Secretary Hillary Clinton delivered this statement in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. We welcome the news in Belfast of the decommissioning of weapons by the Ulster Defense Association. This is a positive step toward securing a lasting peace in Northern Ireland. As I saw first-hand this fall, the people of Northern Ireland have traveled a long way together on the road to peace in the 11 years since the Good Friday Agreement was signed. But the journey is not over. That is why this announcement today is so important. I want to commend the work of General John de Chastelain and his colleagues in the Independent International Commission on Decommissioning, whose oversight and support was essential to the process, and reaffirm the commitment of the United States to supporting Northern Ireland in its progress towards a future of peace and prosperity.

Secretary Hillary Clinton delivered this statement in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. The United States strongly condemns this morning's bombing that critically wounded a serving member of the Police Service of Northern

Ireland. My thoughts and prayers are with the officer and his family.

This was an attack on the hard-won peace and progress achieved by the people of Northern Ireland, exemplified by this week's announcement of weapons decommissioning by the Ulster Defense Association. As First Minister Peter Robinson and Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness have said, the actions of a small number of unrepresentative, violent criminals will not deter those in Northern Ireland who have shown leadership in pursuing peace, nor will they influence the wider society that has supported this progress. The United States remains resolute in our support of the political process and the men and women of the PSNI.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Prime Minister Milo Djukanovic delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. It's a great pleasure to welcome the prime minister. We consider our partnership with Montenegro to be very strong, and we look forward to it becoming even more important in the future.

Prime Minister Djukanovic and I discussed a range of issues. We particularly focused on the Western Balkans and the role that Montenegro is playing to ensure stability. I congratulated the prime minister on Montenegro achieving MAP status with NATO, and pledged the United

States' support for Montenegro becoming an integral part of the Euro-Atlantic community.

I offered the support of the United States as Montenegro makes some of the reforms in the rule of law area that both NATO and the European Union are looking to see. And I thanked the Prime Minister for his country's commitment to sending infantry troops to be part of the international force in Afghanistan.

And finally, I was delighted to receive an invitation to visit Montenegro sometime in the future, which I would very much hope to be able to fulfill.

Prime Minister Djukanovic. Ladies and gentlemen, before I begin, I would like to thank Secretary of State Clinton for the overall support that the U.S. has given Montenegro towards its European and Atlantic integration.

I would like to recall that during a difficult period in the Balkans in the 1990s, that we managed to build a strong mutual trust. That cooperation has helped us understand the values of the American society and has helped us restore Montenegrin independence in a situation and in conditions of full stability and to move today steadily towards European and Euro-Atlantic integration.

I wish to thank Secretary Clinton in support—for the support to Montenegro in pursuing our goal, which is membership action plan at NATO. And at the same time, I would like to say that we stand ready to work hard to fulfill all the obligations in the next stages of our integration. And I would like to announce with confidence that Montenegro will be the next state to become a new member of NATO. Our two challenges for the future are improving, enhancing the rule of law, and we stand committed to doing this in order to improve the quality of life of our citizens and achieve our European and Euro-Atlantic goals at—as early, as soon as possible.

And I would like to reiterate on this occasion too that Montenegro is and will remain a responsible and reliable partner to the U.S. and EU in dealing with the still outstanding issues in the Balkans. And we will also work closely with our partners in other places beyond our region, starting with Afghanistan.

And finally, I would like to say how grateful I am to Secretary Clinton for accepting our invitation, and I will be looking forward to her visiting Montenegro at a period convenient to her.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you so much. Thank you all very much.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Representative Catherine Ashton delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. Well, good afternoon. It is such a pleasure to welcome Baroness Catherine Ashton, the High Representative of the Union—the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy here to Washington for her first visit in this new position. She is, by no means, a firsttime visitor to the United States, having served in a number of capacities both within the United Kingdom and in the EU prior to this. But I want to take the opportunity to congratulate her again on the appointment as the EU's first High Representative, and I look forward to working closely together with her on behalf of the United States and the European Union.

These are historic times for the EU. I expect that in decades to come, we will look back on the Lisbon Treaty and the maturation of the EU that it represents as a major milestone in our world's history, and not just in Europe and not just in the Euro-Atlantic community. EU enlargement over the past 20 years has contributed enormously to our collective security and prosperity and to democracy worldwide. It has helped to stabilize and strengthen Central and Eastern Europe, and it continues to serve as a vital global leader on so many important matters. As the EU develops a more powerful and unified foreign policy voice in the wake of the Lisbon Treaty, our transatlantic partnership will continue to grow.

Together, we have a population of 800 million, a $27 trillion economy, a zone of peace, democracy, development, and respect for human rights and the rule of law which stretches from the Pacific Ocean to the Baltic Sea. Our partnership is the foundation for our mutual efforts to advance peace and prosperity worldwide.

So today, as you might guess, we discussed a broad range of common interests and concerns. We, of course, first focused on the situation in Haiti where one of the greatest rescue-and-relief efforts in the history of the world is underway. This is a broad international relief-and-rescue undertaking, and teams from the United States and the countries of the European Union are working side by side.

But as the High Representative and I agree, we will have to have a coordinated, integrated, international response to the reconstruction and the return of prosperity and opportunity to Haiti. And I want to thank Lady Ashton for the generosity to the people of Haiti, demonstrated by the EU and its member states and citizens. We also discussed Iran. I thanked the High Representative and her team for their support of the E-3+3 engagement with Iran concerning its nuclear program. Regrettably, Iran has not responded to that engagement, even as the international community's concern about the intent of Iran's nuclear program has increased. We will continue our close consultation on next steps in keeping with our dual-track approach. But let me be clear: We will not be waited out and we will not back down. Iran has a very clear choice between continued isolation and living up to its international obligations.

We also discussed Afghanistan and Yemen and the upcoming conferences that we will be attending in London next week, the need for economic and development assistance in Pakistan, reviewed the situation in the Western Balkans, and in Bosnia in particular, talked about the range of other challenges and opportunities that we both face.

I am grateful to have such a strong, thoughtful, accomplished partner in the efforts that confront us as we attempt to navigate an increasingly complex world. But I am very confident that with the EU and the U.S. growing even more closely together, we are up to those challenges.

Ms. Ashton. Thank you very much. It's a great privilege to be back in Washington, and the Secretary of State has said to be in the first of what I believe will be many meetings together as we navigate the course of the European Union and the United States of America together through the challenges that we face.

As the Secretary of State has said, the most critical issue on our agenda today was the people of Haiti. As I speak, the commissioner responsible for development is in Port-au-Prince. He's there to look at what has happened in order to begin the next stage of our support, which is support for the short-, medium-, and long-term.

So far the European Union has given half a billion U.S. dollars in support, already pledged. Twenty-one member states have sent support in the shape of medical teams or other ways in which they can provide support on the ground. And there is a great willingness in the European Union to work closely with the United States and, of course, under the auspices of the United Nations, to provide that support for the future. Much to do now, but much, much more to do for the future. And we are very keen to work collaboratively in a strategic approach to support that nation into economic growth and into a new world.

As the Secretary of State said as well, of course we have a range of issues to discuss. Iran is of great importance to us. We stand together with the United States, the E-3+3. As I have said already very publicly, we want to have dialogue, but six years of dialogue by my predecessor Javier Solana has not brought us to the outcome that we would wish. And so we do have to consider what else needs to be done, and we stand ready to do that.

We also, of course, looked at issues around the neighborhood of the European Union. Bosnia is, of course, a case in point, Kosovo, where we're working together to begin to plan for the future and to consider what other options we have available and what else we should be doing. And those are discussions that we will continue with.

The Lisbon Treaty gives me an opportunity too because I can speak on behalf of the council and the commission; two people become one in a job that grows bigger by the day. But one of the great advantages is that we're able also to look across the range of mutual interests and to find solutions to the mutual benefit of the people of the European Union and of the United States of America.

And I've enjoyed today very much. I am absolutely thrilled to be working with Secretary of State Clinton. And I look very much forward to us joining together to face the challenges of the future.

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

Secretary Clinton. Well, good afternoon. It is always a pleasure to host Foreign Secretary David Miliband here. We've had many productive meetings over the past year. The special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom is rock solid. We are working hard to promote peace and prosperity, and it's a pleasure to be working with David.

We went through a long list of issues. We're going to cut our statement short because David has to be up on the Hill, actually, to testify before the Foreign Relations Committee. But we're working together on our Haiti relief efforts. And I thank the British search-and-rescue teams that have played such an important role these—this last week. The United Kingdom's Department for International Development has pledged $33 million for Haiti relief, and private UK donations have surpassed $38 million.

We will also meet again next week when we have the conference on Afghanistan. We appreciate the UK's leadership in helping to organize this meeting, which is at a very important time in our commitment together through NATO to Afghanistan.

The President will soon submit to Congress a request for the resources to implement a civilian strategy that offers the best prospects for stabilizing Afghanistan and Pakistan. I was very pleased that we were able to get this kind of important request into our budget. And next week in London, when the United States and the United Kingdom join—how many countries now?

Foreign Secretary Miliband. Over 60.

Secretary Clinton. Over 60. We will be discussing very specific ways that we intend to move forward.

We covered a lot of other ground, but in the interest of time I will turn it over to David.

Foreign Secretary Miliband. Well, ladies and gentlemen, Madame Secretary, very good to be back in Washington. Our discussions today have been substantive as well as wide-ranging, and got into some of the big issues that confront us in 2010.

The first thing I'd like to do is acknowledge and applaud the leadership of Secretary Clinton on the Haitian disaster. The scenes in Haiti have touched hearts all around the world. And the response of the United States, civilian as well as military, has been of the highest order. And it's something that we're proud to be supporting very, very strongly.

We've discussed in detail the Afghanistan conference next week. It will come at a decisive moment in the Afghanistan campaign following the inauguration of President Karzai, the speech of President Obama on December the 1st. And there's a very clear call, which is for every country to mobilize its civilian as well as military resources behind the coherent and credible agenda that has now been set for Afghanistan. That includes responsibilities for its neighbors, and that's why it's very, very important that we take forward the regional agenda as well as the agenda within Afghanistan.

We've talked also about the challenges in the Middle East, where the work of Secretary Clinton and Senator Mitchell is so important to try to restart talks, which are the only prospect of Israelis and Palestinians finding a way to live side by side in peace. And I look forward to meeting President Abbas in London next week.

We've always—we also talked about the pressing issue of the Iranian nuclear program, where our countries are working closely together as part of the E-3+3 to take forward our dual-track policy.

Finally, it's worth mentioning that we both remain very committed to working together on climate change. This is an issue where the Administration has changed American position in an important way and in a way that I think has made an important contribution to the international debate about climate change. We know that there is still a long way to go if the international system is to rise to the challenge, and that's something that we are going to be working on very closely together in the months ahead.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Franco Frattini delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. Well, good morning. It is a—everybody down and ready—good, okay. It is a pleasure to welcome a friend, a personal friend as well as a representative of a country that is a great trusted friend and valued ally to the United States. Foreign Minister Frattini has been someone with whom I have consulted closely and often over this past year. And based on the agenda in front of us, I think we will be continuing that pattern.

We had much to discuss today. I thanked the foreign minister for the generous assistance that Italy has provided to the people of Haiti. As we know, Italy suffered its own tragic earthquake last year, and the Italian people have opened their hearts in solidarity. I will be leaving shortly for Montreal where there will be a conference on the international relief effort. I will have more to say about developments in Haiti later today. We discussed how difficult this endeavor is in a country without the infrastructure and the capacity that we take for granted in countries like ours. But we will look to Italy for technical advice and assistance as we move forward for the longer term.

We also discussed our shared commitment to Afghanistan. The United States appreciates Italy's leadership in our refocused mission and we especially are grateful for the increased troop commitment that Italy has announced. Later this week, both Franco and I will be in London for the international conference on Afghanistan. Our soldiers are fighting side by side. Italy leads NATO forces in western Afghanistan and provides a provincial reconstruction team and elite police trainers who are helping the Afghans build their own capacity to take responsibility for their own security.

Last week, the State Department released a comprehensive plan to implement a civilian strategy that offers the best prospect for stabilizing Afghanistan and Pakistan. And it includes the work of many agencies across our government. While our military mission in Afghanistan is not open-ended, we are committed to building lasting partnerships with both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

We will also be focusing at the London conference on the Afghan Government's commitments and plans to spur sustainable economic development, to improve governance, to fight corruption. And those are issues that Franco and I have a particular interest in. We will be looking for the gradual ability of the Afghans themselves to assume the security responsibility and assist in the development of their own country.

I also appreciate Italy's announcement earlier this month of new financial support for Somalia, which is a great boost to the efforts there. We discussed Iran and agreed that it must fully address international concerns about its nuclear program and end the repression and abuse of its citizens. Iran faces a clear choice between continued isolation and living up to its international obligations.

And finally, we have a shared commitment to a comprehensive peace in the Middle East. In coordination with Italy and our Quartet partners, including the EU, the United States will continue to vigorously pursue a comprehensive and durable peace. There are many other issues we covered, from energy security in Europe, to Bosnia and so much else. But suffice it to say, we are very grateful to our friends for all that they do both on their own and in concert with us to address the many challenges we face in the 21st century.

Foreign Minister Frattini. Thank you. Thank you very much, Hillary. It was, as usual, very interesting and fruitful talks with a personal friend with a country which is, for Italy, the first ally in the world. We share points of view. We share common values. We talked about many, many important issues.

First of all, I want to repeat here how highly we value the important and generous efforts of United States to help people in Haiti. We highly value, we strongly appreciate the personal commitment of President Obama and Secretary Hillary Clinton to help people there. Italy was among the first countries helping and contributing in a framework of international coordination. We will continue to do so. We are sending a military boat that is coming to Haiti—the boat Cavour, a ship which is bringing helicopters and the first Carabinieris team. It is a special unit to contribute, to guarantee public order and security on the ground. We want to do so in very close cooperation with America. We appreciate very much. This is the first point.

Second point: We have really the same goals on Afghanistan. Italy is on board on training police, on contributing to local development, in dealing with cross-border issues, and working together with partners, European partners, and United States, on transition of powers to Afghanis' authorities. These can be, should be done from the London conference to the months to come to show the people in Afghanistan that we want a political solution. We want to talk about a national reconciliation while making a very clear distinction between those who renounce violence and those who don't. They—we cannot make a confusion.

On terrorism, we talked about what to do on prevention and fight this network of terror, which is not related to Yemen only. We cannot point finger on one or another country. Instead, we have to cooperate on data sharing, information sharing, preventing by reaffirming our basic values. These are the antidote against those who join violence—reaffirming democratic values in the world.

I paid a visit quite interesting in the Horn of Africa recently. I briefed Hillary about this. And there is need to cooperate with African countries in the Horn, like Somalia. Yes, okay, we decided to help Somalia. But Italy cannot do so alone. We need a cooperation. I raised this point. I will raise the point in London.

While talking about terrorism, we have to take into consideration there is, unfortunately, a dissemination of terrorist cells not in Yemen only, but in the Horn and in the north of Africa. This is a problem that concerns all of us.

Finally, on Iran, I think we together have to prevent Iran from going nuclear. This is a concern for all of us, for Western democracies, United States, Europe, but for Arab states as well. And we are in perfect agreement on broadening the consultation of a number of states in the region that can be interested and are interested in talking about what to do in order to repeat once again that the double-track strategy requires unity of international community. Of course, those who want to go nuclear will be exploiting eventual divisions. We cannot allow them to do so.

Final point, I completely agree with suggestions made by Secretary Clinton about having an enhanced dialogue between EU and United States on energy security. Italy is among the European partners that have interest in doing so. We are diversifying our energy strategy but we want to do so at European level, not only at bilateral level. We are absolutely in agreement on, I would say, working together on some concrete proposal to be submitted to European partners.

Thank you.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner delivered these remarks in Paris, France

Secretary Hillary Clinton delivered these remarks in Paris, France at L'Ecole Militaire

Secretary Clinton. Thank you very much, Mr. Charillon. And it is a great pleasure to be here at this historic setting, and I appreciate the opportunity to discuss a matter of great consequence to the United States, France, and every country on this continent and far beyond the borders: the future of European security.

Now, this is not only here at L'Ecole Militaire an architectural and historical treasure, one that when I was much younger I would walk by and looked at as I wandered the neighborhoods. But this is also a place that speaks to the long and proud partnership between the French and American militaries on behalf of our mutual defense and freedom. Two hundred and fifty years ago, young men from across France began arriving here to be trained as soldiers and officers of the French military. And only a few years later, you stood with us during our war of independence. Soldiers from both nations fought together to liberate Paris 65 years ago. Today, they fight together in Afghanistan to defeat al-Qaida and the syndicate of terrorists and offer the Afghan people the hope of a stable future.

As founding members of the NATO Alliance, our countries have worked side by side for decades to build a strong and secure Europe and to defend and promote democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. And I am delighted that we are working even more closely now that France is fully participating in NATO's integrated command structure. I thank President Sarkozy for his leadership and look forward to benefiting from the counsel of our French colleagues as together we chart NATO's future.

