Ambassador Peter Allgeier delivered these remarks in Geneva, Switzerland

Ambassador Allgeier. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

On behalf of the U.S. Government, I would like to welcome Minister of Labor Nadir and his delegation, including Ambassador Gomes, to Guyana's second Trade Policy Review. I would like to commend Minister Nadir for his opening statement, and for the documents that his government provided for this review, including the responses to our advance questions that we have just received. As always, we thank the WTO Secretariat for preparing us for this TPR, and for its comprehensive and informative report. The United States is also grateful to Ambassador Harris for acting as discussant for this review of Guyana's trade policy.

My Government considers Guyana to be a valued hemispheric partner. Since 2001, the United States and 15 countries of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) have worked together on the “Third Border Initiative.” The “Initiative” provides a framework for structuring our engagement across the broad spectrum of matters that affect the prosperity and well being of the region.

As Guyana's number one trading partner, the United States' commercial relationship with that country remains vibrant and growing. Our total two-way goods trade during 2008 increased by nearly 40 percent from 2007. Though trade between our countries was down 3% in the first four months of 2009 (compared to 2008) we are hopeful that as the global economy recovers, our trading relationship will continue to expand. Approximately 15 percent of total imports from Guyana enter the United States duty free under the Caribbean Basin Initiative. We would encourage Guyana to take full advantage of this program by increasing its utilization rate to the greatest extent possible, and we're happy to work with you toward that objective.

We are pleased by the Secretariat's judgment that Guyana's economic performance has improved since its last Review in 2003, particularly as a result of the government's significant reform efforts in various areas. Nonetheless, although Guyana has taken measures to improve the country's business environment, challenges remain. In 2008, Guyana ranked 105th out of 181 economies analyzed in the World Bank's ease of doing business index. Further reforms are needed to promote investment, which the government views as critical to the country's economic development. The Secretariat says that such reforms “should include the expansion of the country's economic infrastructure …as well as the further strengthening of governance and the regulatory environment.” We agree that such improvements could well serve Guyana's trade and investment objectives.

We had hoped that the government would have made greater strides in implementing its WTO commitments since the 2003 TPR. The United States appreciates that Guyana's non-resident status makes its participation in the WTO more challenging. We also understand that aid for trade is a governmental priority that would help Guyana's efforts not only to diversify its economy but also its efforts to improve its implementation of its WTO commitments. The Secretariat's report states that Guyana's major reform of its taxation system represents one of the most significant developments during the period under review. We are curious as to how the 16% value added tax (VAT) that was introduced in 2007 is being applied in light of Guyana's WTO obligations. According to the report, some locally produced goods, but not the equivalent imported products, are zero-rated under the VAT. In addition, the environmental tax levied on non-returnable beverage containers is levied on imports only. A basic tenet of WTO membership is national treatment. We would welcome Guyana's explanation as to how these taxes are applied in a manner that is compatible with this core WTO principle.

Transparency, another core WTO tenet, needs much attention. Greater transparency in Guyana's SPS regime would, as the Secretariat observes, benefit both Guyana and its trading partners. But Guyana has not notified any SPS measures to the WTO. Most SPS measures, the Secretariat observes, are contained in the implementing regulations of relevant acts, “which are largely inaccessible.” Furthermore, many SPS measures pre-date the creation of the WTO and have not been revised to reflect Guyana's obligations as a WTO Member. Moreover, there is no procedure for removing measures that are no longer relevant. If we look at Guyana's customs procedures, the Secretariat says that Guyana has not submitted its legislation under Article 22 of the Customs Valuation Agreement, nor has it replied to the Checklist of Issues.

Similarly, greater transparency in the area of technical barriers to trade would be of mutual benefit both to Guyana and to its trading partners. We commend Guyana for notifying the 20 technical regulations in force. This notification represents a marked improvement from Guyana's previous Review, but we understand that some particularly important notifications have yet to be made-notably its measures to implement the TBT Agreement and its enquiry point. Furthermore, as Ambassador Harris pointed out, Guyana has not submitted any notifications regarding state trading enterprises within the meaning of Article XVII of the GATT 1994. Meanwhile, two state-owned companies have exclusive rights to import and export sugar and gold, respectively.

