forward with their ballistic missile program, if we'd do that together.

Another alternative is, as we have talked with the Russians before, of incorporating them in a partnership that makes them a full partner in missile defense, because the reality is that the missiles that the Iranians are testing can reach a good part of Russia, as well as Eastern Europe and part of Western Europe.

These missiles cannot reach the United States at this point. This is part of our commitment to a European missile defense. And so I don't think anybody was trying to put the Russians on the spot.

This really was about saying, look, here's the cause of the concern; can we do something about the cause? And if not, then what can we do together to deal with a potential threat to you, the Russians, as well as Western and Eastern Europe?

Q. And the message to Poland and Czech Republic?

Secretary Gates. Well, I think that the message that I gave Prime Minister Tusk was, give us a little time. The administration has not had an opportunity to look comprehensively yet at our relationship with Russia and arms control and all the different aspects of the relationship, which includes the potential for a partnership in missile defense.

So I think that, I mean, my sense was that the Poles were somewhat reassured. They obviously would like to see us go forward quickly and strongly. But it is a new administration, as is evident. There are many critical issues on the president's plate right now. And this is one that we'll get to as quickly as we can.

Secretary Hillary Clinton delivered these remarks en route to Brussels, Belgium

Secretary Clinton. I just wanted to make a couple of points as we head to Europe. I think that the message out of the last three days is that the United States is fully engaged and committed to play a vital role in an effort to achieve a comprehensive peace and two states, Israel and the Palestinians, living side by side in peace and security. We accomplished what we set out to achieve. We went to Sharm el-Sheikh and pledged over $900 million in humanitarian aid for both Gaza and the West Bank. We also consulted widely with Arab, Israeli, and Palestinian leaders on the way forward. We very strongly supported the Palestinian Authority as the only legitimate government for the Palestinians and the only partner for any negotiations. We also laid the groundwork for the comprehensive peace settlement that we'll be working toward by sending two representatives to Syria.

And importantly for me, we tried to highlight why we're doing all of this. The meeting with the women entrepreneurs in Israel, the meeting today with the young Palestinian students really illustrate both what we think is the real hope for the future, but also the necessity of the role that the United States intends to play. This is obviously my first trip back as Secretary of State, but I will be back often, and our special envoy will be back as soon as there is an Israeli government.

Looking ahead to Europe, this will be my first meeting with the NATO Council, and I'm looking to demonstrate that the United States intends to be an active participant within NATO and with our NATO partners. I will certainly be raising issues that are important to the United States such as our plan going forward for Afghanistan and Pakistan, the NATO-Russia relationship, some of the old problems and the new threats that we are going to confront together. I will end the week with a meeting in Geneva with Foreign Minister Lavrov, and then going on to Turkey for consultations with the leadership there.

There's a lot of work to be done, but I'm not only very committed but eager to see that work take off in a meaningful way. I think we laid the groundwork over the last three days.

Q. Madame Secretary, you were understandably circumspect about your hopes for Syria a couple of days ago. I'm wondering now whether you might give us a little bit more of a sense of the role that you could foresee Syria playing in this comprehensive solution. There's a lot of talk about how it can be—it can have an influence on both the Palestinian issue, on Iran, and on Israel and Syria itself. Just maybe hear your thinking a bit on that?

Secretary Clinton. I think that I don't have too much more to add to what I've already said. We believe that there is an opportunity for Syria to play a constructive role if it chooses to do so. We are going to explore the range of issues that we have concerns about, both on a bilateral basis and then about the role that Syria plays with respect to other nations and peoples in the region.

I really have nothing to contribute other than our willingness to send Jeff Feltman and Dan Shapiro to see whether or not there's a basis for us to expect any constructive contributions from the Syrians.

Q. Madame Secretary, President Abbas made some very strong comments on Iran today, standing beside you. And I wonder what's your—what do you think of those comments and what's your assessment of the role that Iran has been playing in efforts to form a unity government in the Palestinian territories?

Secretary Clinton. I think President Abbas responded appropriately to what were comments made at the highest levels of the Iranian Government today, which were a clear interference in the internal affairs of the Palestinian people continuing effort on the part of the Iranians to undermine the Palestinian Authority. I'm not going to add to what President Abbas said. I think he spoke forcefully on behalf of his government and the Palestinian people.

Q. Bob Burns from AP. You mentioned Afghanistan and the discussions you'll have in Brussels. I'm wondering whether you think there's a prospect for engaging Iran in being helpful in Afghanistan. Is that one element of your engagement strategy?

Secretary Clinton. Bob, we are in the final stages of our policy review on Afghanistan and Pakistan and I don't want to preview that or try to summarize where we are in the process until we are ready to unveil it. But Iran borders Afghanistan. In the early days of the military efforts by the United States and our allies to go after the Taliban and al-Qaida, Iran was consulting with our ambassador on a daily basis. Where it is appropriate and useful for the United States and others to see whether Iran can be constructive, that will be considered.

I've said it and many of you have heard me say it over and over again: there is a great deal of concern about Iran from the entire region. I heard it over and over and over again in Sharm el-Sheikh, in Israel, in Ramallah. It is clear that Iran intends to interfere with the internal affairs of all of these people and try to continue their efforts to fund terrorism, whether it's Hezbollah or Hamas or other proxies. So we have said consistently that we are ready to engage, but we want to make sure it's constructive, and that goes for Afghanistan and it goes for all the rest of the region.

Q. Madame Secretary, could you talk a little bit, please, about Russia and the conversation that's going on at NATO whether to fully—whether to bring Russia back into the fold, particularly after the conflict in Georgia?

And then, if I may, would you mind responding to the ICC warrant for Bashir in Sudan, and whether you're concerned about—this will result in a lot more violence?

Secretary Clinton. With respect to Russia, the relationship between NATO and Russia is going to be on the agenda of our discussions in Brussels. I think, just as with the conversation that I will begin with Minister Lavrov on Friday, there's an interest in exploring with Russia what kind of cooperation is possible—both with NATO, with the United States—on a range of issues, and that's going to be teed up. I think in some areas we're going to find there's a great potential for cooperation. In others, we're going to have differences and we will stand our ground and they will stand theirs and we'll hope to find some accommodation if possible.

But there are some actions that Russia has taken recently, as you know, over the last several years that are very troubling. Yet on the other hand, Russia just signed on to our P-5+1 statement, calling on the IAEA to vigorously enforce the Security Council resolutions regarding Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons. I think there's a really active dialogue going on, and I'm looking forward to sitting down with Minister Lavrov to explore what the limits of it are.

Q. And on the ICC?

Secretary Clinton. Governments and individuals who either conduct or condone atrocities of any kind, as we have seen year after year in Sudan, have to be held accountable. The ICC has issued an indictment based on a very long investigation, and it is now in a judicial system, properly so. We are going to hope that there is not any increased violence on the part of the government in Khartoum. In the face of this indictment, President Bashir would have a chance to have his day in court. If he believes that the indictment is wrongly charged, he can certainly contest it. But I certainly hope that it does not lead to any additional actions of violence or punishment on the part of the Bashir government.

Q. Madame Secretary, a question about your philosophy of peacemaking in the Middle East. I wonder if you believe that the proper U.S. role is to be a coordinator in talks between Israel and the Palestinians, or whether you think that, as in your husband's administration, the U.S. should take a position on some issues and promote them.

Secretary Clinton. Paul, we're going to start off in a coordinating and facilitating role, because it's important to get the effort going again. It would be preferable to have the parties be able to conduct these negotiations and advance an agenda that would produce real results in a timely manner. But certainly, the United States has been involved in this effort for a number of years, as have other parties who have opinions. I'm sure that as it goes forward many of us will be expressing those opinions and presenting positions for the parties to consider.

But at the end of the day, as I said earlier, no one can make a decision on whether or not there will be two states or a comprehensive peace settlement except those who are directly involved. I believe that starting so early as we have—the fact that as soon as President Obama asked me to take this job, I began to put together recommendations that I thought would advance our positions on a number of issues, including the extensive use of special envoys, which I am 100 percent committed to, as you have probably surmised, because I think it gives you extra capacity to deal with particularly challenging issues.

Senator Mitchell was appointed on day two of the Obama Administration, day one of my tenure as Secretary of State. It sent exactly the message we intended it to send: that we weren't waiting, we weren't delaying, we weren't sitting on the sidelines, we were going to be actively involved.

Now, are there risks to being actively involved? Yes. There are risks in getting up in the morning and pursuing whatever your particular interest might be. I am absolutely committed to this. The President is absolutely committed. Senator Mitchell has made this a full-time endeavor. We're going to give it everything we have. We can't promise any outcomes, but we can promise the very best efforts of the United States.

Q. Madame Secretary, on Russia and their position in relation to NATO, we understand that the U.S. is sort of thinking that the NATO-Russia Council has not really been as useful as it should have been, and that some sort of upgrade of that relationship is necessary. What might that look like?

And on the Syria question, how much coordination and what kind of coordination did you do with the congressional delegations that went to Damascus in recent weeks and months?

Secretary Clinton. We are exploring ways, as I said, to create more cooperation between Russia and NATO. I think the NATO-Russia Council is one vehicle, but there may be other ways that we can design. But it's not the vehicle so much as the substance. We want to have a more robust and meaningful dialogue with Russia going forward on a range of issues. We believe that there are a number of areas that should be explored to determine exactly what possible overlapping areas of responsibility could be developed.

For example, you heard and saw that we think that there is some useful discussion that can be had about missile defense with the Russians. I don't think that should surprise anybody. The Russians and the United States have sort of had an on-and-off discussion for a number of years about whether they can cooperate, whether we can cooperate together.

Let's put it on a serious track and not talk to each other through the press, with all due respect, but actually talk to each other about what's possible. It is important to make the case, as I and others have been making it, that we think Iran poses a threat to Europe and Russia. How do we cooperate on that? But first, how do we make the case for that shared mutual interest? I think this is a very rich area for exploration, and that's what we're going to do.

With respect to Syria, I personally spoke with two of the congressional delegations that have gone to Syria, got a full readout from them as to their assessments. I think that certainly based on those assessments plus our own, we're taking this step of sending our two representatives to Damascus. We're not staking out ground and saying what we are or are not going to do. We're exploring. We don't know what's possible. We don't know what's going to be developed out of this. We're testing whether or not there is a sincere interest in resolving a number of the issues that are contentious between us.

Q. Thank you, Madame Secretary, Sylvie Lanteaume from AFP. During your talks with your European colleagues, are you going to speak about the transfer of detainees from Guantanamo? And are you satisfied so far with the level of cooperation you got from them?

Secretary Clinton. I'm very encouraged by what I've heard, as you may know, because I've done a number of these bilateral meetings over the last weeks. I have met with many European foreign ministers as well as foreign ministers from other parts of the world. In the vast majority of cases, I have raised this as something that we may well come back to them about once we finish our own internal work on this issue.

I think we have been quite encouraged at the positive, receptive responses we've been getting. But we're not ready to go yet and actually make specific requests. But I am encouraged that this will be an area where we'll have a good working partnership.

Q. Thank you, Madame Secretary. You know, there's—with some of the discussion in the press about the letter to the Russians and missile defense, there have been—

Yes. There have been concerns raised in Poland and the Czech Republic about whether or not they're being left in the lurch. And I was wondering if you were planning to address that in any way, when you see your counterparts.

Secretary Clinton. Well, actually I've discussed it already with Foreign Minister Sikorski and Foreign Minister Schwartzenberg, and I see it very differently. My view is that the people and governments of the Czech Republic and Poland showed great courage and leadership in agreeing to have the missile defense systems deployed on their soil. Why? Because they recognize there is a real potential future threat. They didn't hide their heads in the sand. They said, you know what, we see it as you see it, that missiles not only with a nuclear warhead, but a conventional warhead, or some other chemical, biological weapon, could very well be in the hands of a regime like Iran's, which we know will use whatever advantage they have to intimidate as far as they think their voice can reach, and which—who are actively pursuing a missile development program.

Certainly the constant threat that we worry about—of these weapons falling into the hands of terrorist groups —suggest strongly that Europe, which is much closer in range to a country like Iran or a potential launching ground of a terrorist network, needs to be prepared.

I think that both the Czech Republic and Poland have shown a visionary understanding of what is at stake. And as I said with both of them, and I think in the meeting with—the press avail with Minister Schwartzenberg, as I remember, I not only publicly thanked the people and Government of the Czech Republic, but said that their willingness to do this assists us dramatically in trying to figure out how we are going to have a mutual defense.

We've made the point to Russia, and we will make it again—and I think that they're beginning to really believe it—that this is not about Russia. We have real potential threats and obviously Iran is the name we put to them.

But it is a kind of stand-in for the range of threats that we foresee. Just as we had to build a mutual defense with Europe in the 20th century, we have to build it in the 21st century. It is my hope, Glenn, that we will persuade Russia to be part of that defense. We don't look at Russia and see a missile threat from Russia. We have other problems on energy and their sphere of influence. You know the list. But this is a very real part of our planning for future defense cooperation. I think that because of what Poland and the Czech Republic did, we are further along than we would have been.

Also, I'm going to be looking at potential mutual defense pacts in other parts of the world as well. Because what keeps us awake at night is the potential of a nuclear weapon or another weapon of mass destruction falling into the wrong hands, and either being launched in an intentional way, despite the consequences, because as you know, deterrence is more difficult to use against a non-state actor. It's a different mindset about how you retaliate against a non-state actor; or in an unintentional, inadvertent, negligent way in the wrong hands.

This is a big piece of business. I hope that all of our allies and partners around the world begin to think with us about what 21st century deterrence looks like.

Secretary Hillary Clinton delivered these remarks in Brussels, Belgium

Secretary Clinton. Let me start by saying what a pleasure it is for me to be back here in Brussels again and on my first visit to NATO as Secretary of State. I came here to deliver a clear message: The United States is firmly committed to NATO, and the Obama Administration will work vigorously to renew a real dialogue within this alliance. We look forward to listening, to consulting, and to working in concert to devise and deliver smart solutions to our shared challenges.

As I said to my colleagues, this is not only of great importance to my country and President Obama; it is of great personal importance to me as well. When NATO expanded in the 1990s, I was privileged to visit many new NATO nations as well as longstanding ones. I witnessed firsthand the strength of this alliance, and we in the United States were honored to host the 50th anniversary of NATO.

We've had a very productive set of sessions today. Last night at a wonderful dinner hosted by the Belgian foreign minister, I reported to both NATO and EU foreign ministers on my visits to Sharm el-Sheikh, Jerusalem, and Ramallah, and we engaged in a wide-ranging discussion on a number of issues.

Today, we made real progress on key items of our agenda. First, we expressed a unity of purpose with respect to Afghanistan, NATO's most important ongoing operation. In Afghanistan and in the border regions of Pakistan, we face a common threat, we have a common challenge, and we share a common responsibility.

The United States is working to complete our strategic review of the way forward, and today we found broad agreement on some of the basic elements of a new strategy: first, a regional approach that looks at Afghanistan and Pakistan together; second, increased and integrated civilian and military commitments; third, a strong partnership with the people of Afghanistan to provide security for safe and fair elections in August; next, intensive development efforts to strengthen governance and promote economic opportunities; and finally, a closer relationship working with the people and Government of Pakistan.

Now, today was not a pledging conference, but all of the participants recognized the need for increased resources and manpower to meet the challenges we face in the region. Our consultations will continue when Vice President Biden comes here next week to consult with NATO about not only how our strategic review is moving, but to solicit last-minute opinions from all who wish to participate, and to also seek initial responses with respect to individual countries as well as NATO's future contributions.

We also today had a vigorous discussion about Russia. I thought it was absolutely invigorating to have the kind of true debate that exists among friends and allies over such an important issue. We emerged with greater unity of purpose about how to build a constructive relationship with Russia and a stronger consensus about our relations with the emerging nations of Europe's east.

While the alliance won't agree and indeed need not agree on every issue relating to Russia, we can and do agree that we must find ways to work constructively with Russia where we share areas of common interest. We also agree we must find ways to manage our differences with Russia where they persist, and stand firm where our principles or our vital interests are at stake.

NATO today agreed to restart the NATO-Russia Council as a mechanism for dialogue on issues both where we disagree, such as in Georgia, as the Secretary General noted, and a platform for cooperation that is in our interest, like transit to Afghanistan or nonproliferation. Tomorrow in Geneva, I will be meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov to discuss a wide range of critical matters where we can cooperate and those where we have differences.

Thirdly, today we laid the groundwork for concluding a declaration of alliance security at the NATO summit and for launching a longer-term effort to review NATO's strategic concept. Our discussions were based on the premise that we can only succeed in dealing with old problems and new threats if we are flexible and pragmatic, but united around our common purpose and principles.

Next month's summit on the occasion of NATO's 60th anniversary provides that opportunity not only to reaffirm the values of the North Atlantic Treaty that brought us together, but to ensure that the alliance is equipped to meet the different and diverse challenges of this 21st century.

Let me close by conveying a message from our President. President and Mrs. Obama will visit the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and the Czech Republic between March 31st and April 5th. The President will attend the G-20 summit in London, participate in bilateral programs with French President Sarkozy and German Chancellor Merkel, attend the NATO summit events in Strasbourg and Kehl, travel to Prague where the Czech Government will host leaders of EU member-states and the European Commission president for a special U.S.-EU summit.

President Obama is committed, as I am, to strengthening the transatlantic alliance, to supporting a strong Europe that is a strong partner to the United States, and to energizing our partnerships to confront the common challenges of our time.

Thank you very much and I'd be happy to take some of your questions.

Q. Thank you. Madame Secretary, as you know, some of the new NATO members have interpreted your recent overtures to Russia as potentially the U.S. making deals behind their back. I wonder—I know that you've been emphasizing that you'll be consulting before any decisions are made anywhere—in Asia, in Middle East and Europe, everywhere you go. But what did you do today to give assurances to those allies that you will not indeed make any deals over their heads, whether it be with the Lithuanians, the Czechs or the Poles? Thank you.