Today, thanks to the partnership between our nation and others, Europe is stronger than ever. The bitter divides of the Cold War have been replaced by unity, partnership, and peace. Russia is no longer our adversary but often a partner on key global issues. Nations that once were members of the Warsaw Pact and eyed NATO with suspicion are now active members of our Alliance. And the European Union has grown to include 27 nations, from the British Isles to the Baltic states, and is poised to become even more dynamic with the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon. As I recently expressed to the new EU High Representative Baroness Catherine Ashton, the challenges we face in our Euro-Atlantic relationship demand collective responses, and the European Union is an invaluable and increasingly effective force for global progress.

So the accomplishments of the past half century have showcased how vital European security is, not only to the individual nations, but to the world. It is, after all, more than a collection of countries linked by history and geography. It is a model for the transformative power of reconciliation, cooperation, and community.

But at the same time, much important work remains unfinished. The transition to democracy is incomplete in parts of Europe and Eurasia. Arms control regimes that once served us well are now fraying. And in too many places, economic opportunity is still too narrow and shallow.

Adding to these ongoing challenges, the institutions that guarded Europe's and North America's security during the 20th century were not designed with 21st century threats in mind. New dangers have emerged, such as global terrorism, including cyber terrorism and nuclear terrorism; climate change; global criminal networks that traffic in weapons, drugs, and people; threats to Europe's energy supply, which, if exploited, could destabilize economies and stoke regional and even global conflict. Tanks, bombers, and missiles are necessary but no longer sufficient to keep our people safe. Our arsenal must also include tools that protect cyber and energy networks, halt the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, counter the threats of terrorism and destructive ideologies, in part by confronting the political, economic, and social conditions that give rise to such ideologies in the first place.

The transatlantic partnership has been both a cornerstone of global security and a powerful force for global progress. Now we are called to address some of the great challenges in human history. And to meet them, we are required to modernize and strengthen our partnership.

New thinking is underway on both sides of the Atlantic. NATO is revising its Strategic Concept to prepare for the alliance's summit at the end of this year here at (inaudible). I know there's a lot of thinking going on about strategic threats and how to meet them. Next week, at the Munich Security Conference, leaders from across the continent will address urgent security and foreign policy challenges. France has urged all of us for a high-level discussion to address European security. Other nations have proposed new approaches and agreements. Russia has recently suggested both a new European security treaty and a new NATO-Russia treaty.

The United States, too, has also been studying ways to strengthen European security and, therefore our own security, and to extend it to foster security on a global scale. Today, I'd like to discuss the core principles that guide the United States today as we consider the future of European security and our role in shaping, strengthening, and sustaining it.

But first, let me address some questions raised in recent months about the depth of the United States commitment to European security. Some wonder whether we understand the urgent need to improve security in Europe. Others have voiced concern that the Obama Administration is so focused on foreign policy challenges elsewhere in the world that Europe has receded in our list of priorities.

Well, in fact, European security remains an anchor of U.S. foreign and security policy. A strong Europe is critical to our security and our prosperity. Much of what we hope to accomplish globally depends on working together with Europe. And so we are working with European allies and partners to help bring stability to Afghanistan and try to take on the dangers posed by Iran's nuclear ambition. We are working with Europe to help meet the crisis of climate change and revitalize the global economy. And we're working in the fight against extreme poverty, genderbased violence, and pandemic disease. Human rights and universal values, shared as part of our common history between Europe and the United States, must always be a cornerstone of our security efforts, because if Europe is not secure, Europe cannot lead. And we need European leadership in the 21st century.

But European security is far more than a strategic interest of my country. It is also an expression of our values. We stand with Europe today, as we have stood with Europe for decades, because enduring bonds connect our nations and our peoples. We are united by an understanding of the importance of liberty and freedom. We have fought and died for each other's liberty and freedom. These are ties that cannot and never should be broken. And we seek both to venerate and reinforce them by helping to maintain peace and security in Europe, today and all the tomorrows to come.

But as we move forward, a set of core principles will guide us in our approach and in our joint effort. First, the cornerstone of security is the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all states. Much of the suffering that occurred in Europe during the 20th century emanated from a failure to respect borders or to honor the right of all nations to pursue their own foreign policies, choose their own allies, and provide for their own self-defense. These are fundamental rights of free nations and must and will remain vigilant in our efforts to oppose any attempt to undermine them.

The United States has demonstrated our adherence to this principle in recent years with our support for new European democracies seeking to chart their own political futures, free from external intimidation or aggression. We have repeatedly called on Russia to honor the terms of its ceasefire agreement with Georgia, and we refuse to recognize Russia's claims of independence for Abkhazia and South Ossetia. More broadly, we object to any spheres of influence claimed in Europe in which one country seeks to control another's future. Our security depends upon nations being able to choose their own destiny.

For years, Russia has expressed a sense of insecurity as NATO and the EU have expanded. But we strongly believe that the enlargement of both has increased security, stability, and prosperity across the continent, and that this, in turn, has actually increased Russia's security and prosperity.

Furthermore, the right of all countries to enter into alliances of their own choosing has been endorsed by Russia and all members of the OSCE at the 1999 Istanbul summit. NATO must and will remain open to any country that aspires to become a member and can meet the requirements of membership. But we do not seek to create divisions between neighbors and partners. Russia's confidence in its security enhances our own.

So that brings us to our second principle: Security in Europe must be indivisible. For too long, the public discourse around Europe's security has been fixed on geographical and political divides. Some have looked at the continent even now and seen Western and Eastern Europe, old and new Europe, NATO and non-NATO Europe, EU and non-EU Europe. The reality is that there are not many Europes; there is only one Europe. And it is a Europe that includes the United States as its partner. And it is a Europe that includes Russia.

For in this century, security cannot be a zero-sum game. The security of all nations is intertwined. And we have a responsibility to work to enhance each other's security, in part by engaging with others on these new ideas and approaches.

Now, the Russian Government under President Medvedev has put forth proposals for new security treaties in Europe. Indivisibility of security is a key feature of those proposals. And that is a goal we share, along with other ideas in the Russian proposals which reaffirm principles of the Helsinki Final Act and the NATORussia Founding Act. However, we believe that these common goals are best pursued in the context of existing institutions, such as the OSCE and the NATORussia Council, rather than by negotiating new treaties, as Russia has suggested—a very long and cumbersome process.

I want to emphasize, though, even though we may have differences with Russia, the United States is very proud of what our two countries have accomplished together during the past year. The Obama Administration inherited a deteriorating relationship with Russia, and we immediately set out to build a more substantive and constructive relationship based mutual respect and mutual interests. Together, we have made progress on a range of such matters, including helping to address Iran's nuclear program through the P-5+1, sharing a concern about stabilizing Afghanistan, confronting North Korea's defiance of its international obligations, negotiating a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, tackling non-traditional threats such as pandemic disease, cyber warfare, and the trafficking of children.

We will build upon this foundation as we seek to revitalize the NATO-Russia Council, so it can make concrete contributions to areas where we are working together and need to be doing even more, such as in missile defense, counternarcotics, and Afghanistan. And we are committed to exploring ways that NATO and Russia can improve their partnership by better reassuring each other about respective actions and intentions, through greater military transparency, the sharing of information, and other means of building trust and confidence. Now, I don't need to state, but I will, that the United States and Russia will not always agree. We have different histories, different experiences and perspectives. Our interests will not always overlap. But when we disagree, we will seek constructive ways to manage our differences.

Third, we will maintain an unwavering commitment to the pledge enshrined in Article 5 of the NATO treaty that an attack on one is an attack on all. When France and our other NATO allies invoked Article 5 in the aftermath of the attacks of September 11th, 2001, it was a proclamation to the world that our promise to each other was not rhetorical, but real. And the people of Europe brought great comfort to the people of the United States by reminding us that even in such a difficult hour, we were not alone. I was a senator representing the state of New York at that time, and I well remember the extraordinary outpouring of support that the people of New York specifically received. And for that, I thank you. And I assure you and all members of NATO that our commitment to Europe's defense is equally strong.

As proof of that commitment, we will continue to station American troops in Europe, both to deter attacks and respond quickly if any occur. We are working with our allies to ensure that NATO has the plans it needs for responding to new and evolving contingencies. We are engaged in productive discussions with our European allies about building a new missile defense architecture that will defend all of NATO territory against ballistic missile attack. And we are serious about exploring ways to cooperate with Russia to develop missile defenses that enhance the security of all of Europe, including Russia.

Missile defense, we believe, will make this continent a safer place. That safety could extend to Russia, if Russia decides to cooperate with us. It is an extraordinary opportunity for us to work together to build our mutual security.

In the 21st century, the spirit of collective defense must also include non-traditional threats. We believe NATO's new Strategic Concept must address these new threats. Energy security is a particularly pressing priority. Countries vulnerable to energy cut-offs face not only economic consequences but strategic risks as well. And I welcome the recent establishment of the U.S.-EU Energy Council, and we are determined to support Europe in its efforts to diversify its energy supplies.

Fourth, we are committed to practicing transparency in our dealings in Europe, and we call on other nations to do the same.

In this interconnected age, and particularly on this integrated continent, a threat that originates in one country can quickly become a regional or even global crisis. To keep Europe safe, we must keep the channels of communication open by being forthright about our policies and approaches.

That begins with transparency. The United States supports a more open exchange of military data, including visits to military sites and observation of military activities and exercises because when nations are uncertain about the military capabilities of their neighbors, that uncertainty can foster suspicion and even lead to conflict. As we work together to advance security across the continent, we must be able to trust each other enough to share information that could in real time make a difference in protecting the lives of our citizens.

To this end, the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty needs our attention. For more than 20 years, the CFE Treaty has been a cornerstone of conventional arms control, transparency, and confidencebuilding. But this valuable regime is in danger of crumbling. Two years ago, Russia suspended the implementation of the CFE Treaty, while the United States and our allies continue to do so. The Russia-Georgia war in 2008 was not only a tragedy but has created a further obstacle to moving forward.

We must not allow the transparency and stability that the CFE regime has provided to erode further. We should revive discussions on the way forward with our allies, Russia, and other signatories. Our goal should be a modern security framework that takes into account developments in Europe since the original treaty was drafted, limits military deployments, and strengthens the principles of territorial integrity, non-first use of force, the right of host countries to consent to stationing foreign troops in their territory.

It is only through such an approach that we can provide the reassurance that no country is secretly preparing its forces to attack another. I meet with foreign ministers and defense ministers and heads of state on a regular, ongoing basis. And there is still a great deal of concern on the part of Central and Eastern Europeans that something may be happening they're not aware of, that some action may be taken

that is directed at them. So to achieve our goal of greater transparency, we will consult closely with our allies on how we can best put this fundamental principle into practice.

Fifth, people everywhere have the right to live free from the fear of nuclear destruction.

The nuclear arms race that characterized the Cold War cast a shadow over the lives of people everywhere, especially those living in Europe and the United States. I remember very well as a child doing drills in my school that, in retrospect, were absurd but were meant to prepare us in the event of a nuclear attack. Getting under one's desk, for example. Well today, the United States and Russia are close to concluding a new START treaty to dramatically reduce the size of our strategic nuclear arsenals. But now we face increased threats—that nuclear materials will fall into the wrong hands or that certain states will develop or even choose to use them.

In his speech in Prague last year, President Obama declared the long-term goal of a world without nuclear weapons. As long as these weapons exist, the United States will maintain a safe, secure, and effective arsenal to deter any adversary, and we will guarantee that defense to our allies. But we will begin the work of reducing our arsenal. And as we do so, we will spare no effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and to secure existing stockpiles and materials.

In April in Washington, President Obama will host a Nuclear Security Summit to draw high-level attention to the threat posed by nuclear terrorism and to galvanize support for tough measures to secure vulnerable nuclear material across the globe. And in May, we will reaffirm and reinforce the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty at its review conference. And we continue to work with other nations and the United Nations to halt the proliferation of nuclear weapons and materials to terrorists and non-nuclear states.

We will seek to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and to negotiate a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty. And we are conducting a comprehensive Nuclear Posture Review to chart a new course that strengthens deterrence and reassurance for the United States and our allies while reducing the role and number of the nuclear weapons we have.

We will continue our intensive efforts to prevent Iran to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons capability. And I applaud President Sarkozy's leadership on this issue, which will continue when France assumes the presidency of the United Nations Security Council next month.

Sixth and finally, true security entails not only peaceful relations between states but opportunities and rights for individuals who live within them.

A secure nation defends human rights and allows its citizens to select their leaders. It allows citizens to express their views freely and participate fully in public debates, both in person and online. It offers its citizens the opportunity to live in healthy communities, receive an education, hold a job, raise a family if they choose, travel freely, and make the most of their God-given potential.

Development, democracy, and human rights comprise a mutually reinforcing cycle that is critical to security everywhere. When that cycle is broken, a nation is not secure. The essential building blocks for long-term progress and prosperity are missing. And we have seen with countries such as Yemen that one nation's struggle to maintain order and provide for its people has consequences beyond its borders. A country that stifles its people's voices, suppresses dissent, and asserts authoritarian control over citizens, is not a strong country but a weak country, no matter the size of its army or the scale of its ambitions.

Now, Europe understands this, that security is about more than military might, that it is also about human potential. In Europe, security is provided by an array of institutions—including NATO, the European Union, the OSCE—that provide the full range of tools to meet common challenges.

Consider the former Communist countries of Central Europe, now democracies that offer their citizens a better quality of life. They were drawn to the EU because of the political, economic, and social opportunities it represents. They received legal, social, and technical assistance in building democratic institutions and the rule of law. They inherited the riches of a single market and the unifying experience of a common European identity. These are such powerful forces for progress and stability. Europe has harnessed them through the creation of effective institutions. So now the United States works with NATO, the EU, and the OSCE to extend this kind of comprehensive human security to other places.

We are continuing the enterprise that we began at the end of the Cold War to expand the zone of democracy and stability. We have worked together this year to complete the effort we started in the 1990s to help bring peace and stability to the Balkans. And we are working closely with the EU to support the six countries that the EU engages through its Eastern Partnership initiative.

We stand with the people of Ukraine as they choose their next elected president in the coming week, an important step in Ukraine's journey toward democracy, stability, and integration into Europe. And we are devoting ourselves to efforts to resolve enduring conflicts, including in the Caucasus and on Cyprus.

Our work extends beyond Europe as well. With the EU, we are fighting poverty and strengthening institutions in Yemen, Haiti, and Pakistan, among others. With NATO and other European partners, we're working side by side to encourage accountable, effective governments in Afghanistan. European and American voices speak as one to denounce the gross violations of human rights in Iran. European and American governments and nongovernmental actors operate together and in parallel to promote economic and democratic development in Africa.

And we look forward to doing even more together as the EU develops its capacities for global engagement, including by sending its own highly qualified diplomats to serve alongside their counterparts from individual European nations.

Our combined efforts can help put an end to the scourge of human trafficking, a threat to public safety and a crime that degrades and dehumanizes its victims.

We believe that our commitment to expanding opportunity compels us to reach out to those who too often go unseen and unsupported, particularly in countries marked by poverty, political oppression, and violent extremism. Women and girls, who are one of the world's greatest untapped resources, deserve our investment in their potential. There've been so many studies about how raising the status of women produces greater development and greater stability.

We also strengthened—we wish to strengthen the ability of the OSCE to defend and promote human rights in the world. The commitment to human rights enshrined in the Helsinki Final Act is one of the best things that the Euro-Atlantic community has accomplished together. Now we are called to renew that commitment by empowering the OSCE to increase its work in the world.

So we are coming forward with proposals for strengthening its efforts in three areas—military, economic and environmental, and human rights. We support the creation of an OSCE crisis prevention mechanism that, in situations of tension between OSCE states, would empower the OSCE to offer rapid humanitarian relief, help negotiate ceasefires, and provide impartial monitoring. We also propose that the OSCE chair-in-office have the capacity to facilitate consultations in the case of serious energy or environmental disruption, dispatch special representatives to investigate reports of egregious human rights violations, and provide a forum for emergency consultations.

Looking back on all we have achieved together over the past 65 years, it is remarkable how much has been accomplished—Europe emerging from the ruins of war to become a showcase for peace and opportunity and prosperity. The condition of modern Europe, however, is not a miracle handed to the people of Europe. It is the result of years of careful, courageous work by leaders and citizens, in this country and others, to create institutions and erect policies that brought together former adversaries and united them in common cause. Now it is our turn. It is our responsibility to continue that tradition of leadership and renew those institutions for a new era. As we proceed, let us remember why we began this project in the first place, and why it is still vitally important today.

This partnership is about so much more than strengthening our security. At its core, it is about defending and advancing our values in the world. I think it is particularly critical today that we not only defend those values in the world. I think it is particularly critical today that we not only defend those values, but promote them; that we are not only on defense, but on offense. There is so much that the West has to be proud of and to lay a claim to.

We believe and we have the evidence to prove it that democracy works and can deliver for citizens if leaders are committed to the enterprise, and if democracies are about more than just elections; if we build institutions of independent judiciaries and free media and protection of minority rights and so much else, that we have worked and labored to create.

