Industry Advisory Panel of the Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations Meeting

Washington, DC

November 9, 2009

The Industry Advisory Panel of the Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations will meet Thursday, December 1, 2009 from 9:30 a.m. until 3:30 p.m. The meeting will be held in Room 1107 of the U.S. Department of State, located at 2201 C Street, NW (entrance on 23^rd Street) Washington, D.C.

This meeting is open to the public as seating allows. Following a discussion on design, operations, and building maintenance between the senior management of the Bureau and panel members, the Acting Director of the Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations will field questions and comments from the public.

To obtain pre-clearance for entry, members of the public planning to attend must provide, by November 15, 2009, their name, professional affiliation, date of birth, citizenship, and a valid government-issued ID number (i.e., U.S. government ID, U.S. military ID, passport, or drivers license) by emailing:  FousheeCT@state.gov. Requests for reasonable accommodation should be sent to the same e-mail address by November 19, 2009. Requests made after that time will be considered, but may not be able to be fulfilled. Please note that attendees must enter and exit using the 23^rd Street entrance only. Because of space restrictions, we request that companies interested in attending this meeting send only one representative.

For further information please contact Jonathan Blyth at BlythJJ@State.Gov or by phone at (703) 875-4131.

New Online Exhibit: Voices of U.S. Diplomacy and the Berlin Wall

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

November 9, 2009

The U.S. Diplomacy Center, Bureau of Public Affairs, is launching the Web exhibition Voices of U.S. Diplomacy and the Berlin Wall on its website http://diplomacy.state.gov/berlinwall.

The international diplomacy of world leaders played a significant role in the demise of the Berlin Wall, the end of communism and the immediacy of German unity – topics all receiving wide coverage on the internet. This exhibit draws upon different and less well covered aspects of diplomacy and shares experiences of U.S. diplomats serving in Germany from the time of the Berlin Wall’s construction to its demolition. The exhibit reveals their untold stories and contributions to the diplomatic process.

This behind-the-scenes narrative is told using oral histories (recorded narratives) given by the diplomats themselves. This collection of oral histories, called Frontline Diplomacy, is a unique treasure collected by the Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training (ADST). Charles Stuart Kennedy of ADST has been interviewing retired diplomats for more than two decades. Voices of U.S. Diplomacy and the Berlin Wall marks the first time these oral histories have been featured as the centerpiece of a museum exhibition.

Commemorating the twenty year anniversary of the Berlin Wall was a natural choice for the U.S. Diplomacy Center, as its demise was a peaceful resolution to a conflict fraught with tension and potential violence.

Keynote Address at the Atlantic Council Gala Dinner

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Adlon Hotel

Berlin, Germany

November 8, 2009

(Applause.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I like Henry, too.

(Laughter.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: And I am especially honored to have been introduced by him today, and to be with all of you for this extraordinary occasion.

There are so many in this room, and then so many others who have been mentioned, who deserve all of the appreciation and admiration we can bestow upon them. But I have the great and high honor today to accept this freedom award on behalf of the American people, some of whose names are already in the history books, but many of whom will never be known to history.

But because of their steadfastness, because of their conviction about freedom and the hope that it would be, once again, alive and well throughout all of Europe, and particularly in Germany, they supported the policies of successive presidents of both parties, they voted for people who believed strongly in the importance of the Transatlantic Alliance, they paid taxes year after year after year to support our defense of Europe, the NATO Alliance, and to give a tangible and very clear message, that the people of the United States wanted to see a strong and vibrant Germany and Europe.

And there is no better place for this award or this moment than right here in Berlin, a city where some of the greatest victories in the 20th century occurred, and a city that, today, embodies the strength of our democracies and what we have achieved together. So, I gratefully accept this on behalf of all of those Americans.

And I thank the Atlantic Council and Fred, thank you for your coverage of this part of the world over many years, and your leadership of this council, and Alan Spence, as well, for co-hosting this evening, the presidents of both Estonia and Latvia, who sit here today representing two nations that were considered captives.
And, on a personal note, when I was in high school, I was part of an organization that, in our own way, as high school students, tried to speak out for freedom of those who were in the Baltics and elsewhere in Central and Eastern Europe. We would often host events at the school, or at our public library of those who had escaped, to hear their stories, to remind ourselves, to remind all Americans what was at stake, and to put a personal face on what seemed to be a faceless and terrible oppression.

So, thank you. And thank you for taking this time on the eve of the occasion tomorrow to look back, to remember, to convey the emotion and commitment that so many of you who have already spoken have demonstrated clearly, in order to pass it on to that next generation and the one after that.

I am delighted to be joined by members of the United States Presidential Delegation who have come to represent the United States on this historic occasion. We have already heard from most of them: our ambassador, Phil Murphy; our former national security advisors, Dr. Brzezinski and Lt. Gen. Scowcroft; and Craig Kennedy, president of the German Marshall Fund.

And, of course, as Henry Kissinger said, we are in a federation. And we do understand the challenges and difficulties that each of us has faced, and not only are facing today, but whoever holds these positions of National Security Advisor or Secretary of State will face, new challenges. But that is part of the responsibility that we, together, have assumed.

And I want to personally express my appreciation to the Vice Chancellor and the Foreign Minister. We had our first meeting just a few days ago in Washington, where I was very pleased to host Guido. And tomorrow he will host me for a working lunch. The emotion that his remarks conveyed, the story of going to Berlin with his father, will stay with me. And I look forward to working with you on so many of the important challenges we face today.

This award comes in a year of anniversaries -- the one we celebrate tomorrow, the night 20 years ago when history broke through concrete and barbed wire and brought liberty to millions across this continent, but that's not the only milestone that should be remembered.

Sixty-five summers ago, allied troops landed in Europe with the goal of liberating Berlin. And in 1949, 60 years ago, we formed the NATO Alliance, and completed the largest humanitarian airlift in history, well over a quarter million flights, to sustain West Berlin during the Soviet blockade. And, Admiral, thank you for accepting the award on behalf of not only those who serve today, but most importantly, those who have served in years past, in a continuous chain of commitment.

The Americans and their allies who fought to liberate this city in the Second World War, the farmers and airmen who helped to feed Berlin's people and fuel its homes, and the soldiers who stood guard for generations to preserve the peace, all did so with the hope that someday Berlin might stand at the center of a free, peaceful, prosperous, reunified Germany in a free, peaceful, prosperous, unified Europe.

But there wasn't anything inevitable about it. And there is nothing that we can take for granted about that history. The circumstances that surround us today are a culmination of an effort by Europeans and Americans that spanned generations. And, yes, the end to the Berlin Wall was an iconic moment. It was an hour when the hopes and prayers and sacrifice of millions came together in an unwavering exclamation of freedom. But it did not begin with the mistake of a flustered Communist spokesman in East Berlin, or even the peaceful masses that took to the street that evening. It had been building over years.

Edward Gibbon, the great historian of the fall of Rome once observed that a "mighty state reared by the labors of successive ages could not be overturned by the misfortune of a single day." But I would add the accumulation of days, of days where people no longer could tolerate the oppression and the denial that they had to live with, who could no longer stomach what they saw in those who pretended to lead them, built and built. So, with the destruction of the Berlin Wall, we witnessed the climax of a broader saga that had been playing out in Budapest and Bucharest and Bratislava and a thousand other communities across Europe.

In Poland, that son of a carpenter, who has already been honored, was elected prime minister of a free nation. For the Polish people, it was the end of a campaign for liberty that was marked by scores of protests and years of privation. And for an electrician from Gda?sk, it was the end of a journey that began when he climbed over a wall of the Lenin Shipyards to lead a strike that became Solidarity.

In the Baltic countries of Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania, a human chain comprised of one-fourth the population joined hands across their lands, and helped break the chains that held their nations captive. Tens of thousands gathered at Heroes' Square in Budapest to witness the reburial of Imre Nagy, a hero of the 1956 revolution.

And later that summer, Hungary's Communist leaders opened the border to refugees seeking freedom and, in the morning darkness of September 11th, allowed a vast army of East German automobiles to surge across the Hungarian frontier into Austria. The small cars filled with vacationers didn't have much in common with the armored battalions of the Warsaw Pact that had menaced generations of Western military planners. But their impact on history was as dramatic as any invasion. There was little use in a wall that you could walk around.

So, when capitals across the region, refugees from the East, found sanctuary in the embassies of West Germany, and when a dying government tried to end the exodus of its people by allowing a handful of them free passage to the West in a sealed train, the sight spawned an outcry for change. East Germans took to the streets of Leipzig in peaceful protests that affirmed, "Wir sind das Volk,"or, "We are the People," which became, "We are One People," after the events of November 9th.

Then, only eight days after the destruction of the Wall, we watched students in Prague march and begin what became the Velvet Revolution that would bring Havel, a playwright, to the presidency. For a nation that had grasped for liberty in the spring of 1968, the transition to democracy couldn't come quickly enough.

There were many authors of the changes we witnessed in 1989. Some acted knowingly, like the Polish pope who resurrected a gospel of liberty. Others, like President Gorbachev, sought a break from a darker past. But in doing so, helped to break down the wall.

But again, I say these events were not inevitable. In January of 1989, East Germany's Communist leaders predicted that the Wall would still be standing in 50 or even 100 years. History could have gone another way. And, in some parts of the world, it did, and it has.

So, where do we stand now? As we commemorate that moment when history pierced concrete and concertina wire, we remember the troops who faced down war and kept the peace, the dissidents and activists who risked all they had to demand a free and better life, the millions of mothers and fathers, workers and students who never lost faith that a system built on tyranny and oppression could and would be overcome.

So, we remember every citizen of every nation who helped preserve the world with the gift that we accept today. But that gift came with strings, as gifts often do. It came with the responsibility to advance the principles that were vindicated in this city 20 years ago. When the Wall came down, we could not know what the people of Europe would build in its place. And the Atlantic community confronted a cavalcade of crises and a crisis of confidence.

I well remember, following from afar, the debates over reunification: the cost, how it could be possibly accomplished. How would one ever integrate the industries, the militaries, the mindsets of peoples who had been divided by that wall? And the Euro-Atlantic coalition struggled to find policies worthy of the sacrifices made by the people of Central and Eastern Europe, and to help them build democracies on the rubble of a ruined system.

Now, ultimately and together, we achieved successes that would have been unthinkable on this night 20 years ago. And, as we welcomed the historic nations of Central Europe into NATO, and saw them become members of the European Union, the landscape of this continent was transformed.

But our history did not end the night the Wall came down. It began anew. And this matters not only to tens of millions of Europeans, and to the United States, but to people everywhere. How do we take this gift of freedom, this alliance of values, this commitment for a better future, and put it to work to meet the challenges of freedom today?

The new nations of a united Europe are our partners, standing with us in Afghanistan, patrolling waters against pirates, working to combat poverty, helping to prevent terrorism, promoting our common values. Today our battles may be different, and our nations remain imperfect vessels of democracy. But our objectives have not changed. And our work has certainly not ended.

So, we should look to the examples of the generations who brought us successfully through the 20th century, and once again, together, chart a clear and common course to safeguard our people and our planet, defeat violent extremists, and prevent nuclear proliferation, come together to cut carbon emissions and address climate change, increase our energy security -- an issue of special importance in this region that carries ramifications for the future of Europe and the world.

To expand freedom to more people, we cannot accept that freedom does not belong to all people. We cannot allow oppression, defined and justified by religion or tribe to replace that of ideology. We have a responsibility to address conditions everywhere that undermine the potential of boys and girls and men and women that sap human dignity and threaten global progress.

European countries have been leaders in addressing the economic and social development challenges of the world. We need to continue our work on an economic recovery, and we need to continue to promote democracy and human rights beyond freedom's current frontiers, so that citizens everywhere are afforded the opportunity to pursue their dreams and live up to their own God-given potential.

When Chancellor Merkel came to Washington last week, she spoke eloquently about the walls of the last century, and the less visible but equally daunting walls we face today. These are walls between the present and the future, walls between modernity and nihilistic attitudes, walls that divide our common heart, that deny progress and opportunity to the many who yearn for both.

As one who came of age amid the barriers of oppression, Chancellor knows of what she speaks. But tomorrow, when she walks through the Brandenburg Gate, she will do so as a free daughter of Brandenburg, and the leader of an emancipated people. That moment should be a call to action, not just a commemoration of past actions. That call should spur us to continue our cooperation and to look for new ways that we can meet the challenges that freedom faces now.

We owe it to ourselves and to those who yearn for the same freedoms that are enjoyed and even taken for granted in Berlin today. And we need to form an even stronger partnership to bring down the walls of the 21st century, and to confront those who hide behind them: the suicide bombers; those who murder and maim girls whose only wish is to go to school; leaders who choose their own fortunes over the fortunes of their people.

In place of these new walls, we must renew the Transatlantic Alliance as a cornerstone of a global architecture of cooperation. When we come together to uphold the common good, there is no constellation of countries on earth that has greater strength. There is no wall we cannot topple. There is no truth we can be afraid of.

Now, as in the past, we know that the work ahead will not be quick, and it will certainly not be easy. But once again, we are called to take ownership of our future, and to affirm the principles and the sacrifice of the generations who helped us reach the milestone we commemorate. The ideals that drove Berliners to tear down that wall are no less relevant today. The freedoms championed that night are no less precious. And the rights and principles that brought us to this hour are no less deserving of our defense.

Now, some of us may not be here to celebrate the 50th anniversary. Although, if I were placing bets, I would bet on Henry.

(Laughter.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: But we must be confident that the men and women who gather on that occasion will look back on us as we look back now on them, on the generations that brought us through the Cold War, and eventually saw the blossoming of all that sacrifice during 1989.

So, let us resolve that when our actions are examined against that backdrop of history, our children and their children will be able to say that we served them well. Thank you very much.

(Applause.)

SPEAKER: As they are standing here and having their pictures taken, let me just say, Madame Secretary, thank you for that powerful and significant speech on this historic occasion. You talked about bringing down the walls of the 21st century and confronting those who stand behind them. You have carried the lessons of the past into the responsibilities of the future.

You now have standing beside you tonight's awardees, but you also have what Dr. Kissinger, the longest-serving member of the Atlantic Council Board, called "The Club," the club of national security advisors and foreign ministers who are looking out for the best of their countries and the best of the alliance, and the best of the world. We salute you all, and I declare the inaugural Atlantic Council of Freedom Awards concluded.

(Applause.)

New Election Law in Iraq

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Berlin, Germany

November 8, 2009

I congratulate the Iraqi Council of Representatives for reaching agreement on a law to govern the January parliamentary elections. I commend the Iraqi leaders for finding ways to resolve complex, important issues so that the elections can go forward and look forward to prompt confirmation of this legislation by Iraq’s Presidency Council. The Independent High Electoral Commission (IHEC) will now be able to move ahead and implement the procedures for Iraq to hold credible and legitimate elections in accordance with international standards. The elections will be a major step forward in the development of Iraq's democracy.

Camera Spray at Top of Trilateral Meeting with Estonia and Latvia

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Hotel Adlon

Berlin, Germany

November 8, 2009

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I am delighted to have this opportunity to meet with the presidents of two countries with which the United States has long historical, familial, political ties. And I look forward to hearing from each of them about what is happening in Estonia and Latvia, and how the United States can broaden and deepen our relationship.

PRESIDENT ILVES: Well, we are just happy to be here. This is a wonderful occasion, 20 years (inaudible). I am glad to see (inaudible). When I was ambassador (inaudible) in charge of your visit to Estonia.

SECRETARY CLINTON: That is right.

PRESIDENT ILVES: (Inaudible) years ago, yes.

SECRETARY CLINTON: That's right.

PRESIDENT ILVES: Yes, so it is old friends getting together again.

PRESIDENT ZATLERS: I agree that it is a very important occasion. We are meeting here in Berlin, and (inaudible) turning point in our history and also a turning part for democracy in the eastern part of Europe. It is very important that we are all together today here in Berlin, saying that nothing is going to change (inaudible) future for a better Europe, for a better America.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Indeed. Thank you. Thank you all.

Remarks at No Limits Public Policy Conference Luncheon

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Ronald Reagan Building

Washington, DC

November 6, 2009

Thank you so, so much. Thank you. I told Terry after that introduction, there was no limit to his enthusiasm. (Laughter.) I cannot tell you how excited and really grateful I am to be here with all of you. I want to thank Mark for his remarkable commitment to be the chair of the board of No Limits, Ann Lewis who has served the – so many roles, who is the president of this new, but exciting organization.

Before I start, I just want to say that our thoughts and our prayers are with the soldiers killed at Ft. Hood, and with their families and their friends and their colleagues. I join all Americans in expressing our sympathy and in wishing the more than 40 who were injured a full and speedy recovery. These terrible incidents, especially one like yesterday, reminds us of the sacrifices that our men and women in uniform make every day. It is difficult when you lose brave Americans overseas, but it is horrifying when they come under fire because they wear the uniform of our country or they work to defend our nation right here on American soil. So we all owe them a debt of gratitude and are recommitting ourselves to make sure that they know that they have a grateful nation behind them.

This conference is really a special opportunity for me because I get to see so many of my friends. I look around this room and there are countless familiar faces of people who – (applause) – I have worked with and we have had some extraordinary times. You’ve heard from some real stars today, including the incomparable Barney Frank. Now, Barney, as those of you who may not have known before, is one of the most talented public servants in Washington. He’s also famous as the man with the best one-liners on Capitol Hill. But of course, we in this room know the secret of his success, namely, he learned from his long-suffering older sister, Ann Lewis. (Laughter.) And it was funny when I said to Ann, I said, “Oh, I’m so sorry I missed Barney.” And she goes, “Oh, he was brilliant, but he didn’t have his shirt tucked in.” (Laughter.) I mean, it sounded like every big sister, including myself, that I have ever heard.

Ann is the reason that we are here today, because she’s been in the trenches fighting for equal rights, and equal pay, and equal opportunity, blazing a trail for generations of women like me whose path in politics was a little easier because of the battles that Ann Lewis fought and won. Before there was an EMILY’s List, or a Feminist Majority, or even a sisterhood of the traveling pantsuits – (laughter) – there was Ann Lewis, and she is still going strong. I am so proud to call her my friend. And I am so impressed that in less than a year, she decided to bring us all together, put this organization together and create a platform for people to think of new ways to join together on behalf of issues and causes that we all share.

In this room are people who I went through the battles of the 1990s on behalf of healthcare. And I think tomorrow, we’re going to win a major part of that effort. (Applause.) I cannot tell you how excited I am at the prospect that, for the first time in American history, the House of Representatives is poised to pass a comprehensive health care reform. I am still keeping fingers and toes crossed because we know that there are those who would try to derail it, even at the last minute. But it looks so promising, and it is so long overdue. And as someone who has fought this battle for so many years, I cannot tell you how proud I am that it will be under a democratic President and a democratic speaker and a democratic speaker and a democratic Congress, that we’re going to actually get this to happen. (Applause.)

And there are others of you in this room who stood with me as we told the world something that was self-evident, but needed to be said, that women’s rights are human rights, as well. (Applause.) And as Terry said, there are many friends from New York who worked with me and stood with me and campaigned with me, on behalf of not only working families, but 9/11 victims and survivors and so many others who looked to us to help them have a chance to end the limits on their own dreams and pursue those.

And of course, there are so many of you here who were with me on that long, exciting, death-defying journey across our country. (Applause.) And you’re the ones who helped put all those cracks in the glass ceiling. And I want to thank each and every one of you for really committing yourselves to the political process, believing in the importance of what needed to be done in our country, working with me and then working with me to elect Barack Obama. And now working with all of us to try to translate into reality the dreams that we hold for our nation and our world.

We’ve stood together over all these years because we share a deep conviction about the importance of our nation and the significance of public service. And I have to say that, my path into politics and what still guides me today is my belief that every child deserves a chance to live up to his or her God-given potential, and that is what motivates me and what I know is important to all of you. (Applause.)

And so here we are, and there has been just an enormous amount of extraordinary happenings in the time since I’ve seen many of you last. And for me, this new position just reaffirms that we live in an interconnected, interdependent world. Whether I’m in a small town in Africa or I’m in a big metropolis in Asia, I’m always reminded of how important it is that we see each other as fellow human beings, that we share a journey. We may come from very different backgrounds, have all kinds of experiences that are not at all in common. But we do actually share a commitment to making it possible for not only our nation, but all nations to forge a new future. It is hard because we face some of the most complex problems that I think any time in history has ever presented. And for me, being in this new position and being so mindful of the responsibility that the Obama Administration holds just encourages and urges me to work as hard as I can on behalf of creating new partnerships, on reaching out and explaining what the United States stands for, showing people the respect they deserve by listening to them, but standing our ground, making clear what it is we value, and how we intend to pursue our interests.

And so for the last nine months, I’ve had the good fortune and the high honor of representing our country around the world, whether it was in Zurich for the landmark signing of an agreement between Turkey and Armenia, with such a long and difficult history between them and seeing the last-minute falling apart of that, and having to work hard with my colleagues to make it happen and reminding people that every day leaders around the world have a choice – whether they continue to show allegiance to a past they cannot change or a new commitment to a future that they can shape. And one of the biggest issues we have to overcome is how people cannot leave behind their history. That doesn’t mean that they have to forget it. It doesn’t mean they have to deny it, but it means they have to be willing to keep looking forward instead of in the rearview mirror.

Every conflict we have in the world today is really bound up in whether people will invest in the future, whether they will seek common ground with others, or whether they will either stay frozen or go backwards. And part of our job in the State Department is to better explain what it is the United States represents. We got a little off track over the last eight years. We’re trying to get back on track today. I was very pleased that – some of you know Judith McHale was appointed the Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy, and she is traveling the world, looking for the ways that we can better connect so that we can tell our story. Because everyone has a story to tell, and everyone needs to be thinking about how we better tell America’s story.

Whenever I travel, as Terry said, I try not just to meet with diplomats and officials, but to go out and meet with people. And that’s been kind of a interesting experience the last nine months, because a lot of people thought, “Well, why are you doing that?” Well, it’s because no matter what society you’re in, public opinion matters to a greater or a lesser degree, but it matters. You can be an authoritarian dictator, but you still have to listen to what people are saying and thinking. And we needed to do some concerted work to try to create a better communication between our country and others.

That’s why I’ve held town hall meetings from Santo Domingo to Moscow to Nairobi to Bangkok. I even appeared on what’s called the Awesome Show in Indonesia. (Laughter.) And at every turn, I have listened and responded, but also stood up for what I think are our core values. It is critical in today’s world that we recognize information is not compartmentalized; it doesn’t stay in official channels or in diplomatic cables. It is pervasive.

And we are now using the new tools of technology. Some of you might remember during the demonstrations in Iran during the post-election period, the way people were finding out where they should go and learning what was happening was through Twitter. And the young men and women who work for me in the State Department, the twenty-somethings, realized that Twitter was going to shut down for some kind of technical rebooting whatever they do. (Laughter.) So these young people called Twitter and said, “You can’t shut down. The demonstrators in Iran are depending on you.” I mean, that could not have happened five years ago. And so part of what our challenge is, is to really try as directly as possible to reach people through governments, around governments, under governments, in every way possible. We’re also doing more to build partnerships, which I think are key to our success. Again, another long-time friend of many of us, Ambassador Elizabeth Bagley, is now heading up our global public-private partnerships effort. And she’s reaching out, working with business, working with NGOs to create opportunities for people to contribute to America’s diplomacy.

And there’s a lot that we can do and we can do better, and it’s an area where I think that we can enlist the help of those of you who are interested in trying to be part of reaching out to the rest of the world. It is important that we look to the pillars of the American foreign policy that I have laid out in numerous speeches, pretty simple – defense, diplomacy, and development. We know defense because it gets a lot of the funding and a lot of the attention, rightfully so. But we can’t have a strong and positive and successful foreign policy without also building up diplomacy and development. So I’ve been working very hard to make the case to the Congress for more Foreign Service officers, for more civil servants, for more development experts, because we’ve got to do a better job.

So we’re doing a complete review. We’re having the first-ever what’s called Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, which mirrors something the Defense Department has done forever, the Quadrennial Defense Review. Because what we’re trying to figure out is what works and what doesn’t work. Let’s quit doing what doesn’t work and let’s start doing more of what we think will work around the world. (Applause.) Because if we truly believe, as I know all of you do, that there should be no limits to opportunity, then we have to forge partnerships that provide people with the tools they need to solve their own problems.

I like to say that talent is universal, but opportunity is not. And I think all the time when I’m in places that don’t educate women or do not respect the dignity of work for both men and women, that have systems that are engrained in their society, that really keep a large group of people subordinate to a small group of people, just think of what that society is missing. It is missing future doctors and academics and researchers and businessmen and women. What a loss that they really cannot afford to have.

So we are also investing in a new approach toward food and hunger. It’s a terrible problem in the year 2009 that so many people are dying of hunger or who are malnourished. And in discussing the priorities that I brought to the job, I asked if we could have a big focus on food security, and people said, well, sure, we do a program over here and we do a program over there and we do – I said, well, how about if we bring them all together and we actually have an organized whole-of-government approach? So President Obama asked me and the State Department to take the lead on that, and we’ve really had a remarkable process.

And it’s the first time where people from all over our own government are actually in the same room trying to decide what it is we can do that will deliver not only food aid, as important as that is, especially with drought and the effects of climate change, but better agricultural productivity. Let’s start helping people grow their own food, bring it to harvest, bring it to market, support themselves so that they can become more self-sufficient. (Applause.)

So every day, we wake up and we think about all of these great ideas, and then we work hard to implement them. But there is nothing that has been more important to me over the course of my lifetime than advancing the rights of women and girls. It’s been a cause of my public life. (Applause.) And it is now a cornerstone of American foreign policy.

We have appointed the first-ever Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues. Some of you know Melanne Verveer, who – (applause) – was my chief of staff at the White House, went on to run Vital Voice, which some of you have become involved in, which I am delighted about because everywhere I go in the world, the Vital Voices women come to meet me. And they wear their little pins, the kind of Vs that look like wings taking flight that give them a better future. And we want to do more in partnerships like that, so we’re opening up on the State Department website that we will notify everybody about, a way for you to be part of supporting some of these projects and supporting individual women; individual women and their own needs, whether it’s a small microloan or a program to help rape survivors or victims.

Melanne, as you know, has been one of the most consistent voices turning up the volume on the problem of gender and sexual-based violence, especially in conflict areas. And on my trip to Africa this summer, Melanne was with me in the Eastern Congo when we visited a refugee camp, when we went to HEAL Africa, an extraordinary hospital that helps the women who have been attacked and so brutally raped, and met with the doctors and the advocates and some of the victims themselves.

And it was, as I’m sure you can imagine, the most poignant and personally painful experience, because this has become a tactic of war, not just in the Democratic Republic of Congo, but in other places around the world as well. But just to take the Congo as an example, about 1,100 rapes are reported each month. That’s an average of 36 women and girls raped every day. The camp that Melanne and I visited was home to about 18,000 people seeking refuge from a cycle of violence that has left 5.4 million people dead since 1998.

And when you see that, the depth of suffering and the brutality, it just tears at your heart. But what lifts your spirits is the courage and the resolve of the people themselves, the victims who go on every day, who show a resilience that I find awe-inspiring, and those who are there on the front lines helping them. The United States condemns these attacks. They are crimes against humanity. I announced more than $17 million in new funding to prevent and respond to gender and sexual violence and to help survivors rebuild their lives.

Then I was privileged to chair a special United Nations Security Council session that passed a resolution to strengthen international efforts to curb these atrocities and hold those who commit them accountable. We have to do more, and I think this is an area where a number of you have told me you’re interested in working, and Anne will give you a menu of options that you can choose from as to how you can personally try to strike back at this atrocity that happens all too frequently.