Secretary Clinton. I think I reiterated that as members of this alliance, we share a common defense commitment—an Article 5 requirement—that we take very seriously. We intend to work with and support all of our NATO allies. We are well aware of the particular concerns that a number of nations in Europe's east, who have long experience with Russia, have voiced about any kind of dialogue with Russia, whether it be NATO-Russia, the United States-Russia, or any kind of discussion.

I certainly have emphasized, not only today but repeatedly, as have the President, the Vice President, and others that we support the rights of sovereign nations to make their own decisions. As Vice President Biden said in his well-received speech in Munich, the United States will not recognize any nation having a sphere of influence over any other nation.

I reiterated again today—in our meetings with Ukraine and Georgia—the United States' firm commitment to each of those nations moving toward NATO membership and our equally strong commitment to work with them along with NATO to make clear that they should not be the subject of Russian intimidation or aggression.

But I think—as we decided today after lengthy, thoughtful debate—there are benefits to reenergizing the NATO-Russia Council, just as there are potential benefits for the discussion that I will begin with Foreign Minister Lavrov tomorrow in Geneva. We have areas where we believe we not only can, but must cooperate with Russia—nonproliferation, arms control, antiterrorism, anti-piracy efforts. There are a number of important matters that should be discussed between us and Russia.

There are equally serious matters that we need to not stop talking to Russia about. I don't think you punish Russia by stopping conversations with them about matters, whether it be the misuse of energy supplies or the failure to comply with the requirements set forth by the OSCE and others concerning their actions in Georgia.

I think that what we have to be is willing to vigorously press the differences that we have while seeking common ground wherever possible. That's what we intend to do. I believe that our allies understand that. They are well aware that the United States supports them and their national aspirations.

We think that this kind of dialogue with Russia has the potential of easing tensions and solving problems and we pursue it with our eyes wide open. We are certainly not in any way speaking for any other nation whose sovereignty and territorial integrity we respect. We also intend to stand firmly behind our values and principles. That's our position and that's how we will proceed.

Q. Yes, Pravo daily newspaper, the Czech Republic. To the missile defense, there were some controversies over the letter President Obama sent to President Medvedev. Will you have any clarification tomorrow with—dealing with Secretary Lavrov on this issue?

Secretary Clinton. Let me clarify, as I have said before, what has been a constant theme both by myself and the President and other members of our Administration. We applaud the decisions by the people of the Czech Republic and their government—as well as the people and Government of Poland—for proceeding with missile defense on their soil. And the reason for that is it has always been the American position that missile defense is primarily aimed at a nation like Iran or networks of terrorists that could obtain deliverable nuclear or conventional or biological or chemical weapons, and the missiles to use that.

Our discussion about missile defense is aimed at determining its feasibility economically, technologically, and we will continue to explore it with our allies. We've made the case to Russia time and again, and I will make it once more tomorrow in Geneva, that Europe has a right to defend itself from the new threats of the 21st century. We happen to believe in the United States that those threats in the future are more likely to come from regimes and terrorist networks than from nation-states in the immediate vicinity.

Therefore, we want to help Europe be prepared and that's why what Poland and the Czech Republic have done sets the stage for what will be strategic decisions going forward. I know that there's an ongoing debate about what the status of Iran's nuclear weapons production capacity is, but I don't think there is a credible debate about their intention. Our task is to dissuade them, deter them, prevent them from acquiring a nuclear weapon, which given the range of the missiles they currently have access to threatens Europe and Arab neighbors in the Gulf, not the United States.

We will also raise with Russia their continuing discussions with Iran about selling longer-range missiles, which we think are a threat to Russia as well as to Europe and neighbors in the region. We see this in a broader perspective than it's usually described, and we have long offered Russia the opportunity to work with us on missile defense. We actually think that missile defense is a very important tool in our defensive arsenal for the future, because there is unfortunately a great deal of proliferation of weapons of all kinds. We pick up the newspaper and read of a nation testing a chemical weapon. We pick up another paper and read about the continuing desire of terrorist groups to obtain such weapons.

Just as we had a defensive posture against the old Soviet Union in the 20th century, we must now have a defensive posture against the new threats of the 21st century. Therefore, the Czech Republic and Poland —in our view —have been very visionary in looking over the horizon about what we have to be prepared for if we're not successful in preventing the acquisition and proliferation of these weapons of mass destruction.

On that happy note, let me again express my appreciation to NATO for organizing this meeting, my pleasure to representing my country and our new Administration in attending it, and my anticipation looking toward the summit and the work that lies ahead.

Thank you all very much.

Secretary Hillary Clinton was interviewed by the BBC in Brussels, Belgium

Q. I've been asked to start off with the meeting. So what did you—what—I mean, I could say it's good PR. Do you get anything from this?

Secretary Clinton. I get a lot. The meetings that I've had here in Brussels starting with a wonderful dinner hosted by the Belgians of both NATO and EU members was a freewheeling discussion. I was thrilled that it covered a broad range of global issues. People expressed opinions. There was a variety of views around the table.

I thought the NATO ministerial yesterday resulted in two very important outcomes: the NATO-Russia Council being put back into use for a forum that we can, I hope, take advantage of in our many discussions with Russia about where we disagree and agree, and coming up with a big tent approach to Afghanistan that many of the Europeans have been very supportive of.

It was a thrill to be talking to the next generation of young Europeans because after all that's what we all should be thinking about when we do this work. What is it going to mean for the future of these young people who have so much promise and potential? Are we going to make it better for them or are we going to mess it up? I'm going to try to do my part to make it better.

Q. And one striking example of the open hand policy is asking Iran to a conference on Afghanistan. Have you had a reply?

Secretary Clinton. No because we just floated the idea, which was well-received yesterday at NATO. We don't yet have a time or a place. We're just beginning to put that together. But we are reaching out to nations that are not just in NATO or in ISAF, which is the expanded contributors to the military effort in Afghanistan, but countries that have regional, strategic, transit interests—international donor countries. There are so many other countries who have a stake in Afghanistan being stable. Iran borders Afghanistan. Iran—

Q. Do you expect them to help?

Secretary Clinton. They were helpful early on in our efforts in Afghanistan. There were almost daily contacts, a little known fact, between our Ambassador to Afghanistan and Iran's ambassador to Afghanistan. They literally met practically every day to talk through what they could do together. Remember that the Taliban was viewed as one of Iran's adversaries. We sometimes lose track of the complex relationships that exist. So we will invite them. Whether they come is up to them.

Q. Now you're meeting your Russian counterpart later today. Is this the beginning of a new relationship with Russia? Because things have been pretty sticky recently haven't they?

Secretary Clinton. We're going to press the reset button, as Vice President Biden famously said at the Munich conference. I will be meeting with Foreign Minister Lavrov. We have a long list on both sides of matters that we're going to try to seek some areas of cooperation— our efforts against terrorism, our efforts on behalf of arms control and nonproliferation, discuss areas where we think that we've got to understand each other better and try to eliminate the friction—energy security, climate change, things like that.

But there are areas where we just flat out disagree, and we're not going to paper those over. We will not recognize the breakaway areas of Georgia. We do not recognize any sphere of influence on the part of Russia and their having some kind of veto power over who can join the EU or who can join NATO.

Yes, we run the gamut of areas where we believe we have the same interests, areas where we are diametrically opposed. We want to move as many of the areas of agreement into action items. We want to try to better understand whether there are ways to deal with the disagreements.

Q. But what about the idea of putting missiles on Czech and Polish soil? That's obviously a very big source of disagreement. How can you persuade the Russians of your argument that they are not aimed at them? I mean, missiles don't have labels on them saying “Do not deliver to Russia.”

Secretary Clinton. Well, they are defensive weapons. That's part of what missile defense is all about. And the Russians actually offered to work with the United States on a joint production of missile defense capacity. We feel very strongly that the threat comes toward Europe not from Russia in terms of missiles, but from Iran and maybe networks of terrorists. We're going to make that argument and I think there is a growing receptivity on the part of the Russians because it is clear in what we have been saying and doing that we want to open up this process to them.

We would love for them to be partners with us in trying to create a 21st century deterrent that would include Russia vis-à-vis the threat of longer-range missiles.

Q. I'm not sure where your open hand policy leads. Clearly, listening impresses people, people like being consulted, but does it lead to a different sort of American foreign policy?

Secretary Clinton. I think it already has. I think that the reaction that I have received here in Europe is wiping away a lot of the both misunderstandings and very difficult discussions that we had with our European friends.

Q. There's already a different relationship.

Secretary Clinton. Very different. There's an openness. Nobody's editing their words or worrying about the impact that saying, “Well, I don't agree with that” might have. I have invited that kind of debate. I don't think that you get the best out of friends and partners by trying to direct the debate and saying this is what we believe and you'd better believe it. That's not going to work.

Q. But the aim of American foreign policy remains the same, doesn't it? You're talking about different methods rather than—

Secretary Clinton. No, I don't think so. Take what we were just speaking about. I think there was a rather confrontational approach toward Russia in the prior administration. How much that contributed to Russian behavior, I think, is a legitimate question to ask.

Now we don't expect because we're consulting, we're listening, we're putting forth a new approach on engaging with difficult problems like Iran, that everybody is going to agree with us.

But we think we maximize the chance of reaching positions that are mutually in our interests.

Foreign policy is not about being nice and expecting people to agree with you. It is about making common cause, making the arguments, enlisting the positions of friend and foe alike, and then trying to find that common ground.

I think you'll see us doing more and more of that.

Q. Finally, there's always a discussion in Europe about whether America wants, as Kissinger famously put it, one phone number that it can ring up to get Europe's views, or whether you'd rather deal with the leaders of other various countries. I mean, are you—do you support the idea of a Lisbon Treaty, that there should be a single person in charge of the council, maybe Tony Blair, to talk about foreign affairs?

Secretary Clinton. Our view is that we're going to do both. We're going to deal with Europe however Europe decides to organize itself. That's up to the Europeans, of course. We're going to deal bilaterally because there are specific issues that we might have with one member nation that we wouldn't have with everyone else. I see no contradiction. Obviously it's more complex, it's more time-consuming—but I don't shy away from that.

I think that it's part of our responsibility to be as engaged as we can in dealing with both individual countries and multilateral institutions that have formed themselves into a voice, because we don't pick that. That's not our choice. That is your choice.

It is clear that whether we're talking— let's take energy security. To me, a common European energy security policy is in the interest of European nations. We would like to promote that. What Europe decides to do is up to Europe. You've been farther ahead on climate change. Some of your member nations have been less willing to go along. Our country hasn't, up until now, gone along at all. We learn from everybody's experience as I think it's a fruitful and productive constant back and forth that will lead to the best conclusions.

Secretary Hillary Clinton was interviewed by NPR in Brussels, Belgium

Q. Madame Secretary, you've exchanged letters, you met briefly in Egypt this week already with Sergey Lavrov, but this is going to be your first lengthy meeting with the Russian foreign minister tonight. How do you set the tone? Because as you know, your predecessor had quite a testy relationship with him.

Secretary Clinton. We're going to hit the reset button and start fresh because clearly, the Obama Administration believes that there are a number of important areas to discuss with the Russians. We're just at the beginning of this discussion, but I'm looking forward to it.

I was pleased that Foreign Minister Lavrov came to Sharm el-Sheikh, was a participant in our Quartet meeting, joined with all of us in reasserting the Quartet principles. That was a very good sign. And Russia joined with us in the P-5+1, sending a letter to the IAEA about our concerns regarding Iran's nuclear program. So there's a lot for us to do together.

Q. And the Obama—the Russians seem really interested in arms control, and I wonder if you can give us a sense of how the Obama Administration is going to approach that topic differently from the Bush Administration.

Secretary Clinton. We're going to believe in arms control and nonproliferation as a core function of our foreign policy. As you remember, Michelle, there was a great deal of confusion and infighting and ideological position-taking regarding arms control and nonproliferation in the last administration. We're committed to both, and we are going to be working with the Russians on the START Treaty and the nonproliferation treaty and other matters of great concern to us.

Q. About missile defense, is the Obama Administration going to slow down the pace of that to give you more time and room to get the Russians on board to help rein in Iran's nuclear program and Iran's missile program?

Secretary Clinton. There is really nothing to slow down. The question about deployment is dependent upon, you know, fiscal and technological answers being provided. As we said, and as the President has made clear—our view toward missile defense and the Russians is to clarify that our intention is to work to provide a shield that would deter Iranian aggression.

Q. You actually called it an important part of our arsenal yesterday at NATO, and I wonder if the Obama Administration is ready to put, sort of, resources into it, or are you waiting?

Secretary Clinton. We have a lot of different kinds of missile defense. We have sea-based missile defense, we have the missile defense based up in Alaska. Missile defense is a part of our arsenal. The specific issue about deploying in Poland and the Czech Republic is, as I said, a question of fiscal and technological concerns.

Q. Yesterday at NATO headquarters, you suggested this high-level conference on Afghanistan, a big tent conference, and you said that Iran would probably be invited. What incentive does Iran have to come to such a meeting?

Secretary Clinton. We made a proposal for a big tent meeting. We don't have any agreement or details or place or anything like that set up. But we think it's important to provide an opportunity for everyone who has an interest in the stability of Afghanistan to come together and determine how we're going to work toward the security and stability there.

Iran's a neighbor. Iran, for example, is deeply concerned about the importing of narcotics into Iran from Afghanistan. There are a lot of reasons why Iran would be interested, and over the last years the Iranian ambassadors to Afghanistan and even Iraq have consulted about Afghanistan with our ambassadors. There's a history of discussions about Afghanistan so they will be invited. Obviously, it's up to them to decide whether to come.

Q. Well, it's interesting. You have this overture, you're sending envoys to Syria, you've told Israelis and Palestinians on this trip that peace talks are inescapable, you've talked about this fresh start with Russia. This is a lot of diplomatic outreach in one week.

Secretary Clinton. Yes, it does feel like a lot, but I think we have a sense of urgency in the Obama Administration. We believe that there are a lot of challenges and threats that we have inherited that we have to address. But there are also opportunities and we are being extremely vigorous in our outreach because we're testing the waters. We're determining what is possible. We're turning new pages and resetting buttons. And we're doing all kinds of efforts to try to create more partners and fewer adversaries.

Q. And do you think that's why you had such an overflow crowd at this town hall in the European parliament building, or why you got applause at a dinner with European foreign ministers? I mean, that's quite unusual.

Secretary Clinton. I think that the Europeans are excited and relieved at the change in Washington. President Obama and I share a view that there are many ways that the European Union and the United States must work together. We believe that about NATO. These are our strongest ties of alliance going back decades. And it's important to demonstrate that the United States is back. We are listening. We're consulting. We don't pretend to have all the answers to meet these problems that we share.

It was gratifying to see that there's an excitement among Europeans for this renewed level of cooperation. The President will make his first trip to Europe in April and I believe that you'll see the excitement at a frenzy pitch.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Minister Sergey Lavrov delivered these remarks in Geneva, Switzerland

Secretary Clinton. Good evening. Foreign Minister Lavrov and I just finished our first in-person meeting over a wonderful meal together, and I am pleased by the opportunity that we had to begin a discussion on resetting U.S.-Russian relations, a process that we know will take time, but I think we had a very productive meeting of the minds on the range of issues that we will be addressing.

From our side, I think it's fair to say that we are hopeful that this first meeting will lead to others and improve our ability to work together on a range of matters that are significant not only to each of our countries, but to the world. Our two nations share a common interest in working constructively in areas of mutual concern, from arms control and nonproliferation to counter-piracy and counternarcotics, to Afghanistan, Iran, North Korea.

We discussed a number of specific issues that we believe it is important for us to work together to make progress.

There is no time to waste on a number of these significant challenges, so we will begin working immediately to translate our words into deeds. In particular, we discussed at some length our top priorities, including the negotiation of a follow-on agreement to the START treaty, and broader areas of cooperation to reduce the number of nuclear weapons and prevent further proliferation.

We talked about new ways to strengthen our cooperation in Afghanistan. And we expressed appreciation for Russia's decision last month to allow the transit of non-lethal goods to troops in Afghanistan. Both of our countries, along with the rest of the world, are facing an economic crisis. Our two presidents will be attending the G-20 summit in London, and that will be the occasion for a face-to-face, one-on-one meeting between our presidents. President Obama is looking forward to exploring with President Medvedev the range of issues that we discussed and teed up.

We had frank exchanges about areas where we still disagree. We need more trust, predictability, and progress that only comes from working together. Georgia is one of those issues. We talked about ways that we could reduce the violence and make progress in the Geneva process. And we engaged on the importance of strong civil societies and the rule of law, of the role of NGOs, the ties that can be strengthened and deepened between our two peoples. I appreciated greatly the openness and willingness that Minister Lavrov had to discuss any and all issues. Nothing was off the table.

We also engaged in determining how to move forward with bilateral and multilateral mechanisms, including the restart of the NATO-Russia Council, not just as a vehicle for discussing shared interests, but also for addressing our differences. Our agenda tonight was broad, but this is just the beginning. It was, Sergey, a good beginning from my perspective. And we will continue to work closely together in the coming months. There is a lot of work to be done. We think that this is a fresh start not only to improve our bilateral relationship, but to lead the world in important areas, particularly with respect to nuclear weapons and nuclear security.

I deeply believe that improved relations between our two countries will advance the common good and will help us secure a safer, more prosperous, more peaceful future. Those who have traveled with me know that this is all about, for me, the future of our children—what kind of opportunities they have. It is incumbent upon people who hold positions like Minister Lavrov and I do that we exert our best efforts to make sure that we've done all we can to provide the future that Russian, American, and all children deserve to have.

So again, thank you very, very much.

Foreign Minister Lavrov. Dear colleagues, first of all, I would like to thank the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton for this meeting. A separate thanks go for this wonderful dinner. And I believe that I would share everything that's just been said by the Secretary of State.

In addition, I can say that we have already managed to achieve a specific, practical result. We reached an agreement regarding how (inaudible) should sound both in Russian and English. We have no differences (inaudible) anymore. And I am confident that would contribute to the interaction between our two peoples and contribution to the advancement of English in Russia, and of Russian into United States of America.