We are closer than ever to achieving the goal that has inspired European and American leaders and citizens—not only a Europe transformed, secure, democratic, unified and prosperous, but a Euro-Atlantic alliance that is greater than the sum of its parts, that stands for these values that have stood the test of time, and worked strategically to move toward a vision that may need to be updated and modernized, but is timely. The United States is honored to stand by your side as we take the next steps towards fulfilling that vision. Thank you very much.

Q. (Inaudible.) Madam Secretary, we hear very often that America and the EU should be complementary with (inaudible) that have not yet reached this complementarity. What should be, then, from your views to achieve better complementarity between these two organizations?

Secretary Clinton. Thank you very much. I would start by saying that these, of course, are decisions for the Europeans to make with respect to the EU. When it comes to NATO, I think that greater integration on the European continent provides even more opportunity for the level of cooperation to increase. We value our bilateral relationship and we will always maintain them, stay focused on them, because even in a time of greater European integration, there are obviously differences when it comes to certain national matters that have to be respected.

But I think, given the complexity of the world today, closer cooperation and more complementarity between the EU and NATO is in all of our interests to try to forge common policies—economic and development and political and legal on the one hand in the EU, and principally security on the other hand in NATO. But as I said in my remarks, they are no longer separated. It's hard to say that security is only about what it was when NATO was formed, and the EU has no role to play in security issues.

Take, for example, energy security. I mean, it would be the EU's responsibility to create policies that would provide more independence and protections from intimidation when it comes to energy markets from member nations. But I can also see how in certain cases respecting energy, there may be a role for NATO as well. So as we refashion, rethink the way forward in this century, I think we should respect and honor the foundation institutions, but we should be unafraid to ask a lot of the questions about how can they function better.

And certainly, when one thinks of NATO as a response in the Cold War to the Warsaw Pact nations which no longer exist in the form that it was, and with the new threats that we have to confront, the strategic review that is now ongoing by NATO which will be presented at the NATO summit in Lisbon at the end of this year should be a hard rethinking. I mean, if it just repeats that we have to do better what we've always done, it will be a lost opportunity. And under the Lisbon treaty, with more focus and specific leadership attached to foreign policy and development assistance, there will be a way to better coordinate.

So I think that your question is a very timely one and one that calls us to be creative and to work closely together and hopefully make the changes that are called for.

Q. I'm an American so I'll put my question in English. Thank you for coming, Madam Secretary. Amy Green, Ph.D. student in political science here in France. Given the interconnectivity of global challenges, it seems evident that the United States and Europe, in the context of NATO, can't solve all the problems alone. Is there support in the Administration for extending the boundaries of NATO to non-Western countries, emerging powers like Brazil, India, other democracies that might ful fill their criteria?

Secretary Clinton. I think there is an awareness of the global nature of a lot of these problems, but a great reluctance to go beyond the geographic reach of NATO. Now, we still have work to do in the Balkans. There are issues regarding Georgia and Ukraine's aspirations. So there are still a lot of areas that require attention from NATO. But your question really raises an important issue: How do we cooperate across geographic distance with countries in other hemispheres, different geopolitical challenges? And there is a modern living example of that with the NATO ISAF commitment in Afghanistan.

There are many reasons on the substance, I would argue, why this is an important mission for NATO. But clearly, there were more countries than just NATO members who have a stake in a stable Afghanistan. So as Australia sends troops, we are working through how to coordinate with non-NATO members. And I think that in addition to the substantive commitments, there will be a number of lessons learned from how that worked and what didn't work going forward.

In many ways, it's quite remarkable, the success of this alliance. Yesterday at the London conference on Afghanistan, as you know, the United States, under President Obama, has agreed to put 30,000 more troops in Afghanistan. And member nations, NATO and ISAF—the international partners—have come up with a total of 9,000 more troops. How you integrate commands, how you utilize the different contributions that countries are making is a leadership and management challenge.

But I think it's an important test for the world. NATO is leading the way, but NATO has to determine in what ways it can cooperate with others. I think that the world that we face of failing states, nonstate actors, networks of terrorists, rogue regimes—North Korea being a prime example—really test the international community. And it's a test we have to pass. Now, there are some who say this is too complicated, it is out of area, it is not our responsibility. But given the nature of the threats we face, I don't think that's an adequate response.

Take cyber security, for example. We have to figure out how to cooperate not just in physical space, but in virtual space. The threats from cyber security breaches, concerted attacks on networks and countries, are likely to cross borders. We have to know how to defend against them and we have to enlist nations who are likeminded to work with. Similarly, with energy problems, attacks on pipelines, attacks on container ships, attacks on electric grids will have consequences far beyond boundaries. And it won't just be NATO nations. NATO nations border non-NATO nations.

So how do we begin to re-imagine the world that we're in, not just try to keep adding to the structure of the world we inherited? When you mention countries like Brazil and India, how do we find common cause? Now, the U.S. peacekeeping missions are a very important way to combine military under UN military leadership for countries that might not be able to take on a mission themselves, but with combined capacity, can. Brazil, under a Brazilian general, has done an excellent job in leading the UN peacekeeping operations in Haiti for a number of years, providing the only source of solid, sustainable security as they work to train a police force. There's no army in Haiti. So honing one's skills so that they could be put to work, I think, will be one of the responsibilities we have to address.

And finally, there's a tremendous opportunity for us to improve our disaster mitigation and response abilities. We have a lot of common desire to respond to disasters, as we've seen in the wake of Haiti. Countries immediately sprang into action. I commend France for the excellent response and the aid that was sent. The disaster relief could not have been done solely by civilians. It's impossible. The disaster consequences were so profound that without military assets, there is no way food, water, or rescue missions could have been delivered.

So how do we better coordinate? No matter whose military it is, no matter whose flag it's under, how do we better coordinate? How do we think this through? And that is something that countries across the world should be interested in addressing. So there are so many implications of what we must do, and I think it's going to require leadership from both military and civilian experts to help us find our way forward.

Q. Bonjour. So I'm (inaudible), firstyear medical student. So I would like to know your opinion about the European army that France and Germany have been trying to build for the last 50 years and to know the opinion of the U.S. about this.

Secretary Clinton. Well, again, this is a European matter. It certainly is a French and German matter. And I respect the decision making of allies like France and Germany, so it is really within those two countries' sphere of authority.

I think the U.S. view is that we would not want to see anything supplant NATO. If it were able to supplement NATO, that would be different. But given the strains that already exist on NATO's budget and military expenditures in our countries, we think it's smarter to figure out how to use the resources we have more effectively, use the alliance that we're members of in a more strategic way. But again, that is ultimately a decision of the French and the German people.

Secretary Hillary Clinton delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. Good morning. Good morning, everyone. Well, today is a very positive day for Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland has taken another important step toward a full and lasting peace. Its political leaders have agreed on a roadmap and timeline for the devolution of policing and justice powers, and they've taken other productive steps as well. The accord they announced today will help consolidate the hard-won gains of the past decade.

Now, this has not been an easy road. There were plenty of bumps along the way. I have been in regular contact with the parties during the past year and, especially since my trip to Belfast in October, and I know that the way forward was far from clear. So I really want to applaud all of the parties for ultimately choosing negotiations over confrontation. In finalizing this deal, Peter Robinson and Martin McGuinness and their teams displayed the kind of leadership that the people of Northern Ireland deserve.

I want to recognize the leadership and the patient resolve of Prime Minister Brown and Taoiseach Cowen, as well as Northern Ireland Secretary Shaun Woodward and Irish Foreign Minister Micheal Martin. They have resolutely focused on moving this process forward, forging common ground, and reaching an outcome that will keep Northern Ireland on the path of peace and stability.

Now, this is not the end of the journey. So far, the devolution process has enabled Northern Ireland's leaders to enact a range of needed reforms, from health to housing to environmental safety. Now they have even greater authority, and with that authority comes greater responsibility. They must continue to lead. The people of Northern Ireland are poised to build a thriving society on this stronger foundation—a country where neighbors can live free from fear and all people have the potential to fulfill their God-given rights.

This is a dream nurtured for so long in the hearts of people across Northern Ireland. It is also a dream that lives far beyond its borders, in countries and communities where ethnic and religious conflicts persist. This latest success in Northern Ireland points the way forward—and not only for this conflict. Northern Ireland gives us hope that, despite entrenched opposition and innumerable setbacks, diligent diplomacy and committed leadership can overcome generations of suspicion and hostility.

So, now we join the world in looking to the leaders of Northern Ireland to build upon their efforts by promoting a new spirit of cooperation among all of the parties. As they do, the United States will help. Our Economic Envoy, Declan Kelly, will continue working to help Northern Ireland reap the dividends of peace, including economic growth, international investment, and other new opportunities. In the near future, Declan and I will host First Minister Robinson and Deputy First Minister McGuinness here in Washington to discuss further investment in Northern Ireland and ways to build on this agreement.

I spoke very, very late in the evening in Northern Ireland with both Sean and Micheal and congratulated them, thanked them for their efforts. I spoke early this morning with both Peter and Martin and did the same, and also pledged our continuing support for their efforts.

So today, we salute this achievement. We recognize that a new chapter of partnership among Northern Ireland's political leadership and people can now begin. And I am confident that the people of Northern Ireland will make the most of this moment. I want to reaffirm the commitment of the United States, and my personal commitment to support them in every way we can as they continue on this very positive path into the future.

I'd be glad to take your questions.

Secretary Robert Gates and Minister Ignazio La Russa delivered these remarks in Italy

Minister La Russa. We have just finished this important meeting and we have debated several issues. We thanked the secretary for the—(inaudible)—expressed also on the actions developed by the Italian forces. Of course, we have dealt—we have spoken about Afghanistan. We have expressed our desire to increase the number of forces in ISAF—(inaudible)—trainers (inaudible) forces—(inaudible)—as you know—(inaudible)—train and assist troops on the ground.

We are currently—(inaudible)—new approach especially as it comes to the regain and win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people. This is a very important solution, as we say, of the Afghan—(inaudible)—exercise their government and to respond to the threat and the task. This is why we are persuaded that we have to ensure what I have just (inaudible) to reduce the time for Afghanization.

Of course, other issues have been debated, namely, Kosovo, where the reduction of the presence, as now determined,(inaudible) force being on the ground.

Yesterday, I also introduced to Secretary Gates, General Graziano, that has just been retained as commander of—(inaudible)—and will be my chief of staff from tomorrow.

Iran has been another important issue we have debated. We have agreed to use any possible (inaudible) means to oppose escalation of violence in this country.

Secretary Gates. Good morning. While I have been to Italy many times, this is my first visit as secretary of defense, and it is a pleasure to be here.

Let me start by thanking the Italian people who play host to more than 10,000 American service members and their families. For decades, Italy has shown U.S. military personnel stationed here a level of warmth and hospitality with its people. We appreciate it.

I also had a chance to experience Italian hospitality at dinner last night with Minister La Russa, shortly after I met with Prime Minister Berlusconi. Today's meeting was a continuation of those conversations.

I expressed my gratitude to both the prime minister and the defense minister for Italy's vital role in Afghanistan, especially in Regional Command West, where Italy is in the lead, and with the police training mission where the world class Carabinieri is sharing its expertise.

I also thanked them for Italy's recent commitment of another 1,000 troops, the most of any ally since President Obama's December announcement of a new strategy in Afghanistan.

Minister La Russa and I see each other often at NATO ministerials, but those conversations focus on the Alliance and operations in Afghanistan. The truth is our two nations have a much wider-ranging bilateral relationship than just that.

I wanted to come to Rome to discuss the whole range of defense issues on which we cooperate. That includes the disaster relief in Haiti, where Italy has deployed the flagship Cavour, the Joint Strike Fighter Program and other international issues, such as the need to improve relations with Russia and the challenge posed by Iran.

In all of this, our countries have a tremendous amount to gain from this relationship.

Minister La Russa, thank you, again, for your continued friendship.

Q. Craig Whitlock with The Washington Post.

Minister La Russa, as you know, the Istanbul ministerial ended with a plea for more trainers. Can you be more precise about what Italy intends to contribute along those lines in terms of trainers and when they will start?

And Secretary Gates, as you know, France said that it would send 80 more trainers to Afghanistan. Are you disappointed in that? And where will you look to make up the difference?

Minister La Russa. We are ready to send 120 Carabinieri that have already been financed and go beyond the 1,000 men we are expected to deploy in the second semester between the end of May and the beginning of June.

Half of these 120 have already deployed. The remaining is pending the authorization by the Afghan government since they haven't decided nor the venue, nor the people to be trained for these soldiers to deploy.

Indeed, in Istanbul, we remarked that the efforts by the international community must finds its obvious counterpart in the Afghan government and resolve. In June, the chief of defense, General Camporini, will meet with his U.S. counterpart and the chiefs of defense of the other countries involved to decide what percentage of this Carabinieri or of the men we have to deploy must be assigned to train police forces and what other military trainers must be deployed in the OMLTs to train the Afghan armed forces.

This is a common objective. And indeed, our objective is to keep the time for Afghanistan to stand on its feet and take care of its own security as short as possible.

Secretary Gates. During my first year in this position, our NATO allies and non-NATO partners had about 17,000 troops in Afghanistan. And the general feeling was that was about as much as people could do.

We now have, on the ground or pledged, almost 50,000 allied and non-NATO partners. If you had told me we would have that kind of an increase two years ago, I would have thought it a miracle.

France has a substantial presence already in Afghanistan, and their defense minister in Istanbul pledged that France would provide additional trainers. He did not mention a number.

I think that what needs to be done as we go forward is, of the roughly 10,000 more troops that have been committed, we need to shape the nature of those forces.

The key, it seems to me, is not necessarily more troops in addition to the 10,000, but rather to ensure that among those 10,000 are as many trainers and mentors as we possibly can get. So I ask my NATO colleagues to go back and look at the composition of the commitments that they have already made.

And I have confidence that when we have done that, that we will be able to meet the need for trainers and mentors in Afghanistan.

Minister La Russa. And I would like to respond to a third question that I asked myself, these are the two reasons for satisfaction for this meeting. First of all, I should remark, the intention by the U.S. side is to share intelligence data and to use a more open attitude when it comes to sharing the instruments to fight the threat we are expected to.

I have been informed of that and discussions have been going on to obtain better results than in the past, and also to remove several of the—(inaudible).

Second reason for satisfaction, that emerged in Istanbul and was confirmed during our meeting, is the decision by the U.S. side to have expert meet about the possibility of sharing technologies for counter-IED efforts. IEDs, as we know, are the important cause for many of the casualties for our soldiers and the soldiers of other nations.

We have state-of-the-art equipment on the ground—(inaudible)—and we are about to—(inaudible)—to prevent the remote activation of those bombs. For this, I thank Secretary Gates also for showing his—(inaudible)—side that has been confirmed during yesterday's dinner. It's a sign of profound friendship that both of our countries share in every aspect of life.

Secretary Robert Gates and Minister Herve Morin delivered these remarks in Paris, France

Secretary Gates. It's a pleasure to be back in Paris and have the opportunity to talk with one of our closest partners. Minister Morin and I just finished a good indepth conversation about many aspects of our relationship. And I look forward to meeting Foreign Minister Kouchner later this afternoon and then President Sarkozy, for the first time, this evening to continue these discussions.

Over the past two years, the bilateral relationship between the United States and France has significantly expanded, a welcome time—a welcome change from times in the past, when we did not have such a productive dialogue.

I think this warming is in part due to the realization, by both of our governments, that the security challenges of the 21st century are too large and too complex to be dealt with by any single nation acting alone. In that respect, France's decision to rejoin the NATO integrated military structure last year, after more than four decades, marked an important step for the alliance, as it adapts to new threats in a new century.

Whether the issue is NATO and the need for reform or the danger posed by Iran, France has demonstrated real and principled leadership on the global stage. That is particularly true in Afghanistan. I told Minister Morin and will also tell President Sarkozy how much the United States appreciates France's contribution to the war effort.

Since this conflict began, thousands of French troops have served courageously alongside American forces and other members of the coalition. And many have made the ultimate sacrifice for a mission that is vitally important to the security of the whole world.

In particular, we had a good discussion about the importance of the training mission and the need to prepare the Afghan national security forces to assume security responsibility across the country.

That will only happen if the coalition provides Afghanistan with additional trainers and mentors, who can make an immediate difference. As General McChrystal said a few days ago, he no longer believes the situation in Afghanistan is deteriorating. We must act swiftly to increase the impact of the forces now headed to the theater for this pivotal year.

I first met Minister Morin two-and-a-half years ago, when we had the opportunity to pay tribute to the Allied troops who fell on the beaches of Normandy. That event was a reminder of the shared sacrifices and values that continue to undermine this relationship—underpin this relationship today.

Minister Morin, Herve, thank you for your personal as well as professional friendship.

Secretary Gates. Well, first of all, I agree with everything Minister Morin just said. The reality is that the international community in recent months has offered Iran multiple opportunities to provide reassurance about its intentions with respect to its nuclear program.

No U.S. president has reached out more sincerely and, frankly, taken more political risk in an effort to try and create an opening for engagement with Iran and the Iranians' willingness to negotiate an end to their nuclear program.