But there are good news stories as well. In fact, as I travel around and see the developments in many countries that I hadn’t been to for about 10 years, I see the change. Recently in Indonesia, I was able to celebrate 10 years of democracy and to really hold up what a democratic Islamic secular society looks like. And we have to keep holding up those examples.

And when we go and see the courage of people who are willing to risk it all against the forces that are arrayed against them, it just encourages me and gives me even more of a push to go out and do what I need to do.

But what’s important about No Limits is your message. That is such an American message, but it shouldn’t be only an American message. And what I’ve been trying to do is to help people separate their historical sense of limits from what is possible going forward, that it is hard in traditional societies, it is hard when the odds seem stacked against you, but it is part of the American message at core that we believe not just in a better life for our own people, but we think helping those around the world to a better life is good for America, that it gives us a chance to see our values in action.

So I hope that you believe, as I do, that foreign policy matters, that public diplomacy matters, that standing up for the rights of people we will never meet very far away matters. And who does it matter to? It doesn't just matter to someone else. It matters to us as Americans. I say to my staff all the time, “I want to make sure that our foreign policy, our diplomacy, and our development are delivering for the laid off auto worker in Michigan or the laborer in Ohio. I want to make sure that what we’re doing can be explained and understood by the small business owner in Colorado or the homemaker in California who says, ‘Look, we’re having a hard time here at home. Why are we taking our money and educating somebody else’s children or providing healthcare to other people, or why do we involve ourselves in these conflicts far away that are so insoluble and hard to follow half the time?’” Because it is important to our security and it’s important to who we are as a nation, what we stand for in pursuit of our interests and in accordance with our values.

I think it’s imperative that in today’s world we keep our eyes on where we want to lead the rest of the world. Sometimes they claim they don’t want to listen. Sometimes they reject our advice. But that doesn't mean we quit. It just means we get smarter about how we’re trying to work with everyone else.

I said when I got to the State Department on the very first day that I wanted to see smart power in action. And smart power requires smart people, and we have just a wonderful group of really smart, dedicated people here in the State Department, at USAID, and around the world.

But ultimately, it rests on you. It rests on our fellow Americans as to whether you think that the United States has to keep getting up every day and going out and trying to solve problems and manage situations and create space for good things to happen. I believe that. That’s what motivates me. But we have to make the case to the rest of our country as well.

I’ll be leaving again tomorrow for another trip. (Laughter.) I know. Hard to believe. One that will take me first to Berlin, where I will be representing the United States at the commemoration of the 10^th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. (Applause.) And since I grew up in the Cold War, as some of you did, and I well remember the duck and cover drills in the hallway and under our desks, it was an extraordinary moment in history when the wall came down and the Soviet Union dissolved and people in Central and Eastern Europe finally had a chance to chart their own futures without the heavy hand of communism.

But I think that event 20 years ago was to some extent the end of an era where, perhaps as dangerous as the times were, it was easier to explain. It was us and it was them. Everything we did, everything that they did, was aimed at gaining advantage versus the other. We supported terrible countries and terrible rulers because they said they’d be against us – or against them, and then they did the same to us. So there was a very clear moral clarity about it. There was a very clear almost black and white sense of it. And I think people, when that wall came down, thought oh, great, the world will be so much better now, democracy is going to absolutely thrive. And people were saying history is over, we can go on with the dreams that America was founded on and export them everywhere.

That’s not the way the world works, and that’s not the way history has ever worked. So we find ourselves now in a much more complex world, and we just have to be up for it. And we have to be smarter about it, and we have to demand more from ourselves and our partners.

And from Berlin I’ll be going to Singapore for a meeting with my counterparts from Asia and the Pacific. And we want to have a very positive relationship with them, particularly with China, but we don’t get that by just sitting back. We have to be engaged and involved and working to create conditions that we think will foster democracy and development and human dignity and results for people.

And then I will be paying a visit to China with President Obama on a very important trip to further the dialogue between our two countries. And somewhere along that schedule – I’ve lost track of when – I’ll be going to the Philippines to show solidarity with our friends in the Philippines who have been battered by typhoons and have just suffered so much over the last weeks.

And everywhere I go, I will be thinking about how we translate the slogan “No Limits” into opportunities, how we give people the sense that they too, if they will be committed to democracy, if they will care about their neighbor, if they will make investments in their people and their children, they too can have a better life.

This, for me, is an extraordinary experience in a very blessed life that I really relish sharing with you. I’ve known some of you my entire life. My best friend from sixth grade is here. And I’ve known many of you in a very personal and intense way over a number of years, and some our relationship was created in the cauldron of 2008 politics. But every single one of you is here today because you want to stay involved and you want to give back and you want to be part of something bigger than yourself. And there is no limit to what we can do together.

So let me thank you for being part of this new organization that holds out such promise. Let me encourage those of you who want to personally develop an ability to speak out and participate to stay for this afternoon’s sessions about acquiring the skills of being able to speak. Public speaking – it ranks up as the biggest fear that most people have. It’s more than dying in a fire. (Laughter.) I mean, it’s just really scary to a lot of people. And so we want to help you and we want to give you that chance. That’s what Ann is setting up so that people can feel empowered. So it’s not just what you want to do. It’s how you get the tools to do it. Because we don’t think there are any limits to what any of you can do if you’re willing to invest the time and the effort.

So finally, let me just end by saying that we share a lot of history and we share friendships and we share all kinds of experiences together. But fundamentally, we share an optimism about what can be done if people are given the opportunities to break through glass ceilings, to break the chains of history that sometimes hold them down. And we believe strongly that our country has both the opportunity and the responsibility to take that message around the world. There must be no limits on human potential, and it is up to us to continue to make that a core value of who we are as Americans and what we hope for others around the world.

Thank you all so much. (Applause.)

# # #

Honduras and the Tegucigalpa-San Jose Accord (Taken Question)

Washington, DC

Question Taken At The November 6, 2009 Daily Press Briefing

November 6, 2009

Question: Has Senator DeMint been assured by the State Department that the U.S. will recognize the election results in Honduras (11/29/09) regardless of whether or not the steps of the Tegucigalpa-San Jose Accord have been implemented? What is our policy regarding support of the electoral process? Will we or not recognize the results even if the T-SJ Accord has not been implemented?

Answer: State Department officials have maintained regular contact with many interested Members of Congress on the situation in Honduras. As a rule, we do not disclose the private conversations of our officials with Members of Congress.

Our policy goal has always been to help the Hondurans restore the democratic order in their country. The signing of the Accord, through difficult negotiations among the Hondurans themselves with support from the OAS and the international community, provides the path to that goal.

As we noted in our statement on November 6, “We urge both sides to act in the best interests of the Honduran people and return to the table immediately to reach agreement on the formation of a unity government. The formation of a Government of Unity and National Reconciliation will serve the Honduran people and will change the political dynamics in the country in a positive way. It is urgent that this government be created immediately.”

Our commitment is to the Tegucigalpa-San Jose Accord and its implementation. Our commitment to support the Honduran elections is the product of that agreement. Failure to implement the accord could jeopardize recognition of the election by the international community.

Zimbabwe and the Kimberley Process

Washington, DC

November 6, 2009

In light of serious concerns about Zimbabwe’s compliance with the Kimberley Process (KP) rough diamond certification scheme, we await full and expeditious implementation of the stringent controls for exports of rough diamonds from Zimbabwe’s Marange fields that were agreed at the KP Plenary in Swakopmund, Namibia, on November 5. The United States expects Zimbabwe to commit substantial effort and resources to the obligations of the Work Plan. If the Work Plan is not thoroughly implemented, we expect the KP to suspend Zimbabwe's status in the KP certification scheme. We further note that Zimbabwe agreed only to export Marange diamonds once the monitoring mechanism is established. In addition, the United States remains deeply concerned about human rights abuses in the diamond regions of Zimbabwe.

The United States welcomes progress made during the KP Plenary regarding increased oversight of exports from Guinea, new measures regarding identification and cooperation on suspicious shipments and efforts to improve coordination on technical and development assistance.

Special Press Briefing by Ambassador Elizabeth Frawley Bagley

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

November 6, 2009

Special Representative for Global Partnerships Ambassador Elizabeth Frawley Bagley will brief the press on the Shanghai 2010 World Expo on Monday, November 9, 2009 at 12:30 p.m. in the Carl T. Rowan Press Briefing Room (Room 2209) of the Department of State.

Ambassador Bagley will brief the press on the State Department’s involvement with the Shanghai Expo and will provide an update on the progress of the USA National Pavilion.

This event is open to the press.

Media representatives may attend this event upon presentation of one of the following: (1) a U.S. Government-issued identification card (Department of State, White House, Congress, Department of Defense or Foreign Press Center), (2) a media-issued photo identification card, or (3) a letter from their employer on letterhead verifying their employment as a journalist, accompanied by an official photo identification card (driver's license, passport).

Press should allow adequate time to process through security and be in the press briefing room 15 minutes prior to the scheduled event.

PRESS CONTACTS:

Office of Press Relations
U.S. Department of State
(202) 647-2492

###

Secretary Clinton to Deliver Principal Address at the Commissioning of the USS New York

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

November 6, 2009

Secretary Clinton will deliver the principal address at the commissioning of the USS New York tomorrow, November 7, 2009, at 11:00 a.m. alongside Pier 88, at 48th Street and 12th Avenue near the Intrepid Sea Air Space Museum.

The USS New York’s bow was constructed from 7.5 tons of steel retrieved from Ground Zero. It is the newest entry to the U.S. Navy's fleet of San Antonio-class warships and is available for public viewing through November 11, 2009.

The event is open to the press. Press interested in attending should contact Jonathan Blyth at 202-270-8136 or BlythJJ@state.gov.

For more information, please visit the official website of the Commissioning Event: http://www.ussny.org/press-room.php

The Sixth Global Forum on Combating Corruption and Safeguarding Integrity

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

November 6, 2009

Attorney General Eric Holder will lead the U.S. delegation to the Sixth Global Forum on Combating Corruption and Safeguarding Integrity, to be held November 7 – 8 in Doha, Qatar. The Attorney General will provide keynote remarks at Global Forum's opening plenary session.

The United States is committed to engaging with other countries on preventing and combating corruption. The United States joined more than 130 other countries in negotiating the UN Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC), which concluded in October 2003. Since that time, the United States and 141 other nations have become parties to this comprehensive Convention. The United States is also a leader in the area of enforcement of the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention. In the last fiscal year the United States contributed hundreds of millions of dollars for anti-corruption and governance assistance on the global level.

The Global Forum series was launched by the United States in 1999. This, the Sixth Global Forum, will discuss good practices and innovative approaches to international cooperation in anticorruption enforcement and ongoing efforts to establish effective asset recovery regimes. Prevention of corruption, transparency, and sound public procurement will be additional areas of discussion. Officials and experts will also take up protection of the independence and effectiveness of anticorruption authorities and the role of civil society and the private sector.

The 3^rd Conference of States Parties to the UN Convention against Corruption will take place immediately following the Global Forum.

Reports of Ayman Nour Not Allowed to Leave Egypt

Ian Kelly
Department Spokesman

Washington, DC

November 6, 2009

The United States Government is disappointed by the decision of the Egyptian Public Prosecutor’s Office to deny Ayman Nour permission to travel. We hope the Government of Egypt will review its decision in this case and allow Mr. Nour to travel to the United States as planned.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's Travel

Ian Kelly
Department Spokesman

Washington, DC

November 6, 2009

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton will travel to Europe and Asia November 8-19, 2009.

In Berlin (November 8-9), she will represent the United States at the 20th Anniversary celebration of the fall of the Berlin Wall and meet with senior German officials.

Secretary Clinton will continue on to Singapore (November 10-12) for meetings of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum. While there, she will attend the APEC Ministerial Meetings and will hold bilateral meetings with her counterparts from the region.

In Manila (November 12-13), the Secretary will hold consultations with senior Filipino officials, highlighting the U.S.-Philippines treaty alliance.

Returning to Singapore, the Secretary will join President Obama for the APEC Leaders Meeting.

Honduras

Ian Kelly
Department Spokesman

Washington, DC

November 6, 2009

A week ago, Honduran negotiators, with the support of the OAS and friends in the region, achieved an historic victory for democracy in their country by signing the Tegucigalpa-San Jose Accord. That agreement spells out a step-by-step process for Honduras to re-establish democratic and constitutional order and move toward national elections with the support of the international community. The United States and the international community applauded the Honduran people for addressing the political crisis in their country with patriotism and pragmatism.

The process of reconciliation in Honduras took another step forward this week with the formation of the Tegucigalpa-San Jose Accord Verification Commission, including members from Honduras and the international community. During a November 3-4 visit to Honduras, the Commission emphasized the need for phased implementation of the Accord and underscored the importance of the next step in the process: the formation of a Government of Unity and National Reconciliation. The Commission welcomed efforts by both sides to form such a government by the November 5 deadline.

In the wake of the Commission visit, the two sides made significant progress toward the formation of the unity government. For that reason, we were particularly disappointed by the unilateral statements made by both sides last night, which do not serve the spirit of the Tegucigalpa-San Jose Accord.

As the Verification Commissioners have noted, both sides need to work together implement the Tegucigalpa-San Jose Accord.

We urge both sides to act in the best interests of the Honduran people and return to the table immediately to reach agreement on the formation of a unity government. The formation of a Government of Unity and National Reconciliation will serve the Honduran people and will change the political dynamics in the country in a positive way. It is urgent that this government be created immediately.

The Honduran people have made clear that they want to move forward. They deserve leadership that looks to the future, in the interest of all Hondurans. Complete and timely implementation of the Tegucigalpa-San Jose Accord is the path to that future, and the formation of a Government of Unity and National Reconciliation is the next vital step forward.

Trans-Pacific Symposium on Dismantling Transnational Illicit Networks

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

November 6, 2009

The Department of State’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement and the Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement will co-host an international symposium on November 10-12 in Honolulu, Hawaii. Participants will include Pacific Rim economies from Asia and the Western Hemisphere, representatives of Pacific Island economies, and other international organizations such as APEC, the Organization of American States (OAS), the Asia Pacific Group on Money-Laundering, Interpol, and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).

The symposium is expected to start an inter-regional dialogue among senior U.S. and foreign law enforcement and judicial officials that will strengthen our combined efforts to combat transnational organized crime organizations and networks that span East Asia, the Pacific, and Latin America. Its focus will be on east-west cross-border crimes, illicit routes, gaps and challenges within existing frameworks, and ways to contain illicit threats before they extend beyond their borders.

The symposium will study new, and reinforce existing, inter-regional law enforcement cooperation techniques to combat transnational criminal activities and illicit networks across the Pacific region. More specifically, the symposium will center on international criminal threats that have become increasingly prominent in the trans-Pacific region. These include arms, narcotics, and human smuggling/trafficking, money laundering, and corruption. Discussion will cover current and emerging threats, vulnerabilities and challenges, as well as opportunities for cooperation in investigations and intelligence sharing.

For further information please contact:

Susan Pittman
Department of State
202-647-2842
pittmansr@state.gov

Brandon A. Montgomery
ICE Office of Public Affairs
Department of Homeland Security
202-732-4222

Dinner Honoring the Visit of the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Benjamin Franklin Room

Washington, DC

November 5, 2009

Good evening, and please be seated. I want to welcome all of you to the Ben Franklin Room here on the eighth floor of the State Department for such a special occasion. It is indeed an honor for me to welcome His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, whom I have had the great honor and personal pleasure of getting to know over the years. And I know we have a number of other very distinguished representatives, His Eminence Geron Metropolitan Athanasios of Chalcedon, His Eminence Metropolitan Ambrosios of Korea, and, of course, a personal friend of mine, His Eminence Archbishop Demetrios, who is celebrating his 10^th anniversary here in America.

His All Holiness and I have had the pleasure of meeting a number of times since I first visited him as First Lady at the Patriarchate in 1995, but one of our most memorable times together came when Archbishop was enthroned in New York 10 years ago. A lot has happened in the intervening decade, but one thing that has not changed is his All Holiness’s commitment not only to his church and to the people of the church, but to the world, and the work that he has done, which is so important to us all.

The institution of the Ecumenical Patriarchate dates to the dawn of Christianity and His All Holiness is the 270^th successor of St. Andrew the Apostle. Now, one might think that someone who carries such a mantle of history, such a legacy of service and faith, would be, you know, a little stuffy. (Laughter.) But those of us who know him know nothing could be further from the truth. He is a person of such great warmth and humor and care and concern, and his tireless work for religious tolerance, his award-winning advocacy on behalf of the environment – he’s been a champion for dealing with the global challenges of our time.

It is not a coincidence that when I travel around the world and discuss climate change or environmental stewardship or the imperative for peaceful coexistence among people of different faiths, I often find myself echoing sentiments that he’s been expressing for years, and even quoting from him.

I particularly appreciate what he did in the aftermath of 9/11, when he united leaders from across the religious spectrum to condemn the terrorist attacks and call for harmony among the world’s faithful. His campaign on behalf of religious freedom and peaceful coexistence has helped to bridge divides among believers. And the United States has been proud to support his calls for religious tolerance, both in Turkey and around the world. It is one of the reasons that President Obama and I have been so vocal about the need to reopen Halki Seminary and protect the rights of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. (Applause.) We have raised these issues repeatedly and publically, and will continue to do so until they are addressed.

I know we have several ambassadors here. I believe we not only have the Ambassador from Greece to the United States, the Ambassador from Cyprus, but indeed the Ambassador from Turkey. And we look forward to working with Turkey and we welcome Prime Minister Erdogan’s visit to Washington next month.

Now, in this room there are many friends of mine, people whom I have known for many years who have been friends of my family and myself, who have invited me into your homes, who have been the supporters and advisors and counselors, and I am grateful that each and every one of you could be with us. It means a great deal to me. I said, well, I want to recognize my friends, and then I realized we would be here all night. Because I look out and I see so many familiar and really beloved faces, particularly from the times when my husband was president, and of course, the times of my great privilege of serving the people of New York for eight years. So I welcome particularly all of you here this evening.

And we are welcoming His All Holiness not only as the leader of 300 million Orthodox Christians, but as a living embodiment of the positive role that faith can play in healing and humanizing our world. Many people claim faith. Few live it the way that he has. He represents both centuries of tradition, and an agenda that is at the very cutting age of our modern time. The message that he carries around the world is timeless, but you can follow his travels on Twitter and Facebook. (Laughter.) We value his wisdom, his vision, his leadership. And I look forward to continuing our long and productive friendship as we work together for the benefit of all God's children.

With that, please join me in welcoming His All Holiness to share some remarks, and then provide us with an invocation. I know that he loves many things and many people, but particularly children and music, and later we will hear from some of the talented musicians of the DC Youth Orchestra. But I have been looking forward to this evening for many months, and it is with great personal honor and delight that I ask him now to address us. (Applause.)

H1N1 Vaccine Distribution Overseas (Taken Question)

Washington, DC

Question Taken At The November 4, 2009 Daily Press Briefing

November 5, 2009

QUESTION: In regard to the H1N1 outbreak, what provisions are being made by the State Department on behalf of Foreign Service Officers serving at posts overseas? Are vaccines being made available to those serving overseas?

ANSWER: The Office of Medical Services expects the H1N1 vaccine will be available to most of our overseas missions sometime in December.

Because of the extremely limited amounts of vaccine available to the Department of State through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Office of Medical Services is purchasing additional H1N1 vaccine doses from the Department of Defense for shipment overseas to try to address our needs.

The Office of Medical Services already has shipped its initial allotments of the vaccine to Baghdad and Kabul where employees live in barrack-like conditions. The next distribution priority is to hardship posts where local medical care is inadequate, and these shipments have begun.

H1N1 remains sensitive to Tamiflu and Relenza, therefore all posts overseas have been stocked with enough of these anti-viral drugs to treat all individuals at post.

Diplomatic Immunity for the Three Americans Acquitted in Italy (Taken Question)

Washington, DC

Question Taken At The November 4, 2009 Daily Press Briefing

November 5, 2009

QUESTION: Did the State Department invoke diplomatic immunity for the three Americans acquitted in Italy of the 2003 kidnapping of an Egyptian cleric from Milan? What is the current status of the lawsuit brought against the Department by the woman who sought diplomatic immunity in this case but was not granted that status by State?

ANSWER: The Department has been following the proceedings closely in coordination with the Department of Justice and other agencies.

We have raised our concerns about the case on numerous occasions with Italian officials, and supported the Italian Government’s challenge of the prosecution before the Italian Constitutional Court.

The Department will continue to follow this matter in consultation with the Italian Government.

Immunity defenses were raised before the Italian trial court by the lawyers for the defendants.

For the status of the civil suit brought against the U.S. Government by Ms. De Sousa, I would refer you to the Department of Justice.

Remarks to the Press

Ian Kelly
Department Spokesman

Washington, DC

November 5, 2009

MR. KELLY: So what can I help you with?

QUESTION: What’s your reaction to Abbas’s criticism of the U.S. siding with Israel?

MR. KELLY: Did you see the Secretary’s press availability?

QUESTION: Yeah.

QUESTION: Well, she didn’t comment on that. That’s why he’s asking you.

MR. KELLY: Well, we are – we’re working very hard on trying to get the two sides to sit down and get to the point where they can begin negotiating towards the goal that both sides want, and really the entire world wants. I think that whatever we have said has been completely consistent with our policy. We haven’t changed anything. You’ve heard the Secretary say many times that our policy on settlements, for example, has not changed. But I think the important thing is to start direct negotiations. And we’re committed to playing a facilitative role to helping the two sides get to that point.

QUESTION: Well, but --

QUESTION: Well, are you concerned that his departure from the scene will make that harder? And do you want him – the Secretary ignored this part of the question – do you want him to change his mind?

MR. KELLY: That is really – this is a – it’s a Palestinian solution to a Palestinian problem. This is really – it’s – we respect Mr. Abbas. We think that he is a – he’s an important player in this whole process. He’s been an important interlocutor for us, and we respect his work and we look forward to continuing to work with him.

QUESTION: I’m sorry, let me ask the question again, because that’s not the answer to the question that I asked.

MR. KELLY: Well, you may not get the answer to the question that you asked, but go ahead. Try it again.

QUESTION: Well, then just tell me that and don’t say – don’t give me the answer to another question. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Well, he said it’s a Palestinian solution.

QUESTION: Do you want him to change his mind, and are you concerned that his --

MR. KELLY: It’s not up to us to say whether or not he should change his mind.

QUESTION: I’m not saying it is up to you. I’m asking if you would like to see him stay, and if you’re worried that his departure will make it more difficult to get the negotiations started.

MR. KELLY: Look --

QUESTION: I think those are pretty straightforward questions.

MR. KELLY: Yeah. I mean, he has – as I say, he’s played a very productive role. I mean, this is a --

QUESTION: Okay. So in other words, you can’t --

MR. KELLY: This is a decision for him to make. We respect him. We – he’s been a great partner.

QUESTION: Okay, just stop. If you’re not going to answer the question, just tell me you’re not going to answer the question. Don’t go on with this other stuff.

MR. KELLY: All right. We look forward to working with him, and he’s been a good partner for us.

QUESTION: Well, when Clinton said that he – he obviously told her about his decision when they were meeting, because she pretty much said that. And she said that she looked forward to meeting with him and working with him in any new capacity. Did he suggest any new capacity that he could help the negotiations?

MR. KELLY: I don’t know the answer to that, Elise. I just know that we would expect him to continue to play a role. And he has been committed to the – to our shared goal: to a two-state solution, to creating a better future for his people. And we hope that he will continue to play that kind of productive role.

Other questions?

QUESTION: The foreign minister of Egypt stated today that the Arabs want – they would like to see some guarantees that if the Palestinians start the negotiations, it will lead to a Palestinian state with the 1967 borders, so then they don’t make an issue about the settlements before the negotiations.

MR. KELLY: Yeah.

QUESTION: Is the U.S. ready to give such guarantees?

MR. KELLY: It’s – this is really – this is something for the two sides to work out. Our position is clear. We want an end to settlement activity. We want to see the creation of a Palestinian state living side by side with Israel. And this is a matter for the two sides to work out.

QUESTION: Well, you just said a minute ago that you wanted to help facilitate them getting together and sitting down. And if a guarantee by Israel that the negotiations would lead to a two-state solution would enable him to walk down from the position that you put him in by suggesting that you wanted a full settlement freeze and that’s why he went along with you, and now that you’re saying you don’t want one, you’re asking him to climb down from this position.

MR. KELLY: We’re not asking anybody to do --

QUESTION: Of course you are.

MR. KELLY: -- anything but sit down --

QUESTION: Of course you are.

MR. KELLY: -- and start negotiating.

QUESTION: You’re asking – you said you wanted a full settlement freeze, and when you decided that you weren’t getting – didn’t think it was a precondition that you should have for talks, you asked him to walk away from that.

MR. KELLY: We --

QUESTION: But I’m just saying that if you – saying you want to facilitate the climate where they could have talks, and now you’re asking him to not have those settlements as a precondition, are you willing to push Israel --

MR. KELLY: We never said --

QUESTION: -- to guarantee --

MR. KELLY: We never said that there should be a precondition for any of these talks. What we said was that all sides should take steps that they’ve already committed to in the Roadmap that would lead to the kind of environment that could produce useful and significant negotiations.

QUESTION: Okay. Well, now he is --

MR. KELLY: That has never changed.

QUESTION: Now that you asked them to walk away from their settlement issue, they’re saying, okay, if you don’t want us to hook on the settlements, then give us the guarantee that if we’re going to talk, it’s going to lead to a two-state solution. Are you willing to push Israel to give that guarantee? You pushed them for settlements; it didn’t work. Are you willing to push them for this?

MR. KELLY: Look, we – what we’re willing to do is what we’ve been doing all along, and that’s trying to get the – both sides to the point where they’re going to sit down and talk.

QUESTION: Well, this is a point --

MR. KELLY: We’re not willing to do any more or any less.

QUESTION: This is something where they said that they will be willing to sit down if you --

MR. KELLY: I don’t know what kind of guarantees the U.S. can give. I’m not sure I understand the question.

QUESTION: No, he’s responding to the Secretary saying that start the negotiations and it would --

QUESTION: It’ll come. If you build it, it will come.

QUESTION: -- it will solve the problems of the settlements, not block the starting of the negotiation of the issue of settlements, that she’s saying that the negotiations on the border will solve the problem of the settlements.

MR. KELLY: Right.

QUESTION: So he’s responding to this.

MR. KELLY: Yeah. Well, okay. I would need to see exactly what he said, because I’m not sure what kind of guarantee that we can make on the sovereign state of Israel. I’m not sure what he means by that.

QUESTION: No, no, he’s responding to the Secretary is guaranteeing that the negotiation to solve the borders will solve the problem of the settlements.

QUESTION: She’s saying come to the table --

MR. KELLY: Yeah, I’m sorry. I really don’t understand the question.

QUESTION: She’s saying come to the table, and if you have a two-state solution you don’t need to worry about settlements. They’re saying, how we do know that if we’re going to come to the table we’re going to get a two-state solution?

MR. KELLY: You don’t – you’re not going to find out anything until you come to the table. Simple as that.

QUESTION: Next? (Laughter.)

QUESTION: On North Korea, do you have any comment on the reports that North Korea and the United States --

(cross-talk)

QUESTION: Do you have any comment on the reports that North Korea and the United States had agreed to meet twice bilaterally before North Korea returns to the Six-Party talks?