As Hillary Clinton just mentioned, we discussed in detail practically all issues on our agenda, starting with bilateral relations and, of course, including our cooperation on the international arena. And all of this was done within the context of the preparations for the first personal contact between our two presidents which is scheduled on the fringes of the G-20 summit in London.

We have exchanged our views on priorities for the next foreseeable future for our two countries, and I am confident that the Secretary of State would share my opinion that, by and large, they coincide—our priorities, I mean. Each party describes their outlook and shades of opinion. We did not agree on everything, of course, but we agreed to work on every issue, including where we differ, in a partnership manner and openly.

We identified the readiness of the both sides to prepare to work in such a way— our bilateral relations today acquire a special importance and another chance which we cannot (inaudible) now in the interests of our both peoples, people of the United States and people of the Russian Federation. And we feel our responsibility for the state of affairs globally.

As I've mentioned, we paid a great deal of attention to the preparation of the meeting between our two presidents in London, and of course, we discussed specifically the hot spots in our relations, I would say. We discussed how would we arrange our work to clear up the vestiges of the past in our relations so that a constructive element would dominate and purposeful partnership interaction would prevail. Special attention was paid to non-proliferation of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destructions—destruction, strategic offensive and defensive weapons as well. I think we can manage to arrive at a common view both in the context of strategic offensive weapons and the missile defenses. We understand the readiness of the U.S. side to take into account our mutual interests. We have also considered the nonproliferation developments related to nuclear weapons, including in the context of Iran, Korean Peninsula. I am confident that in the near future we will try and arrive at some agreements, some results which would enable us to bring closer political and diplomatic solution to such things within the frameworks of the existing political and diplomatic channels and formats. We have noted the special importance of the Nonproliferation Treaty and agreed to interact in the context of the forthcoming (inaudible) conference in 2010.

We also remembered that some time ago, on the initiative of Russia and the United States, the Security Council adopted an important resolution on prevention of nuclear weapons and materials finding their ways into the hands of nongovernment entities. We agreed that that would be our common initiative and will continue to be of special importance and priority for us. We will continue our bilateral steps to strengthen this regime within the Security Council. We have launched a number of common initiatives which still valued, are dealing with threat of nuclear terrorism. We have specific agreements here on how do we jointly work towards a more consolidated position of the global community. We've discussed the initiative of the President Medvedev on the Euro-Atlantic initiative in terms of security. And we are looking forward to specific, pragmatic consultations at the expert level with the United States and with all the countries on—within the Euro-Atlantic space.

In Middle East settlement, here we are all members of the Quartet of intermediaries. We consider it our common goal to stabilize the situation. In Afghanistan, we have an interest in the practical cooperation in this area, and I am confident that here we will develop new areas of cooperation. We agreed to facilitate the successful conclusion of the conference in Moscow under the Shanghai security organization devoted to the threats of drugs and terrorists originating in Afghanistan. And we will facilitate a successful conduct of yet another conference on the initiative of United States in late March in Europe somewhere.

We have a common interest in reaching a new level of economic relations between our two countries. The numbers are quite impressive, but the results are far from being in tune with the capabilities of our both nations. Overall, I believe that in London our two presidents would make a strategic choice towards constructive relationship between the United States and Russia. An exchange of letters last month has taken place, and we are confident that it is consonant with the interests of both our peoples and of the world community. We have agreed on the schedule of our work for the future which we will be guided by, and we are looking forward to further contacts with Hillary Clinton and very much satisfied with today's discussions. Thank you.

Mr. Wood. First question to Sylvie Lanteaume from Agence France Presse.

Q. I have a question for both of you. Madame Secretary, did you agree with Foreign Minister Lavrov on any concrete step on resuming the START negotiations?

And Mr. Minister, do you think this dinner put the relationship with the U.S. on a better personal footing?

Secretary Clinton. Sylvie, we spent a lot of our time talking about the follow-on work required regarding START, with the Nonproliferation Treaty, obligations that need to be keyed up for the preparatory conference next year. We agreed to a workplan. I think both Minister Lavrov and I are very work-oriented. We're very practical. We want to make progress every day toward our shared commitments. We are going to create a very specific set of objectives and responsibilities. We hope to be in a position where we can present those to our two presidents before their meeting, so that they can then agree upon the instructions that should be provided to our negotiators.

There's been some good preliminary work on START, and we intend to get fully immersed in that. We discussed some of the elements of what a new treaty would look like. The same on nonproliferation. As you heard the minister say, we have a deep concern about the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. We think both of our countries have the responsibility to lead in this important area. We are discussing a specific program of nuclear security leadership that we will also be working to present later to our presidents.

But a significant part of our meeting was taken up with what is the most serious threat facing humanity, and that is a potential nuclear weapon in the hands of an irresponsible actor. Both Russia and America know that we have to work together to try to prevent that.

Foreign Minister Lavrov. I agree with that entirely. But speaking of the addressed to me, I do hope Hillary would agree with me the question is quite easy to answer. I venture to say that we have a wonderful personal relationship.

Moderator. Russian news program (inaudible) correspondent, please.

Q. Madame Secretary of State, first of all, thank you for the wonderful presents you gave to your Russian colleague. I'm sure the journalists here enjoyed it as well as he did. The question is the Russian word written on the button, there was a slight mistake; it means “overload.” So do you believe there is an overload of problems in the relations between Russia and the United States? If so, which problems and issues could be solved first? And do you think that by pressing this button we will manage to start—to have a new start in the relations between our two countries?

And a follow-up on that to the Russian foreign minister. Have you pressed this button, and if you press it, how would you imagine the Russian-American relations after that?

Secretary Clinton. You are correct. The minister corrected our word choice. In a way, the word that was on the button turns out to be also true. We are resetting, and because we are resetting the minister and I have an overload of work.

This is one of those instances where our commitment to pursue this reset relationship means that we have a very broad agenda. There are so many important matters before us. We each mentioned some of them. But we are going to systematically go through each and every one of them. Where we can agree, like our position on the START treaty and nonproliferation, we are prepared to get to work. Where we have more work to do about how exactly we will cooperate with respect to Afghanistan and what our options are vis-à-vis the Middle East and Iran, we're going to be working through that. And where we have differences, we are keeping those on the list, because we think through closer cooperation and building trust in each other we can even tackle some of those differences. It is overload that we have come out of this dinner with, but it's a responsibility that Sergey and I have taken on on behalf of our presidents and our countries.

Foreign Minister Lavrov. I agree that the load is enormous in terms of our agenda, but neither Hillary nor myself have no desire to get rid of anything of this load.

In addition to the problems, in addition to the joint initiatives that we are to advance, we have discussed a lot of practical projects aimed at ensuring the interests of our citizens, making their lives easy in terms of their contacts, on implementing different ideas in the cultural areas, the area of environmental protection, and many other things. And I believe that we will—would not make any easier the job for us by dropping any of the issues that were discussed today.

Today, our agenda is a full one, but do not compare us with the stone that Sisiphus was trying to get up the hill. And anyway, we will always manage to get that stone up the hill. Together with Hillary, we did press that button, as you've seen. It is a very, very large red button, and I do hope that both Russia and the United States and all other countries would never, ever push any other buttons associated with the initiation of destructive facilities. We will keep pushing the reset button of constructive interaction.

Mr. Wood. Next question to Paul Richter of the Los Angeles Times.

Q. Mr. Minister, both sides are fairly eager for better relations, but one source of concern for the U.S. side has been the sale of Russian S-300 missiles to Iran. Has your government decided to go ahead with those sales now?

And Madame Secretary, I'd like to ask you, the Russian Government—I mean, the British Government has apparently decided to begin some limited contacts with Hezbollah. I wonder if this is of concern to you, and if so, if you've communicated that to the British.

Foreign Minister Lavrov. Speaking of military technical cooperation with Iran, all the issues like issues of our interaction with any other country in this area are dealt with exclusively within the framework of a legal field in accordance with the Russian legislation dealing with the export controls, one of the most stringent ones in the world, and in accordance with our international commitments.

We supply our partners, first of all, non-destabilizing defensive types of weapons, and we want our partners to behave with equal restraint in their military supplies to the countries who quite recently used those weapons quite close to our borders.

In our military technical cooperation with Iran we haven't violated anything. At the same, we fully and seriously take onboard concerns expressed by our partners from the United States and our partners from Israel. And I am confident that the road towards removing those concerns lies through the more active discussion of the proposals made by the P-5+1 group devoted to Iranian nuclear program (inaudible). In addition to serious, tangible economic stimuli, we need a dialogue with Iran with the involvement of all the countries in the region to ensure stable, reliable security where all countries there, including Israel, would live side to side— side by side in peace and security. That is a very complicated issue with lots of shades of opinions and positions, but we have a clear understanding that those issues are to be dealt with and must be dealt with. We will do so. Thank you.

Secretary Clinton. Paul, I can't comment on your question. I don't know any details. I know there was a press report which I just heard about after dinner tonight. We're going to look into it and we may have something to say tomorrow, but I don't have anything tonight.

Q. With your permission, I would like to revisit the issue of the strategic—the weapons. During the previous administration of the United States, the main issue why the United States and Russia couldn't agree was that United States didn't want to include into a new agreement the (inaudible) and the verification control mechanisms. Would you describe the position of the United States now? Are you prepared to do so, as Russia insists?

And a question to Sergey Viktorovich. After this meeting, you discussed the strategic offensive weapons. Will you manage by December 5th this year to reach a new agreement?

Secretary Clinton. Let me first say that we did discuss verification. That is part of the agenda that we are prepared to discuss.

If I may just answer your last question, we intend to have an agreement by the end of the year. This is at the highest priority to our governments. I believe we will be instructed by both of our presidents to make sure we do have an agreement, and we're going to get to work immediately.

Foreign Minister Lavrov. I fully subscribe to this statement. We will do everything to have this agreement reached. This treaty, the present treaty, has become obsolete. The limits in it have been implemented long ago, and staying within the boundaries of that treaty would mean that the United States will have to increase its strategic offensive weapons, sending a very bad signal to the rest of the world, especially on the—during the preparation for the review conference of the NPT treaty.

Q. What do you think about the situation in Kosovo (inaudible)? You've received the president of Kosovo in Washington. Is it (inaudible) NATO and Western allies to stay in Kosovo? Doesn't it provide the situation?

And another question to Mr. Lavrov. When the Russia recognize the independence of Kosovo, because Kosovo is recognized by the majority of the European Union, including by (inaudible)? Thank you much.

Secretary Clinton. I did have a productive meeting with the leadership of Kosovo and congratulated them on their first year of independence. I think a lot of progress has been made, but there is still more to be done. We discussed yesterday at the NATO ministerial the necessity for the continuation of the KFOR mission at this time in Kosovo. But we will continue to work with the government and support them in their efforts to have a very pragmatic approach to many of the issues that are still facing them. The United States is pleased by the progress that they have made and look forward to working with Kosovo for additional progress in the future.

Foreign Minister Lavrov. Well, Kosovo is indeed one of the issues where we, with United States, do not see eye-to-eye and we have quite serious differences. Russia has never tried to make these differences as a course for far-reaching conclusions which would negatively affect our relations in other areas. We believe— we consider that unilateral independence of Kosovo is illegal, and we have a query at Serbian International Court of Justice. Russia has its own opinion, and which will be used in the court procedures.

I believe that all those who do not recognize Kosovo do understand the danger of such a process—of such processes which are not related whatsoever to any logic—logical security of the Albanian population of Kosovo. After, in 1999, a resolution of the Security Council was adopted, has never been threatened. On the contrary, the suffering party was the minority in Kosovo. No threats to the Kosovar Albanians in the last eight or nine years were present, and against this ground declaring (inaudible) recognizing independence would not seem right.

We do hope that—we did hope that this situation would not lead to a new way for violence in the Balkans. And new attempts to (inaudible) the fragment of this state, we have no interest in that. What we want is to strengthen security in the Balkans with the interests of all peoples living there taken into account, and of course, in—with the account of the international law. The initiative by President Medvedev on the new Euro-Atlantic security treaty also envisages consideration of criteria for the settlement of conflict in that region. A single standard would be quite appropriate here.

Q. A question to the Secretary of State Clinton. When could we expect the relaunching of direct discussions—negotiations between the United States and Iran? And how would it go in—hand-in-hand with further sanctions against Iran established by the United States?

Secretary Clinton. We discussed Iran at length tonight. As we explained, we are currently conducting a very broad-based policy review as to the potential steps that can be taken to try to dissuade or prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, work for the end of Iran's support of terrorism directly and through proxies, like Hamas and Hezbollah. We certainly would be very welcoming of any advice that Russia has about ideas that should be considered. Obviously, along with any new approaches are ones that we think are important to continue, namely sanctions, both unilateral and multilateral.

But we are not yet ready to discuss some of the options that we are going to adopt. We think it is significant that there is a great deal of interest, as evidenced tonight with our discussion with Minister Lavrov and with everybody I spoke with in the last week—from Sharm el-Sheikh, to Jerusalem, to Ramallah, to Brussels— about the real challenge that Iran poses in the region and beyond. We hope to have a lot of unity with respect to some of the steps that we are going to be recommending, and I look forward to discussing this further with Sergey.

Foreign Minister Lavrov. A couple words only. We very much appreciate that the President Obama's Administration, in the course of a comprehensive review of the Iranian policy, is prepared to listen to other countries, including Russia. Our opinion, our view as to how we would see our behavior in this area was presented today, and we are hopeful that the discussion will continue. Thank you.

Secretary Hillary Clinton, Minister Karel Schwarzenberg, and Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner delivered these remarks in Brussels, Belgium

Foreign Minister Schwarzenberg. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Sorry that you—we kept you waiting for such a long time, but I have some good news. Madame Secretary confirmed that President Obama accepted the invitation to participate in the EU-27 plus United States in a formal summit in Prague on April 5th, 2009. This is great news for Europe, and I genuinely believe that the summit will represent an important milestone in the European Union-United States relation. And it's wonderful that we have it during the Prague presidency, but it's not for the Czech Republic so important; it's a symbol for the whole of Europe that the President of the United States comes to a small country in the center of Europe to meet the European Union.

We also discussed possible main topics for the summit, of course, such as Afghanistan, energy security and climate changes issues, and the whole area from the Mediterranean to the Caspian Sea, and probably we will include, too, the Balkans in our (inaudible) on the summit. Given the fact that Madame Secretary will be accompanying Mr. President, I am pleased to invite European colleagues to Prague, too.

Today, we have touched upon several issues, such as Russia, energy security, Afghanistan, and the Middle East, the Balkans, climate change, as well as some aspects of financial crisis. We have agreed to work together to stimulate Russia to play a constructive role on the international stage. The Georgian crisis and the (inaudible) gas crisis represented a serious setback in our relations with Russia. As a result, we will incentivize cooperation with Georgia and other Eastern European partners, yet we also need to diversify the gas and oil resources.

The United States expressed support in this direction. I reassured Madame Secretary that Afghan police reform and (inaudible) mission in Afghanistan remain top priority for the EU, and Europe will maximize its efforts in stabilizing Afghanistan.

On Iran, we both agreed that only firm, united, and coordinated approach of the international community may lead to a tangible result. Continuation of the Iranian nuclear program and uranium enrichment is unacceptable.

On the Middle East we have reiterated the importance of a two-state solution.

The EU will continue to support the Egyptian efforts in the peace process. The role of the Quartet remains instrumental for reaching the solution. We are pleased that the new United States Administration reconfirmed its role in the Quartet.

On climate change, the EU looks forward to the active engagement of the United States in international negotiations, and working with the United States in leading efforts to secure a global agreement.

And now, may I ask you, Madame Secretary, to take the floor.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you very much Foreign Minister Schwarzenberg and High Representative Solana, External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner. I appreciate the very warm reception that I have received on behalf of President Obama and our country as we work to bring U.S.-EU cooperation to a new level.

President Obama and I intend to energize the transatlantic relationship and to promote a strong European Union—and more fundamentally, a strong Europe. The EU is a union of friends and allies. We share values, interests, and a rich history of working together to confront common challenges and seize common opportunities. The lesson we have learned is clear: We derive strength from each other. A strong Europe is a strong partner for the United States, and the Obama Administration intends for the United States to be a strong partner for Europe.

Two nights ago I attended the transatlantic dinner, a gathering of foreign ministers from both NATO and EU countries. The event reinforced my belief that these two great institutions can and should cooperate seamlessly; indeed, to meet our common challenges they must. This is also a belief that President Obama shares, which is why he will attend a special EU summit in Prague after he attends the NATO summit.

The President and I believe in a strong NATO working together with a strong EU. We cannot afford to waste energy or resources. We all must be focused on the same agenda. We have embraced the EU's new missions, like EULEX in Kosovo, where the United States is participating for the first time in an operation led by the European Security and Defense Policy. We are also committed to listening, consulting, and working in concert to deliver smart solutions to our shared challenges.

And today, as the foreign minister said, we discussed a great number of these challenges. I pledged American support for EU initiatives to build a single energy market and to diversify gas supplies. EU leadership and unity were pivotal in resolving Russia's recent gas cutoff to Ukraine and Europe, and that leadership may be needed again in the future.

We talked about a way forward in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and I solicited EU input in our ongoing strategy review. Our conversation centered around the civilian elements of our new approach, including the EU's priority on governance, rule of law, and police reform.

We also discussed the financial crisis. Together the U.S. and the EU produce half of the world's GDP and generate 40 percent of its commerce. If we're going to stabilize our markets and reenergize our economies, we will need a coordinated strategy in advance of the G-20 and an effort that demands joint consultation, joint leadership, and joint follow-up.

So on an array of emerging and persistent challenges, from Iran to climate change to the conflict in the Middle East, we shared ideas and laid the groundwork for future cooperation. The United States and Europe are both great centers of power—economic, diplomatic, and cultural—and we have responsibilities to match that great power. As we have so often and so well in the past, we must work together closely now and into the future, and I am confident that we will.

Thank you very much.

Foreign Minister Schwarzenberg.