In Guyana's 2003 TPR, the United States questioned the government's automatic and non-automatic licensing requirements. We are disappointed to learn that Guyana's last notification of its replies to the questionnaire on import licensing procedures was in 2003. At the time of Guyana's previous Review, the licensing system was being reviewed and this was expected to result in the elimination of a number of products from the list. However, the Secretariat reports, no changes were made.

Turning to intellectual property rights, a key issue for Guyana's economic development, most of Guyana's intellectual property laws date back to the colonial period. During the review period, legislative reform has been limited. While it appears that a new law on geographical indications was adopted in 2005, this law has not yet been notified to the WTO.

The United States will continue to work with Guyana and the other CARICOM members to strengthen and deepen our relationship. We look forward to working with Guyana and other CARICOM members to achieve a balanced and ambitious result in the Doha negotiations with meaningful new market access for all. Such a result could further enhance opportunities for Guyana to broaden its exports and its export markets. The United States looks forward to working with Guyana toward bringing the round to a successful conclusion, and we wish you a successful TPR.

Thank you.

Ambassador Ron Kirk delivered these remarks in Pittsburgh, PA

Ambassador Kirk. Good morning. I'm so pleased to be here today. I met with your CEO, John Surma, in Washington, DC last night, and I'm glad to see him here again today.

And I'm exceptionally pleased to get to meet all of you. I know this is one of the largest manufacturing plants in Pennsylvania—and one of the oldest. Steelworkers have been producing high-quality, American made products right here since 1875.

This plant had been open for 87 years when President John Kennedy stood on a wharf in New Orleans and gave a speech about trade. He told the crowd gathered there that America needed a new trade policy. His policy would support new opportunities for American businesses and, in turn, American workers. When that crowd heard the promise of new prosperity, they burst into cheers.

Less than one year later, President Kennedy had Congress's approval for the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. That led to the creation of the Office of the United States Trade Representative.

Kennedy sent the very first USTR, Christian Herter, to Geneva with one mission: to negotiate lower tariffs, so American businesses could compete overseas.

Forty-seven years later, America has another young president. And President Obama has made it clear: this administration shares Kennedy's goal, to create new jobs for American workers, and new markets for American businesses.

The global economy has gotten a lot more complicated over the last forty years. New trade agreements can still open markets to U.S. goods and services, and so they are an important part of our mission. But we have to do more than just pursue new trade deals. We must also insist on respect for our rights in the global trading system, if Americans are to reap the real benefits trade has to offer.

Right now, many Americans aren't sure those benefits exist.

A lot of what you hear about trade is negative. But the truth is, Americans benefit from trade every single day. The benefits are just so commonplace, we don't notice them.

We get produce at the grocery store year-round because we trade with countries that have different growing seasons. Many new items become more affordable in six months or a year, because the world's companies are competing for American customers.

Benefits like these are basic to our daily lives. But trade's rewards go far beyond what we can buy. The best benefits—better-paying jobs and economic growth— come when America sells to countries around the world.

Ninety-five percent of the world's consumers live outside the U.S. One of the easiest ways to grow American businesses and American jobs is to sell products to people outside our borders.

So we need access to foreign markets. And that is what good trade policy gets for America. Not just trade agreements with the WTO and with individual countries—but trade enforcement, too.

Realizing the potential benefits of trade pacts depends largely on whether we're willing and able to enforce those rules.

A trade agreement is a contract. Contracts tell us what's expected of us. Americans live up to contracts every day. When you buy a car, you get a car in exchange for making your monthly payment. That's keeping your end of the contract.

Our trading partners can sell their goods here. But in exchange, they must keep their end of our bargains.

I can tell you with no reservations: the Obama Administration is both willing and able to enforce our trade agreements. American workers deserve no less.

Today, on behalf of President Obama, I am here to affirm this administration's commitment to trade enforcement.

I am announcing several concrete new measures that will help to guarantee America's workers, businesses, and families a fair deal.

We will take new steps to protect the rights of American farmers and small business owners. We will hold our trading partners to their word on labor standards. And we will use work we're already doing to fight even harder for the men and women who fuel our economy and support their families.