All of these initiatives have been rejected, and we've heard more about that just this week, including the IAEA's proposal for the Tehran research reactor, which I think all of us believed offered promise. Now, the reality is, from the beginning, the P-5 plus one has had a dual track. One—the first track was to reach out, try and reach negotiated solutions to this that would prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon while at the same time allowing it a safeguarded, peaceful civil nuclear program, in conformity with the nonproliferation treaty. But the second track was to turn to pressure if this didn't work.

We must still try to find a peaceful way to resolve this issue. The only path that's left to us at this point, it seems to me, is that pressure track. But it will require all of the international community to work together to try and bring enough pressure. The point of the pressure is to bring the Iranians back to the negotiating table and to resolve this issue in a way that prevents Iran from having a nuclear weapon. And I think that we are very much agreed that action by the international community, it looks like, is now the next step.

Secretary Hillary Clinton delivered these remarks in Washington, DC at the NATO Strategic Concept Seminar

Secretary Clinton. Well, good evening, and it is a great privilege for me to join you on this occasion. I am delighted that it is sponsored by the Atlantic Council—and Fred and your entire team, we are grateful once again for you providing this forum. And to my former colleague, Senator Hagel, thank you very much for your continuing interest and for your service on the President's Intelligence Board. And it is especially a delight to have the secretary general here. Secretary General Rasmussen has been in the position for less than a year and has already proven to be extraordinarily effective in demonstrating leadership on some of the critical issues confronting us in NATO.

But I particularly want to thank Madeleine for that introduction and for her extraordinary leadership of this process. I don't think there is a human being with more credibility on these issues. She helped bring some of the countries represented here tonight into NATO in the late 1990s—an effort that many questioned at the time but which I believe has proven to be a major success. She played a central role in developing NATO's last Strategic Concept eleven years ago. And she has a unique perspective on where the Alliance is coming from, where it is, and where it should be headed. Madeleine has always championed the truth that we are strongest when our nations are united by common purpose and common principles. And President Obama and I are very grateful to her and to all of you for the work you're doing to advance that vision and develop NATO's new Strategic Concept.

Those participating in this effort face an extraordinary challenge, but also an extraordinary opportunity, because we are building a common vision for the most successful alliance in history. A few weeks ago in Paris, I put forward the principles that will guide the United States' engagement in Europe as a whole. And today, I want to speak specifically about NATO. I want to outline some of the basic goals that I hope will define the new Strategic Concept, discuss some of the key questions we will need to answer as we formulate that document, and explore our vision for a revitalized Alliance for the 21st century.

Now, revisions to NATO's Strategic Concept don't happen often, thankfully. And the occasion merits some reflection on the path that has brought us here. This Alliance has endured because of the skill of our diplomats, the strength of our soldiers, and—most importantly—the power of its founding principles. At the time of NATO's birth, Europe was still recovering from a long, brutal conflict. The post-war peace was under threat, and the leaders of the day did not know what the future would hold. But they built the Alliance around goals that could adapt to new challenges. First, NATO was charged with defending the nations of the Euro-Atlantic alliance. Second, it was designed to strengthen those transatlantic relations. And third, it helped facilitate further integration among the nations of Europe.

These goals channeled into our broader common efforts to establish a world order that was more peaceful and more principled. By taking a region that had been a source of global conflict and helping to transform it into a wellspring of stability and progress, the Alliance bolstered the security of people everywhere. And in an increasingly interconnected world, NATO's positive influence extended far beyond the boundaries of its member states. In the decades after NATO's birth, the Alliance faced a difficult struggle. There were real dangers from without and, at times, divisions within. Yet the nations of the Atlantic met that challenge. And today, we can survey the landscape from the Baltics to the Balkans and find a Europe that is more peaceful, democratic, united, and free than at any time in its history.

That transformation may be the defining political achievement of our time. It was neither easy nor certain. And we can take satisfaction in what we've accomplished together.

Yet notwithstanding that progress, today we confront challenges that have parallels to the problems that faced the Alliance at its inception. Once again, we face a new strategic landscape. New technologies, new adversaries, and new ideologies threaten our security. And once again, there is little certainty about the future. But I believe that the original tenets of NATO's mission—defending our nations, strengthening transatlantic ties, and fostering European integration—still hold. So as we move forward with the process of drafting a new strategic concept, we should remember that the basic goals that defined this Alliance still bind us together today.

Amid that continuity of purpose, the ways in which we pursue our goals must change. As any good soldier knows, success in a protracted struggle is not simply a matter of having more troops or better equipment. It is also a function of how effectively you adapt to new circumstances. You don't win by fighting the last war. And NATO cannot continue to succeed by looking in the rearview mirror.

NATO's new Strategic Concept must consolidate the gains that we've made and reflect the new nature and origins of the threats we face today. Some of the new dynamics we're dealing with were beginning to appear in 1999 when NATO last revised its Strategic Concept. For example, we faced the question of whether the Alliance would engage in out-of-area operations. Today, NATO ships are combating piracy off the Horn of Africa. NATO's Training Mission in Iraq has provided instruction to more than 14,000 Iraqis. We have agreed to work together to counter the missile threat from the Middle East. And in the last two and a half months, Allies have answered President Obama's call to support ISAF's mission in Afghanistan and are scheduled to increase their contributions by nearly 10,000 troops. In an interconnected world, we cannot defend our people by crouching behind the geographic boundaries of the Alliance. Reality has redefined the area in which we operate.

Many threats we face have little or no respect for borders. Whether we're battling piracy, or the menace of terrorism, or the prospect of weapons proliferation, we must be prepared to address new dangers regardless of where they originate.

Few of the dangers confronting us today are purely military or purely conventional. And in some cases, such as cyber attacks, their origins may be unclear. So meeting these challenges requires a comprehensive approach. Afghanistan is the perfect example of this phenomenon. There, as in the Balkans, we've seen NATO work together with other institutions such as the UN and the OSCE to deliver integrated solutions where each organization focuses on its comparative advantage.

But sometimes NATO still needs to act alone. This means that it may also have to provide civilian capabilities, especially in the early phases of a crisis when it is the only institution in the field. For too long, our Alliance has been hamstrung by those who argue that NATO is an exclusively military organization and oppose attempts to develop—or in some cases even to discuss—the Alliance's capacity to take on civilian responsibilities. Our common experience in Afghanistan has shown that the Alliance cannot accomplish its missions using purely military tools. If we are going to succeed in counterinsurgency warfare, NATO must continue developing mechanisms to draw on the existing security-oriented civilian capacities of its member states. The decision to enhance the role of the NATO Senior Civilian Representative in Afghanistan is a clear sign that we understand this need in practice. That realization should be codified in our new Strategic Concept. We have seen enough history since 1989 to know that complex emergencies and failed states will be features of the world we inhabit for decades to come. The Alliance needs access to tools that can help us deal with these continuing challenges.

We also need to think about threats to our networks and infrastructure such as cyber attacks and energy disruptions. Managing these problems requires close cooperation with the private sector, and NATO may not take the lead in these efforts but needs to be involved. Allies should work together to enhance our preparedness and our defenses. Now, the Alliance has taken preliminary steps such as agreeing to a cyber defense policy. But we must continue to keep pace with the evolution of these emerging dangers. Missile defense, we believe, will make this continent a safer place. And that safety could extend to Russia if Russia decides to cooperate with us. It provides an extraordinary opportunity for us to work together to build our mutual security in the 21st century. The spirit of collective defense must also include nontraditional threats. And we believe NATO's new Strategic Concept must address these.

Energy security is a particularly pressing priority. Countries vulnerable to energy cutoff face not only economic consequences but strategic risks as well. And I welcome the recent establishment of the U.S.-EU Energy Council and we are determined to support Europe in its efforts to diversify its energy supplies.

Missile defense, we believe, will make us safer because, clearly, we see a threat. We see a threat that is emanating from the Middle East and we see a threat that can only be addressed in the spirit of collective defense. How we do that and how we recognize the importance of addressing it is something that the Strategic Concept needs to tackle with.

We also need to assess NATO's role in deterring and responding to terrorist attacks and nuclear proliferation. We know these are key problems to our security because, for example, a terrorist training camp in a lawless country can pose just as great a threat to our security as the conventional capabilities of an adversarial neighbor. Americans will always remember NATO's decision to invoke Article 5 for the first time in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Thankfully, the prospect that we would have to face this again has not come to pass. But we have so many dangers, including the danger of a nuclear attack from a non-state actor. We know that non-state actors seeks nuclear capability. We see that, unfortunately, every day. And we know that nuclear proliferation and the development of more sophisticated missiles in countries such as North Korea and Iran are reviving the specter of an interstate nuclear attack. So how do we in NATO do our part to ensure that such weapons never are unleashed on the world?

Part of the answer lies in continued nuclear deterrence, and the United States has responded to our threats by not only maintaining our nuclear deterrence, but also developing a missile defense system that is designed to protect our territory, our population, and our forces throughout NATO. We believe NATO needs to develop its own missile defense architecture so that it can defend nations of Europe. And the Obama Administration's new approach to missile defense—the phased, adaptive approach—will be our contribution to that new architecture. It isn't just NATO that needs to respond to the new threat. We need to make Russia a partner in our efforts to prevent nuclear proliferation and in missile defense. We invite Russia to join NATO in developing a missile defense system that can protect all citizens of Europe and of Russia as well.

And this brings us to the broader issue of pursuing new partnerships beyond the strict confines of the Alliance. Given the global nature of the threats we face, NATO will need to strengthen its ties with such new partners. And the Strategic Concept should examine how to leverage this cooperation to make these relationships more productive.

Now, I know that in the past, the United States has been ambivalent about whether NATO should engage in security cooperation with the EU. Well, that time is over. We do not see the EU as a competitor of NATO, but we see a strong Europe as an essential partner with NATO and with the United States. We hope that the passage of the Lisbon treaty will help us advance this relationship. And we look forward to working together with the EU as it applies its Common Security and Defense Policy to determine how we can best support one another and the United Nations in addressing security challenges.

In many cases, as with the EU and others, NATO will seek out opportunities for collaboration with countries and institutions that share our principles and our priorities. But we may also pursue partnerships based on shared interests or geographic necessity.

I want to speak most clearly about our relationship with Russia and the NATORussia Council. Let me state unambiguously: While Russia faces challenges to its security, NATO is not among them. We want a cooperative NATO-Russia relationship that produces concrete results and draws NATO and Russia closer together.

The Russian Government has come forward with its proposals for a new European Security Treaty and a new NATORussia treaty. Now, we believe that some of Russia's proposals contain constructive ideas and we welcome the opportunity to engage seriously with Russia on this important subject. But, as I made clear in my speech in Paris, the United States does not see the need for new treaties and we believe discussions of European security should take place within existing forums for European security such as the OSCE and the NATO-Russia Council.

We have real differences with Russia on several issues. And we intend to use the NATO-Russia Council as a forum for frank discussions about areas where we disagree. We will use it to press Russia to live up to its commitments on Georgia and to reiterate our commitment to the territorial integrity and sovereignty of all states. We will use it to challenge the assertion put forward in Russia's new military doctrine that NATO's enlargement and its global actions constitute a military danger to Russia. We will also use the Council to advocate on behalf of human rights and individual liberty—these are principles and values that Russia committed to uphold when it accepted the NATORussia Founding Act.

At the same time, we should use the Council to advance our common interests, including the indivisibility of our common security. Because Russia and NATO face common threats. We face it from extremists and drug traffickers coming out of Afghanistan and Pakistan along their border. As a result, we have agreed to cooperate in training counternarcotics officers from Afghanistan and Central Asia. And Russia is now allowing NATO to transit non-lethal goods across its territory in support of our ISAF operations. And we hope to extend that cooperation to other fields, again, most notably in the area of missile defense.

We believe we can build more mutual confidence through measures that increase transparency in Europe. And European security will benefit if NATO and Russia are more open about our armaments, our military facilities, and our exercises. NATO and Russia should have a regular exchange of information on posture, doctrine, and planned military exercises, as well as specific measures to permit observation of military exercises and to allow visits to new or significantly improved military installations. We look forward to working closely with all of our Allies, Russia, and our other partners in the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty during the coming months to reverse the erosion of this valuable regime. If we truly believe that our security is indivisible, we must do more to strengthen the sense of strategic reassurance across the Euro-Atlantic area. As we look ahead, our challenge with Russia is to build a relationship where the principles that both sides have agreed to on paper are consistently respected in practice.

As NATO takes on these challenges, we must remain true to the original principles on which the Alliance was founded. And I want to reaffirm as strongly as I can the United States' commitment to honor Article 5 of the NATO treaty. No Ally—or adversary—should ever question our determination on this point. It is the bedrock of the Alliance and an obligation that time will not erode. Our nation faces threats elsewhere in the world, but we view peace and stability in Europe as a prerequisite for addressing all of the other challenges. NATO has succeeded in its original goal of forging a bond between the United States and Europe. And our commitment to Europe transcends party and personality.

And I want to emphasize that we continue to see NATO as an important mechanism for promoting European integration. It is difficult to imagine today that when this alliance was founded in 1949, a key security concern for many Europeans remained the prospect of future German aggression. NATO's success in providing a security foundation for Europe's transformation is one of the great accomplishments not only of NATO but, as many of you also believe, of any political-military alliance in history. And it must remain a defining feature. The NATO membership process, which requires applicants to make reforms across their political, economic, and defense sectors, has helped create the stable, democratic Europe we see today. We were glad to see the Alliance welcome Albania and Croatia last year. And there can be no question that NATO will continue to keep its doors open to new members.

NATO must also forge deeper partnerships with leading democracies beyond the Euro-Atlantic community. We are already working with many of these nations in Afghanistan. And we must find ways to build on these efforts and encourage more regular cooperation. We have already determined the need for a NATO that can operate at strategic distance. We need to cultivate strategic relationships in support of that goal.

In order to achieve these goals and address these challenges, we'll need to ensure that the evolution of NATO's political capabilities keeps pace with its operational capabilities. NATO has never existed as a solely military alliance. It is also a political forum where democracies come together and act together to defend our values and our vision along with our peoples and our territory. The political side of NATO may receive comparatively little attention, but it is every bit as important. NATO's military structures make it possible to implement policy, but it is the political structures that determine that policy. Now, I am not asking for more ministerial meetings, unless, in fact, there is a proven need for them. But I am asking that, in addition to honoring Article 5 of the NATO treaty, we reaffirm our commitment to Article 4, where allies pledge to consult together about political and security developments. These discussions are the lifeblood of NATO's future.

And that leads me to a final critical point: the need for NATO reform. This topic has received considerable attention from NATO's defense ministers. It hasn't been as much of a focus for NATO foreign ministers, but it should be. NATO Headquarters is bulging with over three hundred committees, many with overlapping responsibilities. Too often, our budgets—military and civilian—are divorced from Alliance priorities, and the most important priorities have been underresourced for years. Our secretary general has not been invested with the power he needs to truly manage the organization. This must change—and we must agree to that change in parallel with the new Strategic Concept. A new Concept with old structures will not be transformational. In fact, it may not change much of anything at all. Secretary Gates will address this issue further tomorrow, but I want to make it clear that we are united in our belief that in a time of limited resources for all of our nations, NATO must improve its efficiency if it is to successfully carry out its vital missions.

Let me conclude where I began: Those of us responsible for crafting a new Strategic Concept do face a great challenge and a great opportunity. The phrase “post-Cold War” says more about what our current era is not than about what it is or should be. All of us here today will help define what this new era will become.

NATO has always been the institutional means through which our democracies meet the security challenges of our day. And the issues we're facing now are broader, and arguably more difficult, than before. I'm not coming to you today with a new catchphrase, but I know that if we are to succeed in our efforts, NATO must remain the cornerstone of Euro-Atlantic security, yet we also cannot shut our eyes or shut our doors to those challenges that transcend geography and the traditional definitions of security problems. Each and every one of the member nations is grappling with that on our own. NATO must be part of us helping to find the solutions. And as we do so, this Alliance will continue enhancing the peace and progress of an interconnected world.

The work ahead won't be easy. But done right, it will allow future generations to enjoy advances in security and prosperity that equal the inheritance we received from NATO's founders. I thank you for what you all are doing and I applaud your efforts. And President Obama and I look forward to seeing the results of your deliberation.

It is not an overstatement to say so much of what we now take for granted that we have seen develop since the beginning of NATO must be addressed and continued with the same passion and sense of mission that the founders of NATO felt. They took a big leap of faith.

There was no guarantee at all that their hopes would ever be realized. But they believed that they had to move forward together. I believe very much the same. The world is in many crises right now, but one of the crises is a crisis of leadership, particularly in the democracies. And we have to demonstrate, individually in our own democratic nations, collectively through an organization such as NATO, that we can meet the challenge that is confronting leadership today. What will we do today that will stand the test of time as those who stood in hotel rooms and nations' capitals 50 years ago have been able to produce? And those who helped to create NATO so many years ago understood what leadership meant, that it might not be quickly understood or rewarded, but that the obligations went far beyond the immediate.