Thank you. Javier, would you like to speak?

High Representative Solana. Everything has been said and well said.

Moderator. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. We have time for a few questions.

Q. I'm Bob Burns of AP. I have a question for Secretary Clinton. Regarding your discussions this evening in Geneva, are you looking to set a date to begin the START talks? And also, is the U.S. willing to include in that strategic defense as part of a negotiable item; in other words, missile defense broadly? And if I may ask the Czech minister, what is the level of your government's concern that if the U.S. were to abandon its missile defense plans in your country and in Poland that that would embolden the Russians? Thank you.

Secretary Clinton. Bob, first of all, I am looking forward to my meeting this evening in Geneva with Minister Lavrov. We have a very broad agenda to discuss. And I discussed some of what I will be raising with Minister Lavrov with my colleagues here at our luncheon.

Specifically with regard to START, we are beginning the work now. There's been ongoing contact and consultations. We intend to vigorously engage on this in preparation for having a START agreement that will continue on beyond the one that expires at the end of this year. We're looking at all aspects of our relationship when it comes to offensive and defensive weapons, not just in START but across the board with our nonproliferation consultation.

I would just reiterate with respect to missile defense, as I've said numerous times before and as I believe very fervently, missile defense is an element of our joint defense posture. It obviously has to be proven to work and be cost-effective for it to be deployed in the Czech Republic and in Poland, but it is intended to be part of a deterrent and a defensive response vis-à-vis Iran and other actors that might obtain and determine to use missiles against Europe.

We believe that Russia and the United States have the opportunity to cooperate on missile defense, to do joint research and joint development, and even eventually —assuming we can reach such an agreement—joint deployment. This is the 21st century. Just as NATO is reviewing our strategic concept and the European Union is looking at its defense policy, we need to be prepared to provide mutual defense in effective manners. And we're going to continue to explore various ways of doing that. And if missile defense is proven to work and is cost-effective, it can be a part of that overall defense.

Finally, with respect to the Czech Republic and Poland, as I said yesterday at NATO, I think both countries, their people, and their governments, showed visionary leadership in recognizing that there are new threats that need to be addressed in new ways in order for us to guarantee the safety and security of Europe against these actors, whether it be Iran or a terrorist network, whatever it might be. So that is the argument and the case that I'm taking to Russia.

But were it not for Poland and the Czech Republic being willing to step up and be part of this new defense posture, we would not be able to engage with Russia on this.

Q. Good afternoon. (Inaudible) from Czech radio. A question on Guantanamo. I know that it wasn't on the agenda today, but who knows when will you arrive here again, so I'll use this opportunity to ask you that question.

Several European states have already stated their willingness to adopt or to take some inmates in Europe. When will United States ask officially Europe to do so, if you want to ask it? Thanks.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you. Actually, it was on the agenda. I thanked the EU for working with us to determine a policy regarding detainees from Guantanamo. As you know, the Obama Administration has been in office a little over six weeks but we've already launched a very aggressive review of the detainees at Guantanamo.

When the President signed the executive order for closing Guantanamo, he said at the time that we're going to do this right. We're going to take every single file and review it. If we determine that it would be appropriate for a particular detainee to be relocated, we will discuss that with our friends and partners like the EU. When we are ready to do so, we will have that conversation.

Q. Viola Gienger from Bloomberg News. Madame Secretary, can you comment on your views about how well Europe is handling dealing with the economic crisis at this point in relation to the joint efforts with the United States?

And Mr. Foreign Minister, could you please comment on what kind of compromises the European Union and European countries may be willing to make in order to gain the sort of unity that people talk is—talk about being needed to deal effectively with the economic crisis?

Secretary Clinton. With respect to the economic crisis, I think that there's a great deal of close coordination and planning that is going on in preparation for the G-20 summit in London. As you know, Prime Minister Brown recently visited the White House and engaged in extensive conversations with President Obama and our economic team.

I think that there is a very clear set of items that will be on agenda for the G-20 that will address the multiple aspects of this crisis: how do we stimulate demand; how do we provide assistance to countries that find themselves in difficult financial condition; how do we come up with a new architecture for the regulatory framework for the new economy, which has so many different instruments and the capacity to trade trillions of dollars with the flick of a computer key. There are so many matters that we are attempting to address, and the cooperation has been very positive.

We all understand that it is in our joint interest to work together. As I said in my remarks, the United States and Europe are blessed to have so much economic capacity. Between us we have more than 800 million people, and so we have a special responsibility which we are trying to exercise responsibly. I think we'll be well prepared for the G-20.

Foreign Minister Schwarzenberg.

Well, let's (inaudible) one thing. As you well know, the presiding power in the European Union has, as a main job, a moderating job. It's not that we decide the presidency, but that we moderate the discussion between the member-states of the European Union. You are perfectly right that there are different opinions between the European states. There are more interventionist states, there are more states who prefer a more liberal attitude, and so that's all right for us. We are bringing the people together. We are consulting each step with our partners in the European Union. We're discussing it as with Germany, as Britain, as with France and with Italy, with whoever is interested—also Dutch. And I do think it's the only way in this community of 27 to reach a compromise.

We have to realize that in spite of a common market, the conditions in the different European states are very different, and the economic crisis showed different degrees of intensity and results in different European countries. There's a different situation in Ireland and in Belgium, there's a different situation in France and in Germany, and there's a different situation in Hungary and Czech Republic. We have to look at it individually and make our steps according to the conditions of each single state.

Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner. May I add, because the Commission has made a lot of proposals here, that indeed our proposals are going in the direction to coordinate, to bring together. And I think Madame Secretary has mentioned all the different items that are as much on our agenda as they are on your agenda, if you think of financial regulation, the rating agencies, the question of not starting protectionism now. And all of these things will, of course, be discussed in London. They have been discussed already under the Czech presidency, as the president rightly said at the last informal European Council. We'll be there at the European spring council, and then we hope to come together to find a common strategy, of course, at the London meeting.

Q. Darren Ennis of Reuters. Madame Secretary, regarding climate change, you just recently visited China. What sort of climate change deal is acceptable to the United States and China? Did China indicate, for instance, what sort of cuts it would like from the United—it was willing to accept?

And to Foreign Minister Schwarzenberg and to Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner, how concerned are you that this weekend we may have another gas crisis? Can you bring up to date, you know, on negotiations? Have you any indication from Russia that they won't switch off the taps this weekend?

Secretary Clinton. As to China and climate change, we had very productive talks. I brought with me the Special Envoy for Climate Change that President Obama and I have appointed. He will be leading our efforts going toward Copenhagen. In addition to the ministerial talks, he was able to begin discussions with his counterparts in the Chinese Government. I was heartened that in my discussions with the foreign minister and other Chinese officials, they were quite forthcoming in saying they wanted to participate in Copenhagen.

Now obviously, just as the foreign minister said regarding the varieties of economic conditions within the European Union and indeed the world as we look at this economic crisis, the climate crisis manifests itself in different ways in different countries and their reactions will be comparably varied. Our challenge is to create a regimen that includes a number of different approaches.

President Obama said in his speech to Congress a week or so ago that we are committed to a cap-and-trade system. But we're committed to a lot of other things. We're making major investments now in our stimulus package in alternative energy and in basic science research, in new forms of fueling transportation and so much else, as well as upgrading our grid. The European Union is taking a similarly broad approach.

I think it's very important that at the beginning of this effort, that China has expressed a willingness to participate. They understand they've got to be part of the solution. They recognize that they have just surpassed the unfortunate historic record that we have held of being the largest emitter. They now hold that position. But I also spoke about this in Japan, in Korea, and in Indonesia. Each of them have different problems. Indonesia is a very large emitter because of deforestation, so the solution for Indonesia may not be the solution for China, which may not be the solution for Europe or the United States.

What I'm hoping for is to have as tight a regime with measureable benchmarks and accountability with specified outcomes, but there will be different approaches that can fit within this regime and that's what we're attempting to begin work on.

Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner. Well, let me answer to that. Again, we have been working from the outset with the United States. But we see with this Administration a very different attitude. We see the attitude of openness, and as Madame Secretary has said just now, we are going totally in the same direction. And we would like to a binding agreement by the end of the year in Copenhagen.

And for that, we have to go for binding commitments on the developed side. But we also want to have a different shaded approach on the developing side. And we know we still have quite a while to go. But this makes a huge difference now. Now, we have United States with us, and United States has Europe with her. So I think that is a new approach, and we are quite hopeful.

Foreign Minister Schwarzenberg.

Okay, that now (inaudible) answer the question which was posed to me. (Inaudible) information that I have is that Ukraine paid its debts so the flow of gas shouldn't be endangered. About intra-Ukrainian quarrels and fights and actions, I would like to comment that task of Ukraine—or the question of Ukraine interior policy, and it's not up to me to comment.

Joint Statement by Turkey and the United States of America on the Occasion of the Visit of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton Upon the Invitation of Minister of Foreign Affairs of Turkey Ali Babacan

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Ali Babacan today reaffirmed the strong bonds of alliance, solidarity and strategic partnership between the Republic of Turkey and the United States, as well as the commitment of both countries to the principles of peace, democracy, freedom, and prosperity enshrined in the Shared Vision and Structured Dialogue document agreed to in July 2006.

Turkey and the United States reiterated their determination to continue close cooperation and consultation on all issues of common concern. They pledge to contribute to peace and stability in the Middle East and in this context, to support a permanent settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict, including alleviating the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on the basis of a two-state solution; to enhance energy security and to expand the Southern corridor of natural gas and oil infrastructure to enable Caspian basin and Iraqi energy producers to reach European and world markets; to promote peace, stability, and prosperity in the south Caucasus, including through U.S. support for the efforts of Turkey and Armenia to normalize relations and joint support for the efforts of the Minsk Group to resolve the Nagorno Karabakh conflict; to continue to cooperate in the Balkans; to support strongly a comprehensive and mutually-acceptable settlement of the Cyprus question under the auspices of the UN and in this context ending the isolation of the Turkish Cypriots; and to enhance their cooperation in the fight against terrorism, particularly against their common enemies, the PKK and al-Qaeda. The United States will continue its intelligence support for Turkish operations against the PKK and is reviewing ways to be more supportive. As members of the G-20, Turkey and the United States pledge continued cooperation to deal with the global economic crisis and efforts to increase and diversify bilateral economic relations with particular emphasis on trade, investment, scientific and technological cooperation.

Secretary Clinton and Foreign Minister Babacan discussed Turkey's accession to the European Union as a member, a goal the United States continues to strongly support, as well as the Government of Turkey's continued emphasis on reform process. With their commitment to Transatlantic relations and as Allies in a strong NATO, they pledge continued cooperation in Afghanistan, including through continued Turkish contributions to Afghanistan. They reiterated their commitment to the sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of Iraq as well as reiterated their support for a democratic, pluralistic, unified and federal Iraq. They also welcome Turkey's deepening relations with the Government of Iraq as evidenced by high level visits as well as trilateral meetings to discuss cooperation against the PKK. Turkey and the United States will strongly back the United Nations Security Council in its work to maintain global peace and security for the prevention and removal of threats to the international community and in this context will cooperate in dealing with issues including terrorism, drug trafficking, organized crime and the threat of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery in the region and beyond.

Finally, they reaffirmed their determination to diversify the broad based bilateral relations particularly between the Turkish and American people. In that context, the Secretary and Minister announced the establishment of “Young Turkey/Young America: A New Relationship for a New Age.” This initiative will enable emerging young leaders in Turkey and the United States to develop initiatives that will positively impact people's lives and invest in future ties between the leadership of our two countries.

Secretary Hillary Clinton was interviewed by Kanal D TV in Ankara, Turkey

Q. Madame Secretary of State, thank you for your time. I know it's very limited, so it's going to be a very disorderly interview. I'm going to jump from one question to another without the—now, the big news you brought us is President Obama's coming visit to Turkey. Now, I wonder, is the President going to come to Turkey as a NATO ally, or as an ally—Islamic country to address the Islamic world from here? What will be—

Secretary Clinton. Well, first of all, I am delighted that President Obama will come to Turkey. Ten years ago, my husband and I were together here in Turkey, and we were received so warmly by the Turkish people, and I know that President and Mrs. Obama will as well.

He's coming as an ally, a partner, and a friend representing the United States of America, which we believe is all of that with Turkey. We have been good allies in NATO. We have been partners in areas like Afghanistan and fighting terrorism. And we have been friends. There is the biggest increase in Turkish and American students visiting the other's country. In fact, I learned today that American and Turkish young people are number [one] and two in using Facebook.

So, we have a lot in common, and I think the President wants to illustrate that commitment as we start our new Administration.

Q. Is he going to give this message to the Islamic world from Istanbul?

Secretary Clinton. Well, that hasn't been decided. But by coming to Turkey, he's going to be speaking to the Turkish people. And Turkey, as everyone knows, is a model democracy with a secular constitution that shows Islam can coexist with both. So I think that's a great example.

Q. Interesting. Now, how do you qualify Turkey today? I mean, previous administrations used the terminology “moderate Islam.” Now, will you be using the same terminology? Is it—

Secretary Clinton. No. We're not going to characterize any country's religious affiliation. We're looking for an opportunity to strengthen and deepen our relationship with Turkey.

Turkey is many things. Turkey has many aspects to it. What I love about Turkey is the vibrancy of the society and the democracy. The fact that Turkey is a predominantly, but not exclusively Muslim nation, that there are varying levels of society that are moving forward together, we find all of that very exciting. So we want our relationship to be with the Turkish people.

Q. You are putting the emphasis on democracy—secularism. Now, do you have any doubt that Turkey might go or tilt more to Islamic values, to Islamic world? Do you have any doubt, or what would be your reaction?

Secretary Clinton. You know, my view is that Turkey has proven to be a reliable ally and partner and, as I like to think, friend. I know right now that the Turkish people are somewhat negative about America, I would argue, because of some of the decisions of the last eight years.

I remember very well when my husband and I were here in '99. The Turkish people were very positive about America. That's what we want again. Because we think we have so much in common, and the role that Turkey is playing as a regional and global leader on important issues is something that we're very supportive of. So we hope to increase the relationship's positive feelings again between the Turkish and American people. But our government-to-government relation is strong, and we will build on that.

Q. Now, I'm going to ask you a question, maybe about your talk with the prime minister. I'm going to ask this question because he said that —he said openly that he would ask you. Did Mr. Erdogan complain about the State Department's Human Rights Report? Because in this report he was criticized about his threats to freedom of press and some pressure to some media groups. Did he complain about this before?

Secretary Clinton. He raised it with me and—

Q. Oh, I don't believe it.

Secretary Clinton. No, he did, and that's what friends do. You know, it would not be an honest relationship if he had a criticism and wouldn't raise it with me. I would worry about that. You know, I've known the prime minister since 1996 when he was mayor of Istanbul, and I've seen him several times in New York when I attended break-fast for Eid. And so I have a great deal of respect for him and what he's trying to do in Turkey.

Q. What was your reaction?

Secretary Clinton. Well, my reaction is that we put out this report every year, and I fully understand. You know, look, I was in politics, and no politician ever likes the press criticizing them. I understand that because I lived through it. But overall, we think that Turkey has made tremendous progress in freedom of speech and freedom of religion and human rights, and we're proud of that.

Q. You say it's a must for—as far as this report indicator it's a must—freedom of the press is a must as long as—

Secretary Clinton. It's part of a vibrant democracy. As much as those of us in public life complain about you and the press, it's a combination that—

Q. Are you complaining ?

Secretary Clinton. Not me, no, I'm not complaining. But I understand it. I'm not complaining because you're not an American journalist. But I understand that it's just a natural tension, but it's a necessary tension.

Q. Now, let's get to the Kurdish problem a little bit. Now the worry here is that with withdrawal of some armaments and ammunition might be gone to PKK's hands. Do you have any contingency with this, one?

And second one, now you are withdrawing from Iraq. There will be a vacuum of power, especially around northern Iraq. And we have a PKK problem; the common enemy, you have said yourself. Do you have an initiative or a plan to solve this problem —I'm talking about terrorism and the Kurdish problem. Do you have an initiative? I mean, what—who should do what—Turkey and northern Iraqis?

Secretary Clinton. Well, you're right; we consider PKK a common enemy. And our military has cooperated with the Turkish military to prevent PKK activity and incursions from the north of Iraq into Turkey, and we will continue to cooperate. We are just beginning our planning with respect to the withdrawal. The President made the announcement after careful study. So we will withdraw. How we do it and how we protect against, as you say, a vacuum is something we're going to consult with Turkey over and have our militaries, who are, after all, allies in NATO, work those through together.

Q. I'm told that the interview is over.

Secretary Clinton. It's gone by too fast.

Q. Well, yeah, it's going—you are great. I mean, I was afraid that I'm going to get to maybe two more questions. Now, if you were to name three issues where Turkey will be helpful, which one are they? Pakistan? Palestine? Iran? Which one are the most important?

Secretary Clinton. It's all three. And that's what's so important about Turkey's role. The leadership role that Turkey is now playing is not limited the way maybe it was in the past. What Turkey did in helping us in Afghanistan—

Q. Do you want more troops in Afghanistan?

Secretary Clinton. You know, we are going to discuss that, and that's something that will be up to the Turkish Government. But I remember the first time I went to Afghanistan as a senator in 2003, I was met by a Turkish general. And Turkish soldiers have been very courageous and have fought and died with American soldiers in Afghanistan. We agree that Pakistan is very fragile, and we both have to work there. I applaud what Turkey did in creating the Syria-Israel track. That was an enormously helpful effort. Once there's an Israeli government, we have to go on both a Syria track and a Palestinian track. And we need Turkey's leadership in helping the United States push for a comprehensive peace plan that includes a two-state solution.

And with Iran, you know the Iranians better than we do. You have shared a border for—I think I was told over 350 or so years. So we are going to ask for your help in trying to influence Iranian behavior.