That's the mission of USTR. We're here to help Americans grow their farms, build their businesses, and support their families through trade.

USTR will work with Congress and across the federal government to guarantee American families new opportunities. In particular, your representatives in Washington know how trade helps families in their states or districts, and how trade violations may hurt them. Theirs are critical voices in all our discussions at USTR.

We understand that Americans are worried: about their jobs, their businesses, their families. And they are worried that trade will take away new opportunities, not protect them or create new ones.

Americans have believed that our government hasn't done enough to protect our trade rights. And, while our trading partners largely respect our agreements, sometimes those rules are violated. That's why enforcement cannot be an afterthought. It needs to be a centerpiece of trade policy.

From day one, President Obama has focused on moving our nation toward economic recovery. Increased trade, coupled with strong enforcement, is an integral part of our plan.

In 2008, exports generated nearly two trillion dollars in income for American workers, farmers, ranchers, manufacturers, and producers… that's about one in every eight dollars Americans earned last year.

Exports of manufactured goods support six million American jobs. Millions more high-quality jobs depend in part, or entirely, upon trade in services and American intellectual property. And jobs supported by exports pay as much as 18 percent above the national average.

The Office of the United States Trade Representative is strengthening trade enforcement efforts because we will do everything we can to support those jobs and the workers who hold them.

President Obama and I believe that on a level playing field, Americans can compete in any sector—from manufacturing to services to agriculture. Just enforcing the rules on the books can win our workers and companies the benefits of trading as fully, fairly, and freely as our agreements allow.

Our new approach to enforcement is simple. We will deploy our resources more effectively to identify and solve problems at the source. But make no mistake: we will pursue legal remedies when other options are closed.

Last month, the United States filed suit at the World Trade Organization. We believe that China is unfairly restricting exports of raw materials like manganese and coke. In effect, this keeps the prices of these products lower for Chinese producers than the global market price.

This plant, and other steel, aluminum, and chemical plants across the country, need these materials to make products at a competitive price. We have begun consultations with China on this issue. We are prepared to take the case to the next step, if we do not reach an acceptable solution.

But we saw the problem, and we are responding for you. We're going to bat for American industrial workers and American steel, aluminum, and chemical producers. And we did not hesitate to do it.

Also this year, we addressed Canadian actions that undermined commitments they made in the Softwood Lumber Agreement. Most Americans don't know what that agreement does, and they don't care. But it's designed to help Americans whose livelihoods depend on a free and fair market for lumber products.

So when Canada violated its commitment, we acted and imposed tariffs on Canadian lumber shipments. We hope to work out our differences with the Canadians. But we will keep tariffs in place to give them an incentive to come back to the table.

Legal remedies are never our first choice. Not because they are not effective, but because right now, many American companies, and the people who work for them, can't afford to wait years for an international legal case. So we will emphasize vigorous oversight, frank dialogue, and negotiation as faster means of getting trade back on track.

In May, we reached an agreement with the European Commission. It was a major breakthrough in a 20-year dispute that locked many American cattle ranchers out of the European beef market.

That achievement is the result of a great deal of hard work alongside our partners at the Department of Agriculture, led by Secretary Tom Vilsack.

American ranchers, meat packers, and their employees will now be able to sell high-quality American beef at zero duty within the European Union. Those exports are expected to put $100 million in the pockets of American farmers and ranchers over the next three years.

As they do, we should see new jobs created among the more than one million ranches, farms, and businesses in America's beef industry.

Each one of those steps benefited American workers and American businesses. But they were only a start.

President Obama has committed to a new approach to trade—one that rejects protectionism and creates opportunities at home and abroad. He recognizes that trade is essential to America's prosperity and has the potential to lift up workers in America and around the world. The President will share more about our approach, but we already know that for trade to reach its full potential, we need to do a better job of enforcing our trade agreements.

So, in this administration, we will break down trade barriers that confront American workers and businesses.

First, we will build on what works. One of the best ways we guarantee America's trade rights is by consistently monitoring our partners' trade practices. If they know we are holding a magnifying glass up to their actions, they'll be less likely to break the rules. So, we will use that magnifying glass on behalf of more American businesses.