MR. KELLY: Yeah. That – look, here’s where we are. Sung Kim met with Ambassador Ri Gun about 12 days ago, and they had very useful discussions. We are now deliberating on whether or not to accept the invitation of Ambassador Bosworth to have bilateral talks which would lead to the resumption of the Six-Party Talks. That is – that’s exactly where we are. I don’t know anything about any kind of stipulation for two talks before we have the bilateral talks. We are right now deliberating on the next steps.

QUESTION: Can you make a comment on this Yonhap article that said that Jack Pritchard the KEI and Scott Snyder from the Asia Foundation are going – are planning to go to Pyongyang?

MR. KELLY: I don’t – I’m not –

QUESTION: I sent you an article. I sent it to you this morning.

MR. KELLY: Okay. I didn’t see it. I’ll look for it.

QUESTION: Do you have any --

QUESTION: I called their office, and they substantiated that the trip is on. So – and it said that they’re working with State Department.

(cross-talk)

MR. KELLY: Yeah, I’m sorry. I don’t know. Hey, there’s one briefer here, okay?

QUESTION: Do you have any readout from the meeting between South Korean Six-Party Talk Envoy Wi Sung-lac and Ambassador Bosworth today?

MR. KELLY: Yeah. I don’t have a readout. They did – I think they met yesterday. He met with both Ambassador Bosworth and with --

QUESTION: Yesterday?

MR. KELLY: Maybe it was today. I’m sorry.

QUESTION: I think it was today.

MR. KELLY: Was it today?

QUESTION: Today.

MR. KELLY: Today. All right, they met today. But I don’t have a readout of it.

QUESTION: They met here?

MR. KELLY: They met here, yeah. And both – it was both Bosworth and Sung Kim.

QUESTION: Can you get anything – get us anything on that?

MR. KELLY: We’ll see.

QUESTION: Is he going to be here tomorrow, too?

MR. KELLY: I’m not sure. We’ll see if we can get you a readout.

QUESTION: And one more.

MR. KELLY: Yes.

QUESTION: Do you have any comment on the report that South Korean foreign minister said United States and North Korean bilateral meeting is going to be the end of this year or the beginning of next year? He said that.

MR. KELLY: Yeah. Well, we’ve made no decision about when and where.

QUESTION: Ian, in the --

QUESTION: Ian --

QUESTION: Is this another Korean?

QUESTION: No, it isn’t.

QUESTION: Okay. In the talks with Westerwelle just now --

MR. KELLY: Yeah.

QUESTION: -- did the issue of basing the nukes in Germany come up and --

MR. KELLY: They had a – kind of a general discussion of the issue of the Nuclear Posture Review and how this was being done within a NATO context. There was no – it was no real specifics about the location of the nuclear weapons, and you know that we never talk about where nuclear weapons are anyway. They had a general conversation, but it was in the context of the Nuclear Posture Review and NATO’s nuclear policy.

QUESTION: Any word about this report that there was a Saudi Arabian incursion into Yemen territory? Yemen is denying it.

QUESTION: Yes.

QUESTION: Yemen is denying it, right?

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR. KELLY: Let me read you what I have. We’re concerned by the expansion of the conflict along the Saudi-Yemeni border. It’s our view there could be no long-term military solution to the conflict between the Yemeni Government and the rebels – the Houthi rebels, is that how it’s pronounced?

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR. KELLY: Yeah. We call on all parties to the conflict to make every effort to protect civilian populations and limit damage to civilian infrastructure. But I don’t have any information about whether or not the conflicts were across the border or not.

QUESTION: Was there no --

MR. KELLY: No confirmation on that, yeah.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) Saudi (inaudible).

MR. KELLY: But within the Yemeni border, yeah.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR. KELLY: Yeah, I don’t have any confirmation.

QUESTION: Ian, do you have any – well, characterization – do you have any comment on the fact that Karzai’s two vice presidents are basically corrupt and (inaudible)? (Laughter.)

MR. KELLY: Well, that’s one of the more loaded questions you’ve ever asked.

QUESTION: Is there some new development on that today?

QUESTION: No, I’m just wondering what your opinion is of it.

MR. KELLY: Yeah. Well --

QUESTION: What’s the U.S. opinion?

MR. KELLY: I think we’re really looking to the future. We’re – we are going to, of course, support President Karzai as he forms his new government. But of course, we’re going to look for some pretty quick and vigorous steps to try and address some of the problems that he himself has identified, including the need to fight corruption.

QUESTION: Right. But do you have any position on these guys – these two guys --

MR. KELLY: I honestly do not have a position on --

QUESTION: -- the former warlords?

MR. KELLY: Yeah, I don’t have a position on that.

QUESTION: Well, but I mean, President Obama – didn’t President Obama call for like a tribunal or some kind of investigation against Dostum in the first place?

MR. KELLY: Dostum is not one of them.

QUESTION: But I’m not – I’m talking like in a general sense.

QUESTION: It’s Fahim and then someone else.

QUESTION: I mean – and then there was Fahim. He had – President Obama himself had kind of made comments that he didn’t think that Fahim should be his running mate, so --

MR. KELLY: Well, no, I don’t --

QUESTION: I’m just saying --

MR. KELLY: I don’t have any position on these two, I’m afraid.

QUESTION: Could you clarify one thing on North Korea?

MR. KELLY: Yeah.

QUESTION: U.S. got an invitation from North Korea, right?

MR. KELLY: Right.

QUESTION: Did they invite specifically Stephen Bosworth, or did they just invite high-ranking official? Could you clarify that, please?

MR. KELLY: I believe it was Stephen Bosworth, but if that’s --

QUESTION: Specifically?

MR. KELLY: -- incorrect, we will let you know. But I believe the invitation was to Ambassador Bosworth.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MR. KELLY: Okay. Thanks.

QUESTION: Thank you.

Remarks With German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle After Their Meeting

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Treaty Room

Washington, DC

November 5, 2009

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, my goodness, we have a good crowd today. Well, we have had an excellent conversation, and I welcomed the new foreign minister to Washington so early in his tenure, and I am looking forward to spending more time with him when I travel to Berlin and participate in the very exciting and important commemoration of the fall of the Berlin Wall.

For Americans, our relationship with Germany is rooted in our commitment to freedom and democracy. And certainly, the new government that the minister represents exemplifies that. This time is a reminder of the values that we share and that we will use to chart a new future together: democracy, tolerance, human rights, the pursuit of a peaceful and prosperous future for our people and for all people.

This is the foundation of such a strong partnership, and we will, through our own efforts, try to deepen and broaden that partnership, because the challenges that we face today are not the challenges that our parents and grandfathers faced and that we will celebrate the end of in Berlin on Monday. They are new challenges which come to every generation, from rebuilding the global economy, combating climate change, understanding and combating violent extremism, curbing nuclear proliferation. This all demands the kind of international cooperation that the United States and Germany must provide, not only for each of us in our bilateral relationship, but within Europe and globally as well.

So we discussed a very broad array of issues. And I want to express publicly our appreciation and the honor that we show toward the German soldiers who are working to bring peace and stability in Afghanistan. Their sacrifice is deeply respected and honored by Americans. And we appreciate also the generous support that Germany has provided Pakistan to help the Pakistanis improve health and education, encourage energy efficiency and responsible governance, and assist people who are displaced by the current conflict.

The United States is also grateful for Germany’s participation and leadership in the P-5+1 and the E-3+3 processes to ensure Iran’s full compliance with UN Security Council resolutions and IAEA directives on its nuclear program. We are speaking with one voice on this critical issue, and it is a voice that is amplified by our friends from Britain and France, from Russia, China and the European Union. We are pressing Iran together in our support of the recent proposal to provide new fuel for the Tehran research reactor in exchange for Iran shipping out its low-enriched uranium. We both support the IAEA’s efforts to inspect the recently disclosed uranium enrichment facility near Qom. And we both remain ready, along with our partners, to meet with Iranian representatives to discuss further steps to build confidence and transparency in its nuclear program. As I have said, this is a pivotal moment for Iran, and we urge Iran to accept the agreement as proposed. We will not alter it, and we will not wait forever.

The United States and Germany are also working together to forge a strong international agreement to combat climate change. We applaud Germany’s efforts in transitioning toward a clean energy future, and we appreciate and admire its leadership. With one month to go before the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change conference in Copenhagen, it is absolutely imperative that we work together. And as Chancellor Merkel said in her important address to Congress last week, the only way we are going to meet the challenges of the 21^st century, the only way we are going to tear down the walls of today, is by working together as partners.

So I am looking forward to continuing these discussions. It is wonderful to welcome you, Guido, here to Washington, and --

FOREIGN MINISTER WESTERWELLE: Thank you.

SECRETARY CLINTON: -- I am delighted that I will see you again very soon in Berlin.

FOREIGN MINISTER WESTERWELLE: (Via interpreter) Ladies and gentlemen, I was delighted about the very warm welcome I received on my introductory visit here to Washington and my counterpart. The fact that I traveled to Washington, to the United States right after taking on my tenure as foreign minister, is meant to underline the great friendship existing between the peoples of both our countries, and the fact that we intend to continue that partnership and cordial relationship and friendship between both our countries.

These days, especially, we think back with gratitude as Germans for what the Americans did to ensure our freedom, our reunification, and the unity of Europe. In many of the international issues that we discussed during our meeting today, we noticed a high degree of agreement.

On the Afghanistan issue, the policy that we pursue towards Afghanistan, we noticed high agreement. We both believe that, on the one hand, our commitment goes towards the freedom and peace in the country and the region; but at the same time, we also have certain expectations from the reconfirmed Government of Afghanistan with respect to good governance. And here again, we want them to pursue a policy that not only accepts and acknowledges certain irregularities in the country but does its best to do away with them. And in order to be successful in that endeavor of ours, our intention is to cooperate and consult very closely.

I again strongly underline the point that the peace policy and the disarmament policy pursued by the American Administration, from the German viewpoint, is not only a very good path to pursue, but that we want to do whatever we can not only to accompany it with words but also with deeds. But it’s, of course, quite clear, very clear indeed, that we intend to do so in close consultation together with our allies and partners.

And of course, today in our exchanges we also talked about an issue that affects both our countries, and that is being intensively debated in Germany right now. And again, the American Secretary of State made it very clear and strongly underlined the fact that the decision taken by General Motors was a decision taken without any political influence having been exerted beforehand by the American Administration, and that is – indeed it’s very good news to receive.

But for the German Government, it’s equally clear that, on the one hand, we have to make sure that as few jobs in Germany are being lost as possible; and at the same time, we place great value on the fact that the funds that we’ve provided to General Motors are being paid back, because we are talking about funds here that have been provided by the German taxpayer and thus the German taxpayer wants that money to be paid back. And I thank you very much for the understanding that you showed on that issue.

And generally speaking, we got off on a very good start not only politically speaking but also on a personal note. Thus, I am looking forward to receiving you very soon, Madame Secretary, Sunday evening, that is, and then again on Monday in Berlin. I will have the honor and the pleasure of being your host then and returning your hospitality, and we will have a chance to continue the discussions of today. Thus, our cooperation has got off on a very good start. We intend to make sure that it continues in that very same vein. We will focus very much on continuing to cooperate very closely between both our governments and both our people. I am looking forward to that.

MR. KELLY: Thank you. We’ll take a few questions. The first question to Nick Kralev, Washington Times.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Hi, Nick. How are you?

QUESTION: I am well. How are you?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Good, thank you.

QUESTION: Welcome back.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, I wanted to ask you for updates on two issues that have to do with Iran. The first one is the hikers with whose families you just met today. If you can tell us what you heard, what you told them, and what’s the course from here.

And the second on the negotiations in the P-5+1 group, you say, on one hand, that you want to work this out diplomatically, you want to keep negotiating; but on the other hand, you are saying that the proposal as it is, it’s not up for discussion. So what is to negotiate, and how do you reconcile those two things? And perhaps the minister would like to comment on the Iran question, too.

Thank you.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, first let me say that earlier today I met with the families of the three American hikers who are detained in Iran. These three young people are obviously not only on the minds of their family members but on the minds of all of us. It was an emotional meeting, and I described to the families everything that we are doing. I was impressed by their strength and fortitude and their commitment. They are determined, as we are, to see these young people return home.

As a mother, my heart went out to all of them. I cannot imagine what it would feel like to know that your child was imprisoned for now a hundred days with very little contact between you and them. I told them we were doing everything we possibly could to get Shane and Joshua and Sarah home, and we are exploring every angle. Obviously, I would hope that the Government of Iran would free them on a humanitarian and compassionate basis as soon as possible and return them home to their families.

On the second issue, we have a unified position that we have presented to the Iranians. That position is clear. It was agreed to originally in principle by the Iranians. There were, of course, questions that they were asking about the details that stood behind the agreement, which both the IAEA and our experts have been answering. But the terms of the agreement, the heart of the agreement, is not and will not be altered. And that is why we continue to call on the Iranian Government to go ahead and accept this agreement and begin to implement it, which we think is in the best interests of the Iranians as well as the rest of the world.

And finally, the point to make is that this offer has been made in good faith. We have worked hard to make sure that there was no misunderstanding about the offer. And we continue to hope that the Iranians will accept it, but our patience is not unlimited.

FOREIGN MINISTER WESTERWELLE: (Via interpreter) Allow me to begin by expressing my solidarity with the three young people affected and their families and relatives.

With respect to our Iran policy, I can only strongly underline what was just said by the American Secretary of State. We're pursuing a dual-track approach. On the one hand, we are ready to enter into a dialogue, to pursue that dialogue, to have negotiations, to talk to the Iranians, and the international community has expressed that readiness on several occasions.

On the one hand – on the other hand, it's equally clear that our patience is not endless. We very much hope that our offer to pursue a dialogue is accepted, but we also want to see good results. The federal chancellor has been very clear, unequivocal, in the speech she delivered to the two houses of Congress earlier this week. And I can only underline what she said in that speech, speaking as the federal foreign minister of Germany: This is the position of the Federal Republic of Germany.

MR. KELLY: Next question for Reinald Becker from ARD.

QUESTION: (Via interpreter) A question addressed to both secretaries, both ministers, a question with respect to General Motors and Opel, the recent decision taken by General Motors. Did you agree today that you would bring your influence to bear with respect to General Motors; that is to say, take up the issue with those responsible at General Motors and point out the situation that is the consequence of this decision in Germany?

FOREIGN MINISTER WESTERWELLE: (Via interpreter) The American Secretary of State showed great understanding for the position that I presented and to the clear words that I found earlier today. Now, as to any further steps that might be taken, these will be steps to be taken by those politicians responsible in our government. As far as the German side is concerned, it will be our economics minister who would have to and will be ready to take the respective steps.

MR. KELLY: Question for Desmond Butler from AP.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, are you concerned about Mahmoud Abbas's announcement that he is not interested in running for reelection and that it's come so quickly after your trip? Did it surprise you, and will you try and persuade him otherwise?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, we have tremendous respect for President Abbas and the leadership that he has offered the Palestinian people for decades. I just saw him on Saturday. George Mitchell saw him on Monday. In each of those conversations, he described in great detail the challenges that he faces, and we talked about his own political future. He reiterated his personal commitment to do whatever he can to achieve a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, something that he’s actually been working on since 1972.

And I agree with him; I think it is the only way for the Palestinian people to fulfill their own aspirations, for Israel to have the kind of security that it deserves. And I look forward to working with President Abbas in any new capacity in order to help achieve this goal.

MR. KELLY: And the last question from Peter Carstens from Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.

QUESTION: (Via interpreter) A question addressed to both of you: What are your expectations of the upcoming Afghanistan conference at the beginning of next year?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, we discussed this at length, and we have a very strong sense of agreement about what we would like to see going forward with the newly elected government. We have been both committed to the people of Afghanistan and to the institutions of their government to carry out a constitutional electoral process.

Now that it is over, it is time for us to begin working together and with our other partners in the international community, as well as with the government and people of Afghanistan, to reach understandings of the kinds of commitments that will be made to the people of Afghanistan, to look for ways we can measure those commitments going forward, and then to make explicit what the international community would be expecting.

I think that the minister and I see eye to eye on this, and we will be working together. I am sure we will talk about it again in Berlin because we want to enlist our counterparts as well as others in making it very clear that there is an opportunity now for President Karzai and his government to really engage on all of the issues, from corruption and transparency, to the rule of law, to good governance, to the delivery of services that the people of Afghanistan are looking for.

FOREIGN MINISTER WESTERWELLE: (Via interpreter) What is important is that we develop our strategy together in close consultation. And this is what we agreed upon today, that we will be in close consultation on the strategic issues. And if I speak of close or when I speak of close consultation, I’m not only thinking of the United States of America and Germany, but I think of the international community as a whole, because I believe that the international community indeed does a very important – have a very important responsibility to bear with respect to freedom and the rule of law in Afghanistan.

And this is why we will continue to talk about and to discuss on the questions that are to do with the expectations that we have of the Afghan Government and the work that they need to do on the domestic front, but I think it is far too early a point in time to give any further details here now. The frame and conditions have already been mentioned earlier in our statement.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you all very much.

FOREIGN MINISTER WESTERWELLE: Thank you very much.

Briefing on U.S.-EU Energy Council

Richard Morningstar
Special Envoy for Eurasian Energy 

Via Teleconference

Washington, DC

November 4, 2009

OPERATOR: Welcome, and thank you for standing by. We’d like to inform all participants your lines are in a listen-only mode. During today’s question and answer session, you may press *1 on your touchtone phone. Also, today’s conference is being recorded. If you have any objections, you may disconnect at this time.

I now turn today’s call over to Ambassador Richard Morningstar. Thank you. You may begin.

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: Hello. I’m going to now first turn you over to Ian Kelly, who will, I guess, have a few introductory comments, and then we’ll go from there.

MR. KELLY: Yeah, this is Ian. I just want to, first of all, establish the ground rules. This is on the record. Welcome to this conference call. And as you know, the participant is Special Envoy for Eurasian Energy Ambassador Richard Morningstar. Ambassador Morningstar has a few remarks to make at the beginning and then we’ll turn it over to your questions.

So, Ambassador Morningstar.

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: Thank you, Ian. And thank you for joining in the call, all of you who are in listen-only mode for the moment. I’ll say just a few words to open up.

Today, we launched what we’re calling the U.S.-EU Energy Council. On the European side, I suppose they’ll call it the EU-U.S. Energy Council. But this is, we think, a very important dialogue that – and very – I might add, very high-level dialogue that will allow the U.S. – the United States and the European Union to have a very open and deep dialogue on strategic energy issues, on energy policy issues, on questions relating to research and technology, and will allow us to take a holistic approach towards energy in which we look at a combination of strategic issues, technology issues and policy issues, all of which ultimately relate to each other.

This is being done at a high level. The co-chairs on the U.S. side are Secretary Chu, who is there this morning, as well as Secretary Clinton, who as I’m sure you know, is in Cairo and could not be back. But Deputy Secretary Steinberg very ably filled in for her. On the European side also represented were three of the commissioners: the commissioner for – EU Commissioner for Research Potocnik; the Commissioner for Transport and Energy Piebalgs; and the Commissioner for External Relations Ferrero-Waldner; as well as High Representative Solana and Swedish Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Energy – Economics and Energy, I guess is the title – Minister Oloffson and Foreign Minister Carl Bildt. They, of course, were here for – also for the U.S.-EU Summit yesterday and participated in today’s meetings. I’m sure you all know this is the Swedish presidency period for the EU.

In addition, we – I can tell you that this Energy Council will be broken down into three working groups, all of which were represented at today’s meeting. And we actually had an informal working group lunch afterwards to further talk about our agenda. And the three working groups will work in the area of energy security and markets, energy policies and regulation, as well as energy technologies and research cooperation.

And on the U.S. side, the Department of Energy will be responsible for the work on technology and research. The Department of State and myself, I’ll be responsible for the – on the U.S. side for the group on security and markets. And on the energy policy side, that’s going be shared on the U.S. side by the Department of Energy and the Department of Commerce, co-chaired.

I can get into who’s involved from the European side, I guess, just very briefly. On the energy security and market side, it’ll be the directorate on external relations. Now, that’s all going to change with the passage or the finalization of the Lisbon Treaty, so that will have a state of transition. I guess the high representatives will, in effect, take that over, whoever that will be under after January.

The energy policies questions will be their directorate on research and energy, and then research – the directorate on research will do research and technology. I can get into some of the specific areas that each of these groups will work on, but I think that it probably is better to – with that brief introduction to open it up for your questions.

OPERATOR: Thank you. At this time for questions on the phone, please press *1. Please unmute your line and record your name to be introduced. Again, for questions, press *1. If you’d like to withdraw the request, you may press *2.

Thank you, and one moment for your first question.

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: Don’t all jump up at once. (Laughter.)

OPERATOR: Okay. Currently, we’re showing no questions. As a reminder, press *1.

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: I’ll get into (inaudible). Is there anybody – how can we find out if anybody is there?

OPERATOR: Okay. And for the phones, we’re currently showing no questions.

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: Well, if it makes any sense, I can give you a little more information on what the types of issues will be worked on. But I assume that there are people there. (Laughter.) Maybe – can our operator tell us that there are, in fact, are people who are dialed in?

OPERATOR: Okay. We actually do have some questions that came in queue.

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: Okay.

OPERATOR: We have Lachlan Carmichael. Your line is open.

QUESTION: Yes. Hi. This is from AFP News Agency. Yeah, if you can connect these meetings to the overall goals at Copenhagen? And also, how do you plan to reach out to the private sector, and are there anybody – is there anybody involved right now from the private sector?

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: I can give you the information on that. First of all, the Energy Council will have absolutely nothing to do with Copenhagen climate change negotiations – the negotiations. However, as I’m sure you would recognize, there is a clear relationship between energy technology issues and climate change. And as we work on energy technology issues, which ultimately will reduce dependence on fossil fuel resources, as we look at efficiency issues, by definition, that’s going to have a positive effect with respect to climate change.

The private sector is going to have a – is going to have to have a very significant role with respect to this work; that, one, we need private sector advice when looking at policy issues, as well as some of the regulatory issues that might come up, and that might involve areas like carbon capture and sequestration. It could involve areas like smart grids and other issues. And at the same time, on the more research and technology related issues in which maybe groundbreaking work will take place, obviously, that can’t be deployed ultimately without the private sector.

We will work – certainly work with the Transatlantic Business Dialogue, although not exclusively, although they’re clearly an organization that I think can provide some good, sound advice, and that each – and that the working groups that are working –that are dealing with the issues that I referred to, they will, as necessary, bring in the private sector. And so, they’re definitely – they’re going to have to be a part of it, and should be a part of it.

OPERATOR: Okay. Thank you. Next question we have is Oleg Zelenis. Your line is open.

QUESTION: Yeah, hi. I’d like to ask you a question. How do you see the role of Russia in the new U.S.-EU energy dialogue? Thank you.

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: That’s a good question. What – and just what is your name again and your affiliation?

QUESTION: It’s Oleg Zelenis from ITAR-TASS.

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: Well, certainly, nothing that we’re going to be doing with respect to the U.S. energy – U.S.-EU Energy Council will have any kind of – will have no negative effect whatsoever in what we’re trying to do with Russia. And in fact, hopefully, it’ll have a very positive effect, because where the United States is working with Russia with respect to an energy dialogue – and that’s part of the new presidential Binational Commission that has been set up by President Obama and President Medvedev – there is an energy working group that will be part of that. In fact, the Secretary of State talked about that when she was in Russia two weeks ago – or three weeks ago, whenever it was.

The European Union has its own discussions with Russia. Obviously, Russia is a major energy partner with Europe. There are opportunities. We have not discussed them yet, but there clearly will be opportunities for the U.S. and Europe and the European Union perhaps to work together with Russia on certain issues.

I want to emphasize that we are seeking engagement with Russia on energy issues, that we want to work together on issues where we can agree, such as the environment, such as efficiency issues. We’re looking at investment issues on both sides of the ocean and market access issues. When we don’t agree on things, we want to talk about them openly and candidly so that we don’t distort each other’s views, and look for rational solutions so that we are – we want very much to have a very constructive dialogue with Russia.

I’ve had two very good meetings with Energy Minister Shmatko over the last several months, and we look forward to that dialogue, and I think the U.S.-European Union dialogue should actually – will ultimately help with respect to the dialogue with Russia.

OPERATOR: Thank you. Next question, Herman Wang. Your line is open.

QUESTION: Hello, gentlemen. My name is Herman Wang. I’m with Platts Inside Energy, and I just had a question about the current climate change or the carbon cap talks that are going on in Congress right now, and I know they’re pretty deadlocked right now. How much will the U.S.’s work with this new U.S.-EU council be hampered if the Senate and Congress, as a whole, fails to come to some sort of incentives and pass a bill on carbon caps?

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: Well, I am not the person to be answering that question because I am not involved at all in the legislation, and we are certainly – this – the issue is certainly going to be on the agenda with Europe, but I can’t say what the effect will be on – with respect to the legislation and whether it passes, doesn’t pass, or whatever. I don’t know, Ian, if you want to make any comment on it.

MR. KELLY: We don’t have a view on that right now.

QUESTION: Okay.

OPERATOR: Okay, thank you. Next question, David Ivanovich, your line is open.

QUESTION: Ambassador, thanks for taking my call. Can you give us a little more specifics about what aspects of the markets the council might be looking at and what aspects of regulation you’re talking about?

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: Yeah, and you’re with?

QUESTION: I’m sorry, Argus Media.

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: Yeah. Well, the working group – there are two working groups that will be – well, actually, all three working groups to some extent are – will be working with markets, but probably – I guess I would say it may be different stages of the development of markets. And the research and technology area will be looking at earlier stages; what are the kinds of things that they can be looking at.

Secretary Chu, for example, at the meeting this morning, talked about how important it is to get the most important minds on both sides of the ocean to look at really cutting-edge issues. An example – and I’m a little bit reluctant to give specific examples because nothing has been set in stone as to what might actually be looked at. But as an example, the – finding the best people to work on liquid metal batteries was something that came up this morning. Again, whether that’ll ultimately become a priority item, I don’t know, but it was just brainstorming as the kind of thing that can be talked about.

Then when you get into things like energy policy, and we really – I mean, that would get more into issues of how do we – what – how do we work with new areas and how do we set up a regulatory framework with respect to new areas, and how can we learn from each other and set up, upfront, best practices and regulatory frameworks that may be compatible. The carbon capture issue was one that was talked about as an example. Electric vehicles was another topic that came up as – again, as a possible example. Again, don’t hold us to that those are going to be the two top areas that are going to be worked on, but there again, just two examples of the kinds of things that were discussed this morning.

The third group which will be looking at issues relating to energy markets and security – energy security and markets will be looking at questions that – as to – that you’re all well – many of you are well aware of – diversification of roots, diversification of supplies, but also looking at how we can develop more transparent, stable, nondiscriminatory markets, how we can best promote transparency, competition, open markets in third countries, for example. And so we’ll be working a lot in that area – in those areas as well.

I talked earlier about some of the other issues that we may get into like smart grids. We could go on and on with examples. The working groups will determine over the next weeks – each working group will have a specific work plan, and then we’ll take action and then report back to the council at the ministerial level.

QUESTION: May I follow up?

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: Sure.

QUESTION: Yeah, can --

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: I’m not sure I’ll be able to answer, but I’ll take your follow-up.

QUESTION: (Laughter.) Well, how will we find out – how will we know what the working groups ultimately decide to do? Will we be informed of that, or is there a way we can keep track of this?

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: Well, we don’t have a specific methodology to keep track of it, but there’s nothing that will be nontransparent about what’s happening. Certainly, the reports that will be – that will go back to the full council will be open. But you raise a good question as to how, on an ongoing basis, can we keep people informed. And that’s – we haven’t – we really haven’t thought that through, but again, there’s nothing nontransparent. And we will definitely think of some way that we can keep people informed. And we’re always open to your calls and questions.