Q. What about Hamas. Are you happy that Turkey has a very close relationship with Hamas?

Secretary Clinton. Well, clearly, Turkey is committed to a peaceful resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And the Arab League and the Quartet, of which we are both members of one of those, have said that Hamas should recognize Israel, should renounce violence, and should agree to comply with all the prior agreements entered into by the PLO.

Any influence that can turn Hamas away from Iranian influence and toward a more peaceful approach to resolving the conflict is helpful.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Minister Ali Babacan delivered these remarks in Ankara, Turkey

Foreign Minister Babacan. We would like to welcome Mrs. Clinton. We had a telephone conversation a few weeks ago, and I invited the Secretary during that telephone conversation, and I would like to thank the Secretary for having accepted my invitation and having come so quickly, I mean, after the telephone conversation. This is the first visit of Mrs. Clinton to Turkey after the Obama administration took over and this is a very timely visit because there is a very wide agenda of the partnership between Turkey and the United States covering a vast geography and there are important developments coming up and important turning points coming up. And it is important for us to have discussions and consultations and it was important to have had that discussion to cover distance.

As you know, when we define the relations between Turkey and the United States we use the concept of friendship, the concept of partnership, the concept of being allies. And today, we have, once again, reiterated our friendship, partnership, and strategic alliance, once again. And we have been having many discussions—consultations on many areas and we have a common understanding to further deepening those consultations. In the future the topics that we discuss will be many more and we will have opportunities to discuss those issues in greater depth. Turkey and the United States defend the same values and work to disseminate those values to all four corners of the world: democracy, human rights, freedoms, rule of law, free market economy. Those are some of the values that Turkey and the United States defend, implement and try to disseminate to all parts of the world. And we do have a shared vision, in this sense, and we have common goals.

As you know, about three years ago, we had agreed upon a document called Shared Vision and Structured Dialogue. And today we will have a joint statement in writing, which will be distributed to you after this press conference. And you will see in that document that we will work to achieve even better results by working even closer together. We have, of course, taken up our bilateral relations— political, economic, cultural relations, relations on education between Turkey and the United States. We have also, on the other hand, spoken about the Middle East, Israel-Palestine, Israel-Syria, Israel-Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, developments in those countries—we've discussed those.; the Balkans, the Caucasus; Cyprus was also on our agenda; Turkish-EU relations was another topic we spoke about; energy, from especially a regional perspective was another area of cooperation we discussed. And our good-excellent cooperation in the fight against terrorism. That was another topic we discussed which—this is something that we will continue with the same determination in the future. We have both reconfirmed that approach.

We also evaluated our economic relations and we also very briefly spoke about Africa and North Korea although they are more distant geographies. This morning Mrs. Clinton had quite a detailed discussion with our Prime Minister and this afternoon she will be received by our president—I will be there as well—and then she will go back to her home country. She has been away for quite some time— for about a week now. She has been in this region for about a week.

So, I'd like to once again welcome Mrs. Clinton. The relations between Turkey and the United States will continue to be very important. We have both reconfirmed that importance in our discussions, and I would like to thank her very much for coming to Turkey as a sign of that importance. Thank you.

Please.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you so much, Foreign Minister, and it is wonderful to be back here in Ankara. I have a special place in my heart for your country and I am always grateful to remember the gracious hospitality that I have received here and the memorable trip that my husband and I made to Turkey in 1999. It was in the aftermath of the tragic earthquake, but both Bill and I saw the courage, humanity, resilience and strength of the Turkish people, and we have never forgotten that.

The relationship between our two countries is one of alliance, partnership, and friendship. We have stood shoulder-to-shoulder to face common challenges. We share a commitment to democracy, a secular constitution, respect for religious freedom, a belief in free markets, and a sense of global responsibility. I know that President Obama and I will work with you, with the president and the prime minister, to strengthen and deepen those ties, and to create even more opportunities for us to work together.

Turkey has been a major contributor to the ongoing struggle to stabilize Afghanistan. I remember the first time I flew into Afghanistan in 2003. The officer who met me as I came off my plane was a Turkish officer. I'm also grateful for the courage and sacrifice of the Turkish troops who have served alongside American and NATO forces in Afghanistan. And thank you as well to Turkey for your key role in helping rebuild the Iraqi economy, particularly in northern Iraq. You have stimulated trade and investment and been very helpful in working with the people of Iraq as they struggle to form their own democracy.

Foreign Minister Babacan and I covered a broad agenda today, just as I did with the prime minister earlier in the morning. In addition to Iraq and Afghanistan, we discussed our cooperation to defeat our common enemy, the PKK; to update NATO's capabilities to meet 21st century challenges; and we talked about the urgent need to work with the international community toward a two-state solution and a comprehensive peace in the Middle East.

I reiterate the Obama Administration's support for Turkey's membership in the European Union. The United States believes it will strengthen Turkey, Europe, and our transatlantic partnership. The United States continues to support the UN-sponsored talks now taking place to achieve a settlement of the Cyprus conflict based on reunification of the island as a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation. We talked about Turkey's democracy, its multiethnic heritage, and in that context, I raised the importance that we place on reopening the Halki Seminary and efforts to reach out to all of Turkey's communities.

The foreign minister and I concluded a joint statement that will be passed out to the press. That statement is a clear signal of our shared commitment to reenergize our alliance. I'm particularly pleased that it includes strong support for the United Nations Security Council and its work to maintain global peace and security, to deal with the issues, including terrorism and drug trafficking, organized crime, and the threat of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. It is a roadmap for our progress on a range of issues.

I also am very pleased to make two announcements. The first is that we will establish a Young Turkey—Young America initiative that will enable emerging young leaders in Turkey and the United States to develop initiatives that will positively impact not just their own lives, but the lives of our two peoples, and to help build a better future.

And finally, President Obama asked me to send a personal message as a reflection of the value that we place on our friendship with Turkey. President Obama will be visiting Turkey within the next month or so. The exact date will be announced shortly. We are coordinating with the Turkish Government to find a date that works for both of our presidents and our governments.

When I return home, I will tell President Obama he will find a warm welcome when he comes here to Turkey, and he will find, as I have always found, not only a partner for the challenges and opportunities that we face together, but a friend for all times and all challenges that lie ahead. Thank you so much.

Foreign Minister Babacan. …time, and we're running late so we'll take one question each, one from the U.S. side and one from the Turkish side. Now, as to who is going to ask the first question. Mrs. Clinton, you decide—first question goes to American press.

Secretary Clinton. Mark Landler from The New York Times.

Q. Two questions. With your emissaries now on the ground in Damascus, can you tell us whether the U.S. intends to send an ambassador back to Syria? And is the U.S. ready to work with Turkey on a Syrian-Israeli peace track?

For Minister Babacan, with the Obama Administration ready to engage in the Middle East, do you feel a sense of optimism that a Syrian-Israeli peace deal could be reached?

And then a follow-up for—just a small follow-up. Since you did make a bit of news a moment ago Madame Secretary. There's been a great deal of speculation about where President Obama would deliver a major address in the Islamic world. Can we assume, if he's coming to Turkey in the next month, that that address will be delivered in Turkey?

Secretary Clinton. No, Mark. No, we are just at the beginning of the planning. This decision was reached late yesterday in Washington, and we're very excited that the President will be coming to Turkey, but as I said, we don't even have the dates decided yet. There's a lot of consultation that we need to engage in between our two governments, and what the program will be, the places the President will visit, we just don't know yet. So we will let you know as we work with our Turkish partners on this very important and significant visit.

With respect to Syria, we do have two representatives of the United States Government in Damascus today meeting with the Syrians. We are just at the beginning of exploring the issues that we must discuss between us, and no decisions have been made. We'll wait to hear back from our two representatives, and we will consult further. So we have not decided on any next steps.

With regard to the Syria-Israeli peace track, I offered my appreciation to the prime minister and the foreign minister for the leadership role that Turkey has played in bringing Syria and Israel together. The United States supports a comprehensive peace where Israel lives in peace and security with the Palestinians, and the Palestinians have their own state, and Israel lives in peace with all of their Arab neighbors, including Syria.

So the importance of this track of the peace effort cannot be overstated, and Turkey has played a very important role. Once there is an Israeli government, our special envoy will return to the region. The foreign minister and I and the prime minister and I have talked about how the United States will consult closely with Turkey as we move forward. But certainly, a peace between Syria and Israel, the normalization of relations, is something that would be a part of an agenda of a comprehensive peace effort.

Foreign Minister Babacan. Let me add briefly the following, as you know, the peace talks between Syria and Israel were realized as four rounds, and when Mr. Olmert came to Ankara, there was an additional meeting, which we could call a fifth round. But the developments in Gaza rendered it impossible to continue those talks and we had announced at the time that those talks were suspended because in the peace process, when you have negotiations in one track, you can't have war in another track. You can't think of the same simultaneously.

But the situation in Gaza now and what happens from this day forward will be important. We place a lot of importance on having a permanent ceasefire, and whenever the conditions are right, whenever Syria and Israel say that they would like to re-initiate these discussions, Turkey, no doubt, will be ready to contribute to that process. But this will be upon the request coming from both sides.

Before the events in Gaza, we carried this process forward successfully with strong will, and in the future, too, whenever the two countries are ready, and whenever they make a request from us, then we would no doubt be ready again to take this process further. But the support of the international community, too, is very important, and the United States has been supporting this process from the very beginning, and there is no doubt that the international community and the support by the international community and the U.S. will continue to be important.

Now we take a question from the Turkish side. Yes, please.

Q. (Inaudible) from (inaudible) newspaper. Question to both ministers, first to Mrs. Clinton. With respect to plans of U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, do you plan to use Turkey as a route for the withdrawal of troops? And did you talk to the Turkish officials about your expectations in this regard today, and could you tell us the scope of that request?And I also ask Minister Babacan for his views on that.

Secretary Clinton. We are in the process of beginning to plan for the troop withdrawal from Iraq. President Obama has set forth the outlines of the plan. But clearly, there is a lot of work that has to go into translating our commitment to withdraw troops to the on-the-ground decisions about when and how the troops will leave Iraq. And I think it's understandable that we would not talk about military decisions; we would not be in a position to discuss how and when our troops withdraw. We will consult with and seek advice from a NATO ally like Turkey about the safest and most effective means of withdrawing our troops.

Foreign Minister Babacan. I had already made some statements about the subject before. This is not new on our agenda. This is something that has been under discussion at a technical level for some time, and we'll assess the situation in close consultation with the United States.

But generally speaking, we have a positive view on this. If the timing—as to what sort of equipment will pass through Turkey and what the scope of that cooperation will be, those are things that we will be discussing. And if we don't see any issues or problems as far as we're concerned, we believe that we will have this cooperation. But we're still at the very beginning, and we need to still talk about the details. And first, the American side will have—make its own preparations so that we can know what their request will be, and then we will negotiate or discuss those issues. But generally speaking, we would be willing to support this effort.

Thank you.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Minister Vygaudas Usackas delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. Welcome, and it's a great pleasure to have the foreign minister along with his delegation from Lithuania here today. Some of you may remember that the minister was a shining star in the Washington, D.C., diplomatic firmament when he served as Lithuania's ambassador to the United States. He served for five years, and there was a great regret when he left Washington, so it's especially nice to have him back in his new capacity. I think he's been foreign minister since December, if I'm not mistaken.

Foreign Minister Usackas. That's correct.

Secretary Clinton. So he's been a foreign minister longer than I have been.

During our discussions, the minister and I affirmed our shared commitment to the common principles and common purposes that unite our countries. It is no accident that Lithuania is one of our most dependable partners and allies. Both our countries share a determination to promote democracy, uphold the rule of law, encourage broad-based economic prosperity, and we are deeply committed to NATO's pledge of collective security.

These principles provide the foundation for our efforts to address a growing array of economic, diplomatic, and security challenges. In order to succeed in these common efforts, we have to cooperate even more closely than we already have in the past.

The instruments of ratification we are exchanging today, which are called for by the 2005 protocols regarding extradition and mutual legal assistance between our two countries, are an example of that increased cooperation. This exchange is the first of the 27 similar sets of agreements that the United States will be undertaking with all EU member-countries. These protocols will enter into force shortly, when the related agreements between the United States and the European Union take effect.

Many of the law enforcement challenges our countries face today have little respect for borders. Networks of computer hackers, financial criminals, and violent extremists often hide behind international borders and use geography to gain impunity. These twin agreements between the United States and Lithuania give our police and our prosecutors the state-of-the-art tools they need to cooperate in bringing criminals to justice on both sides of the Atlantic.

In conjunction with the similar agreements we are pursuing with all of the countries of the European Union, the agreements for which we are exchanging instruments of ratification today will help provide the Euro-Atlantic community with powerful tools to apprehend and prosecute individuals who might otherwise escape justice.

These agreements are only one small facet of the vibrant partnership the United States enjoys with the people and Government of Lithuania.

Now, I have been told that this year marks the 1,000th anniversary of Lithuania's name. Now, we in the United States cannot claim such a lengthy history, but I am convinced that our strong relationship, cooperation, and shared values can last just as long. I look forward to working with the foreign minister as we go forward from today's meeting working together as allies to create a stronger, safer, and more prosperous world.

Foreign Minister Usackas. Thank you very much, Madame Secretary. It's great to be back in Washington this year, and it's great to see you again, this time not as a senator but Secretary of State.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you.

Foreign Minister Usackas. Indeed, United States and Lithuania are bound by many ties, and we are members of NATO, we are—Lithuania is a member of the EU and enjoy very close transatlantic relationship. But most importantly, that we are bound by the human chain, human chain of the people who have been residing in United States for more than one hundred years. And I am coming here to Washington, D.C., straight from Chicago, where we had a celebration of millennium for Lithuania and where many people came to enjoy Lithuanian national music and dance.

I am here today to talk to Secretary Hillary Clinton about the challenges for the Euro-Atlantic community. We talked about energy security issues, which are very important both for Europe and for United States. We talked about our common neighborhood of NATO and the European Union, which stretches from Belarus to Georgia. And we also talked about, very important, a neighbor, Russia, with whom we have decided to relaunch—resume NATO-Russia Council only last week. We believe that NATO has an important agenda before the summit, and we look forward to working with United States so as to prepare NATO alliance for the challenges of the 21st century.

Lithuania is a trustworthy ally of United States. We're present in Iraq and Afghanistan. We're going to be increasing our military presence in Afghanistan. And we are continuously sharing our experience of democracy building and free market with such countries as Ukraine and Georgia. We strongly—we are strongly committed to the future membership of Ukraine and Georgia. Those countries have a lot to learn from the examples and lessons learned of Central European countries. And I'm looking forward to working with Secretary of State and with her staff to advance our reforms and to share the best lessons learned with the countries I mentioned.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you very much, Minister. And if you will, join me now for the signing of the protocols.

Vice President Joe Biden delivered these remarks in Brussels, Belgium

Vice President Biden. Thank you very much, Secretary General. I want to thank all the members for the warm welcome they've afforded me. And thank you for your leadership of the Alliance.

Less than a month from today, NATO is going to meet to celebrate the 60th anniversary of NATO. There's a great deal to celebrate, but there's also a great deal left to do. The Alliance has been the cornerstone of our security since the end of World War II. And to state the obvious, it has anchored the United States in Europe. And I believe it's been helpful in forging a Europe whole and free. There's much to celebrate, as I said, but there's also much to do.

Our community of democratic nations faces extraordinary challenges: a worldwide economic crisis, the likes of which we haven't seen; the spread of mass destruction weapons and dangerous diseases; the growing gap between the rich and the poor; ethnic animosities and failed states; a rapidly warming planet and uncertain supplies of water, energy, and food; and the challenge to freedom and security from radical fundamentalism. And nowhere is that challenge more acute than in Afghanistan.

I know the people of Europe, like the people of my country, are tired of war, and they are tired of this war. But many of our citizens both here in Europe and at home question why we need to send troops and treasure so far from our homes. But we know, we know that it was from the space that joins Afghanistan and Pakistan that the attacks of 9/11 occurred. We know that it was from the very same area that extremists planned virtually every major terrorist attack on Europe since 9/11, and the attack on Mumbai. We know that it was from this same area that al Qaeda and its extremist allies are regenerating and conceiving new atrocities to visit upon us.

As leaders entrusted with the security of our citizens, none of us—none of us— none of us can deny that the new threats of the 21st century must be dealt with. None of us can escape the responsibility to meet these threats.

And that's why President Obama ordered a full-scale strategic review of our policy with regard to Afghanistan and Pakistan. He insisted that we consult with our allies and partners so that we produce a truly common vision of how to proceed. And that's what I had the privilege to do today at the North Atlantic Council.

I heard from our allies. I heard the concerns and they listed their priorities. And I pledged to them, as I pledge to all Europeans now, that we will build their ideas into our review, which we expect to present to President Obama before the end of this month, in preparation of the NATO summit in April.

I also shared with my colleagues some of the factors that are shaping our thinking right now, including the requirement that we set clear goals and achievable goals: We need to look at Afghanistan and Pakistan together, because success in one requires progress in the other; the imperative of a comprehensive approach with a strong civilian and diplomatic effort is necessary because we know there is no purely military solution to either Afghanistan or Pakistan; the centrality of building up Afghan security forces— because our goal is not to stay in Afghanistan, it's to be able to leave, and to leave behind Afghan forces that can provide for the security and safety of the people of Afghanistan; and the need to ensure the security and legitimacy in this year's presidential elections.

In each of these areas, NATO and it member countries plays a critical role. So does the European Union. The Secretary General and I will meet with that leadership after this press conference. And I look forward to hearing from representatives of non-NATO countries, as well, who are doing so much in Afghanistan.

So we had a very good meeting. There was an incredible amount of consensus around the table. Each member country spoke, including two of the aspirant nations. And I came away with a much clearer sense of what our NATO friends would like us to consider in this review.

I might add this is not the end of the consultation; this is essentially the beginning of it. Each of the member countries is going to submit in more detail their concerns, their recommendations and their observations. They all will be taken into consideration—because I know from my significant experience in this building— over 37 years—that we only succeed when, in fact, there is a real consensus. There's a need for a real consensus as it relates to Afghanistan.