That is, I think, the obligation we face now. And the Obama Administration and the United States stands ready to work with you so that 50 years from now people can look back and say we met the challenge of our time and that this Strategic Concept gave us a way forward that was desperately needed and that the leadership was there to fulfill it.

Thank you all very much.

Moderator. Secretary Clinton has consented to take some questions. And first of all, I want to thank you for an enormously important but also, for the work that we're doing, inspiring speech. But let me go straight to the audience and see what questions want to be raised. I was told that you've handled a great many town halls, so this group will probably be child's play for you.

Please. Yes. And if you could identify yourself as well as you ask your question.

Q. Thank you, Madam Secretary. Sebastian Gorka, National Defense University and the Strategic Advisors Group of the National Council. You've given an incredibly ambitious speech this evening and one of the corner points was Article 5, renewed commitment to Article 5. Given all the other challenges in the new environment, what is your expectation that Article 5 or what territorial defense actually means has to be somehow addressed or redefined in the new Strategic Concept to include the things you mentioned, such as cyber and energy?

Secretary Clinton. Well, thank you. I think that that's a very good way of putting the question because we have a concept of what Article 5 collective defense means that I think has to be analyzed and considered in light of the new challenges that we confront. But I view Article 5 as at the core of the NATO promise, and therefore we have to be willing to get behind the new challenges that are posed to member states and be ready and willing and able to create not just a new strategic concept but the operational abilities to provide that collective defense. So I'm hoping that we can get some guidance from the Strategic Concept, but then—I'll put in another plug for reform—we need to be marrying our capabilities and reforming our systems so that we are able to carry out these new Strategic Concept obligations.

Moderator. Please. And then after you're done, if you'll pass it back to Julie and identify yourself.

Q. Yes. Madam Secretary, Dr. Katarzyna Pisarska, the director of the European Academy of Diplomacy in Warsaw and also visiting scholar here at SAIS in Washington. Thank you very much for your visionary speech. Thank you for acknowledging the role of Secretary Albright in the enlargement process in 1999, which I think, as you said, made NATO today what it is.

And my question also involves the enlargement factor. Maybe it's more specific than what you said, that yes, we need to enlarge in order to develop and in order to move forward. How would you deal with the fierce resistance of Russia to allow NATO enlargement when it concerns to Ukraine or any other country, for example, in the Caucasus? Thank you.

Secretary Clinton. Well, I start from a premise that no other country should have a veto on a sovereign country making decisions about what organizations it wishes to join. NATO has a set of requirements that have to be met. Not every country that raises its hand and says it wishes to be a NATO member will either quickly or ever be admitted, but that should be a process between the country applying and NATO itself, and not be influenced adversely by anyone on the outside.

And of course, individual countries have every right to decide they want to join or not, and so they make their own strategic calculus as to whether they wish to do so. But a country that wishes to join NATO has to have a very clear sense of what is required in order to meet the threshold of membership. And NATO, I think, has been successfully working with countries to try to move them to be eligible and then finally to attain membership.

So I recognize the very fierce concern that is often expressed by our Russian friends, and I think one of our tasks in the next years is to convince Russia that NATO enlargement is not a threat to Russia, not the 21st century Russia, not Russia which has a lot of other pressing needs and concerns, some of them being threats coming from other sources, certainly not from NATO.

But like anything else, you can't snap your fingers and hope that it changes. But I think what President Obama did with his outreach to Russia on a new START agreement, which is being finally negotiated as we speak, and what the Obama Administration did with what we believe to be a smarter, more strategic missile defense approach, the phased adaptive approach—all of that we hope puts real meat on the bones of our argument that NATO is not a threat to Russia and NATO enlargement is not a threat to Russia. So let us hope that they will see that, but that should not affect any individual country's either desire to or eventual membership if they meet the standards.

Moderator. Madam Secretary, let me throw in a quick follow-up question on that. Can you imagine a time in the future when Russia could be a member of NATO?

Secretary Clinton. Well, I can imagine it. I'm not sure the Russians can imagine it.

Q. Julian Lindley-French, Netherlands Defense Academy and Strategic Advisors Group. The United States is very busy, Madam Secretary.

Secretary Clinton. Very what?

Q. Busy at the moment.

Secretary Clinton. Busy. Yes.

Q. Worldwide.

Secretary Clinton. Yes.

Q. And what's different about this Strategic Concept is that for the first time NATO must necessarily consider its role globally—not a global NATO, but consider its role globally. What is it, given the very great responsibilities the United States has, that you critically want from your European allies over the next 10 years or so, which is the lifespan of a strategic concept?

Secretary Clinton. Well, I don't want to do injustice to the importance of that question by being too brief about it or saying something which then somebody will write and say, well, she didn't say this so therefore we don't want it, when, in fact, we want to use this debate over the Strategic Concept to have the kind of in-depth discussion that Madeleine and her colleagues on the—what's it called—the expert group, which indeed are experts, have been engaged in by traveling throughout Europe and then coming here. So don't read anything into what I might say other than as a few general comments.

You will hear from Secretary Gates tomorrow that we really believe that reform of NATO has to be fully embraced by both sides of the Atlantic and by all members, because we cannot operate in a world where threats are evolving as they are today with an institutional structure that can't make decisions in a timely manner and which uses up a lot of the hardearned tax dollars of the citizens of all of our countries for bureaucratic purposes that are unrelated to strategic priorities.

And you will also hear from Secretary Gates that we believe that despite the historical and totally understandable reasons why European countries have not committed on a per capita basis to a level of defense spending that we would perhaps like to see you reach—not where we are but higher than where many of you are—that this is an area that has to be honestly discussed. Because a lot of the infrastructure challenges that we're going to face with these new threats—take energy security or cyber security—are going to require more investments by member nations so that we can network through NATO. It's not going to be NATO doing it so much as coordinate and working with investments by member nations.

And finally, I guess the point we would make is that we still believe we live in a dangerous world. And thankfully, the integration, the peace, the prosperity, the common market, the advances in Europe are so incredibly impressive and welcome, certainly to us, and the opportunities for European leadership in the EU are, as I said, ones that we support. But this dangerous world still requires deterrence and we know there's a debate going on in Europe and even among some of our leading member nations about, well, what does that mean. And we would hope that there is no precipitous move made that would undermine the deterrence capability. In fact, we want to build up our deterrence through missile defense.

I think making the case to publics about a lot of this is the art and responsibility of leadership. It is not easy. And in an environment in which World War II and the fall of the Berlin Wall all seemed very long ago to large segments of our populations on both sides of the Atlantic, making the case why we need to invest in deterrence, nuclear deterrence as well as missile defense, why we need to invest in protecting our energy supplies, or these new threats like violent extremism, and nonproliferation from non-state actors and potentially state actors—all of that is the responsibility of leadership. And we have to do our part of it, but so do all of our other member nations, and so does NATO as an institution.

Moderator. Thank you, Madam Secretary. I am told we have time for one last brief question. Please.

Q. Elena Poptodorova, former ambassador of Bulgaria to the United States of America and currently director for security policies at the Bulgarian Ministry for Foreign Affairs. Madam Secretary, a great speech, as usual. My sense is, though, that it rests on the premise of solidarity within the Alliance and on the premise of internal coherence among the members. And yet we know that there is if not disagreement, at least differing views, on Article 5, on Russia, and a few other matters. What's your sense about the level of solidarity and internal coherence? Are you comfortable with it? If not, how do you think we can achieve it? My country, as a young member of the Alliance, is vitally interested, also by way of support for itself in seeing this solidarity in full measure and in action. So I'm really looking forward to an optimistic reply from you. Thank you, Madam Secretary.

Secretary Clinton. Well, that certainly gives me an opening. But I am optimistic. I think that the debate that is understandable within NATO or within Europe or within the world today over the nature of the threats we face and the appropriate ways of addressing them is, in large part, because there's been a recognition we are in a new era. For 20 years, we were in the post-Cold War era and it was brutally interrupted by attacks not just on New York but on countries from Spain to the United Kingdom, as well as elsewhere in the world. And now we're seeing the impact of cyber attacks and we worry every day about the proliferation of nuclear weapons. So we are coming to grips with the new security environment in which we find ourselves, and so there's no formula written. We're not taking it down from the shelf and saying okay, well, here's all we have to do to adjust to it. We need to have the debate engendered by the Strategic Concept.

And I think that you should take heart from the fact that you go back to different periods in NATO's history. There were similar debates. And nobody can say they were 100 percent right or that somebody else was 100 percent wrong, but we came together based on fundamental principles and values, a commitment to democracy, a stand against an enemy that had divided Europe. And we're not living in that world anymore. But the world in which we live in has multi-polar threats to us, and we're now coming to grips with that.

So I am quite optimistic because I think that NATO itself is an adaptable organism. It is one that has, along with the European Union, demonstrated that Europe could move beyond a past that when one thinks about it is almost impossible to believe. I mean, I'm looking at representatives of countries that were locked in a brutal struggle during World War II. And millions and millions of Europeans from the Atlantic into and up to Moscow were victims of that war. And yet look at where Europe is today. And I would argue that it's because of good leadership, adaptability, and organizations like NATO that help to define the debate. Many of you, like I, go to countries where they can't get over conflicts 800 years ago. And you sit there and you think, look at Europe, look what Europe has done, look at people sitting down with one another, that memorable event in which I was privileged to participate in Berlin, walking through the Brandenburg Gate with the fall of the Berlin

Wall.

And so what the Atlantic alliance has done is almost unprecedented in human history, and we should be very proud of that and it should make us optimistic. Now, that doesn't mean we're going to agree on everything and it doesn't mean that once we agree we're going to be able smoothly to operationalize it, but history is on our side if we stay true to our principles and our values. And we will bring more and more people to that side by exemplifying that.

So I am optimistic and it's not just because you asked me a leading question. It's because I actually am. But it doesn't happen by mistake or by coincidence or accident. It happens because people like the ones in this room make it happen. And that's why I will end where I ended with my speech: The leadership crisis in the world today, particularly in democracies—and by that I mean not just elected democratic political leaders—but leaders in every institution in society in both the public and the private sector need to be able and willing to accept the responsibilities of leadership now. And that means doing more to explain to publics what is at stake and why this is so important. And it really means looking to bring coalitions within countries and then across countries together.

But I believe that that is what we are called to do, and I am very, very confident that we can do it. It's just we have to make up our minds to do it. I mean, in the United States we're always quoting Winston Churchill's comment about democracy is the worst kind of government ever invented, except for all the rest. Well, a democratic institution like NATO is not easy to run. Right, Secretary General? And yet what a tribute and triumph that it represents. So let's be resolved that we're going to build on it and come out with a Strategic Concept that does justice to all that came before and set the pace for what we need to be doing in the future. And the United States stands ready to be a partner in that. Thank you all.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Prime Minister George Papandreou delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. It is such a pleasure to welcome the prime minister to the State Department. I have had the great privilege of knowing him over a number of years in various capacities, and it's wonderful to be able to work with him now.

Before we begin, I want to say just a few words about Iraq. Yesterday, millions of Iraqis reaffirmed their commitment to a democratic future and rejected a campaign of fear and intimidation. This election is a milestone for both the Iraqi people and our relationship, which is transitioning to a long-term, primarily civilian partnership based on mutual respect and mutual interest. I congratulate every candidate who ran and every citizen who voted. And we look forward to working with the new government once it is formed.

And of course, Greece is the birthplace of democracy, so any time there's a democratic election anywhere in the world, Greece should get a royalty, Prime Minister, because the Greek people—

Prime Minister Papandreou. It would help my deficit too.

Secretary Clinton. Yeah, it would help the deficit. It's a new way of plugging the hole. The democratic values that Greece brought to the world and to civilization have enhanced the security and prosperity of people all over the world for a very long time. We had a broad-ranging discussion. Of course, as NATO allies, we work side by side on so many of these matters, and I thank the prime minister for Greece's contributions to the refocused mission in Afghanistan. Both of our countries know what it is like to be targeted by terrorists and we are committed to confronting violent extremism that threatens peace-loving people everywhere.

Among our most pressing, shared challenges today is the global economic crisis that has thrown people out of work, shuttered businesses, drained government coffers in both the United States and Greece. I know these are difficult days in Greece, but I want to commend the prime minister for his leadership in tackling the challenge that he confronted upon taking office. We support Greece and the tough economic measures it is taking to address this issue. The prime minister and I discussed this today and we will remain in close contact going forward.

We also discussed the Balkans, where Greece has a key role to play in promoting economic opportunities, stability, and democracy. Finishing the task of integrating the Balkans countries into Euro-Atlantic institutions is essential to regional stability and development and we commend Greece for its leadership role in moving toward that.

I also was able to discuss with the prime minister his continuing efforts to strengthen Greece's relations with Turkey. He has shown great leadership through the example of his own personal diplomacy. Greece and Turkey are NATO allies, two close friends of the United States, and a constructive relationship is in the interest of both nations.

As to Cyprus, I reiterated our support for the Cypriot-led negotiations under the auspices of the UN Secretary General's Good Offices Mission, led by Alexander Downer. I commend both Cypriot leaders on their hard work in these settlement talks and on the progress that they are making.

Greece is a valued ally and a trusted partner. I know the President is looking forward to his meeting with the prime minister. So again, Prime Minister, thank you for this visit and your friendship.

Prime Minister Papandreou. Well, thank you much, Secretary of State, dear Hillary. It is both an honor and a joy to work with you in this capacity. And we have met many times in the past in many other venues and capacities and continue to share common purpose and values with both our countries and also, on a personal basis, working for peace, prosperity, and democracy around the world.

And I would say that although democracy is a—Greece is a—the birthplace of democracy, we haven't asked for any royalties. And the reason is that democracy, in fact, we believe, is very important, and I commend and do wish the best for the Iraqi people and the new representatives of the Iraqi people and do wish for a democratic Iraq. A strong democracy is being moved forward in the world. That's a prerequisite. But as I said, democracy, in fact, brings [] stability, but it also brings a security which then allows for much more economic growth, social cohesion, a more just society. And this is the kind of society which we believe we need not only at the level of the nation state, but also around the world.

The financial crisis which we are going through in Greece has made us very much aware of the very strong and sometimes unregulated forces of our financial system, the globalizing market economy, and the need for the types of regulations and rules which will make sure that the markets work for us and work for our—for the benefit of our peoples. So this, I think, is also part of the democratic challenge we face, and it is a message which I'm bringing also from the European Union and from other leaders which I met just a few days ago—Angela Merkel, Nicholas Sarkozy, Gordon Brown, Jose Luis Zapatero—that Europe is very much looking forward to meeting in the G-20, in the next meeting there, and promoting this idea of more further regulation, which is, I think, is in favor of the—of our citizens around the world and for growth.

And what we have done in Greece in dealing with this crisis—and thank you for your kind words—yes, we have taken very difficult decisions, difficult decisions in cutting down our deficit to make sure that our economy is viable, to make sure that we have put in place the necessary steps so that we can then restructure our economy, make our economy a green economy, one which is also important for attracting investment, developing our tourist industry, developing our agriculture, our services, but also making our society more just and more transparent and more open. This is a major change, and I thank you for your solidarity.

At the same time, what we have also seen is that very often, there are certain practices that perversely do not help the countries that are taking the right steps because of the speculation. And this is one of the areas where we think European and American cooperation, within the G-20, of course, will be of paramount importance in order to stabilize and make sure that a crisis doesn't metastasize to other parts of the world.

I would also like to agree with the Secretary of State that we have—we are working very closely on a number of areas. The Balkans we do want to see stable, and Greece has taken the initiative to help promote the idea that the Western Balkans, still not members of the European Union, should accede to the European Union by 2014. Of course, if they do, also live up to their prerequisites of being a member of this community of values. This is important for stabilizing the wider region of the Balkans, and Greece, of course, is in a region where we're at the crossroads—not only in the Balkans but also the Mediterranean, the Middle East. These are areas which are of great concern for us as they are neighboring areas.

Obviously, Greek-Turkish relations are of great importance for us. We have been staunch supporters of the Turkish possibility of being a member of the European Union also. But at the same time, we do believe that there are certain changes and certain problems we need to deal with on this path to the European Union—our bilateral relations issues, such as the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Turkey, which is not a bilateral issue, but is a issue of respecting religious and human rights. And of course, Cyprus, which is—has divided our countries, because it is an island with a large number of occupying troops from the Turkish side. And we do need to liberate, I would say, this island from that type of activity and that type of a situation—allow the Greek Cypriots and the Turkish Cypriots to create their own path and their own future.

Cyprus is now a member of the European Union, and I would just to reiterate that I have given my full support to President Demetris Christofias and his work to move ahead and continue the peace process, the process of negotiation for finding a just solution, one which will be a federated solution with a bi-zonal and bi-communal solution according to UN resolution. So very much support that the sooner the better, but of course, a just solution which will also be within the framework of the European (inaudible), the European law and legislation.

Finally, I will be meeting with Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan in the next few months. We haven't yet set the date, but the—it will be very soon. And I do hope that this meeting will also signify and symbolize a renewal of our rapprochement, which we began some years ago, and dealing with issues such as the continental shelf. And therefore, I would like to see Greek-Turkish relations, Cyprus becoming a model of stability and peace, one—a model where we can work together and show the world that former foes can be the best of good partners in this globalizing world where we have huge issues to deal with. And there's much more potential when we work together than when we work at odds with each other.