Some of our best results have come from two targeted enforcement tools: one to stop violations in telecommunications trade, and one called Special 301, that does the same for American intellectual property rights.

That last one is a technical name for something fairly basic: one of our biggest, strongest enforcement tools.

We use it to scour the globe for copycats and counterfeiters, people who steal America's greatest strength: the intellectual property that flows from the ideas of the American people. Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery. But piracy isn't flattery—it's theft.

That theft lets foreign companies market counterfeit and potentially unsafe goods. And that costs U.S. software companies, music producers, and other creative and innovative enterprises billions of dollars.

So, we call out countries that provide safe havens for the theft of American intellectual property. And as a result, those countries can then miss out on new trade privileges or programs. We're going to apply the lessons of those successful programs to address other, equally important trade barriers. Two new, innovative tools will provide strong support for U.S. farmers, ranchers, and industry.

The first new tool will confront barriers that other countries raise to prevent our farmers and ranchers from marketing their products abroad. We must more strongly address sanitary and phytosanitary barriers, like the restrictive regulations some countries slapped on American pork because of the H1N1 flu scare. And we must address them across the board, as well as on a case by case basis. This will ensure our agricultural producers see their rights restored abroad, and their businesses saved here at home.

The second new tool will take on one of the biggest obstacles our manufacturers face: technical barriers to trade, such as technical regulations and standards that restrict U.S. exports of safe, high quality products. Now, we will seek out these barriers and tackle them head-on.

Next, we will leverage these new efforts and existing USTR work to better enforce America's rights around the world. The trade reports that go to Congress will be more than paperwork. We will use them in new ways to spur real actions with real impact for American workers and businesses.

Here's a concrete example. Secretary Gary Locke and I have agreed: When a USTR report identifies trade barriers threatening American jobs, our agencies will spring into action together.

USTR staff and Foreign Commercial Service officers in more than 75 major countries will team up.

They will talk to the right people and put pressure in the right places to break those barriers down.

And we will take similar action with colleagues from the Departments of State, Agriculture, and Treasury.

At the same time, these officers serving abroad will constantly feed real-time, on-the-ground information back to USTR. They will give us early warning about potential trade barriers we can nip in the bud rather than just report. This new approach can actually save American jobs that might otherwise be lost.

We will also continue to use trade remedies, like anti-dumping and anti-subsidy laws that the U.S. has on the books, and that are vitally important tools. We use them to correct distortions of trade—situations where the playing field is artificially tilted against us—and to ensure that the field stays level everywhere else.

Finally, we will hold our trading partners to their commitments on workers' rights.

Since 2001, the United States has entered into free trade agreements with 14 countries.

Every one of those agreements contains an obligation to enforce domestic labor laws, and to strive for labor standards that adhere to international norms. Now, we will insist that our trading partners hold up their end of the bargain. American workers should not be expected to compete against substandard labor practices.

To date, we have enforced our trading partners' labor obligations only on a complaint-driven basis. Well, no longer.

In close partnership with Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and their staffs, we will immediately identify and investigate labor violations…before they can disadvantage American workers.

Together, we will engage governments of countries that violate the rules, to restore workers' rights quickly. If those governments can't seem to fix their labor problems, we will help them find a way. And if they won't fix their labor problems, we will exercise our legal options.

These are the steps that USTR must take, and will take, to save American jobs and make trade work better for America's families.

The high-quality jobs that U.S. exporters can create here at home are our number one priority. Those jobs are the reason that USTR is on the case.

We can and we will recover from this recession. But we cannot take a single American job for granted. At USTR, that is our bottom line.

President Obama has united the full resources of our government on the road to recovery. We are walking a long road, but we are on the right path.

And the Office of the United States Trade Representative is doing our part to hasten that journey.

Ambassador Peter Allgeier delivered these remarks in Geneva, Switzerland

Ambassador Allgeier. Thank you, Chair.

The United States is pleased to welcome Minister of Commerce, Trade and Industry Felix Mutati, Ambassador Darlington Mwape, and the rest of the Zambian delegation to the third review of the trade policies and practices of Zambia. We would like to thank the Government of Zambia and the Secretariat for the excellent and comprehensive reports that they prepared for this review and that were circulated before this meeting. Finally, we would like to thank Ambassador Jean Feyder, as discussant, for providing a useful context for this review.