Vice President Joe Biden delivered these remarks in Brussels, Belgium

Vice President Biden. Well, thank you very much, Secretary General, and thank you for the warm welcome. It's a pleasure to meet and greet every one of you.

To the NATO allies represented at this table, my purpose here today is quite straightforward and simple: I came to listen. I realize there may be some questions for our administration, but I primarily came here today to listen.

In January, President Obama ordered a strategic review of U.S. policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan to make sure that our goals were clear and that they are achievable. And as part of that review, at that time the President pledged that we would consult closely with all of you in an attempt to form a—and forge a common and comprehensive approach. That's why I'm here, straightforward and simple: I came to keep the commitment that the President made within weeks after becoming the President of the United States of America.

What we want to learn is what your countries believe are working, what you think is not working, how we can do a better job in stopping Afghanistan and Pakistan from being a haven for terrorists. And the United States believes that we share a vital security interest in meeting that challenge. Each of our countries has a vital interest in the—from the point of view of the United States in meeting that challenge.

The deteriorating situation in the region poses a security threat, from our perspective, not just to the United States, but to every single nation around this table. It was from that remote area of the world that al Qaeda plotted 9/11. It was from that very same area that extremists planned virtually every major terrorist attack in Europe since 9/11, including the attacks on London and Madrid.

And if I might add, we had a brief discussion with the Secretary General before I came in—he was kind enough to host me in his office. I want to make it clear to you, from the perspective of the average United States citizen, an attack, a terrorist attack in Europe is viewed as an attack on us. That is not hyperbole—that is not hyperbole—because we understand and we view it as an attack on the West. And we view it as a gateway to further attacks on the United States.

So please understand this is not a U.S.-centric view that only if America is attacked is there a terrorist threat. It was, as I said, from the very same mountains the attacks of 9/11 were planned and the attacks that have taken place thus far in Europe, and—and—it is from that area that al Qaeda and the extremist allies are regenerating and conceiving new atrocities aimed at the people around the world—from Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India, to the United States, Europe, and Australia.

And our responsibility, in my humble opinion, each of our responsibilities, is, first and foremost, to protect our citizens. President Obama and I are deeply committed to NATO. Let's get that straight right from the start. There is no ambivalence on the part of our administration about the value and necessity of a strong, coherent NATO. We know that our Alliance works best when we've listened to each other. I had been a United States senator for 36 years before becoming Vice President. I have made multiple trips to this building. I've observed when we consult, when we genuinely consult, when we internally argue and bang out our differences, we generate the kind of consensus that our political leadership needs to take to our own people to make the case about what we've decided. When we build strategies together, it works.

And once we reach an agreement, when we commit to putting the full measure of our strength into achieving our common goals, then it works. I want to make it clear: We're here to consult; we're here to listen; we're here to come up with a joint common strategy. Once that is arrived at, we, the United States, expect everyone to keep whatever commitments were made in arriving at that joint strategy. It's as simple and as straightforward as that.

Together, I am absolutely confident we can handle not only Afghanistan, but many other crises we'll face in the 21st century. I'm also equally as confident that absent that kind of cohesion, it will be incredibly more difficult for us to meet the common threats we're going to face.

We always use the phrase, gentlemen and ladies, that we have common values, which brings us together. Well, that is literally true. And it's time for us to put it to work. Our administration is committed to doing that.

And again, I want to thank you, Secretary General, for the opportunity to be here. And thank you all for giving me the opportunity to come and hear what's on your minds. Thank you very much.

Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer delivered these remarks in Brussels, Belgium

Q. Thank you, Mr. Vice President. Over the weekend, President Obama opened the door, said that he would possibly talk to and create alliances with moderate Taliban in Afghanistan. How much of a factor meets—how many moderate Taliban are there, and is it enough to make a difference there? And what kind of concessions would the U.S. consider giving them?

Vice President Biden. Well, let me just say—and to paraphrase Secretary Holbrooke, our Special Envoy, and I agree with his assessment after numerous visits to the region and throughout the country—5 percent of the Taliban is incorrigible, not susceptible to anything other than being defeated. Another 25 percent or so are not quite sure, in my view, the intensity of their commitment to the insurgency. And roughly 70 percent are involved because of the money, because of them being—getting paid.

To state the obvious, as you know, the Taliban, most of whom are Pashtun—you have 60 percent of the Pashtun population in Pakistan; only 40 percent live in Afghanistan. The objectives that flow from Kandahar may be different than Quetta, may be different than the FATA. So it's worth exploring.

The idea of what concessions would be made is well beyond the scope of my being able to answer, except to say that whatever is initiated will have to be ultimately initiated by the Afghan government, and will have to be such that it would not undermine a legitimate Afghan government. But I do think it is worth engaging and determining whether or not there are those who are willing to participate in a secure and stable Afghan state.

Q. To continue on this same subject, what kind of negotiation could we have with moderate Talibans? And is the British experience on this matter useful for NATO and for you? And then, Mr.—President Obama said this weekend also that we're not winning the war in Afghanistan. I would like to have your analysis on this.

Vice President Biden. Well, I think the President is accurate; we are not now winning the war, but the war is far from lost—number one. Number two, with regard to the experience, it is different, but not wholly different. We engaged in Iraq the most extreme elements of the Sunni resistance in Anbar Province. We ended up with an operation called the Sons of Iraq, because we accurately determined, as some of us had pointed out in numerous visits there, that the idea that every Sunni was a supporter of—every Sunni insurgent was a supporter of al Qaeda was simply not true—simply not true.

The same principle pertains here. Whether or not it will bear as much fruit remains to be seen. There's only one way, and that is to engage—engage in the process, looking for pragmatic solutions to accomplishing what our goal is; that is an Afghanistan that is, at minimum goal, is not a haven for terror and is able to sustain itself on its own and provide its own security.

Q. Mr. Biden, when we speak about Afghanistan, I wanted to ask you what do you plan for Kosovo? For example, how do you assess the security situation there? And do you plan withdrawing some troops and relocating them, these troops, in Afghanistan when you need them more? And I'm sorry, but I'm using also this opportunity to ask you how do you assess the developments in Kosovo since independence? Are you expecting some recognition from member countries of NATO? Thank you.

Vice President Biden. Thank you for all three questions. No, we do not believe we need to withdraw or make a judgment relative to Afghanistan based on progress or lack thereof in Kosovo. Number two, there is more to be done in Kosovo. The business is not finished. Number three, it is primarily the responsibility of the European Union and the European Community to follow through on the commitments that we have made. But on balance, I want to make it clear that there is not a tradeoff in terms of our concern for Kosovo and the progress in Kosovo and what need be done in Iraq.

Q. On another subject relating to the summit next month, do you expect that the Alliance will decide at that summit who the next Secretary General will be? And could you give us some sense of the U.S. thinking in this debate? Would you like to see, as is traditional, another Western European? Is it perhaps time for an Eastern European, or as a widely read American newspaper columnist said on the weekend, would the U.S. like to see a Canadian?

And if I could ask the Secretary General, realizing that you're not part of the search process, to give your thoughts on how this process is going.

Vice President Biden. The Secretary General has decided to stay. That was a joke. That was a joke. Look, let me say that the United States has not made a decision yet. This is a consensus matter, it is a consultative matter. We believe there are—it's a very strong field. We don't think as a matter of policy any—any member nation should be ruled out as being able to provide a Secretary General, but we have not taken a position on who should be that successor of the Secretary General I'm standing next to. And, yes, I do believe that decision will be made, and hopefully will be made by that time. And I'm sure the Secretary General hopes that to be the case, too.

Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer: I do indeed, Mr. Vice President. Otherwise I would have to change plans, which I do not intend to do. But as the Vice President was saying, that is, of course, a decision which needs consensus and which will be taken by the allies at the appropriate time.

If I could hear your question to me through the—all the tricks of the camera—it was about the surge in Afghanistan? Is that correct? Would you otherwise repeat it, because I had difficulty in hearing it?

Q. No, I just wondered, since you're not part of the process of finding your own successor, if you could, nonetheless, give us your thoughts on the essential qualities that the Alliance should be looking for.

Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer. No, no, no, yes. I can give those thoughts, but I will do that in the privacy of my own office or my own house, but certainly not to you and your highly respected colleagues—since I'm not part of the process. Many qualities; it goes without saying, many qualities.

Vice President Biden. Well, thank you all very much. Appreciate your time.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Minister Michael Martin delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. Good afternoon. Well, I am delighted to welcome the foreign minister here today. I know this comes a little early, but, Minister Martin, I wish you and the people of Ireland and all people who are connected to the wonderful Irish history and traditions a very happy St. Patrick's Day.

I had the great honor of representing a very large Irish American citizenry in New York for eight years, and I know well the contributions that Ireland and Irish Americans have made to the United States. They're so numerous, they're impossible to quantify. And indeed, we now have a President and a Vice President who trace some of their family roots back to Ireland.

So I am grateful that the foreign minister could join us here today ahead of the holiday tomorrow to acknowledge both the history and friendship that we share, but also the working relationship that we have enjoyed on a number of important issues that are really significant to both the people of Ireland and to Americans.

I told the foreign minister how much we appreciate that strong partnership. And we discussed and had a very productive meeting about a range of issues. Our countries share a vital economic relationship that has created tens of thousands of jobs in Ireland and the United States. We need to coordinate closely to preserve those benefits in the face of global economic challenges.

Ireland also makes significant contributions to global security. Over 800 troops, 10 percent of the country's armed forces, are currently deployed overseas on peacekeeping missions in Chad, Kosovo, Bosnia, Afghanistan, and other countries.

And on the subject of conflict prevention, I want to address the recent events in Northern Ireland. As many of you know, this is an issue of great personal concern and commitment to both me and to my husband. It was an honor to work on behalf of peace in Northern Ireland and to do so with the leadership of Senator George Mitchell as our negotiator. I had the privilege of visiting Northern Ireland numerous times to meet with activists from both communities. I spent a lot of time in particular with women, Catholic and Protestant, who were working to build bridges in their own communities, to find common ground as mothers and wives, and to create conditions for peace from the ground up.

Thanks to the brave efforts of government leaders and community activists like the women that I was privileged to know, the people of Northern Ireland, with the strong support of the Government of Ireland and the Government of Great Britain, reached a peace agreement, the Good Friday Agreement, that has delivered more than a decade of calm and progress.

Now, in recent days, a handful of rejectionists have tried to drag the people of Northern Ireland back into a full cycle of violence and retaliation. The recent attacks which killed two British soldiers and a police officer are an affront to the values of every community, every ethnicity, every religion, and every nation that seeks peace. I want to commend the entire leadership of Northern Ireland as well as the Irish and British governments for their constructive statements and their strong resolve in the face of this attack.

I hope that the recent arrests will bring an end to these tragic events and allow the people of Northern Ireland to continue to move forward not only with the important work of reconciliation, but with prosperity and progress that will redound to the benefit of all. The success of the peace process has consequences that go far beyond Northern Ireland. It provides proof to people everywhere that negotiations, dialogue, reconciliation, diplomacy can end conflicts that have tormented generations. The United States stand with the people of Northern Ireland. We will not let criminals destroy the gains that have been achieved through great courage and sacrifice.

Now, this issue is, of course, only a small facet of our relationship with Ireland. Whether it is supporting the Middle East peace process; strengthening democratic institutions in Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Western Balkans; promoting human rights; finding solutions to the global financial crisis and climate change; working together on development, we know Ireland is and will remain a strong and steady partner and leader. We share responsibilities, a common agenda, and a proud history.

So Minister Martin, I am grateful for your friendship and for the friendship that you represent on behalf of your country, and I look forward to working with you as we address these and other challenges.

Foreign Minister Martin. Thank you very much indeed, Secretary of State, and may I say that it's a particular pleasure for me and indeed a privilege to be here with you and to have the opportunity to have our first bilateral meeting here in Washington.

I think you will agree that our meeting was substantive, it was productive, and very fruitful. And indeed, I, of course, congratulated Secretary of State Clinton on her recent appointment and, of course, said all of us in Ireland look forward to working with you in the months and indeed in the years ahead.

It is especially appropriate that the meeting should take place on the eve of St. Patrick's Day, when Ireland again has been honored so warmly here in Washington. And indeed there's a special bond of friendship between Ireland and the United States, and again this is reflected, I think, in the very generous way in which St. Patrick's Day has been celebrated here today and tomorrow in Washington and indeed across the United States itself.

Secretary Clinton has been an extraordinary friend of Ireland and continues to be. For many years you've played a key role in our peace process, as you've just articulated, and you've been a frequent visitor to Ireland over the years. Your engagement at a political and civic level, particularly in terms of developing political awareness among women's groups in Northern Ireland, was particularly important and earned you the greatest respect on the island of Ireland and indeed amongst our Irish American community here in the United States. And of course, we look forward very much indeed to welcoming you to Ireland for an official visit at an early opportunity.

In addition to that, we did discuss, of course, the situation in Northern Ireland, including the tragic events of last—of the past week, when three lives were needlessly and senselessly lost as a result of unacceptable and criminal attacks by dissidents. We—what has emerged from the past week, as I spoke and discussed with Secretary Clinton, has been a very strong unity of purpose from both the Irish and the British Government and indeed from all of the political parties on the island of Ireland. It has demonstrated a very significant unity of purpose in ensuring that we will never go back to the bad old days and that we're very anxious to build on the political momentum and develop very strong political structures and community structures to ensure the continuation and the enhancement of the extraordinary achievements of the past ten years. And of course, America has been particularly important in relation to those achievements.

In terms of the ongoing bilateral relationship that we—Secretary Clinton has expressed interest in the new strategic framework that the Taoiseach announced last evening, which will in many ways be the framework for the development of our relationship with the United States in the decades ahead. And we want to work on quite a number of those issues into the future, not least in developing bilateral frameworks whereby young Irish people can come to America and indeed young Americans can come to Ireland to work and to study and to learn more about each other's cultures and experiences. And in that context, we look forward to working bilaterally on issues such as development and other issues where we can add value to the world by working in partnership.

I wish to pay tribute to Secretary Clinton's intensive engagement with the international community over the past few weeks. We look forward to the United States assuming a strong and progressive global leadership role in the years ahead. And already within the European Union community, there is strong anticipation, excited anticipation about the relationship that will develop across the Atlantic between the European Union and indeed the United States.

We've discussed, as the Secretary of State said, issues pertaining to the Middle East, to Afghanistan, to global economic downturn, and developments within the European Union itself. We welcome your very energetic engagement in the pursuit of a comprehensive peace settlement in the Middle East. And of course, we were particularly warm in our welcome of the appointment of Senator George Mitchell as Middle East envoy, a person who did an enormous amount of work for Ireland in developing the peace process back in Ireland. And anywhere we've gone in the Middle East, we have made it very clear a man of integrity, a man of fairness, and a man who listens has been appointed to a very sensitive post. And that speaks volumes in terms of your commitment to the resolution of that issue. And indeed, if we can be of any assistance in that regard, given our own experiences, we're only too willing to provide such assistance.

We look forward to tomorrow, St. Patrick's Day. I was intrigued by the Secretary of State Clinton's memories of the capacity of the Irish to party in a unique way—(laughter)—and she interrogated the Ambassador in terms of where the real parties were going to be tomorrow evening. (Laughter.) And I think, you know, we're looking forward to it, and the Taoiseach—and the meeting between President Obama and the Taoiseach tomorrow as well, which of course is the highlight of the remarkable celebration of our national day in the United States.

Q. Thank you, Madame Secretary. On Pakistan, I'd like to talk to you about your message to Pakistan over the weekend, which certainly seemed to help, at least, calm the situation. What sort of pressure did you apply to Pakistan? Did you warn that Congress may not be forthcoming with aid if the political turmoil continues? And given the political turmoil, can you say that the government is stable and are you concerned that it's distracted from the very important task at hand at fighting the war on terrorism? Thank you.

Secretary Clinton. Well, of course, the Pakistanis themselves resolved the difficulties that were manifest over the last several days. The work that was done by our Ambassador Anne Patterson and the Embassy staff, along with our Special Representative Richard Holbrooke and his staff, was, I think, very helpful in both working with the Pakistani leaders themselves and in keeping our government informed. I did speak with both President Zardari and Nawaz Sharif. And I believe that the resolution that they have agreed upon is the first step of what has to be an ongoing reconciliation and compromising of political views that can stabilize civilian democracy and the rule of law, both of which are essential to the efforts that the Pakistanis themselves see as so critical; namely, preventing extremism and violence from stalking the Pakistani people and the country.

So we are going to continue our very close working relationship with the government and a number of Pakistani leaders in the days and weeks ahead. We have another trilateral meeting scheduled a few months off. So there will be an ongoing effort to make our services available and to help the Pakistanis fight against our common enemy.

Q. Are you worried that (inaudible)?

Secretary Clinton. Well, I think they understand what's at stake.

Q. Very well. Thank you, Madame Secretary. The Administration has asked a number of European countries, including Ireland, to help with the resettlement of detainees in Guantanamo Bay. I wanted to ask you, first, how important is our help with that issue? And secondly, what would you say to European citizens who say that Guantanamo was an American creation that most Europeans didn't approve of, and that the United States really has the responsibility to resolve the problems it created?

Secretary Clinton. Well, the President has made it clear that we will close Guantanamo. That is a position that was widely advocated by Europeans, both European governments and the EU, as well as European citizens from, I guess, every country. We believe that that is the right step for the United States to take, and we are going through our process now to evaluate the disposition with respect to each detainee.

But it is clear that we will need help because many of the detainees cannot safely, for themselves or others, be sent back to the countries from which they came. There are some countries that have made it very clear if the detainees are returned that they will face consequences; imprisonment, for example. So we need help to avoid the human rights problems that might arise with the release and resettlement of the detainees. And we are trying to do the best we can with the problem that we inherited, and that certainly is something that Europe, from one end to the other, called upon us to do. So we would hope to have the cooperation of European governments.