So thank you again, Hillary, for your— Secretary Clinton. Thank you. Thank you so much, Prime Minister.

Mr. Crowley. On the U.S. side, Arshad Mohammed from Reuters.

Q. Secretary Clinton, what, if anything, can the United States do to help Greece through this period of financial instability? And Prime Minister Papandreou, what would you like to see your European partners do to try to reduce Greece's borrowing costs? Would you like to see state-owned German or French banks starting to buy Greek Government debt? Would you like to see some kind of state debt guarantees for commercial banks that purchase your debt? And why should the market feel confident that—given the protests that one has seen in Greece, that Greek society is prepared to sustain the kind of tough measures that you have taken and that you have described today? Why should people feel confident that that will be a durable phenomenon?

Secretary Clinton. Prime Minister?

Prime Minister Papandreou. Sure. Well, first of all, I would say that Greek society, citizens of Greece, know very well that we have a major challenge and we are taking measures to change our country. As a matter of fact, I was only recently elected, as you may know, and I was elected on a mandate of change.

So therefore, what we are doing in Greece is in fact what the Greek people in their wide majority have decided—making deeper changes, structural changes, making our economy, our society, more viable, more transparent, a whole developmental model, changing and moving to a green economy, which we think is going to be a very competitive economy. Just think of green islands, tourist islands which will have sustainable energy, renewable energy, Mediterranean food, high-quality tourism and so on. This is where we see, just to give you one example, the future of Greek economy, and not so far in the future, but quite soon.

Obviously, we had to take some immediate measures. These immediate measures we did responding to the desire—first, our desire but also the desire of our partners—that we show determination that we are ready to cut down our deficits, and in doing so, making sure that those who do lend us will have a—will be lending, will be investing in a viable economy and will be getting certain returns on their investment. This is, I think, what we had to do and we did do it.

What, of course, would be a problem would be if we continued to borrow at very high rates, beyond those that most of the European Union countries and the Eurozone countries certainly borrow at—twice, for example, the rates of Germany—that would be unsustainable, and that would be unsustainable within a common currency. We would not be able to become competitive. And therefore, what we are saying is we do need the support of the European Union if we see that speculation does not allow us to borrow at the right rates. We're not asking for money. We're not asking for bailouts. We're simply saying what we want to be is equal partners, as we have taken these measures on the market to be able to get what others also can get, which is basically normal rates of borrowing.

Now there have been a number of ideas—I think now we've become much more specific—I don't want to become specific because they haven't been announced—of how one would have to do this. And the European Union, of course, is looking at this and countries around the European Union have the types of instruments which would be necessary if such—if Greece does have a problem. We may never have a problem. We may go out into the market and not have a problem of high borrowing rates next time we do so. But if we do so, there will be instruments which will help us deal with the—this type of speculation.

On the long—longer term, certainly Europe is now thinking of institutions such as guarantees or the EMF—that's the European Monetary Fund or Eurobonds—but these, of course, will take somewhat more time as they also would need certain changes in the treaty—some of our treaties in the European Union.

Secretary Clinton. Well, neither the prime minister nor Greece has asked the United States for anything. We support the steps that Greece is taking. We commend the prime minister and his government for moving quickly to put in place changes that are called for given the economic consequences of the fiscal situation that he inherited.

But what I think Greece is looking for, as the prime minister alluded to, is that the United States, working in the G-20, will make some of the changes in regulatory regimes governing some of these financial instruments that have been used to the detriment not only of Greece, but of other countries, including our own. The prime minister was saying that a year ago he had never heard of CDSs, credit-default swaps. Well, neither had we.

And so we're all trying to focus on the immediate crises, as President Obama had to do when he came into office a little over a year ago, and as the prime minister is now doing, but then looking over the horizon so that we can avoid these kinds of consequences from an unregulated financial market that globally moves money at the speed of sound, if not light, and leaves in its wake all kinds of consequences that governments have to contend with.

Q. Madam Secretary, can you assess the Greek role in the Balkans? Many times, people from the U.S., the U.S. Administration, have called it a strategic partnership. The prime minister, personally he's spearheading the effort of bringing the whole (inaudible) into the European Union a hundred years after the end of—or the beginning of World War I. What exactly—how exactly do you see the Greek role there—the leadership role, I assume, of—

Secretary Clinton. Well, I do see it as strategic. What the prime minister has labeled Agenda 2014 to work with the countries of the Western Balkans to help them be ready for membership in the Euro-Atlantic institutions is exactly the same strategic imperative that we see.

In addition to setting forth a strategy, however, Greece has been an absolutely essential partner in stabilizing the Balkans and continuing to provide very specific assistance in doing so. The Greek troops in Kosovo are a perfect example of that. The support in Bosnia-Herzegovina is another example of that. Working as a neighbor with the governments of the various countries to help them take decisions that will move toward this eventual integration—we not only welcome, but appreciate greatly the leadership that Greece is showing. And we share the same sense of importance that this is critical to future European peace, stability, and prosperity. So working together as partners and supporting Greece's unilateral efforts is something that we are committed to doing.

Q. Thank you very much. Secretary Clinton.

Thank you.

Secretary Hillary Clinton delivered this statement in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. I commend the Northern Ireland Assembly today for its affirmation of the Hillsborough Agreement and its endorsement of the devolution of policing and justice, an important step in ensuring a peaceful and prosperous future for all of the people of Northern Ireland for generations to come. Devolution will mark a major milestone in achieving the aspirations of the Good Friday Agreement and the St. Andrews Agreement, and will help cement the hard-won gains of the past decade.

I applaud Northern Ireland's political leadership for tackling the complex and difficult work that will come with these additional responsibilities, and the many men and women involved in the stewardship and provision of policing and justice who have already made an immense contribution to this process. The journey is not over, and real challenges remain. I encourage all parties to work together in a spirit of cooperation and compromise as they continue the road toward a full and lasting peace.

The United States stands with the people of Northern Ireland in their efforts to build and sustain a thriving, confident, and shared society. Through cultural exchanges and new business relationships, we are deepening our historic ties. Our Economic Envoy, Declan Kelly, is working to help Northern Ireland reap the dividends of peace, including economic growth, international investment, and other new opportunities. And I look forward to meeting with Northern Ireland's leaders next week in Washington to discuss the way forward together.

Secretary Hillary Clinton was interviewed in Washington, DC by Yevgenia Albats of The New Times

Q. On December 5, 2009 the Strategic

Arms Reduction Treaty (START) expired, but negotiations regarding a new one between Russia and the United States have so far failed. What are the major obstacles for the new treaty?

Secretary Clinton. I'm optimistic that we'll be able to complete this agreement soon. It's a technically very complex treaty to accomplish. We share an interest in making real reductions in our strategic arsenals, and that is the most important point. To do that in a way that is verifiable, but which is less costly and less operationally complex than the previous START agreement is the key challenge, and we are working through it together.

Q. Given that the Cold War is long gone, why it is imperative to have this treaty signed? What may happen if it does not go through?

Secretary Clinton. As President Obama said in Prague, the existence of thousands of nuclear weapons is the most dangerous legacy of the Cold War. While the threat of global nuclear war has gone down, the risk of a nuclear attack has gone up. As more nations seek to acquire these weapons, the United States and Russia, as nuclear powers, have a special responsibility to lead in efforts toward a world without nuclear weapons. By taking concrete steps such as the new START Treaty, we can reduce our own stockpiles and encourage others to do the same. Presidents Obama and Medvedev have both recognized the importance of having a quality agreement that meets the needs and interests of both sides and I am confident that we will be able to get there together.

Q. It seems that two presidents, the Russian President Dmitriy Medvedev, and the U.S. President Barack Obama were quite optimistic about the new treaty throughout their meeting and telephone conversations last year. However, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on December 29th expressed certain concerns about U.S. “aggressiveness” and disruption of the nuclear balance. He suggested linking the U.S. missile defense system in Europe to the treaty in question. What would be your response to Vladimir Putin's concerns?

Secretary Clinton. As both Presidents agreed in Moscow, the subject of the new START treaty will be strategic offensive arms. We are more than willing to discuss missile defense and other defensive systems with our Russian partners, but we feel that the best way forward is to give each issue the full and separate attention it deserves. We are discussing missile defense cooperation with the Russian

Government, and we hope to cooperate on missile defense with Russia to address a range of threats from around the world. Russia and the United States have unique missile defense assets which if used together in a cooperative manner could enhance the security of both countries.

Q. A year ago, you, Madam Secretary, proclaimed a “reset” in the U.S.-Russian relationship. Has this “reset” materialized?

Secretary Clinton. The reset is now well-established, but the true test of its success is how we expand our cooperation in areas of shared interest. We are working closely together in addressing the issues revolving around Iran's challenge to the international community on nuclear non-proliferation. We are making progress on the new START Treaty. We've also made progress in our common efforts in Afghanistan, in trying to build stability there and in dealing with the threat posed by Al-Qaida and violent extremists. We have also been working closely on North Korea and Middle East peace negotiations, together with other members of the international community to tackle these challenging issues which affect the entire world. And finally, with the Bilateral Presidential Commission, we are broadening contacts through expanded cultural and educational exchanges, law enforcement cooperation, joint projects in health and the environment, and other activities which will improve the lives of average Americans and Russians.

Q. Returning back to U.S.-Russian relations: There have been ongoing discussions both in Washington and in Moscow between the adherents of the so-called “realpolitik” approach, and those who believe that the Russian government should be held accountable for the violation of human rights. President Clinton's administration was a huge supporter of the Russian democratic development. President G.W. Bush's administration was inclined to a different approach, in which pragmatism prevailed over human rights issues. What is your approach?

Secretary Clinton. As I said when I visited Moscow, I believe that the Russian people yearn for their rights just as much as Americans or anyone else does. The reset of relations between Russia and the U.S. is not merely on a government to government level but also about bringing our two peoples closer together. And it is on the strong foundation of accountable governance and the rule of law that we can strengthen the many ties between our two nations.

Q. There are plenty of people in Washington who believe that Russia is not ‘grown-up' enough for democracy, and the United States will be better off supporting authoritarian regime in my country. What will be your argument in support of the first or the second approach?

Secretary Clinton. We reject the idea that some countries are not ready for democracy. We believe that human rights are universal and that all people, regardless of where they live, thrive in an open society where ideas are exchanged freely. This competition of ideas leads to more accountable governance and a more innovative, prosperous economy, which form a solid foundation for the kind of relationship that we are looking for with Russia and Russians. The discussions I had with students and non-governmental activists when I visited Moscow last October reinforced my conviction that Russians share these same basic aspirations.

Q. Previous US administration was fairly aggressive in its rejection of the Russian government's claims that the former republics of the Soviet Union are “its zone of special privilege interests”, countries like Ukraine and Georgia first and foremost. What is your view on that? Would you consider Ukraine and Georgian membership in NATO any time soon?

Secretary Clinton. The United States stands by the principle that sovereign states have the right to make their own decisions to chart their own foreign policies and to choose their own alliances. We reject the notion of zones of influence as 19th century ideas. We fully support the decisions of NATO and its ‘open door” policy toward membership for both Georgia and Ukraine.

Q. Vice-President Joe Biden, while on his visit to the Caucasus last year expressed a very harsh opinion regarding Moscow's politics towards the post-Soviet countries. Is it to say, that you and Biden have a different approach to the issue?

Secretary Clinton. Both Vice President Biden and I support the President's vision and policies. We all want to seek a fruitful working relationship with Russia. At the same time, we recognize that there will be differences. The United States continues to fully support the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Georgia. We, like the overwhelming majority of countries in the international community, consider Abkhazia and South Ossetia to be integral parts of Georgia.

Q. Research has been done that problems with obtaining visa to European Union and the United States contribute to the negative view Russian people hold of the West. Would you consider free entry anytime soon between our countries?

Secretary Clinton. Our visa policies are based on U.S. law and the concept of reciprocity. While visa-free entry into the U.S. is a long way off, we can do more to ease travel for our citizens in the short run. We are actively working with the Russian government through the Presidential Bilateral Commission to make it easier for both Russians and Americans to visit each other's countries and see for themselves just how much we have in common.

Q. More than 60 members of Congress sent a letter to President Obama in December protesting the appointment of Mr. Surkov, the first deputy chairman of the Russian presidential administration, as the co-chair of the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission's Civil Society Working Group. The legislators called him “one of the masterminds behind Russia's authoritarian course” and urged President

Obama to boycott these meetings until he was replaced. What would be your response to the congressmen's letter?

Secretary Clinton. The Civil Society Working Group under the Bilateral Presidential Commission met for the first time January 27 in Washington. We believe the meeting was a success, having launched a process of dialogue on key issues, including the fight against corruption. The final session of that day brought U.S. and Russian governments and NGO representatives together to share experiences and consider how together they can work to address common problems. Our goal is to have government launch this dialogue and work on various themes between NGOs and other representatives of civil society in both countries, but we hope that we can step back as these contacts and relationships flourish on their own. As for who leads the Russian government delegation to the Civil Society Working Groups, that is a decision for President Medvedev.

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

Secretary Clinton. On March 9th, the Northern Ireland Assembly voted to complete the process of devolution, an important step toward realizing the promise of the Good Friday Agreement and the St. Andrews Agreement, and achieving a full and lasting peace for the people of Northern Ireland. Foreign Minister Martin and his government played a vital role in helping the parties come together to take this step. I know for a fact that he was there for long days and sleepless nights during the Hillsborough negotiations because I spoke to him during the two-to-three-hour a.m. period during one of those nights.

And I know that he and the Taoiseach and not only the government but the people of Ireland will continue to support the leaders of Northern Ireland as they shoulder these new responsibilities. So I thank you, Minister, for your leadership and persistence, and we will be discussing the way forward, as we just have in our meeting, during today and tomorrow, as well as a range of other issues of common concern.

I am particularly looking forward to the upcoming Millennium Development Goals summit in September around the time of the United Nations General Assembly. The United States and Ireland have agreed to co-host a sidelines event highlighting global hunger, food security, and nutrition. I want to commend Ireland for its commitment to devoting 20 percent of its assistance budget to meet the urgent challenge of global hunger. This is a priority for both of our governments, but it's a historical passion and cause for Ireland.

Ireland is already helping to increase food security in Malawi, Ethiopia, Tanzania, and other places. They are targeting maternal and infant malnutrition. Ireland's great famine looms large in the history of both of our countries, and we understand what a destabilizing and destructive force hunger still is in too many places around our globe. And I appreciate, particularly during these very difficult economic times, the commitment and generosity of the Irish people.

On this and so many other fronts, Ireland is a valued partner. Ireland was among the first nations to accept and resettle detainees from Guantanamo Bay, which was an important step and vote of confidence in President Obama's policy to close Guantanamo. We continue to honor the service of Irish troops in Afghanistan and the very considerable role that Ireland has played in helping move our policy there forward. We stand side-by-side against extremists who threaten peace-loving people everywhere.

So again, Minister Martin, thank you for all that you personally are doing, thank you for your friendship, and thank you for representing the close relationship between our two countries.

Foreign Minister Martin. Well, Secretary Clinton, it's a great privilege and pleasure for me to meet with you again this St. Patrick's week and to say how much we appreciate the time that you have made available for us to discuss a whole range of issues. And 12 months ago, I think we met here and the key issue on that occasion was prospects for the completion of devolution of policing and justice in Northern Ireland. And we spent some time discussing the North at that meeting.

I want to thank you for the constant personal engagement of yourself and your Administration to that issue. I think you have injected leadership and momentum to the process, and particularly during critical times. And getting that call at 3:00 a.m. in the morning was a very welcome one, may I say. And—but nonetheless, I think the—as I said earlier, it is important that American dimension has been consistent, it has added value to the peace process in Northern Ireland. And in the context of the Hillsborough Agreement, it added significant value to facilitate a resolution of the issues between the parties in Northern Ireland.

So we thank you very much for that, to President Obama and his predecessors as well, for their contribution to peace in Ireland. We also work well, and as I said during our meeting, we appreciated the appointment of Declan Kelly, your economic envoy to Northern Ireland, and the work he has engaged in with the many private sector interests and business interests on the island of Ireland, and particularly Northern Ireland, with a view to advancing the economic dimension.

As I said during the meeting, reconciliation between communities remains a key priority of ours, between the communities in Northern Ireland. And in particular, I think it's fair to say we still have some way to go to make sure that we can bring the benefits of peace to hard-to-reach communities. I'm talking about areas where the health indices are not what they should be, where school completion rates may not be what they should be.

And I think we've discussed the prospect of the International Fund for Ireland being remanded, if you like, with a view to new terms of reference and new focus on that issue, so that on the ground in communities, that we can ensure the dividend of peace reaches them and that we can take efforts to try and support economic opportunity for young people in such communities. And so that's a key issue for us going forward.

The Secretary said, and I also spoke, of course, about the issue of comprehensive immigration reform and the operation of the working holiday visa agreement, which is a very important bilateral agreement in terms of maintaining engagement and linkage between young people in the U.S. and in Ireland, and I think we've both agreed to work on that particular agreement with a view to enhancing opportunities, again, for young people from the U.S. to go to Ireland and young students in Ireland to come to the U.S.