I would like to begin by acknowledging Zambia's impressive overall economic performance during most of this review period. We see the central role that copper plays in Zambia's economy and appreciate how Zambia's dependence on one commodity can have deleterious effects for the nation's well-being. But we also recognize that substantial debt relief along with the Zambian government's prudent macroeconomic policies and ongoing structural reforms, of which trade liberalization is an integral part, all contributed to Zambia's economic gains through mid-2008.

Unfortunately, as the Secretariat report points out, Zambia's dependence on mining has limited its progress in developing other sectors. We know that diversifying out of copper has been a longstanding objective of Zambian governments. Achieving that goal, despite the government's improved macroeconomic management, seems to have eluded Zambia. The Secretariat report notes slow progress in reducing the domestic cost of doing business and improving productivity (and therefore international competitiveness) in non-mining sectors to achieve diversification. Like all of you, we look forward to a short-lived global slowdown. But we agree that economic diversification remains key to Zambia's national growth and development. The Secretariat advises that, to realize its objectives, Zambia ought to, among other things, continue prudent macroeconomic management and ensure that revenues generated by the copper sector are used to build productive infrastructure as well as support for delivery of social services. We would consider this to be sound, worthwhile advice. In addition, we support the Zambian government's efforts to promote the agricultural sector as a critical aspect of its diversification plan and hope Zambia establishes WTO-consistent import and export policies to foster investment in this critical sector.

The United States enjoys a strong bilateral trade relationship with Zambia. Two-way United States-Zambian goods trade increased ten percent in 2008, totaling $130 million, with trade rising in both directions. Zambia is eligible for trade preferences under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA); and, in recent years, substantially all Zambian imports have entered the United States duty-free, either under AGOA, the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), or zero-duty most-favored-nation provisions. Nevertheless, U.S imports of products from Zambia under AGOA and GSP have been modest and are comprised mostly of refined copper products. We want to work with the Zambian government to find ways to increase Zambia's utilization of AGOA and GSP trade preferences and to diversify its trade with the United States. The USAID-funded Southern Africa Global Competitiveness Hub is already working with the Zambian government and private sector to help maximize trade opportunities under AGOA.

In 2006, Zambia signed a two-year, $22.7 million threshold agreement with the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) which included assistance— described in the Secretariat's report—for reducing barriers to trade and investment, including work to strengthen capacity in such areas as trade facilitation, SPS, and standards and to help meet other technical requirements. USAID would like to work with Zambia's government to complement the MCC threshold program with further assistance to enable the government to continue and deepen regulatory reforms. In December 2008, the MCC selected Zambia as eligible for large-scale assistance via an MCC compact. We urge the Zambian government, as it works with the MCC on a compact proposal, to consider including projects related to trade capacity-building and trade-related infrastructure as elements to help it diversify the economy.

The Secretariat reports that, since the last review in 2002, Zambia's trade policy has remained substantially unchanged. The Government of Zambia has introduced reforms and regulatory changes in some areas, such as government procurement, standards, and business procedures. We note, for example, the improvement over the last few years of Zambia's ranking in the World Bank's Doing Business indicators and are pleased to note that U.S. assistance, through the MCC, has assisted the Zambian government's efforts in this area.

The Secretariat has devoted a chapter of its report to the issue of aid for trade and has rightly acknowledged Zambia's active participation in the Task Force on the Integrated Framework. We read with interest that Zambia continues to benefit from a high level of assistance from its development partners and that Zambia is trying to integrate into its policymaking the findings of the Cabinet-approved 2005 Diagnostic Trade Integration Study. According to the Secretariat, many of the areas that the DTIS identified in its action matrix are being addressed by Zambia's bilateral and multilateral development partners. We would be interested in hearing from Zambia about its latest diversification plans.

We are pleased to note the extent to which the private sector has played a greater role in the nation's economy since the early 1990s. We encourage Zambia to work quickly to allow for improved productivity in the areas of agriculture, energy, and fixed-line telecommunication services so that privatization can be realized.