QUESTION: Good. Thanks very much.

OPERATOR: Thank you. Next question, Corine Lesnes, your line is open.

QUESTION: Hi. I have a question about nuclear energy. This is Corine from LeMonde newspaper. How do you deal with nuclear energy with knowing that European countries have very different policies on that?

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: Well, you answered the question. (Laughter.) European countries have different policies. Nuclear power in general is going to be – I’m sure will end up being, to some extent, part of the energy answer over the next – over the coming 10 to 20 years, and – but each member state within Europe is going to have to make their own determinations as to making use of nuclear energy. And just as we have our issues here, some countries have their issues there. So, I mean, nuclear power will be part of the equation, and it’s going to depend on the country.

OPERATOR: All right, thank you. Once again, for questions, press *1, please.

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: Before the next question, let me just – my colleague, Jonathan Kessler here, who has been working hard on these issues, pointed out that for more information, more specific information, you can refer to the summit declaration, which is on the White House website and the Swedish presidency website, as well as the annex to that declaration. There is an annex specifically on the energy council, and you can find out some additional details by looking at that.

And so if there are any other questions?

OPERATOR: Thank you. At this time, we’re showing no questions. As a reminder, press *1, please. (No response.) Thank you. We’re showing no questions at this time.

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: Okay. Well, thank you very much. Ian, do you have any --

MR. KELLY: No, just thank you all for participating, and just to remind you, this was on the record with Ambassador Richard Morningstar.

AMBASSADOR MORNINGSTAR: Thank you.

MR. KELLY: Thank you.

OPERATOR: Thank you for joining today’s conference. You may disconnect. Have a great day.

Interview With Fouad Arif of Al-Aoula Television

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Marakech, Morocco

November 3, 2009

QUESTION: First of all, on behalf of the Moroccan viewers, Madame Secretary of State, I would like to thank you very much, despite a busy week and a very heavy schedule. My first question is during the past 10 years, His Majesty the King Mohammed VI has initiated reforms across the board – social, economic, human rights, and more specifically, women’s rights.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.

QUESTION: I would like to have your take on these changes that have been taking place in Morocco.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, first let me say I am delighted to speak with you. I always enjoy my visits to Morocco. I was here 10 years ago and I have very fond memories of that trip and a prior trip. So for me, this is a special privilege. And I wanted to express my appreciation, as I did when I met with His Majesty King Mohammed VI, for the changes that he is instituting and that under his leadership the Government of Morocco is following through on.

I think the changes are important. I particularly applaud the new freedoms for women. It has enhanced the cooperation and the participation that women have been able to show. I know in recent local elections more than 3,000 women were elected. I think it will make Morocco a stronger country. The more you involve the citizens, the more you empower citizens to make responsible decisions, the stronger Morocco will be.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, as you know, Morocco and the United States are two countries tied by a free trade agreement, which is, by the way, the only one with an African country. But how can the two countries combine their efforts so that there – it has more economic ties?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, of course, we’re very proud that our relationship with Morocco goes back more than 220 years, our longest relationship in the world that is unbroken by any kind of difficulty. And the recent free trade agreement, which I was privileged to vote for when I was a senator from New York, is a modern example of this very deep and broad relationship.

I think that the significance of it is, as you say, the first free trade agreement with any country in Africa on a bilateral basis, a recognition that Morocco’s economy is growing and the United States wants to invest, and a platform for further work that we must do together.

QUESTION: Yesterday, Madame Secretary, you reaffirmed that there is no change in the Obama Administration’s position as far as the Moroccan autonomy plan in the Sahara is concerned. Would you like please to elaborate some more?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, this is a plan, as you know, that originated in the Clinton Administration. It was reaffirmed in the Bush Administration and it remains the policy of the United States in the Obama Administration. Now, we are supporting the United Nations process because we think that if there can be a peaceful resolution to the difficulties that exist with your neighbors, both to the east and to the south and the west, that is in everyone’s interest.

But because of our long relationship, we are very aware of how challenging the circumstances are. And I don’t want anyone in the region or elsewhere to have any doubt about our policy, which remains the same.

QUESTION: President Obama has more than once called for a renewed and a new beginning with the Islamic world. How can Morocco, with its longstanding tradition of coexistence and tolerance, help in this regard? And how do you envision the relations of Morocco and the United States in light of the Cairo speech?

SECRETARY CLINTON: That’s an excellent question because I think that Morocco is especially well positioned to take a leadership role in fulfilling the call for greater cooperation and understanding that President Obama set forth in his Cairo speech. In fact, the President has reached out to His Majesty King Mohammed VI to ask that the King lead one of the interfaith dialogue working groups because of the history of toleration and interfaith cooperation that exists in Morocco. We are looking to Morocco as a model in many areas, and we think in this area of greater understanding between the United States and the Muslim world, Morocco can help lead the way.

QUESTION: How can both countries again combine efforts to advance the peace process towards a two-state solution?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I think by continuing the very helpful support for the process, recognizing how difficult it is for the parties to do this solely on their own, that they need other countries and leaders like His Majesty to be very much pushing and prodding the process along, and I think refraining from inflammatory comments that sometimes come from others in the region, which unfortunately just get everyone agitated and stall the process.

This is very difficult work. It’s an intensely time-consuming effort. The President has evidenced great sincerity and commitment, but we know that you have to build on that by the painstaking outreach to both. And we would welcome and seek the active support of others.

QUESTION: We are going to move a little bit away from the Near East. I would like to ask you a question about the Maghreb region and its neighborhood. This region is facing several challenges, not least of which the economic ones which are made now more problematic because of the borders – Moroccan-Algerian borders are closed for the time being, and also because of the al-Qaida in the Maghreb, which is causing lots of problems. What is your take on this situation, and how can we move to the more positive path?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, we are grateful for our close cooperation with Morocco and with other countries in the Maghreb on counterterrorism, on law enforcement, on mutual cooperation against al-Qaida and other terrorist groups, against drug traffickers and human traffickers. So we are committed to working with you and other nations to help you defend yourself and to create a more positive atmosphere.

But we also hope that there can be greater regional understanding and cooperation across borders, opening up borders, economic cooperation which would benefit – if you look across North Africa through the Maghreb, there is such an opportunity to build a region of economic success. And that requires political discussion and consultation, so we would encourage our friends, certainly Morocco and others, to see how possible that might be and not to be discouraged by the difficulty at starting such a political consultation.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, I would like to thank you very much on behalf of the Moroccan viewers again. Thank you very much.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you. Great to be back here. Thank you.

Interview With Michel Ghandour of Al Hurra Television

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Marakech, Morocco

November 3, 2009

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, first, thank you for your time. You have met yesterday with Arab foreign ministers. Were you able to convince them to take some gestures toward Israel?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, we had a very constructive meeting yesterday. I have pledged to consult with my counterparts, and I try to keep them informed as to what we are doing. I think there was an opportunity at our meeting to explain better how we saw the current situation with respect to the resumption of negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. I was able to clearly answer questions about what is the Israeli offer on no new settlement activity. And we talked about how important it was for President Abbas to continue his leadership and his commitment to the two-state solution – something that he had first stated back in 1972. So we had a very broad-ranging discussion.

But ultimately, I asked for their continuing support for the process, and I asked them to look for ways that they can demonstrate that support both to the Palestinians and to the Israelis.

QUESTION: In the Arab world, they are saying that the U.S. Administration started by criticizing Israel and asking it to – for a settlement freeze, and ended by praising Prime Minister Netanyahu after he denied the American calls. What can you answer?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, first of all, I think President Obama has demonstrated his commitment and sincerity in pursuing a comprehensive peace that includes a two-state solution.

Secondly, both I and Senator Mitchell, our special envoy, have worked constantly since President Obama became our president to reach out not only to the Israelis and the Palestinians, but to the larger region and the world, about everyone working toward this goal.

Thirdly, I believe it’s important to recognize the positive steps that either side takes. That’s why I have been very strongly in favor of what the Palestinians have done on security. And I have done that publicly and privately, not only with them, of course, but with the Israelis and the Arab nations. Because when people do things which advance the cause of a two-state solution, they should be recognized.

Now, when we called under President Obama’s leadership for an end to settlement activity, it was a restatement of American policy and a recommitment to the Obama Administration’s very strong conviction that settlement activity is not legitimate. The President said that in New York.

What the Israeli Government has offered would end all settlement activity that would be going forward. It would end permits, it would end approvals, it would end expropriation of land. It is not at all everything we would want, but for that government to do anything is unprecedented.

So I think that the foreign ministers from Arab nations understood. I showed them how it would work. Now, it is not what anybody would want, but when you negotiate, very often you start off with the maximum position but you try to figure out where you can realistically end up.

What I want is a discussion between the parties on the final status issues – the ’67 borders, the refugees, Jerusalem, everything that needs to be resolved. Anything which moves us toward the resumption of negotiations and closer to our goal of a two-state solution, I am going to say is a positive development.

QUESTION: Do you expect resuming negotiations in the near future?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, we are pushing very hard for such a resumption to occur. But as I have also said, I’m a very patient and persistent person. I know how difficult this is for everyone. And yet I believe it is so much in the interests of both the Palestinians and the Israelis that I am very hopeful we’re going to see that resumption occur.

QUESTION: Last question on the peace process side. Saeb Erekat has said if America cannot get Israel to implement a settlement freeze, what chance do Palestinians have of reaching agreement with Israel on permanent status issues? Can you give the Palestinians and the Arab states guarantees regarding these issues?

SECRETARY CLINTON: There have been numerous peace negotiations between the Palestinians and the Israelis. I know very well what happened in the 1990s with my husband and Yasser Arafat, how close everyone got. And there was no demand or expectation that settlements would be dealt with before the entire negotiation. After my husband’s administration, I know what Prime Minister Sharon and Prime Minister Olmert were talking about with President Abbas and his negotiating team, and there was no demand about settlements. Everyone believed that when the borders of a new state were set, the settlement issue would take care of itself.

So President Obama has gotten more before negotiations ever started out of Israel than anybody has ever gotten, more than was ever asked for before. So I think everyone should take a deep breath and say, look, what is our goal here? Is our goal to end a few hundred settlements or a few thousand more units? Or is our goal a Palestinian state? And I think if we keep that in mind, we’ve actually made some progress along that way, even though not everybody is satisfied with it. But nevertheless, do we want to say, oh, well, that’s not good enough?

Michel, if there had been a final agreement at Camp David, there would have been no more settlements. The capital of a new state would have been in East Jerusalem. And we were so close, but we didn’t achieve it. So now we are here talking about what we talked about 10 years ago. I want to end the talk. I want to see Israel have the security it needs. I want to see the Palestinian people have the state they deserve.

QUESTION: On Iran, Iran has expressed its readiness for a third meeting with the P5+1 in Geneva to discuss how – or to buy uranium from the international community. Are you ready, first, to attend this meeting, the third meeting with Iran, and to sell Iran uranium?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, the P5+1, which are the group of nations negotiating with Iran, have said that they were willing for another meeting. I am sure that the United States will attend. We are waiting for an answer to the offer that was made by the United States and Russia and China and France and the United Kingdom and Germany and the European Union. We believe Iran should accept the offer that was made, and we are hoping that it does so.

QUESTION: On Lebanon, the Lebanese leaders have been trying to form a new government since six or seven months, and they failed. Some leaders are blaming Iran and Syria. How do you view the situation in Lebanon?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, the situation in Lebanon is distressing, and I think it’s time for the people and leadership of Lebanon to stand up for Lebanon, not to stand up for any foreign influence or any other outside concern. And they should put personal interests or personal ambition behind the interests of the entire nation and form a government that represents the full diversity of Lebanon so that decisions can be made that will improve the future for Lebanon.

QUESTION: Last question, Madame Secretary, on Syria. After months of engagement with Syria, how do you assess the dialogue with Damascus? Are you planning to visit Syria in the near future?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I have no plans to visit Syria in the near future, but I do want to see changes in Syrian behavior and actions. We have, as you know, engaged in diplomacy with Syria on a number of issues. But the jury is out as to how Syria intends to respond. We are hoping for a positive response, and we will continue to try to achieve that. But it can’t be just talk. There has to be action as well.

QUESTION: Thank you, Madame Secretary.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you very much.

Special Representative Richard C. Holbrooke's Travel (Taken Question)

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

November 4, 2009

Question: Will Special Representative Holbrooke be traveling to India? If so, when will he be traveling? What is the reason for his trip? Who will he be meeting with?

Answer: Ambassador Holbrooke’s travel plans are still in the works. We have no announcements to make at this time.

###

U.S.-Azerbaijan Security Dialogue

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

November 4, 2009

Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs Andrew J. Shapiro and Azerbaijani Deputy Foreign Minister Araz Azimov met on November 4, 2009, in Washington, D.C. for the 11^th U.S.-Azerbaijan Security Dialogue. The talks built upon the success of the previous Dialogue, held in Washington in July 2007.
The Dialogue focuses on international and regional security issues and enhancing bilateral cooperation in the areas of maritime security, counterterrorism and counternarcotics, border security, and nonproliferation.

U.S. Welcomes Agreement in Croatia-Slovenia Talks

Washington, DC

November 4, 2009

We congratulate the Prime Ministers of Slovenia and Croatia on their important agreement signed today in Stockholm, and for their courageous and visionary leadership to resolve this long standing border issue through arbitration.

We hope that the ratification and implementation of this agreement will move forward expeditiously. This outcome is in the best interests of both countries as good neighbors and partners in the region and Europe as a whole.

United States-Armenia Joint Economic Taskforce

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

November 4, 2009

The U.S. Department of State welcomed Nersis Yeritsian, Armenia’s Minister of Economy, and his delegation for the 18^th iteration of the U.S.-Armenia Joint Economic Taskforce (USATF). During his visit to the U.S., Minister Yeritsian and his team met with officials from several agencies in the U.S. Government, including the Department of State, Department of Treasury, Department of Commerce, and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.

The USATF, established in 2000, has met semi-annually to provide a forum in which to further cooperation between our two countries, advance economic and market reforms in Armenia, and discuss opportunities for U.S. assistance to contribute to Armenia’s long-term economic development. The task force is an open forum to discuss issues of concern and interest to both countries. This year’s discussion in Washington, D.C., co-chaired by Daniel N. Rosenblum, Coordinator for Assistance to Europe and Eurasia, and Minister Yeritsian, focused on the following themes: promoting good governance and democracy development, addressing regional issues, and enhancing the business climate in Armenia. The resulting action plan, which details the specific actions each side will take to further our mutual cooperation on Armenia’s development, includes items from all of these areas.

The U.S. Government and the Government of Armenia concluded an important agreement on science and technology cooperation as part of the Task Force’s meetings in Washington, D.C. The Director of the National Science Foundation, Dr. Arden Bement Jr., joined Minister Yeritsian in signing a memorandum of understanding that will facilitate cooperation in numerous areas of mutual interest between the United States and Armenia, including information technology, intellectual property, earth sciences, and others.

Remarks on The Plane in Cairo, Egypt

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Cairo, Egypt, DC

November 4, 2009

QUESTION: There seems to be a little confusion over whether the Egyptian position, which, as expressed by the foreign minister earlier in the week, seemed quite harsh, was very much (inaudible) Palestinians (inaudible), that the (inaudible) take up an opportunity to (inaudible), said fine, (inaudible), yeah, we’re not going to come out and scream and yell anymore, and maybe we’re going to tell them they shouldn’t do it, or he was just being polite? How did you interpret it?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I thought it was a very productive meeting. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Candid, cooperative?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Candid, cooperative, productive, constructive – and shows the value of consultation and listening and sharing ideas and hearing the other side and putting forth your views and explaining. I thought it was a very, very (inaudible).

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, in order to get the Palestinians to the negotiating table for – to start talking about full – about final status issues, would you – are you able to give them a guarantee that the negotiations would be about a state within the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital?

SECRETARY CLINTON: We are working – and I don’t want to get into negotiating details, but we are working to really fulfill what were, in essence, the terms of reference for any negotiations set forth in President Obama’s speech to the United Nations. I don’t think enough attention may have been paid to exactly what the President said and the importance of what he reaffirmed as the American position. And it obviously is about the territory occupied since 1967, it is about Jerusalem, it is about refugees, it’s about all of those final status issues.

So we want to be facilitating the return to negotiations. We don’t think that there’s any question in anybody’s mind about what’s going to be talked about.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, I just want to clarify something the Egyptian foreign minister said. On the one hand in the briefing, he said that any more settlement activity is completely unacceptable, but then in another breath, he said we’re focused on the endgame; we don’t want this issue or that issue to impede getting there. So in your private conversation with him, how did you understand the resolution of those seemingly conflicting comments?

SECRETARY CLINTON: The --

QUESTION: (Inaudible) one issue means don’t let settlements get in the way –

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, but that’s our position. We don’t think there should be continued settlement activity either. We would like to make it as clear as possible, which, as you heard, I repeated for the question from the Egyptian media. Our position has not changed. We have the same position. There is a desire to get into these final status negotiations, and we think taking advantage of a stop to all new settlement construction happens to be in the best interests of the negotiations.

QUESTION: Secretary Clinton --

QUESTION: So then it wouldn’t be a precondition anymore? The Egyptians might go along with saying, okay, then don’t have a precondition, get it back to the table?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I don’t want to speak for the Egyptians.

QUESTION: Okay.

SECRETARY CLINTON: And I think that you should let the foreign minister’s words stand for themselves. And Jeff speaks Arabic, so he can go into more detail about that. But I think it was very clear that the – and this is not very different from what I heard from my counterparts in Morocco. We have to figure out a way to get into the re-launch of negotiations.

And things have happened along the way, the Goldstone report being the most recent and the most difficult for everybody. And that was not – and you saw what happened is the Palestinians tried to postpone so that it wouldn’t be an issue and then they got criticized for that. And I mean, so – but that doesn’t take away from what the ultimate objective is, and that’s what I think you heard from Aboul Gheit and what you heard from me.

QUESTION: Have you talked with --

QUESTION: But how – where does Abbas get the cover to take that heat? Where does Abbas get the cover to drop the precondition?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Go ahead, (inaudible).

U.S. OFFICIAL: But he does not have to sign up for this deal. This is something that the Israelis are putting on – are talking about putting on the table. He doesn’t have to sign up for it at all. No one’s asking him to bless it.

QUESTION: No, you’re asking him to sign up for talks though, right?

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, but that’s slightly different. The Israelis are offering this. It can be rejected by everyone. There’s no imposition of it, no requirement for it. The Israelis will decide whether or not they want to go forward with it. That’s up to the Israelis, obviously. But at the end of the day, this discussion about settlements will be mooted by getting into negotiations about borders. Because then, you can build what you want in your state and the other can build what they want in their state.

QUESTION: So just to follow up on my question very quickly, some Palestinians – some Palestinian officials have said that if you were – if the Americans were to give guarantees that negotiations would be about a state within the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital, they would consider this as an encouragement to sit down at the table of negotiations.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, and I think that’s --

QUESTION: Is that one way of getting around the settlement issue?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I think that’s a very welcome suggestion, and it is something that --

QUESTION: Is that something you’ve talked – discussed with them?

SECRETARY CLINTON: We have. We have discussed it with nearly everyone.

STAFF: I think it’s time to buckle up, guys.

QUESTION: Thank you.

Remarks With Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Ali Aboul Gheit (Revised)

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Presidential Palace

Cairo, Egypt

FOREIGN MINISTER GHEIT: (Via interpreter) I would like to welcome the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. We had – she has had – just finished now a meeting with President Mubarak, a meeting that lasted more than an hour. We also met with Secretary Clinton yesterday evening, myself personally, as well as Omar Suleiman (inaudible). These were two-hour – that was a two-hour meeting of very intensive work. Our consultations between the U.S. and Egypt touched on the issue of the situation in Palestine, the effort for peace between the Palestinians and the Israelis, and how we can put back the negotiations on track.

We have also talked about the regional issues, such as Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan and Lebanon. And also our consultations between the two countries are productive, are frank, candid, and are clear. And we have a good understanding of all the issues. Each side put forth his own vision. And we also report our vision of the Egypt vision for the peace – for pushing peace forward, and our consultations keep on being productive.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you very much. It is a pleasure for me to be here with my counterpart Foreign Minister Gheit. He and I have had numerous meetings and telephone conversations ever since I assumed the position of Secretary of State. As he has just said, we’ve had a very productive, comprehensive meeting last night with the foreign minister and with General Suleiman, and then, we had a constructive and very positive meeting with President Mubarak.

The United States sees Egypt as an essential partner, not only in the Middle East, but on global and regional issues, as well. And we are committed to working with Egypt to strengthen and deepen our cooperation and our partnership on these vital matters.

Our main focus today with President Mubarak was, of course, on Middle East peace efforts. I emphasized to the president that President Obama, Special Envoy Mitchell who is here with me today, and I are all deeply and personally committed to achieving a two-state solution and comprehensive peace between Israelis, Palestinians, and all of their Arab neighbors. It is a commitment that brought us to the region this week and to Cairo specifically last night and today. We are working hard to help the parties come together in negotiations that can yield progress toward our shared objectives. And we regard Egypt and other Arab neighbors as critical partners in helping to move this effort forward. I assured the president, the minister, and the general that the United States shares their deep concerns about the people of Gaza.

As I said in Marrakech two days ago, I believe we can find a way through the difficult and tangled history that too often prevents us from making progress for a comprehensive peace and a two-state solution. We can maintain an allegiance to the past, but we cannot change the past. No matter what we say about it, it is behind us. So we must follow the (inaudible) that has been put forward by President Obama and help shape a future that will be vastly better for the children of both Palestinians and Israelis.

I came to Sharm el-Sheikh shortly after becoming Secretary of State and expressed that deep commitment in a very personal and public way. So as we work together on this critical issue, we are also cooperating in a spirit of mutual respect to build a better future for the people of Egypt. As part of that effort, President Obama and I are committed to realizing the vision of the Cairo speech: education, human development, economic partnership, the promotion of human rights. We support the efforts of civil society, political parties, and minority communities, and we support improvements in the lives of everyday Egyptians.

I also expressed our gratitude for Egypt’s leadership on regional and global issues. We discussed the threat that Iran poses to regional stability, including the nuclear file. As President Obama has said, it is time for the Iranian Government to decide what kind of future it seeks. And we have made very clear to them that patience does have its limits. We also consulted on matters ranging from Afghanistan to Yemen, and in particular, on our shared support for the formation of a strong, sovereign government in Lebanon that can advance the aspirations of all of the Lebanese people. So Mr. Minister, thank you again. Thank you also to President Mubarak for a very good and fruitful discussion. And I look forward to the continuing good work that we can do together.

FOREIGN MINISTER GHEIT: Thank you very much, Secretary. We will answer two questions – one from the Egyptian side and one from the American side, if there will be any questions from the Americans. So you will make the selection from (inaudible).

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, no, you have to choose.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, you choose me? (Laughter.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.

QUESTION: Yes, thank you. Thank you. Madame Secretary, my question is President Obama’s lecture in the Cairo University gives us some hope that you are backing the position that Israel has to stop settlements. What is the reasons for this change in the position that (inaudible) through the hard work? And a second point, if I can.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.

QUESTION: What’s your view concerning the Egyptian ideas of having the paper of guarantees given to the Palestinians concerning a deadline for the negotiations? Thank you.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you, and thank you for asking. First, I want to start by saying our policy on settlements has not changed. And I want to say it again, our policy on settlement activity has not changed. We do not accept the legitimacy of settlement activity. And we have a very firm belief that ending all settlement activity, current and future, would be preferable, and that is what we have put forth, and that is what we have continued to support.

What we have received from the Israelis to halt all new settlement activity – and I’ll repeat that again, too – to halt all new settlement activities and to end the expropriation of land, and to issue no permits or approvals, is unprecedented. It is not what we would prefer, because we would like to see everything ended forever. But it is something that I think shows at least a positive movement toward the final status issues being addressed. Just as when the Palestinians made progress on security, I stand and say that is a positive step, even though some may not believe it, I think it’s a positive step, and I say that.

So what we’re looking at here is a recognition that getting into the final status negotiations will allow us to bring an end to settlement activity because we will be moving toward the Palestinian state that I and many others have long advocated and worked for. So I think that that perhaps clarifies where we are on this, and I appreciate your question.

Secondly, on the paper of guarantees, we discussed in great detail what is a productive way forward. And there are some ideas that we’ve received from our Egyptian counterparts that we are going to be taking back today to the President and to the White House, and we very much appreciate the suggestions that they have put forward to us.

QUESTION: And make the choice of the American (inaudible)?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I’ll delegate that to Colonel Crowley. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Hi, I’m Andy Quinn from Reuters. First thing, a quick follow-up to the previous question, and this is a question for Mr. Aboul Gheit: Secretary Clinton has just described the U.S. policy as unchanged on settlements. After your discussions today and yesterday evening, are you persuaded that the U.S. still backs a freeze on Israeli settlement activity, or do you feel that there’s some backtracking going on?

And the second question is for both of you: The U.S. House of Representatives has voted to condemn the Goldstone report which goes before the United Nations General Assembly shortly. To what extent do you believe that the Goldstone report has become an impediment to the resumption of peace talks?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I’ll start because he’s an American – (laughter) – and then I’ll let Ahmed finish.

We believe that it is important to focus on the long-term aspirations of the Palestinian people. I have said this before, and you will not be surprised to hear me say it again, it is very painful to me personally, that with Egypt’s help when my husband was President, we came so close. And the last meeting in Taba laid out what would have been a path toward a Palestinian state that would be operating today. So I carry with me a personal conviction that nothing can be allowed to interfere with our determination and our resolve and our commitment to move this forward.

So yes, are there impediments along the way? You mentioned one; there are many others. But we cannot let anything deter us. In talking with President Mubarak, we were reminiscing about some of the hard decisions that we have seen that had to be faced in this area over the past years, and of course, he has so many years of experience. And he was telling us about how even at the very end of the Camp David agreement that ended the difficulties between Israel and Egypt, there were still people who wanted to change it, derail it, and prevent it.

So this is something that, when you are doing the work we are doing, the foreign minister and I, you have to stay focused on what is the ultimate outcome you are seeking, and I think we share that commitment. We want to see a Palestinian state. We want to see Israel living in security. We want to see the Palestinian people given a chance to chart their own destiny. So we’re not going to let anything deter us or prevent us from working as hard as we possibly can, going forward.

FOREIGN MINISTER GHEIT: May I answer? I will respond in Arabic after your permission, for the benefit of the Egyptian and Arab news media, and then we would have a translation. (Speaking in Arabic.) She will be translating, and I think I spoke at length. (Laughter.)

(Via interpreter) About the U.S. position towards the settlements, we have listened with great interest to the reaction of the U.S. Secretary of State yesterday and today about the conceptions, or perceptions, , if you will, that there has been a sort of backtracking from the side – from the U.S. side. We talked about this very clearly and very candidly. We listened to the U.S. vision. The United States holds on – is committed to its vision that there is no legitimacy to settlement, that the United States rejects settlements. And we also listened that Israel has not been responsive to the desires of the United States, that it rests opposed to them. The United States has not changed its position of rejecting settlements and the settlement activities. And the United States is calling on the resumption of negotiations.

So now I give you the answer that you gave them about our – the Egyptian answer. We feel that Israel is hindering the process. Israel is putting conditions for the – in order to benefit – to continue the settlement activities even and – if these settlement activities will be limited. Therefore, the United States and Secretary Clinton feel that there has been a progress nevertheless by – about the issue of freezing the settlements, even if it’s not fully complete. And here, we feel that we need to focus on the end of the course. We have listened to the U.S. position that we also – and it has been conveyed to us we need to focus on the end of the road and on the road. We should not waste time. The United States is --

QUESTION: What is the end game?