We're very pleased to be co-hosting that meeting in New York next September on hunger and nutrition, and we again appreciate the opportunity to do that with you. And I know our officials who work on that in the coming weeks to put flesh on that and to ensure a substantive meeting that can add value to the countries that we are assisting, particularly in terms of food, crop production, and enhancing the lot of small landholders in Africa who do need our assistance and indeed our help.

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

President Obama. Good morning, everybody. First of all, I just want to congratulate this sound person right here for having the green earmuffs. Now, I haven't seen that before. Happy St. Patrick's Day, everybody.

Before I talk a little bit about the strong and enduring bond between the American and Irish people, I just want to thank Congress for passing this morning the HIRE Act. It is the first of what I hope will be a series of jobs packages that help to continue to put people back to work all across America.

This bill will provide tax cuts to small businesses that are willing to begin hiring right now, putting people back to work. It's also going to provide significant tax breaks to businesses for investing in their business, and so, hopefully, at a time when we're starting to see an upswing in the economic growth, that will help sustain it. And the bill also will continue to improve our ability to finance infrastructure projects all across the country.

I also want to say to the Republicans who voted for this bill that I appreciate their willingness to work with Democrats in a bipartisan fashion to get America moving again. And as I said, I hope that on a series of future steps that we take to help small businesses get financing, to help improve our infrastructure around the country, to put people back to work, that we're going to see more progress on that front.

I want to thank the Taoiseach for coming here today. Last year we had the opportunity to get to know each other and had a wonderful time during St. Patrick's Day. Thirty-six million Americans claim Irish ancestry—I'm sure more do on St. Patrick's Day. And it's a testament I think to how close our two countries are that America has been shaped culturally, politically, economically by the incredible contributions of Irish Americans. Those bonds endure. And in our meeting we reaffirmed how important it is for us to continue a strong partnership across a whole host of issues.

I thanked the Taoiseach for the assistance that they've provided on critical international issues. We use the facilities in Ireland for transit for our military troops to Afghanistan. The Irish police are providing training in Afghanistan. As the Taoiseach indicated, the Irish government punches above its weight on a whole host of critical issues. We're going to be working together to enhance food security around the world. Even in these difficult times it's important for us to make sure that we're tackling big issues like world hunger.

I congratulated the Taoiseach and his government for the extraordinary work that they engaged in, working with Gordon Brown and the British government, as well as Secretary Hillary Clinton, in reaffirming the progress that's been made in Northern Ireland and to get a ratification of continued devolution. It's a sign of his leadership, and we want to be as supportive as possible in advancing the Northern Ireland peace process.

We also discussed the economy. And on both sides of the Atlantic we are seeing stabilization of the economy, but obviously we want more than just stabilization. There are a lot of people out there that are still hurting, still out of work. And so we will continue to coordinate in international fora as well as bilaterally to see how we can spur investment and private sector growth on both sides of the Atlantic.

So I just wanted to say how grateful we are for the friendship and the partnership between the United States government and the Irish government. We wish you and everybody who is here a happy St. Patrick's Day, and are looking forward to the reception that we'll have in the White House later this evening.

Taoiseach Cowen. Thank you very much, Mr. President. And we are—I and my delegation—delighted to be able to join you here at the White House this morning on this wonderful St. Patrick's Day morning. And I think the sun shining outside and the light coming in I think typifies the excellent relationship that Ireland enjoys with the United States not only now, but as you say, over many generations. And that contribution to America by Ireland is a continuing one, one that we have to find and give modern expression to all the time.

And certainly the level of cooperation and common cause we enjoy together in terms of the issues of today in the economy and how we can ensure that our economies recover as quickly as possible is something that's very important to both our countries. And certainly in Ireland's context the resurgent U.S. economy will be a strong indicator of our return to prosperity. And we very much commend the very decisive steps that you have taken in terms of the economic issues and the banking issues, which have been so successful.

I think we are seeking to replicate ourselves in our own context as a recapitalization of our banking system and making sure that we have a banking system fit for purpose that will assist recovery and grow jobs again in the future, and provide investment and credit, working credit for businesses that are hard pressed in the very difficult trading environment.

In that context I've been delighted to head a delegation here to the United States and having visited Chicago, the West Coast, Silicon Valley and now Washington, D.C. over the last couple of days; 70 small- and medium-sized enterprises have been over with us, doing trade with American companies. I'm glad to say that the two-way relationship in terms of investment is continuing. Over 34 billion euros have been invested by Irish companies in the United States, employing 85,000 people directly.

And that, if you like, mirrors the very significant U.S. investment that's taking place in Ireland, employing directly of the order of 90,000 people. So that important two-way mutual benefit to this trade is very, very important, one I know that you're equally cognizant about in terms of finding jobs for your people as we seek to provide jobs for ours.

On Northern Ireland, we are deeply grateful for the continuing and deep commitment shown by the Obama administration, by the President, himself, and by Secretary of State Clinton in recent months. We've been very grateful for that continuing interest which has influenced an outcome that has been so positive. As I said to the President, for a place that has been known for its disagreements, a 98-17 vote was a very good vote to get. I'm sure he's looking forward to a good outcome in what he's doing during the course of this week.

We decided to come on a quiet week—we knew there wasn't much going on. But in that context, it reinforces the fact that we are so, so grateful that the President gives so much of his time—both himself as President, his administration, and, indeed, the people on the Hill from both parties are very welcoming of us. And we deeply appreciate that, as both a recognition of the contribution of Ireland thus far to America, but also the continuing important relationship we enjoy.

So on all these fronts, again, it's a great pleasure to meet with the leader of the free world. We are deeply grateful for his sense of mission not only in terms of how America is progressing, but America's position in the world. And we will always be supportive of the very progressive stands and positions that President Obama has taken—not only in terms of the economic issues, but on development issues. We will have a co-chairing by Secretary Clinton and Micheä Martin, our foreign minister, at the U.N. Conference on Hunger and Food Security. And these are another indication of the values we share and our ability to cooperate and provide leadership positions is one that we've very grateful and privileged to enjoy with you.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov delivered these remarks in Moscow, Russia

Foreign Minister Lavrov. (In Russian.)

Secretary Clinton. Thank you very much, Sergey. Thank you for hosting me and my delegation today in Moscow and thanks to the Russian Government for hosting the Quartet meeting that we will be attending.

Since our first meeting in Geneva, a little more than a year ago, Minister Lavrov and I, along with our respective governments under the leadership of both President Medvedev and President Obama, have worked toward a new beginning in the relationship between the United States and Russia. We believe that this reset of the relationship has led to much greater cooperation, coordination, and a constructive ongoing consultation on numerous issues that are important to our bilateral relationship and to the global issues that we both are facing.

I think it's critical that Minister Lavrov is hosting the Middle East Quartet. When we begin our meetings with Quartet members this evening, we'll have the chance to explore in depth the way forward in the Middle East, but these talks are yet another reminder that the United States and Russia, together, face global challenges, and that there are many people not only in Russia and the United States, but, literally, throughout the world who depend upon the ability of the U.S. and Russia to work together.

We discussed the upcoming nuclear security summit. Fifty heads of state, including President Medvedev, will be in Washington. And it especially is important for the United States and Russia, who bear the responsibility, to continue the way forward on nonproliferation and to work as partners in the global effort to secure fissile materials and counter the threat of nuclear terrorism. So this is another initiative that both President Obama, who suggested it, and President Medvedev, who embraced it, can see the cooperation between us. We are making substantial progress on the new START treaty; that's the word from our negotiators in Geneva. And the results from the latest negotiating rounds lead us to believe we will be reaching a final agreement soon.

We discussed at length Iran's nuclear program, which remains an issue of grave concern for the international community. We are still committed, as we have been, to a diplomatic solution, but there must be a solution. Iran is not living up to its international obligations and, therefore, we're working together with our other partners in the P-5+1 to bring together a very clear international consensus in the Security Council that gives Iran the message it needs to hear that its behavior does have consequences and that its pursuit of nuclear weapons poses a direct threat both to regional and global security.

I thanked Sergey for the cooperation between the United States and Russia with respect to Afghanistan. The transit agreement that our two presidents announced has resulted in troops and material now moving across Russia in support of coalition operations in Afghanistan. As of this week, 111 flights have ferried more than 15,000 soldiers. And we have also increased our cooperation and launched a joint exercise to share financial intelligence related to the flow of narcotics into Russia, an issue that is very important to the Russian people, and that we have pledged to work with the Russian Government to address.

We are also looking for ways to increase our cooperation on disaster response. The devastating earthquake in Haiti was a clear indication of why we need to be working more closely together. Russian emergency relief teams were among the very first on the ground in Haiti after that disaster. This is a particular concern of Minister Lavrov's, and I believe it's another area where we should deepen and broaden our working together.

The Bilateral Commission that our two presidents established is working well, and we're pleased by the results of the efforts of the working groups. This goes far beyond traditional foreign issues. We are exploring new opportunities for collaboration in the fields of energy efficiency and nanotechnology. A United States delegation made up of executives from the information technology companies recently visited Russia to explore joint private sector-led initiatives in education, e-government, and other fields. We're increasing partnerships between Russian and American universities. And there are growing interactions between American and Russian people, including an upcoming sports exchange for young people using basketball as the means of communications.

Now, there are differences in our relationship. We know that. We've raised them and we have had very frank conversations about them. But they are raised within the context of an overall approach that looks for ways to narrow the areas of difference and disagreement, that looks to enhance the cooperation and partnership between our two countries that we are building.

So let me conclude by saying that we have made real strides in the relationship over the past year, but we still have a lot to do. And many of the challenges facing the world today can only be addressed through greater cooperation between Russia and the United States. That's the commitment of our two presidents. That's the commitment that Sergey and I have made over and over again. And we look forward to continuing to work together in the months ahead.

Q. (In Russian.)

Secretary Clinton. Well, we have a saying in the United States—“ Don't count your chickens before they hatch.” And that means that we are beginning our discussions about where and when our two presidents will sign the START agreement. But we don't want to get ahead of ourselves. First, our negotiators have to sign on the dotted line, so to speak, that they have completed the negotiations. And we're looking forward to getting that word soon and then we will move on to setting a time and a place for this very important event.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov delivered these remarks in Moscow, Russia

Foreign Minister Lavrov. I would like to reaffirm that the recent meeting between Her Excellency Secretary of State of the United States Madam Hillary Clinton and the Russian President Dmitry Medvedev reaffirmed the fact that our relations are now on the rise. They've obtained new dynamics (inaudible) and reaching quality to a new level.

So the President highlighted that last year we've managed to perform a true reset in our relationship to turn down, to turn back the—reverse the degrading of our relations that was in place before the Obama Administration came to power and increase the intensity on our content at all levels of executive power.

Our relations today are conducted in accordance with the principles of honesty, openness and full compliance with all agreements arranged. The President highlighted specifically that he is very satisfied with how Geneva negotiators comply with tasks that are formulated for them by Presidents Obama and Medvedev accordingly and that he hopes that in short period of time they will be able to complete negotiations of the new START Treaty.

He also highlighted that they would reach specific agreements that would allow to step up our cooperation that would modernize Russian economy, would put it in on more nominative tract and that will be done using specific instruments.

As to international agendas, special attention was given to the Iranian nuclear program and Afghanistan sentiment. We share understanding that along those two problems, just like in many other cases, we need come up with coordinated, collective approaches and then implement them efficiently. And in this context, Russian president reaffirmed Russia's readiness and desire to cooperate with the U.S. and other partners along this and other tracts.

So in conclusion, let me say a few words about my personal impressions from this meeting. I believe that the reset was a true success and we needn't stop. At this point we need to continue advancing. We need to avoid any interruptions in this cooperation. And I believe that this visit of Madam Secretary of State can be considered as fueling in the air.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you. Let me echo Minister Lavrov's comments. As President Medvedev said at the very beginning of our meeting, the reset has been a success. And now we have to build on the relationships that we have developed, starting between our two presidents, and going throughout our governments.

The bilateral commission that Sergey and I direct under the leadership of our Presidents is making a lot of progress. Let me give you just one example. Just recently there was a delegation from the United States consisting of high technology companies that came to Russia, visited with many businesses and academic institutions and innovators looking for ways to deepen the relationship between our high-tech businesses and academic institutions.

Later this spring there will be a exchange between young people as part of our sports program where young Russians will come to the United States for the purpose of playing basketball. So our relationship is not just between our governments, it is increasingly between the American and Russian people.

As Sergey said, we are very encouraged by progress on a new START agreement. Our negotiating teams have reported that they have resolved all of the major issues and there are some technical issues that remain, but we are on the brink of seeing a new agreement between the United States and Russia.

We also discussed a range of other issues from Iran to Afghanistan and so much more as our part of our ongoing consultation. And we look forward to welcoming President Medvedev back to Washington for the Nuclear Security Summit in a few weeks.

Again, I thank Minister Lavrov for his hospitality and the very cooperative working relationship that we enjoy.

Q. Russian TV channel NTV. So my question goes to both ministers. You've mentioned that in terms of new START agreement negotiations only some technicalities remain to be agreed. So my question is as follows: Does the link between the reduction of strategic offense arms and the deployment of U.S. ABM system facilities in Europe exist and whether—as far as I understand, you have not identified the timeframes for signing this new START Treaty. But do you think it might happen? Have you at least come up with a location? Will it happen in Washington or some rumors ago that it might be in Kiev, or are you for Prague?

And Sergey—Minister Lavrov, do you really think—do you really expect to hear—answer to that question immediately?

Foreign Minister Lavrov. So answering your first question I can say last April, when the first meeting of the two presidents took place, they issued a statement in which they stated that there is a link between strategic offensive and defensive weapons and the current teams of negotiations when they—and they've instructed their governments to take this relationship into account. And current teams of negotiators that work in Geneva at the moment act in accordance with the tasks that were formulated by the president—in particular in accordance with the tasks formulated by the president. I want to be interpreted exactly—literally, I would say.

Secretary Clinton. Let me say that we are very pleased by progress that has been made. And we hope and expect that there will be a signing in the near future. But as Sergey said, we are not going to preempt any announcement of place or time on this occasion.

Because I'm not bilingual, you can say anything and I'll agree.

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin delivered these remarks in Moscow, Russia

Prime Minister Putin. Your Excellency, it's a great pleasure to see you once again and meet you this time in your new capacity. Certainly, our relationship with the United States is especially important to us. And from the very outset, I would like to say that unfortunately, due to the global economic crisis last year, our (inaudible) from $36 billion to a little bit more than 60 billion. That is a great call. So the possibilities are very good.

Some problems now with trade relations still persist. Five Russian companies are still under the sanctions that were initiated by your agency. We still see the Jackson-Vanik amendment. It still reports. And actually, we are ready to work more closely with members of your Congress in order to inform them and update on the real situation in Russia in our economy and in our bilateral trade relations.

Another systemic issue is Russia's accession to the WTO. We've been negotiating this issue for 17 years now. There's only three issues left and we circulate among those three problems. But actually, these problems are not that fundamentally important either for the American economy or to the Russian economy. And I know that you have been in a very active dialogue today with President Medvedev and with your counterpart, Minister Lavrov.

Indeed, the United States is a key partner to us in our foreign policy. And despite some differences on particular issues, we've been able to reach agreement on most important ones. We've been working quite actively and usefully to fight terrorism, to prevent the (inaudible) of weapons of mass destruction, and to settle the most burning international conflicts. And we certainly stand ready to continue our cooperation with the United States on all of those issues.

Unfortunately, the work within the Quartet of international mediators on the Middle East settlement is taking place against the backdrop of exchange of attacks between the Palestinians and the Israelis. Well, certainly, the situation when talks within the Quartet take place, and at the same time, these attacks are taking place, this situation is not acceptable. But I'm convinced that together with Minister Lavrov, you are going to closely follow up on this issue and you will seek additional leverage that will contribute to the solution of this problem.

At any rate, we're always glad to see you and we are always ready to receive you in Moscow. Welcome.

Secretary Clinton. Well, Prime Minister, let me thank you for this opportunity to meet with you today. We had an excellent meeting with Minister Lavrov yesterday, more than two hours, and comprehensively discussed many of the issues that we must work together on to solve. I appreciate your raising the economic relationship because we are committed to broadening and deepening ties between our two economies, our business leaders, and investors.

Earlier when I met with President Medvedev, we talked about the high technology sector and the possibility for greater cooperation between U.S. firms and academic institutions and those in the United States. I know that we have, as every country do in their trade areas, some problems to overcome. But I think if we continue to work closely together, we can move beyond the problems to greater opportunities for our people.

And we are very committed to Russia joining the WTO and have spoken with the president and cabinet members about how we can help to facilitate that happening. And we are very pleased that as we meet here in Moscow, our negotiators in Geneva are finishing the START agreement. And then today, Minister Lavrov hosted the Quartet, which put out a very strong statement about the necessity for Israel and the Palestinians to begin negotiations again.