We urge the Government of Zambia to accelerate the pace of reform in order to reduce any trade restrictions and to increase the competitiveness of Zambian producers. For example, the Secretariat notes that Zambia's tariff structure includes a large overhang between WTO-bound and applied rates that “creates a degree of unpredictability for traders.” With the launch of the COMESA Customs Union and its multi-tier tariff structure capped at 25%, we see no compelling reason for maintaining bound tariffs at over 100% or for not binding a larger number of tariff lines at the lower COMESA rate.

The United States has submitted a few questions on tariff policies, customs valuation and intellectual property rights. We look forward to reviewing the Zambian government's responses.

Finally, I would like to commend Zambia's active participation in the Doha Development Agenda negotiations. Zambia has taken a leadership role among the LDCs in these negotiations. We look forward to continuing our work with Zambia to achieve a balanced and ambitious result in the Doha negotiations with meaningful new market access for all. Such a result could further enhance opportunities for Zambia to broaden its export base, its export markets and hence its opportunity to diversify. The United States looks forward to working with Zambia toward bringing the Doha Round to a conclusion, and we wish you a successful trade policy review.

Ambassador Ron Kirk delivered these remarks in Nairobi, Kenya

Ambassador Kirk. Today is an important day in the U.S.-Mauritius economic relationship, and it comes at an important time. International trade and investment flows—which have grown consistently in recent years—are now challenged by the current global economic crisis.

A Bilateral Investment Treaty will promote investment and deepen the already strong economic ties between the United States and Mauritius. It will also reinforce the efforts of one of Africa's strongest performers on trade and investment liberalization, and economic reform.

Mauritius is a positive model of how trade and investment can fuel economic growth and development. The Government of Mauritius has an impressive track record on democracy, economic growth, openness to foreign direct investment, economic diversification, and the expansion of trade.

Mauritius has developed from a low-income, agriculturally based economy to a middle-income, diversified economy with growing industrial, financial, and tourist sectors. This remarkable achievement is a result of a series of economic development strategies that have focused on encouraging trade, economic reforms, and a strong financial, telecommunications, and services sector.

In the context of our two countries' bilateral relationship, Mauritius has undertaken significant efforts to diversify and increase its trade and investment with the United States. And Mauritius has succeeded in the development of new products and sectors, including diamond processing, aquaculture, sunglass and eyewear manufacturing, and jewelry production. These efforts have attracted significant investment. Since 2004, the U.S. direct investment position in Mauritius has increased nearly 700 percent.

Mauritius is a major beneficiary and a strong partner on AGOA. Indeed, Mauritius hosted the first AGOA Forum in Africa. AGOA has sparked significant investment in Mauritius, and Mauritian investors have made major AGOA-related investments throughout sub-Saharan Africa.

As many of you know, the United States and Mauritius signed a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement, or ‘TIFA’ in 2006. This serves as a mechanism for the United States and Mauritius to develop practical strategies on a wide range of trade and investment issues.

Today's announcement is, in part, the result of cooperation under the TIFA. It is under the TIFA that we began discussing the possibility of a BIT, and conducted several rounds of exploratory discussions and information exchanges. Today's launch is a result of the dedication and hard work of a good interagency team working on both sides.

I look forward to working very closely with the Government of Mauritius to ensure success. The BIT negotiations we launch today will serve as an important tool to promote investment and deepen our two countries' economic ties.

Ambassador Demetrius Marantis delivered these remarks in New Delhi, India

Ambassador Marantis. I had a very thought-provoking discussion with Tarun Das and a visiting CEOs delegation in Washington last month, and I'm delighted to continue that discussion today.

We are meeting at a time of historic opportunity—in each of our countries record numbers of voters recently cast their ballots in favor of new ideas and new leaders. But we also meet at a time of historic challenges—those new leaders, and all of us here today, are working to overcome a global recession that has proved catastrophic for too many families in both our countries.

But in the face of those challenges, America and India are working closely together. Because of that work, our economies are more resilient and our commercial ties are stronger than ever.

We need to build on that work to create incentives that will stimulate trade and investment flows. Currently, India is our 17th largest trade partner. At USTR, our goal is to raise that ranking to the top ten—and it's doable.