FOREIGN MINISTER GHEIT: (Via interpreter) And the U.S. is committed to see the negotiations move forward on clear basis.

Now about your second segment of the question about the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Congress calling – not considering the Goldstone report, I’ll tell you this: This report is at the UN General Assembly. It’s been under discussion. There will be a resolution issued in a few hours about it. And we will move forward on this particular course. Nevertheless, and I can tell you that Egypt or the broader international community had anything to do with the views of the members of congress, as also I can tell you that members – some members of congress have also said that this report needs further deep studying and examination, and that there should be an extra effort, as this report has taken a lot of time to be (inaudible) and should not be thrown out of the window.

STAFF: Another – two questions, as the Secretary has agreed.

QUESTION: (Via interpreter) My question is addressed to Secretary of State Clinton and those who go to the region see that isolating, separating wall, look that the Palestinian areas and the – some territories in the West Bank, some large chunks of it is in the West Bank. In those areas, it is forbidden for the Palestinians to build anything. The Israelis continue on a daily basis to confiscate land.

So talking also about the greater Jerusalem picture, knowing that this would – there is a split between the north and the south of the city, what would be the shape of the Palestinian state in the U.S. opinion? And would it have (inaudible) contiguity – would it be an impact to shape, or also can we say that it would look like the Native American entity or status within the United States?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I can repeat to you what President Obama said in his speech at the United Nations and what he said here in Cairo – that the United States believes that we need a state that is based on the territory that has been occupied since 1967. And we believe that that is the appropriate approach. It is what has been discussed when my husband was president with Yasser Arafat, and it is what has been discussed between the Israelis and the Palestinians and the Bush Administration when President Abbas has been there.

I think that there is no doubt in anyone’s mind that moving toward a state that reflects the aspirations and the rights of the Palestinian people must include all of the issues that have both been discussed and mentioned by President Obama, and that includes Jerusalem. And I would only repeat that it’s such an emotional issue for me. We would not be having this discussion if we had reached a deal, because as you remember, the parameters that were laid out would have recognized a state on the ’67 borders with some swapping of land agreeable to both sides, and it would have also established the capital for the Palestinian state in East Jerusalem, and it would have created a shared responsibility with international support to protect the holy places that are holy to all three major religions of Abraham.

So we want to assure you that our goal is a real state with real sovereignty with the kind of borders that will enable the people of Palestine to make decisions about where they live and what they do on their own. And it is important to us, and we know that it is vitally important to the people of the region and particularly, most especially, the Palestinians and the Israelis.

FOREIGN MINISTER GHEIT: May I follow up on what the Secretary has just stated?

(Via interpreter) Here, this position that was just stated by Secretary Clinton – we say that we approve it and we are in agreement totally with it. We support it fully, we support fully this U.S. position because it reflects a conviction that – of a Palestinian state that is capable, that will be on all of the territories that were occupied in 1967 and that will be a hundred percent of those territories, because a hundred percent of those territories goes to the Palestinians despite the swaps that would happen.

And with this, also East Jerusalem is for the Palestinians. With this, this is clear and with this such position, we support the U.S. fully.

STAFF: Finally, Robert Burns from AP.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.

QUESTION: Over to your question of your trip --

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.

QUESTION: Looking back over the past eight or nine days – somehow it seems longer than that. (Laughter.) You’ve dealt with a wide range of the major issues affecting the entire region, from Pakistan and Afghanistan to the Middle East and North Africa. I wonder if you could give us an assessment of areas in which you feel you made some advancements and areas where you fell short or stumbled?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, of course, I think I only made advancements – (laughter) – and I happen to believe that, not just responding to your question. I think that the level and intensity of the discussions that I have taken part in over the last days, starting in Pakistan, have certainly been productive, constructive, and helped to clarify the approach that the United States is taking and is committed to taking in all of the different settings that I was part of.

I think that in talking about this with President Mubarak earlier, every issue that we touched on during this trip is complicated and difficult. Each requires patience, perseverance, and determination to see them through. There are – if these were easy questions with simple answers, I would not have made this trip. I know how challenging they are. We have some of the best people in the United States with Ambassador Holbrooke and Senator Mitchell working on these complicated matters.

But it is important to recognize that after a period of time in which the United States’s position was rejected, or was certainly questioned, what we are doing is very carefully and consistently rebuilding those bonds, creating those partnerships, finding common ground so that we and our international partners will be able to make progress.

And so I feel very satisfied by what we accomplished on this trip in every one of our settings. I am not someone who is in any way affected by difficulty, who is living in a world apart from the real world in which we inhabit where it takes just an enormous amount of effort to get to where we are headed. The two-state solution is one of the most difficult. We know that from years of efforts. But I have a great team. I have a lot of confidence in the team of people working on these matters. And we have a president who is 100 percent committed. And so I think that’s exactly the combination that we need.

STAFF: Thank you very much.

QUESTION: Secretary Clinton, what happens now? How far or close are we toward the resumption of Israeli-Palestinian talks, if you (inaudible)?

SECRETARY CLINTON: We are working hard to see that happen.

QUESTION: Weeks, months?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I’m not going to make predictions. One of the things that President Mubarak and I were talking about is how we have to be so focused on what we’re doing, but we also have to try, the best we can, to answer questions. So I will say we’re working hard to get there.

# # #

Secretary Clinton Announces New Initiatives to Bolster Science and Technology Collaboration With Muslim Communities Around the World

Marrakech, Morocco

November 3, 2009

In remarks at the Forum for the Future in Marrakech today, Secretary Clinton announced new initiatives to bolster science and technology collaboration with Muslim communities around the world. The Secretary named Dr. Bruce Alberts, Dr. Elias Zerhouni, and Dr. Ahmed Zewail as the first three U.S. Science and Technology Envoys and announced that the State Department will expand positions for environment, science, technology, and health officers at U.S. embassies.

“We want to help Muslim majority communities develop the capacity to meet economic, social and ecological challenges through science, technology, and innovation,” Secretary Clinton said.

The U.S. Science Envoy program is part of President Obama’s “New Beginning” initiative with Muslim communities around the world that he launched in a June 4 speech in Cairo, Egypt. He pledged that the United States would “appoint new science envoys to collaborate on programs that develop new sources of energy, create green jobs, digitize records, clean water, and grow new crops.” The initiative received key support from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Senator Richard Lugar.

In the coming months, the first Science Envoys will travel to countries in North Africa, the Middle East, and South and Southeast Asia. They will engage their counterparts, deepen partnerships in all areas of science and technology, and foster meaningful collaboration to meet the greatest challenges facing the world today in health, energy, the environment, as well as in water and resource management. Additional U.S. scientists and engineers will be invited to join the Science Envoy program to expand it to other Muslim countries and regions of the globe.

Dr. Bruce Alberts is widely recognized for his work in the fields of biochemistry and molecular biology. Dr. Alberts is a professor in the Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics at the University of California, San Francisco. As president of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) from 1993 to 2005, he was instrumental in developing the landmark National Science Education standards that have been implemented in school systems throughout the U.S.

Dr. Elias Zerhouni, M.D., was director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from 2002 to 2008. Dr. Zerhouni is currently a senior advisor to Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and was instrumental in creating the University’s Institute for Cell Engineering. Dr. Zerhouni received his medical degree at the University of Algiers School of Medicine and completed his residency at the John Hopkins School of Medicine.

Dr. Ahmed Zewail is the Linus Pauling Chair Professor of Chemistry and Professor of Physics at the California Institute of Technology and Director of the Institute’s Physical Biology Center for Ultrafast Science and Technology. Dr. Zewail was awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1999 for his pioneering work in femtoscience, which allowed observation of exceedingly rapid molecular transformations. Most recently, Dr. Zewail was appointed to the Presidential Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.

The envoys will be supported by new embassy officers who will also engage with international partners on the full range of environmental, scientific and health issues, from climate change and the protection of oceans and wildlife to cooperation on satellites and global positioning systems. They will work with multilateral institutions, non-governmental organizations and private sector partners to promote responsible environmental governance, foster innovation, and increase public engagement on shared environmental and health challenges.

Briefing En Route Cairo

Philip J. Crowley
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Public Affairs

Cairo, Egypt

November 3, 2009

MR. CROWLEY: Just to kind of give you a little bit of a sense of when we land in Cairo, George Mitchell will just have flown over from Amman, Jordan. He’ll come on the airplane, and the Secretary and he will spend a few minutes comparing notes on what each has done since we last saw them Saturday night. George stayed in Jerusalem, had some additional meetings with Israeli officials on Monday, and then traveled over to Amman and – for meetings with Jordanian officials.

From our standpoint, Egypt has a 30-year history of direct involvement in peace in the Middle East going back to the historic treaty of 1979. So from the Secretary’s point of view, given that Foreign Minister Aboul Gheit was not able to come to the Forum for the Future – he was hosting some Iraqi officials in Cairo – that we thought it was just very important that before leaving the region that we touch base with one of the key players in the peace effort.

So the Secretary will first meet with General Suleiman, the national security advisor to President Mubarak. He has been focused on the reconciliation effort among the Palestinians, and he’ll have the opportunity to update us on his efforts. Then the meeting will be joined by Foreign Minister Aboul Gheit, and then they’ll have dinner, and then tomorrow morning before we depart Cairo for home, the Secretary will meet with President Mubarak and I think there’ll be a press availability for all of you before we head back to the States.

QUESTION: Sorry. You were talking about the meetings that Senator Mitchell had. Can you tell us who all he met with? I understand King Abdullah. Did he meet with Abu Mazen again? And what happened differently than in the meeting with – in Abu Dhabi with the Secretary?

MR. CROWLEY: I’m not aware that he met with Abu Mazen. I believe he did meet with King Abdullah. I have not gotten a readout, to be honest with you, on what they discussed.

QUESTION: P.J., this may seem obvious, but can we – do you – the totality of what the Secretary is saying recently about how positive it is for Israel to offer a halt to settlements and no more expropriations, can we deduce from that that part of what’s going on here is she’s asking the Palestinians to drop the precondition and to consider what Israel has done as important and something that they can sell as a freeze to their public and get on with the peace talks? Is that what she’s doing?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, let me start from a different place and come back to that. As we’ve said throughout the trip, there’s clearly a gap between the two parties. We’ve been encouraging for several weeks now for negotiations to begin as soon as possible. That remains our hope. So on the standpoint, we’re simply trying to chip away at this gap. And as she has said yesterday and today, any steps that we feel narrow this gap and move the parties forward to a negotiation we see as a positive development.

So certainly, she – in her meeting with President Abbas the other day, she suggested very directly that, in our view, his best interest is to get to negotiations as soon as possible. And obviously, in her meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu, while their offer falls short of what we had suggested, obviously that is, in her view – the word again – unprecedented. And so – but certainly, we’ll have the opportunity with President Mubarak to compare notes on – he’s a very adroit reader of the parties. He’s had his own interaction. President Mubarak has a very good working relationship with Prime Minister Netanyahu.

QUESTION: Just as a follow, so is it too strong for us to report that she’s become an advocate for them dropping the precondition?

MR. CROWLEY: Let me get there a different way. We do not think that there should be preconditions to negotiations, and we do not think – and we believe that it – that both parties will be best served by getting into negotiations as quickly as possible. But we do understand how the settlement issue is important to the Palestinians. It’s important to the Israelis. It’s important to others in the region. And what we’re trying to do, what we were doing in our consultations with various leaders in Morocco is to try to just figure out what is the best way forward. How can we help move the parties towards the start of negotiations? So I wouldn't – I just wouldn't say it as directly as that, but our view is, on the one hand, there should be no preconditions. On the other hand, we want to see negotiations start as quickly as possible, and we’re just simply trying to see how we can move the two closer to where they feel comfortable with making that decision.

QUESTION: Two questions. One, the Palestinians say that it’s not a precondition that they’re putting to restart the talks. They’re simply saying Israel has to fulfill its obligations under the Roadmap, and if they can’t even do that, why should we sit down to talk to them? But another question is you’ve said several times that you’re looking at creative ideas to kickstart this process. Can you tell us a little bit more? I mean, what is the way around this issue of settlement freeze? It’s – neither side is really budging enough to satisfy the other.

MR. CROWLEY: I suppose I would just say this will take political courage on both sides. These are very difficult issues. As the Secretary has reflected at various times, they’ve been close before and for whatever reason, or a combination of circumstances, they’ve just never been able to get over the finish line. So this is a – I mean, there are specific technical issues involved here. They’re well known. But this is also a political challenge, and so it does take what kind of confidence-building measures can we establish that, whether or not they’re perfect – and the Secretary has said again today in the interviews – we can’t – in this process, you can’t afford to make perfect an obstacle to the very good. So if you take absolute positions, then it’s unlikely that negotiations are going to start. We feel very strongly that both parties are best served by getting to negotiation, putting all of these issues on the table. And if you get to an agreement, then you’ve solved – you have, in fact, solved these various issues, including settlements, including borders, including refugees, and obviously including Jerusalem.

So I’m not sure I can answer it any – in a different way, but to the extent that we can take steps, encourage them to take steps that then give them confidence, provide some momentum to this effort that gets them to a point where they might say it’s not everything we were looking for, but it’s enough, there’s enough of an investment or they’re beginning to have enough confidence that the dynamic will begin to – they’ll see the dynamic as constructive. So we’ll be looking at a variety of ways that increase the interaction between the parties in some form, find ways that they can begin to address the issues. If we can do that, then we think that at some point baby steps then create a momentum of their own and the effort can pick up steam. So we recognized coming into the region that things have stalled, and we’re just looking – keep looking to see how we can begin to create some forward momentum again.

QUESTION: P.J., you mentioned that General Suleiman will be – is focusing a lot on this issue of Palestinian reconciliation and unity government. Does – do you have any particular message that you will be giving him on that issue?

MR. CROWLEY: I don’t think so. We have a fairly clear stated position, which is we look for whatever combination of circumstances make negotiation more feasible and success more likely. Clearly, you have a situation now where you have a divided Palestine between the West Bank and Gaza. There’s a – obviously, the president, Abu Mazen, has requested of his electoral body to evaluate whether elections are even feasible at this point in time given the situation on the West Bank and Gaza. And I think they’re due to report back to him sometime in the next couple of weeks.

A national – a government of national unity, we feel would be clearly more effective. But obviously, that government would – has to be guided by the well-established Quartet principles fundamentally including recognizing Israel’s right to exist. But – so we will be comparing notes with General Suleiman on where the reconciliation process stands, and then charting out how that fits into some of the other pieces of the puzzle that we currently see.

QUESTION: I wanted to ask – I mean, given all the difficulties over the Goldstone report which you have talked about, plus the – on both sides, and the challenges that are coming up with the planned Palestinian election, tell us what is the real feasibility of anything happening before January, and to what extent is it taking all of your effort to simply just keep this alive?

QUESTION: Why not wait?

QUESTION: Yeah, and that’s the other question. Why not wait, as Jay said?

QUESTION: (Inaudible) the Palestinian Authority that sorts themselves out of it because it’s so fluid?

QUESTION: It’s its life support.

MR. CROWLEY: Well, on the first question, I don’t want to get ahead of the Palestinian electoral bodies. I mean, they’re evaluating the feasibility of elections under the current circumstances. They could come back and say, look, Hamas refuses to even hold it in Gaza. So let’s wait and see. That’s a pretty effective body. Let’s wait and see what their determination is.

On the other issue, Jay, I just think those who are experienced in these issues, waiting is never a good thing. I mean, we always carry a sense of urgency into the Middle East because if there’s a vacuum, there are lots of spoilers very willing to take advantage of that vacuum. Sometimes the effort has an impact in and of itself. As you – it does give people a sense of hope that there’s something better out there. In the absence of that hope, we too often in the past have seen events spiral into violence. And so with so much unresolved, we just think that this is part of the commitment that the Obama Administration made that they would tackle this issue on day one. And so this is just – this is a continuation of that because we just think that without this effort, it’s likely that things will go from difficult to worse.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR. CROWLEY: There is value in having a process, even though sometimes it will advance more rapidly and sometimes it will advance at a snail’s pace.

QUESTION: I was just wondering – I mean, Middle East peace talks have taken place often over the last few years, and most people agree that both parties know what the final settlement is going to look like, what the deal is really going to look like. It’s just about making it happen and crossing that finish line. Has the time come for Washington to say to put a deal on the table, say okay guys, come to the table, this is what we’re going to negotiate, just come and sit down, enough of all this going back and forth about settlements and et cetera, et cetera?

MR. CROWLEY: We have constructed this phase to have discussions with the parties to see what they might be able to put forward together with other countries in the region and to see if that combination of confidence-building measures would get the parties to negotiation. That’s still where we are. And as the President said, as the Secretary reported to the President a couple of weeks ago, there has been some progress, but clearly, at this point, not enough. I think that's part of why the Secretary is here. She wanted to look Prime Minister Netanyahu in the eye, face to face. She wanted to look President Abbas in the eye, face to face. She wanted to talk directly to key players in the region, as she will President Mubarak tomorrow morning. And then based on these discussions, we'll say is there still potential in this current structure or do we need to look at other alternatives. They are available. But I think for the moment, we will – we're going to keep on this path as long as we think it has promise.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.) I'm sorry, so you're actually opening up the possibility that she's going to – that the result of this analysis and these consultations might be that there is not hope in this particular way you're doing it now, that there might be a better way to do it? So I didn't realize you were even thinking of maybe scrapping this (inaudible).

MR. CROWLEY: Let's not leap ahead of ourselves. I mean, we're still on the path we've been on for several months, dealing directly with the Palestinians, the Israelis, working the various countries in the region. We think we've pocketed some actions that countries are willing to take if the parties get to negotiation. We want to see the parties get to negotiation as quickly as possible. And if this particular path we don’t think can get there, then we'll look at other opportunities.

I mean, clearly, as the Secretary said, we believe the only way to solve these issues is through a negotiation. And only through a negotiation will you get to the aspirations of the two sides – security on the one hand and a state on the other hand. The United States has in the past put forward its ideas to the parties. But I don't want to – we're on this current path. I don't want to project too far ahead.

QUESTION: P.J., it's pretty clear what you're asking the Palestinians is to drop the demand for a freeze. Are you making an analogous demand to the Israelis? What are you asking them to do or to sacrifice, specifically right now, to get to negotiations? And – well, let's just leave it at that.

MR. CROWLEY: I think I'll defer and not do the negotiation in public. I mean, that's one of the reasons George Mitchell stayed behind is to continue the conversation with the Israel side on the ideas that they have put forward and to see what else might be there. And we've had the same – similar conversations with various leaders in the region. But we think we've closed the gap some in these last few days coming up. And – but that gap is still there, so there's still more work to be done.

QUESTION: Can you just give us a readout on her bilat with the Libyan and give us the spelling of his name?

MR. CROWLEY: Hold on a second. All right. We'll branch off a little bit. She did two bilaterals this morning. The first was with Foreign Minister Frattini of Italy. They talked about three subjects – the situation in Afghanistan, the Middle East peace, and Iran.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR. CROWLEY: Iran.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR. CROWLEY: Well, let me – the vast majority of the discussion was on Afghanistan. Obviously, the Italians have some efforts that they're already doing, and they kind of traded ideas on what the international community can do specifically on building different kinds of capacity within Afghanistan as the new government takes office, things like the rule of law. The Secretary obviously mentioned the importance of security forces, judges, and so forth. So it's just simply now you're beginning to get – we are in that transition period where – now it's – and as – I mean, you heard from the Secretary in terms of raising our expectations in terms of the performance of the Afghan Government.

I won't speak for the Italian Government, but they were also just trading some ideas on how the international community can be supportive of a Palestinian Authority from a – in terms of helping build further technical capacity within the PA in support of President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad.

On Iran, I think it was mostly the Secretary just reporting on our view of the current situation, and quite honestly, it tracked, in fact, very directly to what she said to you all last night.

And then she met with Foreign Minister Musa Kusa -- M-u-s-a, K-u-s-a – who's a – he's a graduate of Michigan State University. At one point, he said, Spartans and gave a thumbs up.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

QUESTION: Wasn't Musa Kusa indicted for terrorism at one point? Can you check, because was the intelligence chief before he became the foreign minister?

QUESTION: I thought he was indicted for killing Americans.

QUESTION: Were you going to tell us about this? Can I have the next question?

QUESTION: Yeah.

QUESTION: Why was this not on the schedule and why was there no photo opportunity of this?

MR. CROWLEY: The short answer is it happened almost – let me back up. I mean, we had a limited time and we had a number of potential candidates for bilats. And in some cases, there were a couple countries that we were looking at bilats. And for example, and – but the Secretary was able to have pull-asides during the GCC meeting, for example. I mean, Libya is a country that we are – we have an emerging relationship with. And we think it's best to continue talking to them and seeing where we can continue to advance the relationship.

And that – but I mean, it was something that – this was just a – kind of like a target of opportunity where the ministers found themselves with a similar hole and they got pulled into a room and sat for about 15 minutes.

QUESTION: Did they discuss the Lockerbie bomber's recent release back home?

MR. CROWLEY: I was in the meeting; that did not come up. They --

QUESTION: She didn't bring it up? I mean, you guys – excuse me, sorry. I mean, you and Ian were having to brief for about 10 days straight to us. Every single day we were asking you – hammering you guys with questions about the seeming welcome parade that he got and how upset people were about that, and you guys kept saying how upset the U.S. was about that. She didn't bring that up when she had an opportunity?

MR. CROWLEY: We didn't bring up the tent either. (Laughter.) Sorry.

QUESTION: The tent's a little bit less of foreign policy issue.

MR. CROWLEY: No, the – I mean, Libya has a perspective on the region. They have been very helpful and integrally involved in developments in Sudan, so we did talk about Sudan, talked about Darfur. There has been cooperation from the countries on counterterrorism. And they continue to talk about advancing our relationship. But it was about a 10- or 15-minute meeting.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.) Sorry, you just said it was only 10 or 15 minutes. Was that the first time (inaudible)?

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR. CROWLEY: I'll check.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR. CROWLEY: Yes, that's the first time that they've met.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

QUESTION: Is the Secretary talking with the President by phone during this?

MR. CROWLEY: We're staying in close contact with the White House throughout this, but I can't say that she has talked to the President. But I'll double check that.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR. CROWLEY: I think – I don't think so, other than the press conference.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR. CROWLEY: Tonight, I think, you go relax in the hotel, and we go to dinner. But we'll see you in the morning. Okay.

But just to close the loop, obviously, while the issue of Megrahi did not come up, we – our views on that have not changed and our view – the Libyans understand our concerns very, very well. The Libyans understand our concern about Megrahi very, very well.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

MR. CROWLEY: It did not come up.

# # #

Remarks at Embassy Meet and Greet

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Marrakech, Morocco

November 3, 2009

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you all. Thank you very, very much for those really kind remarks, Ambassador. It’s a delight to be here with both Sam and Sylvia who pursue whatever objective or responsibility they are given with such passion and incredible commitment, and it’s wonderful to see you in this new position. I also want to recognize the consul general who is here, Elisabeth Millard. There are so many people who have made this trip possible, which I am very grateful for, and I am delighted that we have many of you from our posts in Rabat and Casablanca. Who’s here from Rabat? Oh, big Rabat group. And who’s here from Casablanca? Excellent.

Well, it is exciting to see you all, and you’re aware of the fact that you are the stewards of our nation’s longest diplomatic relationship going back over 220 years. And after a statement like that, I am tempted to say please don’t mess it up – no. (Laughter.) It is exciting for me to be back in Morocco, especially for this important forum, both because our bilateral relationship is critically important to us. It’s not just the history; it’s what we are doing today and what we hope to do in the future. And it is also because of the sponsorship of this forum which is an important statement about how we bring the region together to pursue some common goals.

The emphasis that we’re placing on both diplomacy and development is an important statement of our understanding of what we need to be doing, that we need to be, of course, reaching out with the very best we have, which includes all of you, to develop those relationships, and we need to be working in partnership on the development of the people of this country as well.

Morocco is one of the 10 pilot countries for the new country assistance strategy. It’s a whole-of-government approach to implementing foreign assistance. And I know that the Millennium Challenge Account is alive and well – is anyone here working on the MCA – with Morocco’s $700 million commitment which we are enthusiastic about and will be working to make sure it produces results.

We also would be remiss in not recognizing that Morocco is home to our second largest Peace Corps operation. Anybody here from the Peace Corps? (Applause.) And I have to recognize – I just learned about this last night – Muriel Johnston. Muriel? Stand up, Muriel. (Applause.) My young staff said, “Oh my goodness, Muriel Johnston, she’s the oldest Peace Corps volunteer in the world.” I said, “That’s not the way we think about it.” (Laughter.) No, Muriel and I might say she is one of the best Peace Corps volunteers in the world. (Applause.) And it’s also a great reminder that in America in the 21^st century, there are not only second acts; there’s third acts and fourth acts and fifth acts and – if you’re ready to embrace new challenges.

I also wanted to say a word of particular appreciation to the Government of Morocco under King Mohammed VI’s leadership to empower more women politically. As part of the Middle East Partnership Initiative, the so-called MEPI, the USAID staff provides training for women interested in running for office and serving in government. And last June, Moroccans elected 3,400 women to local councils. And I am delighted to have had the opportunity to meet Mayor Mansouri, because she is one of the many women who have been entrusted by the people of Morocco to serve and lead them.

I also want to recognize the importance of the U.S.-Morocco Free Trade Agreement. And that was not easy. I voted for it as a senator. It happened because of good cooperation between our governments, our private sectors, and the hard work of people like Johanna Merejo. Is Johanna here? Is Johanna – oh, thank you. (Applause.) I also want to recognize Taly Lind of USAID, who is leading an innovative interagency program to lower recidivism rates among young people in prison. So, Taly? Where are you, Taly?

PARTICIPANT: Taly’s working.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Taly’s out working probably. (Laughter.)

So this is a whole-of-government approach and you’re one of our demonstration projects, and we’re going to look to you to give us feedback, tell us what works, what doesn’t work. But we’re trying to get away from the stovepipes and the compartmentalization. I traveled a lot as First Lady, I traveled a lot as Senator, and when you go into a country and you say that you want to talk to everybody who’s doing aid and development work and representatives from 10 different agencies show up and they haven’t met each other because there’s no effort to try to network and focus, that is not the most efficient way for us to make an impact with our partner nations like Morocco.

So it is my goal as Secretary of State to do a better job in bringing our own government together and then to turn to you on the ground – both our Foreign Service, our Civil Service, our locally-engaged staff – to really help implement what our policies are. So it’s a great privilege for me to thank you.

I also know that when a visit like this happens, it imposes a lot of extra work on you. You do a lot every single day, and then all of a sudden, somebody like me is going to show up and then you have even more to do. I’m not sure Sam and Sylvia know this yet, but there is a time-honored tradition in our missions around the world that when someone like me who has imposed all this extra work on you finally leaves, when you see the plane taking off, it’s time for a wheels-up party, Sylvia – (laughter) – because then I become somebody else’s responsibility. And you have all made a difference.

I wanted to recognize our Assistant Secretary for Near East and Asia Jeff Feltman. (Applause.) We have opened up some websites that really invite you to offer suggestions, and I have been quite pleased. You can do it anonymously if you would prefer – things that you think would work better, ideas that you have, constructive criticism of any sort. Because we want this to be a two-way street. We want the State Department, USAID, all of our neighbor and associated efforts from the rest of the United States Government to be the best we can be. I think President Obama has set a very high standard for that and we want to help fulfill his vision of America’s role in the world.