And as you say, Prime Minister, we have a lot of problems in that area. But I thank you and your government for the constant focus on trying to move the parties to a resolution of this conflict.

Prime Minister Putin. As far as our economic cooperation is concerned, certainly our major companies are very much interested in such a cooperation and they are expecting us to support them—such companies as General Electric, Boeing, and our oil companies have large experience working in this field and they continue this cooperation.

And certainly, they need our support both from the U.S. Government and from the Russian Government. And at the same time, such important Russian companies as Norilsk Nickel, which is the world's largest nickel producer, Severstal and other companies, they are also interested and need such support. They need some company to their activities.

And a message should be sent that they are welcome both in the economy of the United States and in Russia. The United States holds eighth place in terms of (inaudible) Russia investments. This is not that much. And I hope that today, we'll have a chance to discuss what else we can do to increase this figure.

Secretary Clinton. We would very much like to get into specifics about how to (inaudible) barriers and open opportunities. There was a recent delegation we sent from the State Department of hightechnology companies that (inaudible).

Secretary Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Markos Kyprianou delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

Secretary Clinton. Well, we are delighted to welcome the foreign minister to Washington again, and to have this opportunity to discuss matters of great concern to us bilaterally as well as to receive an update about the progress in the discussions going on concerning Cyprus. Certainly, there's a great deal of support for the UNsponsored mediation, and we're hopeful that we can see progress. And we're delighted you're here.

Foreign Minister Kyprianou. Thank you very much. I believe that the Secretary of State is doing a great job in the very difficult role she has with all these international problems. So it's always a pleasure and privilege to be here and meeting with you. I'm looking forward to our discussions today on—the Cyprus issue, of course, is at the top of the agenda—but also on how we can take even further the very excellent bilateral relations. Cyprus is small by comparison to the United States, it's small compared to most states. But I believe that we can offer a lot to the U.S. and to our relationship.

Secretary Clinton. Great. Thank you again.

Foreign Minister Kyprianou. Thank you.

Secretary Clinton. Welcome.

Foreign Minister Kyprianou. Thank you very much.

Secretary Clinton. Thank you all very much.

President Barack Obama delivered this statement in Washington, DC

President Obama. I send my deepest condolences to the people of Russia after the terrible loss of life and injuries resulting from the bombings on the Moscow Metro. The American people stand united with the people of Russia in opposition to violent extremism and heinous terrorist attacks that demonstrate such disregard for human life, and we condemn these outrageous acts. My thoughts and prayers go out to those who lost loved ones, and I wish all who sustained injuries a successful recovery.

President Barack Obama and President Nicolas Sarkozy delivered these remarks in Washington, DC

President Obama. Please, everybody have a seat. Good afternoon. Bienvenue. I am delighted to welcome my dear friend, President Sarkozy, to the White House. And I also want to welcome to the United States the First Lady of France, and Michelle and I are very much looking forward to hosting our guests at dinner this evening.

This visit is an opportunity to return the hospitality that the President and the French people have shown to me during my visits to France. And that includes our family's wonderful visit to Paris last summer. Michelle and I will never forget the opportunity to introduce our daughters for the first time to the City of Lights. And I don't think that Sasha will ever forget celebrating her 8th birthday at the Élysée Palace with the President of France. That's a pretty fancy way for an 8-yearold to spend their birthday.

Today, President Sarkozy and I have reaffirmed the enduring ties between our countries. France is our oldest ally, and one of our closest. We are two great republics—bound by common ideals—that have stood together for more than two centuries, from Yorktown to Normandy to Afghanistan.

Under President Sarkozy's leadership, France has further secured its rightful place as a leader in Europe and around the world, recognizing that meeting global challenges requires global partnerships. France took the historic step of returning to NATO's military command, and we are working to revitalize our transatlantic bonds, including a strong, capable European Union, which the United States firmly supports—because a close transatlantic partnership is critical to progress, whether it's applying our combined strength to promote development and confront violent extremism in Africa, or reconstruction in

Haiti, or advancing peace from the Caucasus to the Middle East.

Mr. President, on behalf of the American people, I also want to thank you for your personal efforts to strengthen the partnership between our countries. We first met four years ago. I was a senator then; Nicolas was still running for President at the time, and I immediately came to admire your legendary energy—and your enthusiasm for what our countries can achieve together. That was the spirit of your eloquent speech to Congress three years ago, which deeply moved many Americans.

Over the past year, the President and I have worked closely on numerous occasions. We respect one another and understand one another, and we share a belief that through bold yet pragmatic action, our generation can bend the arc of history toward justice and towards progress. And this shared commitment to solving problems allowed us to advance our common interests today.

We agreed to continue working aggressively to sustain the global economic recovery and create jobs for our people. And this includes, as we agreed with our G20 partners at Pittsburgh, to replacing the old cycle of bubble and bust with growth that is balanced and sustained. And this requires effective coordination by all nations. To that end, I updated the President on our efforts to pass financial reform, and I look forward to the Senate taking action on this landmark legislation so we never repeat the mistakes that led to this crisis.

We must provide sufficient oversight so that reckless speculation or reckless risktaking by a few big players in the financial markets will never again threaten the global economy or burden taxpayers. We must assure that consumers of financial products have the information and safeguards that they need, so their life savings are not placed in needless jeopardy. And that's why I press for the passage of these reforms through Congress when they return, and I will continue to work with President Sarkozy and other world leaders to coordinate our efforts, because we want to make sure that whatever steps we're taking, they are occurring on both sides of the Atlantic.

We agreed that sustained and balanced growth includes rejecting protectionism.

France is one of our largest trading partners. And we need to expand global commerce, not constrain it. With that regard, we think it's important that Doha trade negotiations move forward this year, and we need all interested parties to push for a more ambitious and balanced agreement that opens global markets. And we look forward to France's presidency of both the G8 and G20 next year. So Nicolas is going to be very busy.

To address climate change, we agreed that all nations aligned with the Copenhagen accord must meet their responsibilities. And I would note that President Sarkozy's leadership has resulted in significant new resources to address deforestation around the world. Upcoming meetings at the United Nations and the Major Economies Forum will be an opportunity for nations to follow up their Copenhagen commitments with specific and concrete actions that reduce emissions.

We reaffirmed our commitment to confront the greatest threat to global security—the spread of nuclear weapons. And I updated President Sarkozy on our new START treaty with Russia. I look forward to welcoming President Sarkozy back to Washington in two weeks for our summit on securing vulnerable nuclear material so that they never fall into the hands of terrorists.

We discussed our shared determination to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. On this the United States and France are united, are inseparable. With our P5-plus-1 partners, we offer Iran good faith proposals to resolve this matter through diplomacy. But Iran thus far has rejected those offers. Today, the international community is more united than ever on the need for Iran to uphold its obligations. And that's why we're pursuing strong sanctions through the U.N. Security Council.

And finally we discussed our efforts to advance security and peace around the world, including in the Middle East, where we agree that all sides need to act now to create the atmosphere that gives the proximity talks the best chance to succeed.

I shared my impressions from my discussions with President Karzai on the urgent need for good government and development in Afghanistan. As I told our troops, we salute our coalition partners, and that includes France, which is one of the largest contributors to the NATO mission, and which has given its most precious resource, the lives of its young men and women, to a mission that is vital to the security of both our countries' and the world's security.

So I thank President Sarkozy for his visit and for the progress that our countries have made today, in large part because of his extraordinary leadership. We are global partners facing global challenges together, and I think that Nicolas will agree that when it comes to America's oldest ally, we've never been closer.

So I'll simply close with words that one American leader expressed to another French partner more than 200 years ago, because Washington's words to Rochambeau reflect the bonds between our countries today: We are “fellow laborers in the cause of liberty and we have lived together as brothers should do—in harmonious friendship.”

In that spirit, I welcome President Nicolas Sarkozy.

President Sarkozy. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you for your invitation. I think that we can say—I stand to be corrected by Bernard Kouchner and Christine Lagarde—but I think we can say that rarely in the history of our two countries has the community of views been so identical between the United States of America and France.

To wit, one example, which is that France would not be stepping next year into the presidency of the G20 had the United States of America not supported France for this presidency. Now, there are the words, there are the statements, and then there are the facts, the acts, and that is a fact.

Now, I will not repeat what President Obama so eloquently said. On Afghanistan, we support President Obama's strategy. We cannot afford to lose—not for us, not for ourselves, but for Afghanistan and for the people of Afghanistan, who are entitled to live in freedom. Of course the road is arduous. Of course nothing can be anticipated. And of course we are so sorrowful for the loss of young lives. But we have to have the courage to go to the end of our strategy and explain that there is no alternative strategy. Defeat would be too high a price for the security of Americans, the French, and Europeans. By fighting in Afghanistan, what we are fighting for is world security, quite simply.

Now, on Iran, I am very satisfied with what President Obama has said. The time has come to take decisions. Iran cannot continue its mad race. Now, we don't want to punish Iran, which deserves better than what it has by way of leadership today, and therefore fully support in order to get stronger, tougher sanctions at the Security Council and take the necessary decisions is what you have. I have said to President Obama that with Angela Merkel and Gordon Brown we will make all necessary efforts to ensure that Europe as a whole engages in the sanction regime.

On the Middle East, it's excellent news to hear that the United States are thus engaged. Of course peace in the Middle East is the—is something which concerns primarily the Israelis and the Palestinians. However, the absence of peace in the Middle East is a problem for all of us, because what it does is keep feeding terrorism all over the world. And I wish to express my solidarity vis-à-vis President Obama in condemning the settlement process. Everybody knows how engaged and committed I am vis-ä-vis Israel's security, but the settlement process achieves nothing and contributes in no way to Israel's safety and security. There comes a time when you have to take initiatives in favor of peace.

Now, on financial regulation, again, it's great news for the world to hear that the United States is availing itself of rules, adopting rules so that we not go back to what we have already experienced. And during the French presidency of the G20, Tim Geithner, Christine Lagarde are going to be working hand-in-glove in order to go even further in regulating world capitalism, and in particular, raising the issue of a new world international monetary order.

On all these subjects there's much convergence of views. And of course I want to say to President Obama how glad we were for him and for the USA to hear of the successful passing of the health care reform.

Q. I'm sorry, sir, I just wanted to ask President Sarkozy, you said yesterday in New York that the world needs an open America, an America that listens. I'm wondering if you can elaborate; specifically if you think President Obama is open to the world and is listening to you.

President Obama. Well, let me answer the second question, even though that was to Nicolas. I listen to Nicolas all the time. I can't stop listening to him.

On Iran, we came in with a very clear approach and a very clear strategy, and it was an open book to the world. We said we would engage Iran and give them an opportunity to take the right path, a path that would lead to prosperity and opportunity for their people and a peaceful region, and one in which they would allow themselves to become a full-fledged member of the community of nations. The alternative path was further isolation and further consequences.

We mobilized the international community around this approach, including partners like Russia that in the past might have been more hesitant to take a firmer stance on Iran's nuclear program. What we said, though, was that there was going to be a time limit to it and that if we had not seen progress by the end of the year, it was time for us to move forward on that sanctions track.

My hope is that we are going to get this done this spring. So I'm not interested in waiting months for a sanctions regime to be in place; I'm interested in seeing that regime in place in weeks. And we are working diligently with our international partners, emphasizing to them that, as Nicolas said, this is not simply an issue of trying to isolate Iran; it has enormous implications for the safety and the security of the entire region. We don't want to see a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.

A conflict in the Middle East as a consequence of Iran's actions could have a huge destabilizing effect in terms of the world economy at a time when it's just coming out of a very deep recession.

The long-term consequences of a nuclear-armed Iran are unacceptable. And so Nicolas, myself and others agree that we have engaged; the door remains open if the Iranians choose to walk through it. But they understand very clearly what the terms of a diplomatic solution would be. And in the interim we are going to move forcefully on a U.N. sanctions regime.

Now, do we have unanimity in the international community? Not yet. And that's something that we have to work on. We think that we are in a much stronger position to get robust sanctions now than we were a year ago prior to us initiating our strategy.

But it's still difficult, partly because, let's be honest, Iran is a oil producer and there are a lot of countries around the world that, regardless of Iran's offenses, are thinking that their commercial interests are more important to them than these long-term geopolitical interests. And so we have to continue to apply pressure not just on Iran but we have to make sure that we are communicating very clearly that this is very important to the United States.

Q. You can get unanimity within weeks?

President Obama. We think that we can get sanctions within weeks.

President Sarkozy. Well, I've read many comments—and I must say I've been quite amused—on the relations between European leaders and the President of the United States. I say I'm amused because I've thought to myself, well, when we speak to one another, people must be listening to our phone calls because I have seen reports on conversations and discussions which in no way resemble anything that has ever taken place between Barack Obama and myself.

Now, why is it easy for us to work? And I speak on behalf of Chancellor Merkel, Gordon Brown, and other leaders. Well, because President Obama, when he says something, keeps his word. His word is his bond. And that is so important. There's a joke among us—we don't like surprises. Well, from my point of view, there's no surprises. When he can, he delivers. When he can't, he says so. So there are no surprises. And we try to be likewise.

Furthermore, secondly, on all topics—and there have been some pretty tough topics. I mean, for instance, bonus—taxes on bonuses, regulation, financial regulations—pretty heavy going stuff—Copenhagen. I mean, I happen to think that President Obama is a step ahead of public opinion in the United States on this. But we're constantly talking about it. It's even President Obama who wanted us to have a call conference, a videoconference virtually every month with Angela Merkel and Gordon Brown.

Now, this doesn't really mean that we absolutely agree neck and neck on everything, but we talk amongst ourselves. And this is a novelty from the point of view of Europe whenever we look at the United States that everything is put on the table, anything can be discussed, everything can be discussed.

What matters, you see, is not whether we agree once systematically before we've even started discussing—that's suspicious—it's to say whatever divergence of views we have, we can talk about it among ourselves. And I say things very frankly to you, and this is what all we European leaders believe and think.

I've also heard it said that Europe was less interested in the United States. Well, for heaven's sake, how many times do we have to come over to show that we are interested? What would it mean if we were interested?

So, very frankly and very honestly on this, not only is it not an issue, not a problem, but it's great to be able to work under such conditions. I would say that what I have to say about President Obama is the same as what Bernard Kouchner could say about Hillary Clinton, or Christine Lagarde about Tim Geithner. We're constantly having a dialogue.

I could even take you—give you an example of something on which we don't necessarily agree, such as Syria—or we didn't agree. France took an initiative, as you know. Well, I'll say this to you: At no point, no point, has President Obama turned his back on what we were doing. Constantly he's watching, he's listening. We're constantly exchanging information on the subject. Even when there are more complex topics, including in our relations with the Russians, before even we inform our Russian—the Russians or our partners, I pick up the phone, I call President Obama, and he knows exactly what we're going to do and why we're going to do it. You follow me on that?

So, there may be disagreements, but never for the wrong reasons. And as we are very transparent on both sides, there's confidence, there's trust. And I really think I can say that. There's a lot of trust.

Now, trust always helps one overcome perhaps diverging interests. It may be that the United States of America has slightly different interests of those of France, but the bedrock of trust between us is something that he also has with all European leaders. And I don't say this to please you. I said this is true. And I took two examples of two topics that could, in other tide, other times, have led to head-on collision, and which in this case, on the contrary, are looked at on both sides of the Atlantic as a situation where we are complementary.

Perhaps he said, well, maybe on Syria, France is on the right track, and maybe one day we'll have the opportunity to do likewise, and that's exactly the way we work.

Go ahead, I'm not the one with the mic.

Q. Since you've just talked about the United—the relations between Europe and United States, didn't you get a bad surprise, a nasty surprise, on the Pentagon's decision on the tanker planes, which reversed the decision which had originally been taken in favor of Airbus? Did you raise this subject with President Obama? And if so, did you try and put together a new approach so as to ensure that the competition would be fairer, new version of this contract with the Pentagon, and don't you think that it would be probably fair to share this contract with the Europeans, since they are now full members of NATO and that they share the price of the war on the ground?

President Sarkozy. If I said I hadn't raised it, it would mean that what I've just told you would be meaningless and senseless. Of course we've talked about it—and President Obama will give you his answer. But I said to him, I trust you. And I do trust him. If you say to me that the request for proposals, the call for tenders will be free, fair and transparent, then we say EADS will bid and we trust you.

President Obama. What I said to President Sarkozy is, is that the process will be free and fair, and that the trust is justified.

Now, it's important for my European friends to understand that, at least here, the Secretary of Defense makes procurement decisions. The President does not meddle in these decisions. And that's a longstanding policy. So I maintain an arm's length approach, but I have assurances from Secretary of Defense Gates that, in fact, the re-bidding process is going to be completely transparent, completely open, and a fair competition. That's in our interests. It's in the interest of American taxpayers, and it's also in the interest of our young men and women who rely on this equipment in order to protect this nation.

And it's important to note, I think, for those of you who don't know Secretary Gates, this is somebody who has actually taken on the military and weapons systems establishment and initiated some very significant procurement reforms that nobody ever thought would happen here in Washington. So he's somebody who's willing to call it like it is and make difficult decisions, and he will do so in this situation as well.

Thank you very much, everybody.