While I'm here this week, the first round of bilateral investment treaty negotiations between our two governments is taking place. As U.S. negotiators sit down to talk with India's, one thing is certain: India's investors and companies have as much at stake, and as much to gain, as America's investors and companies do.

In the last three years, our bilateral trade volume doubled. And it is extraordinary to see the ever-increasing role of India's companies—the large conglomerates, entrepreneurs and investors—in the U.S. economy.

India's companies are making a tremendous impact in the U.S. market. According to CII's report on the “Contribution of Indian Industry to the U.S. Economy,” they invested a total of $105 billion from 2004 to 2007, directly creating 110,000 jobs.

I don't have with me photographs of the U.S. workers India's companies employ, or the families they support, but I can give you a snapshot of the opportunities Indian-American trade is creating for those families.

According to CII's report, over the last three years, key sectors that have created jobs in the United States include civil aviation, automotive, gems and jewelry and pharmaceuticals. I would add defense to that.

Job creation in the U.S. as a result of trade with India follows many paths.

CII cites the direct creation of 8,300 jobs in the aviation sector. We know that when India acquires U.S. goods such as Boeing aircraft (over $10 billion dollars worth in recent years), those planes are being built in U.S. plants by American hands.

Similar stories for different reasons come in the other sectors. Retail jobs are enabled in the U.S. through the sourcing of jewelry from India. Indian pharmaceutical firms are setting up offices and operations in the U.S., hiring Americans.

And, India's defense sector, an area in which the United States was essentially a non-player until 8 years ago, is now another driver of trade and jobs, with companies such as Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and Boeing supplying the Government of India with sophisticated defense equipment.

On the other side of the ledger, so to speak, is the reality that India has also benefited enormously from trade and investment with the United States.

The United States is India's largest trading partner, and a top consumer, for example, of India's agricultural, jewelry, and textiles exports. These create jobs in the thousands, especially among farmers and small businesses who are most in need of economic empowerment in India.

And, that doesn't even include the jobs that have been created through India-U.S. ties in the IT sector. The success of this sector in India has helped foster a new sense in India that Indians can accomplish anything. But, it was India's ties with the U.S. that helped to propel that sector.

For all the alleged divides between the U.S. and India over trade-related liberalization, it is critical that people in India not forget that one of the manifestations of the shared economic interests of the United States and India is the fact that the United States is India's most important export market, and that those exports have and still are creating jobs in India, thus demonstrating the value of trade in general and trade with the United States in particular.

All this is simply to say to you that that trade and investment with India is a two-way street and it needs to grow in both directions. Politics aside, there is ample evidence that both sides are benefiting in the trade arena in this new era and those benefits can and should grow through opening markets and opportunities for investment.

Over the course of this week, I'll be sharing our bilateral success story with leaders in Mumbai and Delhi, because our successes to date are powerful arguments for more engagement, more trade, and more investment. As I sit down with individual companies and business groups, I will be seeking their thoughts on what the U.S. and Indian governments can do to create greater opportunities for trade and investment, just as I look forward to hearing your thoughts and ideas today.

I will be sharing those ideas with your Government, most notably with Commerce Secretary, my direct counterpart at the Indo-U.S. Trade Policy Forum.

The Trade Policy Forum has been—and will continue to be—an important dialogue on trade and investment matters. Because of conversations held at the Forum, Indian consumers can purchase American apples and almonds, and American consumers can savor Indian mangoes. These are successes to be celebrated, but we must continue to expand our areas of cooperation.

I look forward to Ambassador Kirk and Minister Sharma convening a TPF in the fall.

And I'd like to thank CII for its continued counsel to the Private Sector Advisory Group to the Trade Policy Forum. The group was created in 2007 to give the Trade Policy Forum strategic direction in its deliberations on trade policy issues, and your contributions to that end have been extremely helpful.

We have made great progress in the United States.-India relationship, and we are committed to continuing that progress.

As our policies develop, it is critical that U.S. and Indian companies are part of the dialogue. Thank you all for joining that dialogue today. I welcome your insights and questions.