So again, let me thank each and every one of you for being here. I know it’s not a hardship post. I understand that. But in some ways, that demands more of you because the expectation is high as to how much more we can do together. And I expect a lot of you as well. So I’m going to be kept informed about how this demonstration project works here in Morocco. I will look to see the ideas that you bring to the table of our efforts to have the first-ever quadrennial development and diplomacy review. It’s modeled on the QDR, which is the Quadrennial Defense Review.

I served on the Armed Services Committee for six years. It seemed to me that the Defense Department was able to present its views and make its requests very effectively, in large measure, because they were so organized in doing so. So we’re going to do our own QDDR and we’re going to set forth our vision of diplomacy and development so that then we can go to the Congress and the American people and make the case why investing in diplomacy and development is in the interest of American values, American interests, and the American future that we’re trying to help achieve. Thank you all very much. (Applause.)

Remarks at Civil Society Meeting

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Marrakech, Morocco

November 3, 2009

QUESTION: Do you want to tell us anything, Secretary Clinton, about the importance of these folks you’re meeting with?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I do, Indira. Thank you. As I said in my formal remarks to the Forum, the value of this meeting is that government officials and representatives of civil society are at the same place, at the same time, to share concerns and to try to find some common cause. I know it is not easy for many of the people that I’m standing with to get the support and avoid the challenges standing up for human rights and for every other aspect of civil society and human development.

And I feel strongly that it is in the interests of the countries represented here to support the work that these men and women do. You have before you people who have paid a big price for standing up for democracy, for fighting against corruption, for asking that government actions be transparent and accountable. And I want to stand with them because the United States stands with them, and we want to be sure that we send a very clear message to the region and to individual leaders that it is in their interest to work with these men and women. It will actually strengthen the legitimacy and create a better atmosphere for helping to improve and develop the societies. So it’s an honor for me to be with them.

QUESTION: Thank you. And any comments on the situation in (inaudible)?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes. I want to see an emphasis on the freedom of the press and freedom of expression throughout the region in every country. It is, I know, sometimes difficult to report or to maintain an objective, journalistic stance without causing criticism, but as someone who has lived with a free press and taken my share of criticism – (laughter) – I’m still standing. And it is a useful check on power and an expression of concerns that should be heeded, not suppressed.

STAFF: Okay. Thank you all. Let’s go, please.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: If I may, how is it --

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes, yes?

QUESTION: How is it important for U.S. side --

SECRETARY CLINTON: Let’s let her ask. What?

QUESTION: How is it important – excuse me – how is it important for the U.S. side, the Italian presence in Afghanistan?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I just finished an important meeting with Foreign Minister Franco Frattini, and we discussed about how we’re going to work to support the newly reelected president. But we’re going to be expecting more and we’re going to be providing the kind of assistance and guidance that fall within a demand for greater accountability, a serious effort against corruption, more transparency.

We’re going to try to build up the capacity of the government and make sure that we have a partner not just in the president, but in the government in Kabul and the government in the local areas of Afghanistan, as well as the civil society in Afghanistan. Because the struggle that they are engaged in and the threat that they face must be met by everyone doing more and being more accountable to deliver results.

Thank you.

QUESTION: Thank you. Thank you very much.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you all.

Remarks at the Forum for the Future

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Marrakech, Morocco

Remarks in Arabic | French | Indonesian | Russian | Swahili | Turkish | Urdu

SECRETARY CLINTON: So it is a pleasure to join you for this discussion, and I especially recognize the significance of having governor – government ministers and civil society leaders talking together about these issues of common concern. That may be too rare at sight, but it shouldn’t be, because our goal is to listen, learn, and discover new ways that we can work as partners for the good of the people that we represent.

Like all of you, I have experienced firsthand the warm hospitality and openness of the Moroccan people. And yesterday, I had the opportunity in a meeting with King Mohammed VI to express my appreciation for the progress that Morocco is achieving; in particular, the reforms that have granted new freedom to women who now bring their considerable talents to strengthening democratic institutions, accelerating economic growth, and broadening the work of civil society.

On a previous visit to this beautiful country 10 years ago, I had the opportunity to meet with many of the citizens of Morocco. I remember well having a chance to listen to an illiterate father who endorsed his young daughter’s dream of becoming a doctor and meeting devout women who had risen up to become advocates for human rights on local councils. Examples like this remind us there is much in Morocco’s experience that we can look to guide our efforts today.

Five months ago in Cairo, President Obama called for a new beginning between the United States and Muslim communities around the world – a relationship that is comprehensive rather than focused on a few political and security issues, a relationship based on partnership between people as well as government, and a relationship that lasts for the long term. Those were some of the important words that President Obama spoke in Cairo, and his speech generated a great deal of enthusiasm around the world. Many people heard his call and asked, what can we do; what can you, the United States do; how will President Obama’s vision bear out in a new approach to U.S. policy; and how will that new approach translate into meaningful changes in people’s everyday lives?

As President Obama and I believe, it is results, not rhetoric, that matter in the end. Economic empowerment, education, healthcare, access to energy and to credit, these are the basics that all communities need to thrive. And the United States seeks to pursue these common aspirations through concrete actions. We know that true progress comes from within a society and cannot be imposed from the outside, and we know that change does not happen overnight. So we will not focus our energies on one-time projects, but we will seek to work with all of you in government and in civil society to try to build local capacity and empower local organizations and individuals to create sustainable change.

I have asked our Embassy to engage with local communities to solicit ideas for how the United States could be a better partner. I also appointed the first-ever U.S. Special Representative to Muslim communities. The ideas we have heard have helped to shape our plan. Farah Pandith, our new Special Representative, is traveling widely and listening and coming back and expressing the concerns that she has heard from those who are living and working for a better life.

Now, we are focused on three broad areas where we believe U.S. support can make a difference. The first comes from the work and research that has been done over many years. When you ask people in all countries in this region or anywhere in the world what is the biggest concern you have and what do you want to see that happens differently in the future, the answer overwhelmingly is “I want a better job. I want rising income. I want to give my family, especially my children, more opportunities.” It cuts across every society no matter where that society is.

I often say that while talent is universal, opportunity is not. And so we are committed to building ladders of opportunity to help develop the enormous talents that reside in the people of this region. Early next year, the President will host an entrepreneurship summit in Washington to convene people focused on creating small businesses, expanding their businesses, taking the talent that they have and translating it into income generations to assist their families.

We have launched a website for this summit. It is www.entrepreneurship.gov/summit. And I invite you to submit the names for delegates that could possibly benefit from coming to this summit, and please provide your comments on topics for the agenda. Because this summit is part of a broader effort to expand support for entrepreneurship in the region, including by establishing new business development centers. It is also my hope that together, we can launch a virtual entrepreneur network that connects the range of people engaged in such activities in the region and even beyond.

There are so many good ideas that die because the conditions are not right for bringing those ideas to market. There are so many people who work so hard every day that they can’t realize the benefits of that hard work to the extent that they should. Now we already, as you know, give billions of dollars in ongoing direct aid programs in this region, ranging from a community’s livelihood program in Yemen to a youth employment program in Jordan to our work here in Morocco.

We have invested $700 million in Morocco through a Millennium Challenge Corporation Compact. And this is an approach that we are working on that grows and has a partnership between our government and the government of people of a country – in this case, Morocco – where we say we’re not here to tell you what you need from us; we’re here to ask you what we can do to help you realize your own goals. In this case, we are supporting to two agricultural sectors – fruit tree farms and small-scale fisheries – as well as artisan craft and strengthening financial services and enterprise support. Over and over, we hear from small and medium-sized businesses that cannot get the financial assistance, they can’t get the technical support that would grow their business. So working with the Government of Morocco, we are hoping to really help to see blossom a lot more economic activity at the lower level that will then, from the bottom up, build prosperity.

Our second area will be advancing science and technology, something that we have heard from many of you, to help create jobs and to meet global challenges. It’s not something you don’t know; it is your history. But it was the Islamic world that led the way in science and medicine. It was the Islamic world that paved the way for much of the technology and science that we now take for granted. And now we face global challenges. How do we address water issues? How do we solve the climate crisis? How do we eradicate disease? Well, we want to look to your societies and we want to help Muslim majority communities develop the capacity to meet economic, social and ecological challenges through science, technology, and innovation.

The State Department has established a science envoys program, and I’m pleased to announce today that the first envoys will be three of America’s leading scientists: Dr. Bruce Alberts, a former president of our National Academy of Sciences; Dr. Elias Zerhouni, a former director of our National Institutes of Health; and Dr. Ahmed Zewail, the Nobel Prize-winning chemist. Each of these men has agreed to travel to North Africa, the Middle East, South and Southeast Asia to fulfill President Obama’s mandate to foster scientific and technological collaboration. The State Department will also expand positions for environment, science, technology, and health officers at our embassies. To finance these solutions, the United States Overseas Private Investment Corporation known as OPIC is launching a technology and innovation fund.

Our third area of engagement is education. Last week, I announced our support for a new program for higher education in Pakistan. We have also begun a program to support partnership between U.S. community colleges and institutions in Muslim communities to share knowledge and to train students for good jobs. We are expanding our scholarship opportunities, particularly for underserved secondary school students. One of our most successful education programs is called Access. It provides English language instructions to bright students in poor communities. I am personally committed to this program, and I look for ways to provide additional support, because I have seen firsthand its power.

Earlier this year, I visited an Access classroom in Ramallah. I walked into an enthusiastic discussion of Women’s History Month. These were students who did not come from educated families, but they were students with the same ambition and motivation that we heard described by our colleague, the Palestinian foreign minister, about his own son. We want to create more opportunities for students like these to fulfill their God-given potential.

And this points to a related priority – the empowerment of women. I have said, as some of you know, for many years, and President Obama said it in Cairo, no country can achieve true progress or fulfill its own potential when half of its people are left behind. When little girls are not given the same opportunities for education, we have no idea what we are losing out on because they’re not going to be able to contribute to the growth and the development of their countries.

The United States has named our first-ever Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues, Ambassador Melanne Verveer. We strongly support the call made at last year’s Forum for the Future for the creation of a regional gender institute to help advance women’s empowerment across the board politically, economically, educationally, legally, socially, and culturally. And we look forward to working with other governments and civil societies to launch this initiative soon. And we will provide initial funding to make it a priority.

We seek to support civil society efforts worldwide because we believe that civil society helps to make communities more prosperous and stable. It helps to drive economic growth that benefits the greatest number of people. And it pushes political institutions to be agile and responsive to the people they serve. So the United States is launching an initiative called Civil Society 2.0. This organized effort will provide new technologies to civil society organizations. We will send experts in digital technology and communications to help build capacity.

Now, these are some of the ways that the United States is pursuing President Obama’s vision for a new relationship. Our work is based on empowering individuals rather than promoting ideologies; listening and embracing others’ ideas rather than simply imposing our own; and pursuing partnerships that are sustainable and broad-based. We believe that despite our differences, there is so much more that unites us. Fathers and mothers everywhere want safety and opportunity for their daughters and sons. People everywhere want to have a role in the decisions that affect them, to express their needs to their leaders to be heard, and to help chart their own futures.

I also want to make clear that the United States is committed to a comprehensive peace in the Middle East. I know this is a matter that is of grave and pervasive concern among the countries represented here, but even far beyond this region. We are committed to a two-state solution, and we are determined and persistent in the pursuit of that goal. It is important that we all work toward that objective. And I think that does require that all parties should be careful about what we say, the kind of recriminations that are so understandable, but we need to work together in a constructive spirit toward this shared goal of a comprehensive peace.

I believe very strongly that it is attainable. I believe that President Obama’s commitment is understood. And I believe that with your support, we can find a way through the difficult and tangled history that too often prevents us from making progress on this most important issue. As leaders of countries that have a direct stake and care deeply about all of the final status issues that must be resolved, I would just ask you to think about how we can each demonstrate the commitment that is necessary for us to go forward.

Now, we can maintain an allegiance to the past, but we cannot change the past. No matter what we say about it, it is behind us. Or we can work together and follow the vision and the inspiration of President Obama to help shape a future that will be so much better for the children of both the Palestinians and the Israeli families. I am hopeful we can succeed in creating that better world together, because I know what could lie ahead for us if we do.

And I thank you for having a forum about the future, because that is what we have to determine together. And I appreciate the opportunity to be here to build on the vision of the President’s speech in Cairo, but to go to the concrete actions with specific results that are necessary, whether it is making peace, creating jobs, or educating our children so that the people we represent can see their lives improving, because at the end of the day, that is what we are all committed to try to achieve. Thank you very much. (Applause.)

Secretary Clinton Announces Civil Society 2.0 Initiative to Build Capacity of Grassroots Organizations

Marrakech, Morocco

November 3, 2009

In her remarks today to the Forum for the Future, Secretary Clinton announced Civil Society 2.0, which will help grassroots organizations around the world use digital technology to tell their stories, build their memberships and support bases, and connect to their community of peers around the world.

Building the capacity of grassroots civil society organizations will enable them to do the work that, in the past, Western NGOs and governments have done. With increased capacity, communities are better able to initiate, administer and sustain their
own programs and solutions to shared problems.

“Civil Society 2.0” includes the following components:

1. Deploying a team of experienced technologists to work with civil society organizations around the globe to provide training and support to build their digital capacity. The competencies developed in the trainings will include:
   • How to build a website
   • How to blog
   • How to launch a text messaging campaign
   • How to build an online community
   • How to leverage social networks for a cause
2. Partnering these technologists with local civil society organizations and governments to develop and implement
   technology-based solutions to local problems.
3. Publishing interactive “how to” programs and curriculum online to help organizations that do not have access to in-person assistance.
4. Creating a curated open platform that allows any citizen or company to develop, share or suggest content for the curriculum.
5. Allocating $5 million in grant funds for pilot programs in the Middle East and North Africa that will bolster the new media and networking capabilities of civil society organizations and promote online learning in the region.

The United States is a strong supporter of civil society around the world. Civil society activists and organizations work to improve the quality of people’s lives and protect their rights, hold leaders accountable to their constituents, shine light on abuses in both the public and private sectors, and advance the rule of law and social justice. They are key partners for progress.

The Forum for the Future is a joint civil society initiative of the countries of the Broader Middle East and North Africa region (BMENA) and the Group of Eight (G8). It brings together leaders from government, civil society and the private sector to exchange ideas and form partnerships to support progress, reform, and expanded opportunities for the people of the region.

Forum for the Future and Examples of U.S. Support for Civil Society

Marrakech, Morocco

November 3, 2009

The Forum for the Future is a joint civil society initiative of the countries of the Broader Middle East and North Africa region (BMENA) and the Group of Eight (G8). It brings together leaders from government, civil society and the private sector to exchange ideas and form partnerships to support progress, reform, and expanded opportunities for the people of the region.

BMENA participants are Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, West Bank and Gaza, and Yemen.

The G8 countries are Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

The BMENA initiative addresses many of the same themes President Obama articulated in his Cairo speech – including public-private partnerships – and it is a natural partner for making progress in key areas – including economic opportunity, education, good governance, human rights, and women’s empowerment. It places particular emphasis on increasing opportunity for the youth of the region.

The United States is a strong supporter of civil society around the world. Civil society activists and organizations work to improve the quality of people’s lives, solve community problems, protect their rights, hold leaders accountable to their constituents, shine light on abuses in both the public and private sectors, and advance the rule of law and social justice. They are key partners for progress.

In her remarks to the Forum for the Future, Secretary Clinton reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to supporting civil society around the world, and announced Civil Society 2.0, an initiative to help grassroots organizations use digital technology to tell their stories, build their memberships and support bases, and connect to their community of peers around the world.

Other examples of U.S.-BMENA partnerships to support civil society follow.

• 2009 BMENA Civil Society Forum for the Future local grants program -- These specialized local grants are intended for civil society participants to be able to realize goals identified and discussed at the Forum. They will help sustain the momentum and role of civil society in the Forum process.
• Initial Funding for the BMENA Gender Institute -- The Institute, based in the region, will make grants, conduct research, and promote scholarship related to gender issues and encourage active participation of diverse groups.
• Seed Program for a Women's Entrepreneurship Center in the UAE -- This project trained a core team of Emirati businesswomen on business development practices.
• Awareness Campaign: Corporate Governance in Tunisia -- The Arab Institute for Business Leaders worked to develop a corporate governance awareness campaign.
• Empowering Arab Women through Literacy -- A non-formal, integrated education kit in Arabic geared towards illiterate and semi-literate women in the Arabic-speaking World.
• Parent-Teacher Council Reform in Oman -- Community Links helped to form and activate ten model Parent-Teacher Councils in various regions throughout Oman.

For more information, visit: http://www.maec.gov.ma/future2009/en/default.htm

Secretary Clinton Announces Global Partnerships to Advance Cairo's "New Beginning"

Marrakesh, Morocco

November 3, 2009

Secretary Clinton delivered a major speech on November 3 in Marrakesh, Morocco at the Forum for the Future, an initiative of the countries of the Broader Middle East and North Africa region (BMENA), the G8 countries, and civil society and private sector groups. She reaffirmed the commitment of the United States to broad engagement with Muslim communities around the world and outlined concrete steps the United States is taking to follow up on the “New Beginning” that President Obama launched in Cairo. Secretary Clinton focused on partnerships to promote civil society, entrepreneurship and economic development, educational opportunity, scientific and technological collaboration, women’s empowerment, and interfaith cooperation.

Examples of these initiatives include:

Entrepreneurship and Job Creation
The United States will be a partner in advancing entrepreneurship, job creation and economic opportunity in Muslim communities by providing tools and investing in pioneering local stake-holders and programs. These partnerships will emphasize local ownership and lasting results. Projects include:

• Convening an Entrepreneurship Summit in Washington, D.C. in early 2010 to bring together innovators and leaders in Muslim communities around the world and America’s business leaders to advance entrepreneurship and create economic opportunity.
• Supporting the launch of a Global Virtual Entrepreneurship Network to connect entrepreneurs with each other as well as a broad range of stake-holders, including investors, mentor networks and business support services, educational institutions, NGOs, and foundations before the next Forum for the Future.
• Fostering Multilateral Partnerships with efforts such as investments in the International Finance Corporation’s Private Enterprise Partnership (PEP-MENA II) and in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s program supporting of human capital development.
• Initiating Youth:Work, a five-year, $30 million USAID project to meet the needs of vulnerable youth in Jordan and their communities, in collaboration with the Government of Jordan, the private sector, and NGO partners.
• Launching a $76 million comprehensive, multi-sector initiative in Yemen to increase economic opportunities, improve delivery of social services, and enhance local governance and civic participation.

Science and Technology
The United States will be a partner in laying the foundation of knowledge economies that will spur innovation, and will support societies in grappling with their greatest economic and environmental challenges. Initiatives include:

• Establishing the U.S. Science Envoy Program in which three of America’s most prominent scientists, Dr Ahmed Zewail, Dr. Bruce Alberts and Dr. Elias Zerhouni, will travel to countries in North Africa, the Middle East, and South and Southeast Asia to engage their counterparts, deepen and develop partnerships in all areas of science and technology, and foster meaningful collaboration to address common challenges and realized shared opportunities.
• Debuting the Global Technology and Innovation Fund through which the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) will catalyze and facilitate private-sector investments in programs in Asia, the Middle East, and Africa in technology, education, telecom, media, business services and financial technology and green technologies.

Education and Exchanges
The United States is committed to supporting education to prepare young people throughout the world to seize the opportunities of the 21^st century. Initiatives include:

• Contributing $45 million to the Government of Pakistan’s Higher Education Commission (HEC) to expand partnerships and exchanges, to support infrastructure upgrades and teacher training, and to increase access to education, especially for young people, women, and those living in vulnerable areas.
• Sponsoring the BMENA Community and Technical College Grants Program to create partnerships between U.S. community colleges and community and technical colleges in the BMENA region.
• Allocating $7.25 million for Higher-Ed Scholarships for underserved secondary school students in the BMENA region to attend American-accredited universities.

• Investing $12.5 million in USAID’s new Youth Education Project in Morocco to provide quality educational services for out-of-school youth and to develop policies and institutional networks to facilitate the delivery of education.

Civil Society 2.0
The United States is launching Civil Society 2.0, an initiative to empower grassroots civil society organizations around the world by helping them use digital technology. It will include:

• Deploying a team of experienced technologists to work with civil society organizations and provide training and support to build digital capacity.
• Funding new empowerment connection technologies with $5 million for pilot programs to bolster the new media and networking capabilities of civil society organizations, as well as online learning, in the Middle East and North Africa.

Women’s Empowerment
Empowering women and girls and expanding their opportunities to participate fully in all aspects of their societies, are core priorities of the United States. Efforts include:

• Providing initial funding for the launch of the BMENA Regional Gender Institute, which will make grants, conduct research, promote scholarship related to gender issues and encourage active participation of diverse groups.

• Allocating $2 million to fund Innovative Women’s Empowerment Programs that will strengthen women’s participation in all aspects of society and promote women’s equality in the Middle East and North Africa.

Inter-Faith Engagement
The United States has a longstanding history of openness and respect for all faiths, including Islam, and seeks to deepen mutual understanding and create new partnerships with Muslim communities around the world. The United States will partner with Muslim-majority host countries in different regions to hold biannual Inter-Faith Working Groups that will bring together leaders across faith communities, government, civil society, and the private sector to create actionable plans for addressing common challenges affecting all of our communities.

***
Secretary Clinton also announced several major initiatives in Pakistan last week, including partnerships on energy, education, law enforcement, and assistance for internal refugees. More information is available here: http://www.state.gov/secretary/trvl/2009/130992.htm.

Remarks With Moroccan Foreign Minister Taieb Fassi-Fihri

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Marrakech, Morocco

FOREIGN MINISTER FASSI-FIRHI: (Via interpreter) In the name of Allah, Most Compassionate, Most Merciful, first of all, I wish to apologize in my name and on behalf of my colleague, the Honorable Secretary of State, for this delay over which we had no control, considering that we have had many bilateral and regional meetings.

So we shall now convene the Forum for the Future. However, beforehand, I wish on behalf of His Majesty’s government, express our heartfelt and earnest gratitude to the Honorable Speaker. Secretary of State wanted to confer a bilateral dimension by honoring us and gracing us with her presence here in the Kingdom of Morocco. And effectively, the Secretary of State entertained meetings with His Majesty, The King today in Ouarzazate, as you all know, and also with me before and after the said meeting.

First of all, we have resolved to give a strong impetus to our bilateral relations, traditional relations of friendship and mutual understanding that were given strong impetus under the Clinton Administration. And I would say that ever since, our relations have continued to grow. However, today, we stand ready to give it further impetus so as to deepen and strengthen our partnership and to give a new dimension to our strategic political dialogue between Rabat and Washington with regard to what has taken place within the African continent as a whole, within North Africa as well as in the Arab Maghreb and also in the Middle East and in other areas where we are facing issues of great importance.

And I also wish, on behalf of His Majesty’s Government, to express the extent to which we give great importance to what – through the actions and deeds of – and the positions of President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton so as to (inaudible) our bilateral and multilateral positions. And we also observe and keep a close eye on the importance of investing further our energy in entertaining issues of importance to our region and to the Middle East.

So these are my words as I have spoken before I give you the floor to ask your questions, and with a particular focus to the decision and the resolve – the resolution that was made during the bilateral meeting between the Secretary of State and His Majesty, The King in terms of strengthening our bilateral relations.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you very much, Foreign Minister Fassi-Fihri. I appreciate the very positive day that we have had here in Morocco. On a personal note, it is wonderful to be back in this country, a country with such extraordinary history and culture, and to be here this time representing President Obama and the United States as Secretary of State.

Many of you know that Morocco was the very first nation to recognize the United States. And our Treaty of Peace and Friendship has been in force since 1787, making ours the longest unbroken treaty relationship in my country’s history. And the people of the United States are proud of our friendship with the Moroccan people and we are grateful for what this partnership has accomplished for more than two centuries, and we look forward to the future.

This morning, the foreign minister and I had a very productive conversation about a range of issues, including our shared goal of strengthening stability and prosperity throughout North Africa and the Middle East. I’m looking forward to participating tomorrow in the Forum for the Future, and I look forward also to working with the foreign minister on the issues that come from this forum.

The Forum for the Future is a gathering dedicated to creating the broadest possible network of partnerships in pursuit of common goals. It brings together not only government ministers, but representatives from civil society. And I am grateful too that we will work on the important issues confronting us – from regional security, economic development, religious tolerance, social reforms – because none of these goals can be accomplished through laws or governments alone. They require a broad coalition of likeminded people who translate laws into lasting change.

I particularly appreciate the opportunity I had this afternoon to meet with His Majesty King Mohammed VI. Like many countries, the United States has watched with great admiration the progress that Morocco has achieved under his leadership and the democratically elected Government of Morocco. Together, under His Majesty’s leadership, this government has passed reforms that have made new opportunities available to people who didn’t have the chance before to participate fully in the political, social, and economic life of their country.

It will not surprise you to hear that I want particularly to praise the reforms that have granted new freedoms to women who are now bringing their talents and energy to bear in strengthening democratic institutions, accelerating economic growth, and broadening the work of civil society. These opportunities have flourished for the Moroccan people amid an environment of religious tolerance, another example of how government leadership with the support of civil and religious institutions can create conditions in which people and communities thrive.

During my meeting with His Majesty this afternoon in Ouarzazate, I witnessed the launch of the King’s renewable energy initiative, an infrastructure program that will include American solar and steam technology. I know I speak for the American scientists and entrepreneurs who design these technologies in saying how happy we are that their work can help bring clean energy to Morocco. We also discussed the Free Trade Agreement, the Millennium Challenge Corporation Compact. Our collaboration includes the Peace Corps as well as new entrepreneurial and economic initiatives, and we work together on counterterrorism, trying to stop the scourge of trafficking in drugs and persons, promoting human rights, and creating an atmosphere of regional stability.

So, Minister, I have come to Morocco to echo and amplify President Obama’s message of partnership and respect, and we will work together to advance our shared goals of security, prosperity, and opportunity. Much of what you have done can serve as a model for other nations, and I believe that this model can benefit people not only here in Morocco, but those who care about increasing the opportunities for a better life for all people. Thank you, sir.

FOREIGN MINISTER FASSI-FIRHI: Thank you very much. (Via interpreter) You may ask your questions now.

QUESTION: (Via interpreter) Thank you. (Inaudible), Mrs. Clinton, you have met with His Majesty the King this afternoon for a little over an hour. I wish to know what is it that you have talked about, and what is your assessment of the Moroccan experience in the area of democracy, human rights, and in governance? And these are the subjects to be addressed by the Forum of the Future in this present edition.

SECRETARY CLINTON: I think that Morocco has made significant progress in those three areas. I believe that there is more work to be done, but that is a challenge that faces many countries. But what is significant about Morocco and about the King’s leadership is the commitment that has been shown to the improvement of the lives of the Moroccan people.

I think that over the last 10 years, there has been a number of very important measurements of progress, and I discussed with His Majesty his hopes and his commitments to continuing the progress, to building on it; our bilateral relationship, which is very meaningful to both of our countries; how we can deepen and broaden our work together, which we are committed to doing, and the foreign minister and I have discussed our intention to do that. We spoke about some of the regional and international issues that are of concern to both of our nations.

It was a very substantive, productive conversation. It also had some personal elements to it because I was very pleased toward the end of my husband’s term in office to have us be able to host the then new King at the White House. And we know each other’s families. We have a friendship, and it is of great, great import to me.

So we had a very broad-ranging conversation and laid out a set of issues that we’re going to continue to work on. And I hope for signs of even more progress here in Morocco and more broadly.