Foreign Minister Martin. First of all, we warmly welcomed the decision to close Guantanamo, and indeed Ireland was one of the first countries out calling for its closure. And it has been welcomed warmly across the European Union. And as I have said, and I'm on the record publicly as saying, that given the fact that we called for the closure of Guantanamo, we have—there's a compelling logic to being responsive to the situation and to see what—where we can help in—within the context of the European Union as well, because we do believe that Europe is working on this at the moment, and I understand that the European Union is engaged with the Administration in terms of information and so on. And I know it will be the subject matter of discussions perhaps tomorrow as well between the President and the Taoiseach, so I'm not going to preempt anything the Taoiseach may say.

But we're a friend of America and we will respond to the issues as they emerge. And we've made it clear that we want to be positive in our engagement on this issue with the Administration.

Secretary Clinton. We appreciate that.

Mr. Wood. Thank you all very much.

Secretary Clinton. One—you want one more on each side?

Mr. Wood. Sure.

Secretary Clinton. Yeah, okay.

Q. Madame Secretary, how do you respond to criticism from Senators McCain and Graham and Brownback that Chris Hill is—does not have the experience necessary to become ambassador in Baghdad? He doesn't have the experience in the Arab countries. And they also allege that he doesn't have the negotiating skills necessary, and they point to the recent deadlock in the negotiations with North Korea as an example.

Secretary Clinton. Well, obviously, I think both of those criticisms are unjustified and unfounded. Chris Hill is a distinguished, experienced diplomat who has served in some very difficult positions on behalf of our country. Another very distinguished, experienced diplomat, John Negroponte, was our ambassador to Iraq. He did not have Middle East or Arabic language skills when he was sent to Iraq. I believe the people you've just mentioned, my former colleagues, all voted for former Deputy Secretary Negroponte. So I think on the experience basis, he is not only very well-qualified in terms of running a large embassy, helping to deal with the myriad of issues that will arise as we conduct our withdrawal, but we'll have around him, as any ambassador does, people who have particular skills and expertise.

With respect to the North Korean mission that we believe Ambassador Hill carried out with great persistence and success despite some difficult challenges, this is a hard set of challenges to meet. And it is our perspective that he made a lot of lemonade out of some pretty bad lemons, and he was able to get the North Koreans on record as agreeing to certain obligations. We now have to follow through on those obligations.

So our assessment, which we believe is rooted in the facts, may be different from those who, you know, are rightfully distressed with and extremely critical of North Korean actions on human rights, on their continuing effort to obtain nuclear weapons, on their belligerence and their provocative actions. But that is something that is not in any way reflective of the job that Chris Hill did in the Six-Party Talks, where we think he did a very good job.

Q. A question for the Secretary of State. You had strong words there for the dissidents in Northern Ireland. Can I just ask—

Secretary Clinton. Not dissidents, not—I'm all in favor of dissidents. I'm not in favor of criminals.

Q. Okay. Well, your strong words, how—I just want to ask how you felt personally last week when you saw the events unfolding. And just secondly on that, you've been asked to make an official visit at the earliest opportunity.

Secretary Clinton. Yes.

Q. When do you think that will be and will President Obama be coming with you?

Secretary Clinton. Well, I told the minister that unfortunately, my colleagues in the State Department know my great affection for Ireland and they're somewhat skeptical that it's a work job for me to go. So I'm working that through. I will get there at my earliest opportunity.

I think like all people who value peace and who know what it's like to feel secure sending your, you know, son to the store or waiting for your husband to come home from work, those days were thankfully behind us. And so when these criminal elements, these rejectionists, determined to kill and try to set the communities against one another in Northern Ireland again, to relive the troubles and the bad days that everyone worked so hard to resolve, it was distressing.

But I was immediately heartened by the response across Northern Ireland, indeed, the island of Ireland with people speaking out against the murders and the violence and the provocation that these actions represented. I particularly appreciated the very strong statements of Northern Ireland's leaders from both communities. So I believe this did, as the minister said, fortunately foil the efforts of the criminal elements to try to provoke violence again. In fact, it did show a unity of purpose, a commitment to a positive future.

Now that doesn't mean all of the problems are over and all of the difficulties that people live with day-to-day—the minister and I talked about some of the economic issues that we wanted to help address in Northern Ireland. But it did, in a resounding way, demonstrate a commitment to peace that touched my heart and was incredibly moving to me.

President Barack Obama and Taoiseach Brian Cowen delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

President Obama. Well, happy St. Patrick's Day to everybody. I want to welcome Taoiseach Brian Cowen and his lovely wife on their first visit to the White House for this wonderful St. Patrick's Day tradition. This is the first for both of us, and with a little bit of luck of the Irish, I'm sure we'll get it right.

We are pleased to be joined by a statesman who worked as hard as anybody to usher in an age of peace in Northern Ireland, and that is my now Middle East envoy—because he's a glutton for punishment—Senator George Mitchell.

I am also proud today to announce that I am naming a great friend, Dan Rooney, co-founder of the Ireland Fund, unwavering supporter of Irish peace and culture and education—not to mention the owner of the Super Bowl Champion Pittsburgh Steelers—as the United States Ambassador to Ireland. He will be an outstanding representative.

Just a private note here. Dan is a great friend. He and his family are as gracious and thoughtful a group of people as I know, and so I know that he is just going to do an outstanding job. And the people of Ireland I think will benefit greatly from him representing the United States there.

Now, before I turn it over to the Taoiseach, it turns out that we have something in common. He hails from County Offaly. And it was brought to my attention on the campaign that my great-great-great grandfather on my mother's side came to America from a small village in County Offaly, as well. We are still speculating on whether we are related.

I do share, though, a deep appreciation for the remarkable ties between our nations. I am grateful to him for his leadership of Ireland. The bond between our countries could not be stronger. As somebody who comes from Chicago, I know a little bit about Ireland, and the warmth, the good humor, and the fierce passion and intelligence of the Irish people is something that has informed our own culture, as well. And so that's why this day and this celebration is so important.

So, with that, what I'd like to do is let Taoiseach say a few words. And then I believe he's got something to give me.

Taoiseach Cowen. Well, thank you very much indeed. Mr. President, Secretary of State, senators, distinguished members of Congress, members of the Irish delegation, members of the press, ladies and gentlemen. First of all, Mary and I would like to thank you, President and First Lady, for your very warm and gracious welcome to the White House this morning. Your invitation to me today and to host this ceremony honors Ireland and all her people at home and abroad.

And I want to, in the first instance, greatly welcome your appointment of Dan Rooney and we look forward to Dan and Pat coming to Ireland. They will be very welcomed. They are regular visitors, they know Ireland so well. And Dan has been a great personal friend of mine down the years, too, and I really very much welcome his appointment. And I know how great an honor it is for his family.

Can I say, Mr. President, you were saying you were trying to work out if we're related or not. I just want to say that I have checked, and unfortunately, there are no Kearneys on the electoral register anymore in my electoral district. But if there were, I assure you, I'd have them on my campaign team.

I hope, of course, some day to reciprocate your great hospitality by welcoming you and Mrs. Obama to Ireland, where we will offer you the warmest of Irish welcomes, I can assure you.

Mr. President, during your election campaign you captivated the hearts and minds of millions of people. On the island of Ireland, across Europe, and across the continent, indeed, your story and your message of hope were truly inspirational and universal in their appeal. We offer you our warmest congratulations, our good wishes, and our steadfast support.

Mr. President, St. Patrick's Day is a time of joy and pride for all Irish men and women everywhere. Today when Irish America is bound together by a green thread woven through the great cities and into the heartland and length and breadth of this great country, it is a day, too, of reflection on our immigrant history, of our sense of place and of our need to connect.

St. Patrick, of course, was an immigrant to our shores. He brought with him the great gift of faith, and in doing so he changed our country so much for the better. The Irish, in turn, brought this message of hope and his values of generosity around the globe, including to this great nation.

We are proud of our Irish community in America, of how they have preserved their Irish culture and heritage, and how they have helped build this great country. They have lived and worked here, and they have succeeded. They've enriched Ireland and they have enriched America.

And on this St. Patrick's Day, in these most difficult times, we remember the enormous trials and deprivations experienced by our immigrant peoples in times past—times of poverty, oppression and famine, and the Troubles on a scale unimaginable to us today. Their achievements inspire us with the strength of the human spirit and the certainty that we will succeed, and that we will manage our way together to safer and better economic times.

It is my firm conviction that America's leadership, your leadership, will be at the heart of that global resurgence. And every country has its own pressures and difficulties; we must each face up to them, and to our own problems. But we also have to stand together in partnership. In Ireland you will find, Mr. President, the most steadfast of friends.

Time and again in our history, we have looked to America for leadership on the long and often difficult road to peace. At the darkest moments, the United States has been a constant source of hope, a reservoir of support, and a steady and trusted guide. The contribution of the United States has been immeasurable. And some of those who played a central role in our peace process are with us today, including your Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, and, of course, our dear friend, Senator George Mitchell. I wish them well in their work for peace in the Middle East. And I know that their work in Ireland will help to give them the strength and wisdom they will need in the months and years ahead.

We all know that the process of peace-building and of reconciliation takes patience and perseverance. In recent days, an evil, unrepresentative and tiny minority has challenged the democratic institutions which we have built together in Ireland. The people of Ireland, north and south, have risen to that challenge. They have spoken with one voice. They have rejected violence and division. They have stood by peace, reconciliation, democracy, and freedom.

Mr. President, there is a phrase in the Irish language—”Is féidir linn”—it may seem familiar. It translates as “Yes, you can.” In that spirit, and in the spirit of friendship between our two countries, I am pleased to present you this bowl of Shamrock.

I thank you once more for your kind welcome to the White House, and I wish a very happy St. Patrick's Day to you, to your family, and to the American people. Thank you very much.

President Obama. Well, the—let me try that again. Is féidir linn?

Taoiseach Cowen. Is féidir linn.

President Obama. Is féidir linn. All right. I got that. Yes, we can.

I want to thank the Taoiseach and the people of Ireland for this beautiful bowl of shamrocks. Not only does it symbolize the deep and enduring bond between our peoples, but it serves as a hopeful reminder that whatever hardship the winter may bring, the eternal promise of springtime is always around the corner.

The contributions of the Irish to the American story cannot be overstated. Irish signatures are on our founding documents; Irish blood has been spilled on our battlefields; Irish sweat went into building our greatest cities. We are better for their contributions to our democracy, and we are richer for their art and their literature, their poetry and their songs.

Rarely in world history has a nation so small had so large an impact on another. Tens of millions of Americans trace their roots back to the Emerald Isles, and on St. Patrick's Day, many millions more claim to. On behalf of them—and all Americans, I thank the Irish people for this gift, and for all that they've contributed to the chronicles and the character of America.

And I do want to share briefly a few words about the recent attacks in Northern Ireland.

Almost 11 years ago, the world watched with wonder as brave men and women found the courage to see past the scars of generations of violence and mistrust, and come together around a future of peace. We watched with hope as the people of Ireland and Northern Ireland went to the ballot box and overwhelmingly endorsed such a peaceful future.

But every peace process is challenged by those who would seek to destroy it. And no one ever believed that this extraordinary endeavor would be any different. We knew that there would be setbacks; we knew that there would be false starts. We knew that the opponents of peace would trot out the same old tired violence of the past in hopes that this young agreement would be too fragile to hold.

And the real question was this: When tested, how would the people of Northern Ireland respond?

Now we know the answer: They responded heroically. They and their leaders on both sides have condemned this violence and refrained from the old partisan impulses. They've shown they judge progress by what you build and not what you tear down. And they know that the future is too important to cede to those who are mired in the past.

The thoughts and prayers of Americans everywhere go out to the families of the fallen. And I want everyone listening to know this: The United States will always stand with those who work towards peace. After seeing former adversaries mourning and praying and working together this week, I've never been more confident that peace will prevail.

Now, today is a day for all the people of America and Ireland to celebrate our shared history and our shared future with joy and good cheer. So I can't think of a better place to take the Taoiseach for lunch than the Congress.

We'll be—that was good, wasn't it?

Taoiseach Cowen. That was good.

President Obama. You like that? We'll be heading there shortly for the annual Speaker's St. Patrick's Day luncheon—a tradition in which Democrats and Republicans put aside partisanship and unite around one debate only: who is more Irish than whom.

So I thank the Taoiseach in advance for bringing relative peace to Washington for at least this day. Thank you very much.

Secretary Hillary Clinton, Minister Peter Robinson, and Minister Martin McGuinness delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. Good afternoon. Well, I am very pleased to be here this afternoon with two men who have really proven what leadership means and demonstrated clearly courage and commitment: First Minister Peter Robinson and Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness.

I want to begin by saying how pleased I am personally to welcome them here. I have known Peter and Martin for a number of years and have seen them take responsibility for the future of the people of Northern Ireland in a way that has inspired confidence and created a real opportunity for people not only in the United States, but around the world to look to Northern Ireland and to see the progress there. Of course, it's St. Patrick's Day and they are here on this occasion, but they are no strangers to either Washington or the State Department. And I know how important our relationship is to continue to support those who work for peace.

In addition to the discussion that I just concluded with the first minister and the deputy first minister, I have had excellent conversations with others as well who you have seen starting yesterday and continuing through today.

Northern Ireland has made such remarkable progress since the signing of the Good Friday Accord. We've had more than a decade of peace and progress and prosperity for many. Recent acts of violence cannot be allowed to undermine that progress and the progress that is yet to come as these two leaders and those who work with them continue to move into the future. The violence that has occurred with the killing of the two young soldiers and the police officer are an affront to the values of every community, every person who believes in the power of peace and reconciliation.

The two men standing on either side of me led Northern Ireland through the last days in a commendable manner. Along with the governments of Ireland and the United Kingdom, they have confronted these acts of violence with boldness and statesmanship. And they have responded to actions intended to sow fear and division with unity and courage.

So we are here after ten years of peace, and we're committed to looking forward to a future where we, the United States, working with them, can create a better life so that every child growing up in Northern Ireland has a chance to live up to his or her God-given potential.

The State Department and the Obama Administration will be actively engaged in assisting the leadership of Northern Ireland. And this is not a subject of passing interest, but of surpassing interest. During my time as First Lady, during my time as senator from New York, I have been privileged to see the people of Northern Ireland move in a direction that has given so much hope to so many, including those far beyond their own boundaries.

So I want to thank the first minister and the deputy first minister, and now let me turn to the first minister for any comments he wishes to make.

First Minister Robinson. Thank you very much. At the very outset, I want to express my appreciation and the appreciation of all of the people of Northern Ireland to Secretary Clinton. Hillary has been a good friend of Northern Ireland, a great friend of the process in which we have been involved. We were delighted to hear in our meeting which has just concluded that that is going to be an ongoing interest. We're looking for excuses to bring her to Northern Ireland, and we're delighted to hear that the Obama Administration is looking to bring an envoy to continue to partner with us, and indeed to have a particular emphasis with someone looking after the issue of the economy.

The deputy first minister and I have had a difficult period of time. I think that anybody who has followed recent events will know that there was a single purpose on the part of those who carried out those dreadful acts. They intended to divide us. They intended to drag Northern Ireland back into conflict. Their hopes were that the work of the politicians in the assembly and in the executive would begin to fray and that the institutions would crumble and fall.

They have not succeeded, and they will not succeed. There is a massive determination, not just on the part of the deputy first minister and myself, but I was delighted to see it from every single political party. There was no party political bickering on the issue. Every politician stepped up to the line and made it clear their denunciation of the incidents and also their determination that they were not going back.

It is that determination not simply not to go back or to stand still, but to drive us forward, to complete the tasks that we have set our hand to, and to bring Northern Ireland to that place where it has a stable political and economic future, where prosperity is a daily diet of our people. It is that hope that drives us forward, and it is that hope that I believe we have the full support of the people of Northern Ireland in realizing.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you so much.

Deputy First Minister McGuinness.

Well, if I could say that it's an incredible good fortune for all of us on the island of Ireland and the north that Hillary Clinton has been appointed the new Secretary of State. She has for many, many years, alongside her husband, been a true friend of all of us, a true friend of the peace process, contributing tremendously to the transformation that has taken place over the course of the last number of years. And what has been really encouraging about this visit and the meeting that we've just come from is that it's quite clear that she is surrounded by people who have a tremendous insight into our situation, going back many, many years. I find that tremendously encouraging, and we're excited about our meeting with President Obama this morning and the things we heard from him and his reiteration of his commitment to help us within the process, continuing, I must say, a long line of important contributions from the United States of America.

And what we've heard just now in the course of our meeting with Secretary Clinton further encourages us that we will see the appointment of an envoy who will make their own particular contribution, also following in a long line of envoys who have been tremendously supportive for all of us.

And we talked about the economy because we believe that economic development is of critical importance, and our program for government identified the development of the economy as a key priority for all of us. And there has been a long tradition of American companies investing on the island of Ireland and in the north of Ireland, and our visit here and the West Coast, and we've been to Los Angeles, Peter's been to Chicago, I've been to New York, and we're now in Washington. Everywhere we went, it was quite clear that people were very tuned in to what had happened in our country and indeed at the time of those incidents were very shocked that it did happen.

But that shock quickly gave way to a bigger story, and the bigger story was the unity which Peter has just spoken about, not just between himself and myself, but between all of the parties recognizing that this represented a real challenge to our process by people who are dedicated to destroy the peace process, dedicated to the demolition of the political institutions, and absolutely dedicated to plunging our community. And we don't speak about two communities. We represent—although we represent different parties, we represent one community in the north of Ireland, and we are not going to allow our community to be plunged into mayhem and destruction by people who have no support, no mandate whatsoever, and no right whatsoever to attack the peace that the people of Ireland as a whole and in the north voted for in the referendum in the aftermath of the Good Friday upheaval. So I'm actually moving forward on all of this with tremendous confidence about the future, confidence in that we are united, that we are supported by the Irish Government and the British Government, and by a very strong Administration here in the United States of America led by President Obama and Hillary Clinton. So we will leave Washington incredibly buoyed up by the encouragement and support that we've received here, and I want to express my deepest thanks and appreciation to you, Hillary, and to President Obama and all those in all of the political parties on Capitol Hill who have stood by us through thick and thin.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you.