Ambassador Ron Kirk delivered these remarks in New Delhi, India

Ambassador Ron Kirk delivered these remarks at the American Chamber of Commerce in São Paulo, Brazil

Ambassador Kirk. Thank you, Gabriel, for the warm welcome. I am so glad the Chamber has given me this opportunity to speak to you. The relationship between the United States and Brazil is significant and growing, so this is an exciting time for all of us.

The United States has always viewed Brazil as a valuable partner. Over the years, the ties between our two nations have expanded to include increased trade, capital flows, cross-border investment, and a wide range of educational, health, scientific and other joint activities. Presidents Obama and Lula have publicly recognized the benefits of a strong and dynamic relationship between our countries—a relationship that promotes democracy, commerce, and regional stability.

The U.S.-Brazil trading relationship is large, growing, and balanced. In 2008, U.S. exports to Brazil totaled $32.9 billion and imports from Brazil totaled $30.5 billion, supporting jobs and growth in both countries.

The United States is a top foreign investor in Brazil. In 2007, U.S. direct investment to Brazil was $41.6 billion, up 25.6% from 2006. And Brazilian investments in the U.S. totaled $1.4 billion in 2007, up 33.7% from 2006.

These investments make a tremendous, positive contribution to our economies. We must continue to build on that success.

Now, I know we don't always see eye to eye. We have disagreements. But I assure you that I am here to listen. We should work together to seek solutions that strengthen our relations. We should not let our disagreements define us.

We are already working together on many critical issues. And we are making progress on those issues. Our two nations share many of the same values and have common interests. Brazil's special interest in promoting development in the world's poorest countries is widely recognized. So is Brazil's commitment to development cooperation in Africa and its leadership role in the UN peace-keeping operation in Haiti. The Obama Administration shares that commitment to security and economic growth in the world's poorest regions.

In August, I spent eight days traveling throughout Africa to see first-hand how our trade preference and development programs are working to fulfill that commitment. We have made a lot of progress, but there is always more to do. I look forward to doing that work together.

We stand ready to listen to you and work with you. We are facing many common challenges. Among them is the need to stimulate economic growth in the face of the current global economic slowdown without turning inward or resorting to protectionist policies. We need to guard against protectionism around the world. During the Great Depression, knee-jerk protectionism sank the world into deeper suffering. Country after country walled itself off from trade, each responding to the others' insular restrictions. Soon global trade was at a near standstill. We can't afford to let that happen again. We need a trade policy that opens up opportunities, not one that shuts them down.

We need to seek areas where we can work together to spur economic growth and opportunity between, and within, our countries. One such area is the Doha Round. Furthering trade liberalization through new trade flows and meaningful market opening, which an ambitious and balanced conclusion to the Round would achieve, would spur economic growth and development both here in Brazil, and in all countries.

We also need innovative ideas to help ensure that the poor and historically disenfranchised are able to seize the opportunities that international trade can provide.

I am very impressed by much of the work that is taking place in Northeastern Brazil. Innovative centers, such as CESAR/Porto Digital in Recife, are creating new jobs and new opportunities throughout Brazil. This is another area in which we can, and should, work together. As you know, innovation is pivotal to the acceleration of development. Protecting and promoting that innovation, through strong intellectual property rights laws is essential to economic growth.

Brazil is home to some of the most creative minds in the world. But Brazil may not be reaping the rewards of that creativity. Brazil is responsible for 2 percent of scientific publications in the world, but Brazil receives only 0.2 percent of the world's patents. To me, this demonstrates lost opportunity. Brazil is also a worldwide cultural center whose literature, music and films are appreciated throughout the world. They are a valuable asset that should be protected through strong intellectual property rights laws.

Both our nations need to support innovation and creativity now more than ever. We need to create high-wage jobs today, and build new industries that will bring jobs for years to come.

Our interests far outweigh our differences. We must identify ways in which we can achieve our shared goals through dialogue and cooperation. To that end, our governments should consider whether our existing bilateral mechanisms are sufficient to reflect the depth of our bilateral trade relationship. I intend to explore this issue during my time in Brazil. I am confident that by working together, we can resolve our differences, and help lay the groundwork for a renewed bilateral trade relationship that reflects our strong values and helps both our economies grow.

Again, thank you for your warm welcome. I am looking forward to my time here in Brazil.