QUESTION: Thank you. Madame Secretary, as part of its Mideast peace diplomacy, the Obama Administration has asked Arab governments to take some confidence-building steps toward Israel. A number of the governments represented here this week have said that your remarks in Jerusalem may have undermined that effort. I know you clarified those remarks this morning, but have you reissued your confidence-building appeal here in Marrakesh, and what response have you gotten? Also, your spokesman has just announced that you’ll be traveling to Egypt on Wednesday to meet with President Mubarak, and I wonder if you could tell us what you hope to accomplish during that visit.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Karen, none of the leaders here at all characterized what I said as in any way representing a change in position. They engaged with me at length about what it is that Israel is offering, why I believe it is unprecedented. We discussed how the position of the Obama Administration has not changed. We do not believe that settlements are legitimate. We have said that repeatedly, and we have made that clear to the Israelis, the Arabs, the Palestinians, and the world.

It is important, however, in any kind of discussion to get the facts out on the table. And I think a number of my counterparts were not aware that what the Israeli Government is offering would be an end to all new settlement activity in the West Bank, it would be an end to expropriation, it would mean an end to any permits or approvals. It is not enough. It is not what many people in the region and elsewhere would want to see, but it is fair to characterize it as unprecedented. And we discussed it, and I made clear that when we praise what the Palestinians do on security, it is meant to send a signal that progress is underway and it is progress toward a two-state solution. When I say that the Israeli Government is making an unprecedented offer, even though it is not what many would hope for, and even though our position remains the same that settlement activity is not legitimate, nevertheless, it holds out the promise of moving a step closer to a two-state solution.

So I think that our conversation was very, very open. It had – it touched on many aspects of not only the Israeli-Palestinian situation but other situation as well. And it kept coming back to what our goal is. Our goal is to give the aspirations of the Palestinian people a reality, namely their own state, and to have sovereignty and control over their future. That is my goal, that has been my goal for many years, and we’re going to continue to work toward achieving that goal.

With respect to your second question, we are continuing our consultations in the region. I had the opportunity to consult here with many counterparts from the greater region. Because of a predetermined commitment, neither the foreign ministers of Iraq or of Egypt were able to be here, so we will be going to Egypt to continue these consultations. And it evidences the very strong commitment that President Obama, Senator Mitchell, and myself have to this effort.

FOREIGN MINISTER FASSI-FIHRI: May I maybe, just on behalf of the Arab world, try to say to you that how we appreciate the role, key role, played by the new U.S. Administration, how we follow (inaudible) encourage what Madame Secretary of State did the last months and will continue to do. And naturally, His Majesty as the president of Jerusalem Committee in the context of OIC, and Morocco with its tradition, because we believe since a long time that the peace is possible and the vision of two states it’s the best things, and the negotiations will help to reach this important institutional goal. Then we have to continue and we are sure that thanks to this contact what we heard from Madame Secretary today and what we can also humbly contribute for, we will help each other for this important goal of peace between all Arabs and Israel.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, change of subject, if I may. During the past few years, the United States, just like other members of the Security Council, have characterized the Moroccan initiative for autonomy in the Sahara as being serious and credible. My question is: Does the Obama Administration stand by that position? Thank you.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes. Our policy has not changed, and I thank you for asking the question because I think it’s important for me to reaffirm here in the Morocco that there has been no change in policy.

MODERATOR: Last question maybe.

QUESTION: Thank you. Madame Secretary, regarding Iran, there’s increased concern that Iran is not going to follow through on the offer made by the United States and other members of the Security Council regarding the shipment of LEU outside of its borders. I was hoping you could give us some sense on what you discussed concerning Iran today and what measures are being discussed with members of the GCC and other Arab states about increasing pressure on Iran if they don’t come through going forward.

And for the minister, I would just hope we get some comment from you on the what the feeling is amongst the Arab states about the threat from Iran’s nuclear program, as it doesn't seem to be responding to international offers.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you, Jay. We had a very good discussion about Iran. I brought the GCC+3 members up to date. I explained that the P-5+1, including Russia and France and the United States, which are directly involved in the mechanics of this proposal, as well as the other members – China, Germany, the United Kingdom, and of course, the European Union – are absolutely united that we continue to press the Iranians to accept fully the proposal that has been made, which they accepted in principle. The IAEA continues to work with them to answer any questions that they have.

And we do not yet have a final disposition, but I want to reiterate that this is a pivotal moment for Iran. Acceptance fully of this proposal which we have put forth and which we are unified behind would be a good indication that Iran does not wish to be isolated and does wish to cooperate with the international community and fulfill their international responsibilities. And we urge Iran to accept the agreement as proposed because we are not altering it – it is the proposal that they agreed to in principle – so that we can move forward and work with Iran on a full range of issues, including but not limited to their nuclear program.

FOREIGN MINISTER FASSI-FIHRI: (Via interpreter) With regard to Iran, of course, Morocco says that this is an ancient civilization that has great regional importance, but at the same time we want for Iran to respect others and to entertain good relations unto others and also to comply with international conventions so that the entire region be able to enjoy peace and security that we give Iran the opportunity to take part in the joint effort to develop the region, this region that is, as you know, fraught with sensitivities – the Middle East.

I thank you all so much.

U.S. Department of State Honors S.M. Fahad bin Kamal of Bangladesh As State Alumni Member of the Month

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

November 2, 2009

The U.S. Department of State has named Fahad bin Kamal as State Alumni Member of the Month. Kamal is a Bangladeshi alumnus of the Department’s Youth Exchange and Study (YES) program. Throughout November, his leadership and contributions as a community organizer will be recognized on the State Alumni website (https://alumni.state.gov), the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs’ official website for the more than one million Department-sponsored exchange alumni worldwide. Each month, the Bureau’s Office of Alumni Affairs, which supports alumni as they build on their exchange experiences, confers the award on an outstanding alumnus or alumna.

Kamal participated in the YES program in 2004, attending Milford High School in New Hampshire. During his exchange, Kamal not only lived with an American host family, but also participated in numerous school activities, including the indoor track team, the future business leaders association, and the marketing association. “That single year integrally changed my perspective on life,” Kamal said. “The YES program is a platform that helped me gain leadership skills, broadened my vision, and made me aware of my responsibilities.”

Exemplifying alumni excellence, Kamal has served as the elected President of YES Alumni Bangladesh for five years and continues to strengthen the alumni community through service projects such as clothing drives, blood donation events, and cyclone relief efforts. Embodying mutual understanding, he also has served as a representative for Bangladeshi alumni at the U.S. Department of State’s “Diversity and Tolerance Symposium” in Dushanbe, Tajikistan, and the 2009 YES Alumni Conference in Washington D.C.

Kamal is currently in his final year at the North South University in Bangladesh, pursuing a Bachelor of Business Administration in Human Resource Management. He continues to split time between school and community activities. When asked about his rigorous schedule, Kamal said, “I believe we all came in this world to fulfill a certain mission. The YES program taught us to take the lead. To make society a better place, it falls to young people to take up this responsibility and change their world.”

For more information, visit the U.S. Department of State Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs’ website at http://exchanges.state.gov/alumni/alumnus.html.

Media Contact: Catherine Stearns, StearnsCL@state.gov or phone (202) 632-6437

# # #

Recent Developments in Honduras

Thomas A. Shannon, Jr.
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs

Dan Restrepo, White House Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Western Hemisphere Affairs

Via Teleconference

Washington, DC

October 30, 2009

OPERATOR: Welcome and thank you for standing by. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. During the question-and-answer session, please press *1 on your touchtone phone. Today’s conference is being recorded. If anyone has any objections, you may disconnect at this time. I would like to go ahead and turn today’s call over to Ian Kelly. Sir, you may begin.

MR. KELLY: Welcome to our conference call. We have two speakers in Tegucigalpa. They are Tom Shannon, Assistant Secretary, and Dan Restrepo, who is a senior director at the NSC. We don’t have a whole lot of time, only around 15 minutes, so I’m going to turn it right over to Mr. Shannon.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: Thank you very much, Ian, really happy to talk to you all. I look forward to your questions. We’ve got kind of a brief opening statement. I mean, as you know, an agreement was reached last night at the negotiating table between representatives of President Zelaya and de facto regime leader Roberto Micheletti that effectively opens a pathway to resolve Honduras’s current political crisis and that will allow the international community to support Honduras’s elections on November 29^th.

This is an important moment for Honduras. This is an agreement done by Hondurans in response to a Honduran crisis in which we and the international community, especially the Organization of American States, provided support and facilitation. But what’s striking about this agreement is, as Secretary Clinton noted yesterday, I’m not aware of another country in Latin America having suffered the kind of rupture of democratic and constitutional order that Honduras did on June 28, having been able to find a way out of that rupture and repair that rupture through internal dialogue, obviously with help from the international community, but peacefully without violence and without an imposition of a solution from outside.

This is a huge accomplishment for the Hondurans. It’s a big accomplishment for the Organization of American States. I think it shows the value and worth of the Inter-American Democratic Charter. But it also highlights a central aspect of our diplomacy in the hemisphere as articulated by President Obama and Secretary Clinton, which is to work off broad principles that are shared through the region, but to develop a pragmatic approach in our diplomacy based on those principles, but that uses dialogue and engagement and cooperative action with key allies and partners in the region to achieve results that are in the broad United States interest, but also in the interest of the region. And as we move forward, we’ve got a lot of work in front of us. The implementation of this agreement is going to be complicated and it’s going to require a lot of international cooperation and support. But we’re on a good path right now. We’re looking towards a good, peaceful election on November 29 and a peaceful transfer of power in Honduras on January 27.

Let me stop there and take your questions.

OPERATOR: Thank you. We will now begin the question-and-answer session. If you’d like to ask a question on the phone, please press *1, please unmute your phone and record your name clearly when prompted. Your name is required to introduce your question. To withdraw your question, press *2. One moment, please, for the first question.

The first question comes from Nicholas Kralev. Your line is open.

QUESTION: Thank you. Hi, Tom. It’s only been a few hours obviously since the agreement, but in your mind, what is the most fragile part of it that you and your partners will have to really work hard to make sure that it doesn’t unravel in the next few weeks?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: Well, there’s a variety of moving parts to this agreement. One of the most important and immediate parts is setting up a government of national unity. The second is setting up a commission of verification in which notable Hondurans and notable members of the international community will join together to oversee the implementation of this agreement and ensure that it’s being done in a transparent and fair way. But obviously, the nut of the problem here, what really was the difficult issue to deal with was the issue of restitution of President Zelaya.

And as I’m sure you know, the agreement effectively sends the issue of restitution to the congress with both President Zelaya and Mr. Micheletti agreeing that at the end of the day, the congress, in consultation with the Supreme Court and other organisms of the Honduran state, will determine when, if, and how President Zelaya returns to office. And that is the issue that is going to be the most provocative internally in Honduras and probably the one where we and the rest of the international community are going to have to pay the closest attention.

OPERATOR: The next question comes from Mary Beth Sheridan. Your line is open.

QUESTION: Hi, Tom. Thanks for taking these questions. Congress obviously stripped President Zelaya of his power, so why is there any thought that it might restore him the presidency?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: Because of the political dynamic inside of the country.

MR. RESTREPO: Right.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: First, because – although the congress did do what you suggested, there was a dissident component of the congress that did not participate in it. That dissident component is still there. There is a liberal party that is fractured inside that congress which is competing for elections and is looking for a way to repair that fracture and to present a more united front in the elections. And there is a national party which does not want to be tagged one way or another in regard to Mr. Zelaya’s future, and therefore is insisting that it’s up to the liberal party to make a decision before it defines itself.

So there is an evolving and an emerging political dynamic inside the congress that really makes this whole issue up for grabs and requires some real political leadership. But that said, there’s another point that I think needs to be made here, and that is that as the negotiators work through the issue of restitution, the reason they agreed to send this back to the congress is at the end of the day, they realize that this was a political decision and that this decision had to be made in the political body. Not the Supreme Court, which was the legal body, but the congress, which is a political body.

And more importantly, they were looking for a way to root the agreement in a democratic institution. They wanted it to be more than just an agreement between two political leaders, between President Zelaya and Mr. Micheletti. They wanted this to be something where political parties and the different sectors of Honduran society had to commit themselves.

MR. RESTREPO: And Mary Beth – this is Dan Restrepo – I think it’s also important to recall congress acted in a very different environment and a very charged and heated environment when it acted in the wake of the events of the early morning of June 28. This provides a very different context in which the congress can carry out its responsibilities, its political responsibilities, within the context of Honduran institutionality and constitutional order. So it’s a very different moment in time in which the institution and the body – the Honduran body politic – will have to reflect upon this question of the way – of the proper way forward to create an enduring, sustainable democratic order here in Honduras.

OPERATOR: Next question comes from Tim Padgett. Your line is open.

QUESTION: Thank you very much, both Tom and Dan. I was curious, given how observist Micheletti has been in the past months about the issue of restoration of President Zelaya, what to your mind was the factor that finally pushed him over the line on that issue? What finally convinced him that he had to accept that?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: I think recognition that Honduras has to go to elections with the support of the international community, and that lacking that support, the elections were actually going to deepen the political crisis and make Honduras’s relationship with the international community even more problematic.

And that it was worth the political risk in order to ensure that on November 29^th, there were international observers on the ground and broad recognition in the OAS and elsewhere that the results of that election were going to be free, fair, and legitimate, and that the president who takes power on January 27^th was going to be in a position to petition for Honduras’s reintegration into the Inter-American community and to begin to get access again to international financial institutions. Another –

QUESTION: Did the --

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Did the U.S. make it more of a condition? Was the U.S. a little harder on that point now during these talks this week that it would not accept the results of the election?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: Well, I mean, we’ve been clear for quite some time, and the Hondurans have understood us and – but I think what was important here is not so much what we were telling Micheletti as what other Hondurans were telling Micheletti.

We’ve had a very, very active outreach program over the past several weeks. And over the past two days, while some of the team here has been working with the negotiators around the dialogue table, others of us have been out talking to just about every Honduran we could get our hands on. And these Hondurans, I think, had been communicating directly to Mr. Micheletti and to President Zelaya about how we saw things and what our intentions were.

And I think at the end of the day, it was Hondurans talking to each other that allowed Micheletti and Zelaya to make the decisions they did.

MR. RESTREPO: Yeah, and to underscore Tom’s last point, one of the striking things in our broad set of discussions here over the course of the last few days was the recognition throughout Honduran society, regardless of where people find themselves on the political spectrum of this notion, that for Honduras to move forward in a sustainable way, it needed to do so accompanied by the international community.

And I think that message resonated throughout Honduran political and civil society, and was clearly being reflected back to the leadership on both sides. And I think that was a crucial factor – it wasn’t just that Roberto Micheletti changed his mind. It was that Honduran society had come to the recognition that the path forward, accompanied by the international community, was the right path forward. And then that got reflected back to the political leadership and created the conditions for them to make the decisions that they made last night.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: I would like to highlight that these decisions weren’t easy for either one of them to make. And after the agreement was done, our team visited both of these leaders – Mr. Micheletti and President Zelaya – to congratulate them on the work of their negotiators and to praise them for their political leadership and vision.

QUESTION: Thank you.

OPERATOR: Next question comes from Juan Lovez, CNN.

QUESTION: Yes, hi. Thank you. We’ve seen a lot of congratulatory emails and messages from members of the Congress, especially from Democrats. Have any of the members of Congress been in touch with you on these negotiations? And how likely is it for Manuel Zelaya to return to power? And how likely is it that he will keep his word if he doesn’t return to power?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: I mean, in regards to Congress, we’ve been in regular touch with a variety of members of both parties and their staffs, over time, through regular briefings then, and also through the STAFFDELs and CODELs that have taken place, but – so we have a regular and fluid dialogue with our Congress on this and it’s been mostly positive.

In terms of Mr. Zelaya, both President Zelaya and Mr. Micheletti have committed to the decision on restoration to the congress, recognizing that it is the congress that will decide if President Zelaya returns, when he should return and how he should return, and they recognize that this is a political decision that is not going to be made in a vacuum. And I can assure you that both sides are reaching out to members of congress right now and trying to build levels of political support that will favor the outcome that each of them would prefer.

But I think what’s important here is that there’s a broad expectation that they will abide by whatever that decision is. And I think the creation of a national unity government and the presence of a verification commission is going to ensure that that happens.

QUESTION: Will Mr. Zelaya leave the Brazilian embassy anytime soon? Is the agreement done? Is it signed? And is there a timeframe for congress to take action or could we have elections for the 29^th and Mr. Micheletti still be in power?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: There is not a timeline for the congress to take a decision and the negotiators were very clear on this. In fact, last night, Mr. Zelaya’s chief negotiator came out and said that the commission could not impose a timeline on the congress because it was an independent institution. But there is a political dynamic here and a political imperative for the congress to move quickly on this decision. It’s just not something that can be ignored in the short term.

I’m sorry. I don’t remember the first part of your question.

QUESTION: Is Mr. Zelaya leaving the embassy or is Honduras normalizing again?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: Yeah. At this point he is not. The agreement itself does not refer to Mr. Zelaya’s – President Zelaya’s status inside of Honduras at this point. But this is, obviously, a point of dialogue for us with the de facto regime. It’s our view that President Zelaya’s status should be normalized in some fashion and that the de facto regime should end its harassment of the Brazilian Embassy.

OPERATOR: The next question comes from Martha Mendoza. Your line is open.

QUESTION: Hi, thanks for taking our questions today. This standoff went on for months. You came in and got all the parties on the same page in about a day. What did you offer? What did you do? Did you offer to restore the Millennium funding before the election? Did you follow the Arias agreement?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: You know, I think what drove this, as I mentioned, was this desire and belief to have the international community accompany this election process. And yesterday was an important day because it was 30 days before the elections. It was the day in which the command of the armed forces transferred to the Supreme Electoral Tribunal, and it was a clear recognition by all Hondurans that the elections were coming and that the Hondurans had pretty much run out of time, and that there was no longer an opportunity or a space for them to dither. And so I think that drove the decision more than any particular offer.

But we did make it clear to them that with this agreement, we could be move – we could begin to move immediately on electoral observation support and that we would mobilize electoral observation support within the OAS and elsewhere, but that also this would open a space for us to begin to discuss normalization of our relationships to elsewhere and whether it’s in the activities of our consulate or in our assistance relationship. So the Hondurans were well aware that this agreement was the first step towards a normalization of our relationship.

QUESTION: Was there any piece of the Arias agreement on the table?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: Well, almost the whole thing was accepted as is. The only significant change, or substantive change, in the language referred to the restitution of President Zelaya, and that change, as we noted, was to send that issue to the congress. But for the most part, the rest of President Arias’s proposal – the San Jose Accord – was the basis for the Guaymuras Accord.

QUESTION: Thank you.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: We can do one more question, and then we’re going to have to go.

OPEATOR: Next question comes from Sergio Davila. Your line is open.

QUESTION: Hi, my question is for Secretary Shannon. Thanks for taking the question. My question is: What if the congress decides that Zelaya will no – will not go back to power, is he willing to accept that? Did he say that to you guys? And Secretary Shannon, are you already packing your luggage to Brazil?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: In terms of President Zelaya and Mr. Micheletti, both sides, in regard to the issue of restitution, have committed this decision to the congress. Both have indicated that they will abide by it, and I believe them. I mean, President Zelaya, I think, believes he has a strong hand to play in the congress, and that’s why he agreed to this, and Mr. Micheletti believes the same thing. So this is a political issue that’s going to be resolved politically. And I’ll pack my bags once the Senate confirms (inaudible).

Thank you all very much.

MR. KELLY: Thank you. That was on the record, just to remind everybody.

Dominica Independence Day

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Marrakech, Morocco

November 2, 2009

On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States, I congratulate the people of Dominica as they celebrate 31 years as an independent nation on November 3. The bonds of friendship that unite our two countries are based on a shared commitment to democracy and development. The United States values our broad partnership with Dominica that enhances the security and prosperity of all our people. As Dominicans gather to enjoy the festivals that mark this occasion, I offer them our warmest wishes and best hopes for a bright future.

Antigua and Barbuda Independence Day

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Marrakech, Morocco

November 2, 2009

On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States, I congratulate the people of Antigua and Barbuda on their celebration of 28 years as an independent nation on November 1. Our two nations are bound together by strong economic, cultural, and historic ties, and we share an enduring commitment to democracy and human rights. We are working together as partners to ensure a brighter future for all our people and the entire Caribbean region. I wish you a joyous Independence Day and reaffirm our strong friendship.

Secretary Clinton To Deliver Speech at the Forum for the Future on Tuesday November 3, 2009

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

November 2, 2009

Secretary Clinton will deliver remarks at the opening session of the Forum for the Future in Marrakech, Morocco at 4:00 am ET / 9:00 am LOCAL tomorrow, Tuesday, November 3, 2009. Video of the Secretary's remarks will be available shortly after the speech concludes.

The Forum for the Future is a joint civil society initiative of the countries of the Broader Middle East and North Africa region (BMENA) and the Group of Eight (G8). It brings together leaders from government, civil society and the private sector to exchange ideas and form partnerships to support progress, reform, and expanded opportunities for the people of the region.

The Secretary’s speech will reaffirm the commitment of the United States to broad engagement with Muslim communities around the world and outline concrete steps the United States is taking to follow up on the “New Beginning” that President Obama launched in Cairo.

###

Secretary Clinton on the Middle East

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Marrakech, Morocco

November 2, 2009

Secretary Clinton delivered the following remarks Monday morning at a camera spray upon meeting with Moroccan Foreign Minister Fassi-Fihri in Marrakech, Morocco:

For 40 years, successive American administrations of both parties have opposed Israel’s settlement policy. That is absolutely a fact.

And the Obama Administration’s position on settlements is clear, unequivocal. It has not changed. And as the President has said on many occasions, the United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. Now, the Israelis have responded to the call from the United States, the Palestinians and the Arab world to stop settlement activity by expressing a willingness to restrain settlement activity. They will build no new settlements, expropriate no land, allow no new construction or approvals.

And let me just say this offer falls far short of what we would characterize as our position, or what our preference would be. But if it is acted upon, it will be an unprecedented restriction on settlements and would have a significant and meaningful effect on restraining their growth.

Let me take a step back because I want to put this into the broader context. I will offer positive reinforcement to the parties when I believe they are taking steps that support the objective of reaching a two-state solution.

I will also push them as I have in public and in private to do even more. And in my report to the President last month, I talked about Israeli willingness to restrain settlement activity as a positive step.

In the same report, I praised President Abbas’ leadership of the Palestinian Authority for their courage and the security measures on the West Bank. The steps being taken under President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayed are also unprecedented and we have never seen such effective security. I have on many occasions going back – as you know in Sharm El Sheikh - praised the accomplishments that the Palestinian Authority has demonstrated in building, training, and reforming their security forces.

I told Prime Minister Netanyahu that these positive steps on the part of the Palestinians should be met by positive steps from Israel - movement and access, operations by the IDF and on Israeli security arrangements on the West Bank. Israel has done a few things in that regard but they need to do much more. And President Abbas has shown leadership and determination on this issue and Israel should reciprocate.

I just want to clarify that what we are trying to achieve is a two-state solution with a state that represents the aspirations of the Palestinian people – the sovereignty and to have control over their own future, and provide the security guarantees to Israel for their own future. That is my goal. And when either party takes any steps that looks like it moves us in the right direction – even if it is not what I would like or what I would prefer - I’m going to positively reinforce that.

This is an opportunity for both sides to try to move forward together, to get into negotiations, and to realize the goal that many of us around this table have supported and worked for for many years.

###

Secretary Clinton Concludes 3-Day Visit to Pakistan

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

October 30, 2009

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton today completed a 3-day visit to Pakistan. In her meetings and public events in both Islamabad and Lahore, Secretary Clinton underscored America’s desire to build a broad and deep partnership with Pakistan based on mutual trust and respect that both combats violent extremists and strengthens Pakistan’s democratically elected government and civilian institutions to serve Pakistan’s people.

In addition to Secretary Clinton’s official meetings, she also participated in a number of town hall and civil society engagements - in addition to media roundtables each day with television, print, and radio journalists – to connect directly with the people of Pakistan.

Day 1 – Islamabad, Pakistan

In Islamabad on October 28, the Secretary met with Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi and Prime Minister Yousef Raza Gilani at the Prime Minister’s Residence. Secretary Clinton also attended a lottery drawing that is part of the Benazir Income Support Program honoring the late Benazir Bhutto. The program provides support to Pakistan’s poorest women and their families. She then ended her first day with a meeting and dinner hosted by President Asif Ali Zardari at the Presidential Residence.

Throughout the first day, Secretary Clinton announced a number of major contributions to Pakistan:

• $125 million to launch the first phase of a Signature Energy Program by the United States to support Pakistan’s energy development;
• $55 million that will assist Pakistan and U.N. agencies to provide humanitarian relief to families displaced from South and North Waziristan and the North-West Frontier Province;
• $103.5 million to the Government of Pakistan’s priority law enforcement and border security programs;
• $85 million to the Benazir Income Support Fund.

Day 2 – Islamabad and Lahore, Pakistan

On October 29, Secretary Clinton continued emphasizing the Obama Administration’s efforts to broadly expand and deepen U.S. – Pakistan official and people-to-people relations, consistent with the democratic ideals of both nations.

Secretary Clinton began her day in Islamabad with a visit to the shrine of the Sufi Saint Shah Abdul Latif Kazmi, the Bari Imam, which is visited by hundreds of thousands of people each year. She then traveled to Lahore, where she visited the memorial for Pakistan’s national leader Allama Iqbal and the 17^th century Badshahi Mosque, one of the largest in South Asia, constructed by Aurangzeb, the sixth Mughal Emperor.

At the historic Government College University, Secretary Clinton met with a group of Lahore-based lawyers and civil society leaders and addressed a student audience at the College’s auditorium. In both meetings, the Secretary reiterated America’s strong support for Pakistan’s successful return to democratic governance last year and her vision of a broad relationship between Pakistan and the United States based on mutual respect and shared values.

Throughout the second day, Secretary Clinton announced:

• A $45 million American contribution to the Government of Pakistan’s Higher Education Commission (HEC) that will expand university and technical education for displaced students and those students in other vulnerable areas.
• Humari Awaz (“Our Voice”), the first Pakistani mobile phone-based social network, enabling Pakistanis -- who are active users of mobile phone text services -- to develop communities of shared interest for social engagement, economic activity and public debate on contemporary issues.

The Secretary also met with Punjab Chief Minister Shabaz Sharif and former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, leaders of the political opposition, and spoke to Lahore’s business community at an event hosted by Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer.

Reflecting the growing importance of the bilateral relationship, the Secretary participated in a program in which she elevated the U.S. diplomatic presence in Lahore from Consulate to Consulate General status.

Upon returning to Islamabad, Secretary Clinton met with Chief of Army staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani and Director for Inter-Services Intelligence Lt. General Ahmad Shuja Pasha to discuss the recent operations in South Waziristan and areas of mutual interest.

Day 3 – Islamabad, Pakistan

In Islamabad on October 30, Secretary Clinton met with political and community leaders from the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), where she underscored American support for humanitarian and livelihood assistance, education, media and communications for people living in these areas of conflict. The Secretary expressed U.S. condolences for the victims of recent terror attacks in Pakistan and strong support for the sacrifices being made by Pakistan’s army in its current engagement against extremists. Secretary Clinton also engaged the local leaders in a discussion about the political and security situations in their areas.

In a televised town hall meeting with Pakistani women, hosted by five of Pakistan’s top women journalists, the Secretary again addressed America’s desire to build a broad, more comprehensive relationship with Pakistan based on mutual trust and respect.