Q. Madame Secretary, there are predictions of really catastrophic conditions in Darfur because of the president of Sudan's expulsion of aid groups and apparent intention to shut them down completely. And I'm wondering what can the international community do about this. Will this in any way speed the appointment of another special envoy, a U.S. envoy to Sudan?

Secretary Clinton. Well, we have been deeply engaged in determining what we can do, because this is a horrendous situation that is going to cause untold misery and suffering for the people of Darfur, particularly those in the refugee camps. There will be a special envoy appointed for Sudan in the coming days. But the real question is what kind of pressure can be brought to bear on President Bashir and the government in Khartoum to understand that they will be held responsible for every single death that occurs in those camps, because by their expulsion of the aid workers, who came from all over the world to assist with the health and the sanitation and the security and the education of the refugees, they are putting those 1.4 million lives at risk.

And for those governments that support President Bashir's decision to expel the aid workers, they have a responsibility to persuade the government in Sudan to change its decision to let the aid workers back in, or they must replace with money and personnel those who have been expelled, so that innocent lives are not lost and further undermined.

So we take this very seriously. We are looking for the most effective ways to convince and demonstrate to the Government of Sudan that they have now assumed an even greater sense of responsibility and infamy in the eyes of the world by turning their backs on these refugees whom they created in the first place. So we hope that either by the internal processes of the Sudanese Government or pressure brought to bear by the supporters of President Bashir and that government, the decision is reversed, or at the very least, the money and the personnel are replaced.

Q. Thank you. This is a question for Madame Secretary and also the first and deputy first ministers.

Madame Secretary, as my colleague pointed out, there are many serious problems in the world. Northern Ireland has enjoyed top-level attention from the White House for many years now. When Barack Obama was running against John McCain, he indicated that he may revisit the appointing of an envoy. How long can the White House, in the highest levels of the U.S. Government, stay engaged in Northern Ireland? Will there be a time when they will not?

And to the first and deputy first ministers, you are here on an economic investment journey to try to find companies that will invest in Northern Ireland. The global economy right now is in a very serious state. How contingent on economic progress and stability is political stability in Northern Ireland?

Secretary Clinton. Well, as to your first question, we waited until we had the opportunity to consult with the leaders of Northern Ireland and of the Republic of Ireland about the best way to structure our relationship going forward. And it has been a unanimous agreement that having this high-level attention from the United States Government provides a real value to the ongoing peace process and to the economic aspects of, you know, anchoring peace in the soil where people can actually see the fruits of that effort.

So we will be appointing a special envoy. We'll be appointing someone who will pay attention to the economic investment side of this. You know, there's a great sense of affinity between the United States and the Irish, and it's something that I take very personally as well as professionally as part of my responsibilities. It's not only that we have many millions—about 44 million, which I think is an undercount—of Irish Americans, but it is the fact that we formed this deep relationship. And we are there to help; we're not there to do anything other than support the decisions that these extraordinary leaders make.

But if we are needed, if we provide value, we will continue to support this process. It is gaining strength every day. As both Peter and Martin said, the reaction not just by the leaders, but the people in Northern Ireland to the murders last week demonstrated how firmly anchored peace is. But there are still some bumps along the road.

And before I turn to Peter to answer your second question, you know, the Northern Ireland economy is doing better than a lot of economies right now, so I think it is quite attractive for people who understand that we will work our way through this global economic crisis we're in right now, and there will be opportunities for investments. And I think Peter and Martin are absolutely right to be out talking about the advantages of investing in Northern Ireland right now.

First Minister Robinson. Secretary Clinton is right. Northern Ireland does have a deep and special relationship with the United States as part of a secret deal. The deal is that as we have supplied you with 15 presidents that we will continue to do that.

And we continue to get support from the leadership of the United States. It's working well for both of us, I think. The economy of Northern Ireland is critical and is critical to the overall process in which we're engaged. We want to be able to show people that having local control can make a difference. And it only makes a difference to them if they feel it themselves. And therefore, it has to be able to—raise everybody hopes, it has to get into every section of our community. And the economy is the one way that you can do that, you can make people feel better, you can make people feel that this is working.

Of course, we, relatively speaking, are weathering the economic storm better than many. And we have an unemployment rate to which I think most European countries and the United States would be happy with, at just about 5 percent. But we want to go up the food chain in terms of the type of jobs that we have in Northern Ireland. And we're looking at high-end engineering, financial and businesses services, IT, creative industries. Those are the areas that we are wanting to grow in Northern Ireland. And we can provide businesses in the United States, even in these hard times, with a good reason to come to Northern Ireland, where you get the highest skills at the lowest cost.

So yeah, we do want to improve our economy. It's important for the overall process. And we believe that the United States has something that it can give Northern Ireland, but Northern Ireland has something that it can give back.

Deputy First Minister McGuinness.

Well, I think it is very important that people benefit from the fruits of the peace process. And reiterating what Peter said, our relationship with the United States of America is rock solid. We have connections going back here centuries, and the bonds between us are very strong. And I believe that in the future, we will continue to see investment from the United States of America and the island of Ireland and specifically also in the North. And Peter and I have been tremendously encouraged by the messages that we've had over the course of the last short while.

In terms of the whole issue of the connection between the economic situation and the issue of political stability, let me say this. The institutions are, in my opinion, stronger and more stable now in the aftermath of the three killings than they were before. And that should send a very powerful message to those who people who were responsible for those killings. And the message is that we are not going to buckle under this pressure, but we are going to continue to do our jobs, knowing that we have got the overwhelming support of our people, people who too want to benefit for their own sakes, for the sakes of their children, and those yet unborn.

So this is about providing a better future and a better history and this is about recognizing the damage that was done to our Island and to ourselves as individuals by the past that some of us have experienced. So what we have to do is—the key point is to give leadership. That's what it's all about.

I attended two very important conferences in a forest in Helsinki, alongside Jeffery Donaldson of the Democratic Unionist Party, alongside Cyril Ramaphosa from South Africa and Roelf Meyer. And there were many white boards and there were many black boards in attendance. And many words were written on the boards and many words were spoken. I wrote one word on the board when I addressed the Kurds, the Shia and the Sunnis, and that word was “leadership.” That's what is required in the north of Ireland, that's what's required in the Middle East, that's what's required in Iraq, that's what's required in Afghanistan and in many other places throughout the world.

The benefit we had was that we had leaders who understood the need to forge an agreement, who didn't want to be part of a process that saw the misery of the past inflected on future generations. And so I think—I would like to think that we have given strong leadership and that we have given a very powerful message—not just to our own people on the island of Ireland or in the North, but to the world— that the only way forward in situations where there is conflict and dispute is to sit down like sensible, reasonable human beings, forge agreements, and we have done that.

I mean, people have said to me, for example, what is different now in relation to what these people are doing and at a time whenever the IRA were involved in a conflict, which I supported, against the British Army? The difference is we have the Good Friday Agreement. The difference is we have all of the parties coming together, forming an inclusive government supported by the Irish Government, supported by the British Government and the U.S. Administration and the full width of international opinion, but more important than all of that, supported by the people, by ordinary housewives, workers, parents, people who have invested a tremendous amount and us as politicians, to give strong leadership and build a better future for them and for their children.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Secretary David Miliband delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. Hello. Well, I am pleased that the foreign secretary has come for another visit to further our cooperative working relationship in preparation for the March 31 meeting in The Hague and in preparation for the G-20 meeting, the NATO summit, the EU-U.S. meeting. We have a lot on our agenda. Welcome, David.

Foreign Secretary Miliband. Thank you very much. It's really good to be here. We're looking forward to our discussions and hearing how you're building on the very strong, positive impression that the Administration and you, in particular, have made right across Europe. So, glad to be here.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you. Thank you all very much.

Q. (Inaudible) do you think NATO will put forward more troops in Afghanistan if President Obama asks?

Foreign Secretary Miliband. I think that we have discussed this in the European community, European Union and in NATO as well. We're very struck that the Obama Administration wants to have a discussion of objectives, of strategy, and better resources, and they want to do it in that order. Obviously in the UK, we have about 12 percent of (inaudible) forces in Afghanistan.

I think what I would say is that the greatest increase in troops over the next few years is going to come from Afghans, because it's the Afghan National Army that is the focus of development. But some European countries are increasing their troop numbers, but I think there's a real sense that the Administration is serious about consultation and collaboration about all aspects of the objectives of the strategy as well as the resources, and that's greatly appreciated.

Secretary Clinton. And I would only add, Arshad, that what we have is an integrated strategy to achieve the objectives so that the civilian capacity that is going to be important for assisting in the training of the Afghan National Army as well as the police in supporting governance, rule of law, judicial systems, economic opportunities is also on the table. So we're going to have a thorough discussion leading up to the March 31st meeting because we believe that the objectives and the strategic review should lead in making clear what the resources will be, and we'll get into the specifics as we move forward. Thank you all very much.

Secretary Hillary Clinton delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Q. Madame Secretary, one question if you would. The Polish foreign minister was quoted over the weekend with some unusually strong language saying that the Poles had taken considerable risk in agreeing to cooperate in American missile defense plans and that they are waiting on the current Administration's announcement of its further plans with regard to missile defense and that he hopes that the Polish trust in the Americans was not misplaced. I'm paraphrasing, but it was close to that.

Now given the unusual nature of that language, what can you tell us about whether or not the Poles, to put it colloquially, are being left high and dry?

Secretary Clinton. Well, we have a very long and deep relationship with Poland and with the Polish Government and the Polish people. We are going to continue to consult with them and work through the issues concerning security that are of, you know, great interest to not only the Poles but all Europeans and the United States. As members of NATO, we take seriously our alliance commitments and I'm very confident that we will work through whatever issues lie ahead on any front. And that's part of what will be discussed at the upcoming NATO summit.

Thank you. Thank you all.

President Barack Obama and Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Introductory Remarks Omitted

President Obama. I want to welcome the Secretary General. We just had an outstanding meeting. He has been a strong leader of NATO and we are very grateful for the service that he's provided. He's a great friend to the United States.

You know, we are about to celebrate the 60th anniversary of NATO at a summit in both France and Germany. It is a testimony to the strength of the transatlantic alliance, a testimony to the effectiveness of NATO in creating stability and peace and prosperity, laying the groundwork for so much that has taken place over the last several years.

We have a set of challenges that require NATO to shift from the 20th century to the 21st century—issues of terrorism, failed states, nuclear proliferation—a whole host of new challenges, as well as the traditional role that NATO has played in preserving the territorial integrity of NATO members.

And at this summit—the Secretary General and I have been discussing the agenda for the summit. We are confident that we can create a process whereby NATO, which is already strong, becomes stronger, where we become even more effective in coordinating our efforts in Afghanistan. As many of you know, we're in the process, this administration, of going through an evaluation, a strategic review of our approach to Afghanistan. And we expect to share that with our NATO counterparts. We've been in close consultation with them and we believe that we are going to be able to ensure that the NATO members who have made so many sacrifices and have been working so hard already are reinvigorated and that the coordination that's going to be taking place will make it even more effective for us as we complete a successful NATO mission.

We've also discussed the role that NATO plays with respect to Russia and how this administration, my administration, is seeking a reset of the relationship with Russia, but in a way that's consistent with NATO membership and consistent with the need to send a clear signal throughout Europe that we are going to continue to abide by the central belief that countries who seek and aspire to join NATO are able to join NATO.

And finally, I thanked the Secretary General for his outstanding service. He is coming to the end of his tenure. I told him that he's a young man, so he's going to have to find something else to do, because he's an extraordinary talent. But he still has a lot of work in NATO to do just to get us through what is going to be a historic summit. And so I'm very grateful to him for taking the time to travel.

Secretary General de Hoop Scheffer.

Many thanks, Mr. President. For me, of course, it was a pleasure to meet the President of the United States, President Obama, for the first time here in the Oval Office in the run-up, indeed, to the NATO summit in the beginning of April, so less than two weeks away in Strasbourg and Kehl, in France and Germany—in the heart of Europe, by the way, which is an interesting place to celebrate NATO's 60th anniversary.

But as the President already said, celebrating the 60th anniversary should not only be back to look at your successes, but also look ahead. And in Afghanistan, there are still major challenges. Many things are going right, but many things are not going right. We are of course waiting the results of the review going on in the United States of America—very relevant for the other allies, very relevant for NATO—and that review will certainly be discussed at the summit, Afghanistan being NATO's most important operational priority.

NATO's future will be discussed, as well. The question: Is NATO going to have a new strategic concept, which brings to the surface a number of questions President Obama already spoke about—NATO's expeditionary capabilities, never forgetting NATO's core function, the integrity of the NATO territory, NATO's relations with Russia. We have many things on which we disagree, but NATO needs Russia and Russia needs NATO, so let's work on the things we agree on, and let's not hide our disagreements and let us realize that also this relationship can and in my opinion should be—should be strengthened.

So it's a full plate at the summit—from Afghanistan to NATO-Russia to NATO's future. We'll greet hopefully two new members. NATO's door is open to Albania and Croatia in the family of democratic nations. And as President Obama said a moment ago, NATO's door will stay open for new members if they perform—if they fulfill the criteria.

And I'm quite sure that President Obama's administration, as we discussed in the past 45 minutes, is and will be a staunch supporter of the North Atlantic Alliance, because it was and is and will stay, Mr. President, a unique alliance, bringing the United States of America, Canada and the European allies together. So it was a privilege to talk to the President. Thank you very much.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Minister Maxime Verhagen delivered these remarks in The Hague, Netherlands

Foreign Minister Verhagen. Madame Secretary, ladies and gentlemen, I want to extend a warm welcome to Secretary Clinton for her visit to the Netherlands, especially because we want to celebrate this year, 400 years of friendship between our two countries. Maybe not in a big tent we are today, but in a place big enough to host all the delegations, all the people who are involved in the future of Afghanistan, and who know that we have a stake in the future of Afghanistan.

The United States and the Netherlands and over 80 other countries and organizations are today meeting in The Hague. We have serious choices to make today. In recent years, NATO and its partners have reduced the threat of terrorists who once found a free haven in Afghanistan and planned attacks on peaceful citizens all over the world. But our work in Afghanistan is still far from done. And Secretary Clinton and I discussed our analyses of the situation and the possible ways forward. And the Netherlands welcomes the outcome of the policy review conducted by the United States.

As the review makes clear, Afghanistan and the region cannot be made safe by military force alone. Diplomacy and development are equally important. Afghan citizens as well as our own citizens need to know what our strategy will be. And I hope today in The Hague, we will start working on a new deal for Afghanistan, a common contract, a new Afghan bond. Achieving respect for human rights, good governance, and social and economic progress are equally important. And I'm sure that the United States and the Netherlands agree that such an Afghan bond must reflect a comprehensive and integrated approach.

In the province of Uruzgan in the south of the country, Dutch diplomats, development workers and military, together with our allies, are learning to do just that. And although the situation is far from irreversible, the number of security incidents is stable and development is picking up. So the Netherlands very much welcomes the American commitment to the training of the Afghan army and police, because this will enable the international community to proceed from implementing to assisting.

In the end, the Afghan people themselves have to be able to provide security and to lead the development of their country. And this conference proves the international community as a whole stays and is wanting to stay committed to the Afghan people.

Madame Secretary, thank you very much and I hope that we will have a very fruitful conference today.

Secretary Clinton. Well, thank you so much, Minister, and I am confident that this conference will make a great difference. And I am very grateful to you personally and to the Dutch Government for making this conference possible in such a short period of time. It was less than a month ago that we first discussed this together in Brussels. And once again, the Dutch Government is at the forefront of the work done on behalf of the global community, and I appreciate that.

You know, as the minister said, Dutch troops are leading the effort in Afghanistan. In Uruzgan Province, as the minister referenced, the success of the policies implemented by the Dutch forces is remarkable. At the center of our efforts is a courageous military commitment by the Dutch people and their government, and it has proven results. It is not a surprise that the three Ds that the Dutch have pursued in their mission in Afghanistan— defense, diplomacy and development—are ones that I personally believe is exactly the right framework.

More than 80 nations and organizations have been brought together here in The Hague. And this conference is critical to our way forward. The Dutch people have played a vital role in advancing security and spreading opportunity far beyond your borders. And this time in particular, our commitment going forward in Afghanistan has great consequences for all of our people, all free people, all people who share the values that the Dutch and the Americans share. I will be speaking later at the conference about the Obama Administration's strategy for Afghanistan. It is based on collaboration and consultation with our friends and partners.

I looked to the Netherlands not only because of the work that has been done in Afghanistan, but the unsurpassed commitment to fighting poverty and promoting development worldwide. The Netherlands has been a key ally for many decades. The fact that this country is the sixth most generous contributor to international development assistance says volumes about the values of the Dutch people. We will continue to seek your advice and your ideas, your guidance as we work together.

Now the ties between our two countries have a long history. This year, we celebrate the 400th anniversary of Henry Hudson's legendary voyage which took him from Amsterdam to New Amsterdam. And it marked the beginning of a great chapter in American history and American and Dutch cooperation. I know that the people of New Amsterdam, Minister, a city that is very dear to my heart, have already begun to celebrate this anniversary. I look forward to welcoming you to the United States in a few weeks, where I hope that we can bring even greater attention to the ties that join us and to the values that extend beyond time. And I look forward to many centuries of friendship and partnership between the American and Dutch people.

Thank you very much.

Foreign Minister Verhagen. Thank you.

Q. Madame Secretary (inaudible) after 2010, what do you think can be the role for the Netherlands after that period?

Secretary Clinton. Well, that is, of course, up to the Dutch Government and the Dutch people. But I think the people of the Netherlands should know, certainly from my perspective, the extraordinary contribution and leadership that your mission in Afghanistan has provided. We understand very well the sacrifices, the individual sacrifices as well as the collective ones that such a mission demonstrates. But it has been extraordinarily successful. And in fact, our strategic review is building on many of the ideas and the principles that were brought to bear by the Dutch in Afghanistan. But of course, any decision in the future is up to the people of the Netherlands and their government. Thank you.