In a rare and historic visit by a Secretary of State, Secretary Clinton also met with newly-elected parliamentarians at the National Assembly, where she reassured them of America’s strong support for the country’s return to democracy. They discussed social, economic and political areas of mutual interest

Later, at the Police Lines Headquarters in Rawalpindi, the Secretary paid tribute to Pakistani police officers who seek to protect civilians and suffer the brunt of terrorist attacks. Prior to departure, the Secretary attended an Embassy reception highlighting Pakistan’s rich artistic and cultural heritage.

Declaration by Friends of Zimbabwe Group

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

October 30, 2009

The following statement was agreed upon by the countries attending a meeting of the Friends of Zimbabwe held in Berlin on October 26, 2009.

Participants: U.S., Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, UK, European Commission (EC), EU Presidency (Sweden), EU Council Secretariat, International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, African Development Bank (AfDB), United Nations

Begin text:

The Inclusive Government of Zimbabwe has, since February 2009, taken a number of important and effective steps for the economic and social stabilization of the country. We welcome the progress that has resulted from these courageous measures and note that the lives of many Zimbabweans have since improved.

As friends and donors, we have closely followed and encouraged this process. We want the inclusive government to succeed in its determination to fully implement its programme as agreed in the Global Political Agreement (GPA) of 15 September 2008.

We have met in Berlin today against the background of the temporary suspension of the proceedings of the Inclusive Government, reflecting frustration about the slow pace of implementation of the Agreement. We urge all parties concerned to ensure that the current political crisis is resolved effectively without undue delay and in a manner consistent with the provisions of the GPA.

Zimbabwe has embarked on the road towards restoration of democracy and the rule of law. This is a process we hope will allow the country once again to realize its vast potential. In aligning ourselves with the broad national and regional consensus about the priorities of the current transitional period as laid down in the GPA, we reiterate our wish to see the Inclusive Government succeed in its task to build a framework for long term stabilization and recovery, better and more accountable governance, the re-establishment of the rule of law, and respect for human rights. We recognize the critical role of SADC as guarantor of the GPA and the organization's stake in ensuring its full implementation. We stand ready to join forces with SADC in our joint endeavour to assist Zimbabwe on its road to full recovery.

As a result of the signature of the GPA, we as a group have increased our support for the people of Zimbabwe, gradually shifting from measures aimed at purely humanitarian relief to substantial longer term assistance in a number of sectors which are crucial for the rapid improvement of living conditions for the people. In particular, we have greatly increased our assistance in the sectors of education, health, water management, food security and rural livelihoods. At this point in time support is not distributed via the Government budget.

While in 2008, total official development assistance to Zimbabwe (with in kind assistance, such as food aid, not being counted) was $580 million, we have, in 2009, to date allocated over $630 million. These figures include assistance in the above-mentioned fields and beyond. We as a group are determined to continue our assistance in 2010 in order to contribute to the Inclusive Government’s efforts to fully implement the GPA. We welcome the role that the UN agencies are playing and will continue to play, as both a channel of funding and of technical assistance, in support of the priorities of the Inclusive Government. We acknowledge the important role that civil society, national and international NGOs are playing in the process.

We are concerned that, eight months after the formation of the inclusive government, a number of key provisions of the Global Political Agreement remain to be implemented.

While work on the agreed GPA objectives has proceeded impressively in the financial, economic and social sectors, progress on the political track has been disappointing. This situation has been brought about by continued obstruction originating from political forces which continue to be hostile to the implementation of the GPA.

In particular, we note with concern the continuing deadlock on a range of outstanding issues. These include the unilateral appointment of the Attorney General and Reserve Bank Governor, the issue of the appointments of Provincial Governors, politically inspired violence and abuse of the judiciary including politically motivated arrests, continued farm invasions, delays to the land audit provided for in the GPA, the unilateral imposition of partners to owners of private wildlife conservancies, the disrespect of Bilateral Investment Protection and Promotion Agreements (BIPPAs), and the slow pace of progress on a range of issues agreed by the parties to the GPA aimed at improving freedom of the media, governance, human rights and exploitation of natural resources in accordance with internationally agreed standards.

We look forward to the completion of the Constitutional Review process which, if carried out in an inclusive and transparent manner, will lay the basis for timely internationally monitored or supervised free and fair elections. We stand ready to support this process.

Failure to address some of the central elements of the GPA not only undermines the ability of the IG to deliver the change which ordinary Zimbabweans expect, but also deters much-needed foreign investment and hampers Zimbabwe’s capacity to fully re-engage with the international community.
We consider these areas of concern to be major obstacles for Zimbabwe’s recovery and urge all parties to the GPA to address them without further delay so that the Government can operate in a truly inclusive manner.

The progress in the financial, economic and social sectors is already enabling greater engagement and support from the IMF, World Bank and African Development Bank. We strongly support this as shareholders of these institutions, and we expect that the programmatic Multi Donor Trust Fund will soon be operational. We believe that full implementation of the GPA will contribute to re-engagement with the IFIs, including international support for a process towards clearing Zimbabwe’s arrears to international financial institutions, and assistance to the Inclusive Government in identifying its debt and making progress towards reducing it. We encourage the Government of Zimbabwe to formulate and implement a prudent and transparent debt management policy.

We urge the Zimbabwean Inclusive Government to further pursue sound and transparent financial, fiscal and economic policies conducive to bringing substantial benefits to its citizens. As these policies progress, our support for normalisation of relations with the International Financial Institutions will grow, and we will consider support for a proposal to restore IMF voting rights to Zimbabwe. We also reiterate our readiness to assist with the preparation of a national development framework to help ensure that international funds complement national resources once Zimbabwe has formulated its priorities.

End text.

Afghanistan Election

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Washington, DC

November 1, 2009

I recognize the decision by Dr. Abdullah Abdullah not to participate in the second round of balloting in the Afghan presidential elections.

He ran a dignified and constructive campaign that drew the support of Afghan people across the nation. We hope that he will continue to stay engaged in the national dialogue, and work on behalf of the security and prosperity of the people of Afghanistan.

It is now a matter for the Afghan authorities to decide on a way ahead that brings this electoral process to a conclusion in line with the Afghan constitution. We will support the next President and the people of Afghanistan, who seek and deserve a better future.

ROK: Announcement about Afghanistan

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

Question Taken at the October 30, 2009 Daily Press Briefing

October 30, 2009

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Office of the Spokesman

For Immediate Release October 30, 2009 February 27, 2009
2009/1087

ROK: Announcement about Afghanistan

Question: Do you have any comment on South Korea’s announcement that it will send 300 troops to Afghanistan?

Answer:
· We welcome the ROK announcement that it will expand its assistance to Afghanistan. We are confident that this assistance will be of great value to the people of Afghanistan.

· This announcement reflects the ROK’s growing commitment to addressing problems of global concern. We consider the ROK to be a vital partner in such efforts.

· The government of the ROK has stated that it made this decision in response to the government of Afghanistan’s request for assistance. The Korean government made its own determination regarding the assistance it can provide.

# # #

U.S.- Colombia Defense Cooperation Agreement

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

October 30, 2009

On Friday, October 30, the United States and Colombian governments signed the Defense Cooperation Agreement (DCA), which is now in force.

The United States and Colombia enjoy a close and strategic bilateral relationship. The anticipated signing of the DCA (formally titled a Supplemental Agreement for Cooperation and Technical Assistance and Security, or SACTA) will deepen bilateral cooperation on security issues. The DCA will facilitate effective bilateral cooperation on security matters in Colombia, including narcotics production and trafficking, terrorism, illicit smuggling of all types, and humanitarian and natural disasters.

The DCA does not permit the establishment of any U.S. base in Colombia. It ensures continued U.S. access to specific agreed Colombian facilities in order to undertake mutually agreed upon activities within Colombia.

The agreement facilitates U.S. access to three Colombian air force bases, located at Palanquero, Apiay, and Malambo. The agreement also permits access to two naval bases and two army installations, and other Colombian military facilities if mutually agreed. All these military installations are, and will remain, under Colombian control. Command and control, administration, and security will continue to be handled by the Colombian armed forces. All activities conducted at or from these Colombian bases by the United States will take place only with the express prior approval of the Colombian government. The presence of U.S. personnel at these facilities would be on an as needed, and as mutually agreed upon, basis.

The DCA does not signal, anticipate, or authorize an increase in the presence of U.S. military or civilian personnel in Colombia.

The presence of U.S. military and associated personnel in Colombia is governed by statute. In October 2004, Congress authorized the permanent or temporary assignment of up to 800 U.S. military personnel and up to 600 U.S. civilian contractors. That cap will continue to be faithfully respected. In fact, in recent years the actual presence of such U.S. personnel has averaged half or less of the authorized number. Consistent with U.S. policy to nationalize U.S.-supported activities by turning them over to Colombian authorities, U.S. personnel presence has been in a gradual decline. It is the United States’ expectation and commitment that those trends will continue.

At a technical level, the DCA harmonizes and updates existing bilateral agreements, practices, and arrangements on security matters, and continues to ensure appropriate protections and status for U.S. personnel. Bilateral U.S.-Colombian engagement in the security sphere is governed by conditions set in a number of bilateral agreements, including the 1952 Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement, the 1962 General Agreement for Economic, Technical and Related Assistance, and related subsequent agreements in 1974, 2000, and 2004.

Interview With Andrea Mitchell of NBC

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Islamabad, Pakistan

October 30, 2009

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, thank you very much for doing this interview. You arrived in Pakistan trying to turn the page, and the same day you arrived, the horrific bombing in Peshawar, the worst in two years, how does that make you feel about the possibility of changing the dialogue here from just security and terrorism?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, of course, it was horrific, and it was such a tragic event, the loss of life, particularly targeting women and children. It was a women’s market that the terrorists decided to blow up. And on the one hand, it is a stark and terrible reminder of what the people of Pakistan are up against and the common enemy that we face. Yet I think it’s also a spur to greater cooperation and partnership, which is what I am seeking and offering.

So out of this tragedy, even though security and terrorism are obviously a high priority because of the reality of what the people of Pakistan face every day and what we are fighting against, we don’t want that to define our whole relationship, because we actually believe that there’s so much more we can do to really bolster the economy, to give hope to people, to support this democratic government. And so we don’t want to lose the full dialogue and the comprehensive agenda that goes along with the emphasis we place on terrorism.

QUESTION: But when you went and talked to the university students, you went and you came across a wall of resistance and suspicion, low-grade anger. They were not disrespectful, but they challenged you. They said, you know, “Why should we trust you? America has betrayed us in the past.” How do you deal with that?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, actually, one of the reasons I’ve done this trip in the way that I have, so that I’m not just talking to government officials, but I’m out there in university settings and with other groups that we’ve seen over the last three days, is because we know that that is the feeling harbored by many people in Pakistan. But rather than just ignore it or paper over it, I invited that. I knew very well that these questions would be asked by the Pakistani press and the people that I am interacting with.

I wanted to get that out on the table because the Pakistanis have talked about a trust deficit, and it’s a two-way street. We have questions, they have questions, we need to be responding, and we need to be as open as possible. So I thought it was actually very healthy that there was no false politeness, that there wasn’t any holding back. I mean, as you say, everybody was very respectful and personally very supportive, but they had questions about our government’s policy. And I feel like I have a responsibility to try to answer them.

QUESTION: But everywhere else you’ve traveled in the world, you’ve come across skepticism and some tough questions. But your star power, your personality, your passion, your commitment, all of that has won people over. That audience was silent. There was no applause.

SECRETARY CLINTON: But think about it, Andrea. Think about what they have experienced about their perception and about the fear that they’re now living with. I have many people who I’ve seen on this trip that I’ve seen on my prior four trips. And they’ve all said to me, “You can’t imagine what it’s like now. It’s so different. And we’re scared. We’re scared to go places. We’re scared to go to some of the most beautiful parts of our country any longer.”

So when you’re living with that level of anxiety and insecurity – and there is, to be fair, a history of us coming in and going out, even though we’ve been a partner and an ally ever since Pakistan’s inception, we haven’t always had a consistent relationship. And I think if I were sitting where those young students are – and remember, young students are more likely to say the things that other people are thinking – I would have had some of the same tough questions. In fact, I was thinking back, there was one young woman who was standing up and she was very, very kind about me personally and all the kinds of things that people say.

QUESTION: Yeah. And then she lets you have it.

SECRETARY CLINTON: And then she came with a zinger and I thought, oh my gosh, “There but for accident of birth go I 40 years ago,” because it is to the young people that we’re trying to reach out – I announced, as you know, yesterday, a new service that we are partnering with Pakistani telecom companies so that we get young people cooperating and talking about what’s on their minds. We try to increase civil society.

Because it’s not only the fear that is now unfortunately part of their daily lives, because of the attacks that they are suffering, but for eight years, they feel as though they lost their democracy. So there’s all this pent-up desire to be out there talking, and I think it’s a healthy sign. So for me, it was exactly what I expected.

QUESTION: Well, you said, “I’m not going to dance around the issues.”

SECRETARY CLINTON: Right.

QUESTION: And you were blunt. And then you basically laid out the suspicions that Americans and the American Government have long had that the Pakistani Government missed opportunities, did not go after al-Qaida aggressively enough, provided, as you describe, a safe haven for al-Qaida since 2002. People are really angry about that in the government and outside of the government. Were you too blunt?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, I don’t think so, because I believe that the responses that I’ve gotten and from reading the Pakistani press coverage, they understand that if we’re talking about the kind of partnership that I believe we should be, that it is not just a one-way street. I am more than happy to both take responsibility for some of the past problems that have existed, offer a new way forward, but I think it’s important if this is going to be the open and cooperative relationship that I believe is in both of our interests, that we express some of our concerns as well. I would not be representing my country if I were not to be as forthcoming with them as they have been with me.

QUESTION: What if your visit makes things worse, increases the --

SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, I don’t think so.

QUESTION: -- distrust, suspicion?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I don’t think so. That is not at all my impression or what we’re finding as we look at all the reaction across the country. Now, is it uncomfortable to hear what I’m hearing from them and maybe what they’re hearing from me? Well, it may be, but I think that’s part of us beginning to sort out these differences. It’s a fact that even after President Obama’s election and his personal popularity around the world, the attitude in Pakistan toward the United States has been very negative.

So what we are seeing with the democratically elected government, with the courage of the Pakistani military going after the Taliban in Waziristan after their successful campaign in Swat, shows a resolve to dealing with the threats that they face internally that we welcome. But it’s not just that we want to see them go after those who are directly attacking them. What we’re explaining is that we see a syndicate of terror. Al-Qaida is clearly directing and training and funding many of the very same people who are attacking targets here in Pakistan.

QUESTION: And you suggested that people in the government could get these al-Qaida figures if they wanted to.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I said I didn’t know, but I think it’s a fair question to raise because clearly, we want to get as much cooperation as possible. The Pakistanis, the people, and the government certainly want to cooperate with us on economic development, on security assistance, and we are more than happy to come forward because we think it’s in our interest as well as in the interest of Pakistan.

But we do have a continuing commitment to get the people who attacked us, and you know I feel very strongly about this, because I was a senator from New York on 9/11. I lived with the consequences of that horrific attack on my country. And I want the people of Pakistan to know how strongly we feel about making sure we get a chance to see the capture or the killing of the masterminds of that 9/11 attack. And it is also in Pakistan’s interests, so that is the case I’m making.

QUESTION: This has been the worst, the deadliest month in Afghanistan now.

SECRETARY CLINTON: It has been.

QUESTION: A terrible toll. The President took the unusual step of going in the middle of the night to Dover for that very solemn ceremony. What would – what do you think that signifies, and what would you say if you had the opportunity, as you have in the past, to the families of those 18 soldiers who made this ultimate sacrifice?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I really am grateful that the President went, because he did it not only in his – out of his personal concern, but because he does represent our country and the people of our country who are deeply saddened by the loss of the lives of our young men and women who are serving in Afghanistan.

I would say, as I have said on many occasions, both privately and publicly, that their sacrifice is in the great and honorable tradition of those who have gone before them, because they truly are the very best we have in our country. And they are committed to serving our nation in the most dangerous and difficult mission that we are now pursuing. But that their sacrifice is part of what we are trying to achieve. And so it is something that should be honored. It is something that every American should be grateful for.

That doesn’t in any way answer the loss and the pain and the grief that their loved ones and the rest of us feel about these losses. But I have no doubt in my mind that they are fighting for their country in a faraway place for very big stakes.

QUESTION: And are you persuaded, absolutely convinced that the mission is achievable, the mission that you and the President and the rest of your advisors and military experts – that you can come up with a solution out of these deliberations on Afghanistan that will have a definable, achievable mission of – no matter how many troops we send in?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes, I absolutely believe that, and after sitting through many hours of intense meetings in the Situation Room in the White House, I know that the President is resolved and committed. The strategy hasn’t changed. We know we have to defeat al-Qaida and their extremist allies. How we go about that, how we operationalize it, how we try to make up for, frankly, lost time over the last eight years in working with the Afghans themselves and trying to help train and deploy their own security forces so that they will be able to protect their own country, is what we are trying to determine the best way forward on. But I am absolutely convinced of their resolve.

QUESTION: And do you think that there is an end that – depending on the kinds of forces, the way they are put in and the mission that’s defined, is there a way out of Afghanistan for the American people?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Absolutely. I mean, this is not an open-ended, never-ending commitment. But it is one that we have to see through and do our very best to create the conditions inside Afghanistan. I’m not talking about nation-building. That is not at all what we are focused on, but to create a level of stability and security. We have our very best military minds who are looking at that. We have our very best civilian diplomats like Ambassador Holbrooke and others who are very experienced in this.

And I believe that we’re going to come up with an approach that will enable the people of Afghanistan who do not want the Taliban back. They totally reject the Taliban. There is a misconception, I think, in some quarters that somehow the momentum or the advances that the Taliban is making are because the people of Afghanistan reject the alternative. That is just not true. But the people deserve to have a government that can deliver services for them at the local level, a government at the national level that can help to create a security force that can be appropriately deployed to protect them. Those are very basic needs, but the people do not want the Taliban back.

QUESTION: And to those who say that Pakistan with nuclear weapons is a more urgent priority, should be, than Afghanistan?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Pakistan has a very professional military. They are very committed to this fight. They’re taking it to their enemies who also happen to be our enemies. I have confidence in their ability to secure their nuclear arsenal. So it’s a very different situation on both sides of the border. We have encouraged the Pakistani Government and people to take seriously this threat, which they are doing. We think that they have a struggle ahead of them, because unfortunately, it doesn’t take very many suicide bombers to cause havoc and destruction like we saw in Peshawar.

But they are in the fight and they know what is at stake. The president lost his wife to these terrorist assassins. So I have no doubt about the resolve and the commitment. There’s a way to go to make sure that in Afghanistan, they have the same capacity and the same resolve to do that.

QUESTION: Thank you very much, and I don’t know how you timed this trip to miss the World Series with the Yankees playing.

SECRETARY CLINTON: I’ve been getting updates, and just before I came in, it’s 1-1. The Yankees won, so I was breathing a little easier.

QUESTION: All right. Well, get us on home in time.

SECRETARY CLINTON: (Laughter.) I will try.

QUESTION: Thank you, Madame Secretary.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you.

Signing of the U.S.-Colombia Defense Cooperation Agreement

Washington, DC

October 30, 2009

On Friday, October 30th, in Bogota, the United States and Colombian governments signed the Defense Cooperation Agreement (formally titled a Supplemental Agreement for Cooperation and Technical Assistance and Security, or SACTA), which is now in force. This Agreement is a natural part of our relationship and allows us to continue working together closely to respond to security challenges within Colombia. A fact sheet with additional information on the Agreement can be found on the State Department website.

Interview With Kim Ghattas of BBC

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Islamabad, Pakistan

October 30, 2009

QUESTION: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, thank you very much for talking to the BBC here in Islamabad. It’s been a busy few days for you. I’ll go straight to the questions. I know you’re short on time. I wanted to start by asking you, during your time here, you’ve said often that you wanted the Pakistanis to trust America, that America was their friend. But do you trust the Pakistanis, all of them, the government, the army?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Kim, I think that you’ve put your finger on one of the issues that I’m trying to address. I don’t doubt that what we’ve been told here in Pakistan, over and over again, that there exists a trust deficit, is a challenge to the kind of relationship that President Obama and I believe is both possible and necessary with Pakistan. But it is also clear, as I have stated both publicly and privately, that we have questions that we are also seeking answers for. What I’m trying to do is to create a more open relationship, not only between our governments, but between our people.

We have so much in common with the people of Pakistan, and it’s not just the fact that we face a common enemy – violent extremists, al-Qaida and their allies – it’s that we have a long history, going back to the very beginning of Pakistan, that we have an extraordinary presence in our country of a very active, successful Pakistani American community, and that we are committed to this relationship. But in order to have a partnership of the kind that I am seeking, I think we have to be very honest with one another.

QUESTION: You were very honest in your comments here when you said that you cannot believe that there isn’t someone in Pakistan who knows where the top al-Qaida leaders are.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, as I’ve said for many months, we have been encouraging and supporting the Pakistani people and their government to address the threat that they face. And we’re very encouraged by the commitment that we are seeing. The Pakistani army has suffered many losses. They’ve made a lot of sacrifice to push back the Taliban advances first in Swat, now in South Waziristan. And that is answering a lot of the concerns that we’ve been expressing to them about the capacity and resolve to take on the threat that was posed to them. We think it’s a common threat. And so of course, we are very encouraged to see what the government is doing.

At the same time, it is just a fact that al-Qaida had sought refuge in Pakistan after the United States and our allies went after them because of the attack on 9/11. And we want to encourage everyone, not just the Pakistani Government or the military, but Pakistani citizens, to realize the connection between al-Qaida and these Taliban extremists who are threatening Pakistan. They are part of a syndicate of terror. So I want to express my hope that we’re going to be successful in finding and rooting out the terrorists who threaten us both.

QUESTION: Are you convinced that the ISI and the Pakistani army are no longer cooperating with militant groups, be it al-Qaida or the Taliban or other such groups?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I believe that there is a great commitment and a sincere resolve. I spent several hours with the Army Chief of Staff, General Kiyani, and the director of ISI, General Pasha last night, and we had a broad-ranging, in-depth discussion. So I am certainly encouraged by their commitment to this struggle that they are waging. And they are aware that even as we speak about the courageous fight they’re waging in South Waziristan, their challenge goes much more broadly than that. But I think that the resolve and capacity that they are demonstrating now leads me to conclude that they are going to see this fight through.

QUESTION: So do you think there’s no collusion at all anymore?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, when you say at all, I mean, there are thousands and thousands of people who work in this government, just as there are in any government. But I am very impressed by the resolve of the leadership.

QUESTION: Do you think that the Pakistani army is interested mostly in tackling those elements of the Taliban that are a nuisance to them, and not so much those that are the real hard-core Afghan Talibans that are a problem for you and your troops in Afghanistan?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think it’s a question of prioritizing. What we’ve seen in the last months, certainly, since I’ve been Secretary of State, is a joint commitment by the democratically elected government and the military and security forces. But their immediate threat are those who threaten them. I understand that completely. But since there is a connection between those who threaten them and those who threaten beyond their borders – not just in Afghanistan, but in the rest of the world – they’re well aware of our concern that attention be paid to the other elements of this terrorist syndicate.

And from my conversations with both the civilian leadership and the security leadership, I believe that they understand that there is a connection, and they’re going to be continuing this effort.

QUESTION: Moving on to Afghanistan, a new defense bill was passed by President Barack Obama just this week, which provides money for the Taliban in Afghanistan, those who switched sides. And I was wondering, as a staunch advocate of women’s rights, how do you feel about making political deals with people who, to say the least, have a very different idea of what a woman’s rights actually are?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think we have to be clear about who we’re talking about. The hard-core Taliban leadership are, in my view, not going to be interested in anything other than continuing their efforts against us and against Afghans and our allies. So I don’t think we’re talking about the people who are ideologically committed to their view of the world which is, frankly, repugnant to anyone who cares about human rights and women’s rights, as I passionately do.

But many people were caught up in the Taliban, young men who were essentially drafted out of their villages because of intimidation and threats, young men who had no other means of livelihood. And what we’re finding, and what our soldiers and our marines are finding on the ground, as they found in Iraq, is we began to watch the change from al-Qaida in Iraq and some of the other groups, that there are a lot of people who are the foot soldiers who are very interested in coming back to society.

QUESTION: But that’s when it relates to military strategy and military thinking, and what they do on the ground. But when it comes to treatment of women, there isn’t that much difference.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, but I think there is. I think that there – from all of our work in Afghanistan over the last number of years, the vast majority of people in the country want to see their daughters educated, for example. I was so touched by what happened after the horrible attacks where the Taliban would throw acid at these young girls trying to get an education. And their parents – fathers and mothers – insisted that the schools remain open, that their daughters continue to go.

Now, it will be up to the Government of Afghanistan to make clear that they want to provide services, and this is at the national level, as well as the local level – schools and clinics. But I don’t think the vast majority of the people of Afghanistan want to deny their wives and their daughters access to healthcare. So we just have to separate out what are the most radical elements that terrorize the country. The people of Afghanistan do not want the return of that. In every poll that has been taken, the Taliban are rejected, and people are looking for the security that they need in order to get on with their lives.

So I do think that it’s important – and your question is critical – that we look very carefully at who we would possibly be able to reintegrate into society, and who you have to capture, kill, defeat. And that’s a much smaller group than the people who call themselves or are called Taliban.

QUESTION: I’ll move on to the Middle East because that’s where we’re moving on --

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.

QUESTION: -- physically. We’re going to – you are going to hold talks with the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Is your – are you talks a sign of how bad things are, that you need to intervene personally? Or is it, on the contrary, a sign that perhaps something is moving and you’re going to help edge it along?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think it’s more because we know that this is a high priority for not only our Administration, but for much of the world. It is one of the most common questions that I’m asked. And we started this. We knew it would be a process. We knew that it would be challenging. I think the fact that I’m in the region, I’m able to meet Senator Mitchell and have these conversations, reinforces the seriousness with which we are approaching our desire to get the parties to begin a serious negotiation that can lead to a two-state solution.

QUESTION: The – you know, Washington pressed Israel for a settlement freeze. And so far, you know, you haven’t really been able to deliver. President Mahmoud Abbas will look weak if he agrees to talks now without that settlement freeze. He has also tried to please you by delaying the debate at the human – at the UN Human Rights Council on the Goldstone report, which undermined his position at home. Do you think your policies are undermining President Abbas, your ally?

SECRETARY CLINTON: No. I think that in any preliminary that leads up to negotiations, people stake out positions. That is the way it’s done, and I appreciate and understand that. I think that what we’re discussing in great detail with both sides is a very clear understanding of what each has to gain by moving forward with the negotiations.

But I wouldn’t question the fact that some of what has happened in the last weeks has made it more difficult. Because the Goldstone report, which you mentioned, was a very important issue to the Israelis and to the Palestinians. It is, as you know, going forward in the United Nations process. We happen to think that’s not particularly fruitful. We think that it was one-sided and it carried recommendations that would be unprecedented for any country, not just Israel. So there are a lot of problems with it.

But we’re going to be sitting down and talking with the leadership of both the Palestinian Authority and Israel to determine what more we can do. Now obviously, we can’t want this more than the parties want it. I mean, that’s just the way negotiations are. But the fact that the United States is engaged, and that we are serious about this engagement, is, in and of itself, I think a very positive message.

QUESTION: On Israeli settlements, the International Court of Justice ruled in 2004 that Israeli settlements were in flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which clearly states that occupying powers cannot move their population into the territories that they occupy. Do you believe that Israeli settlements are a violation of the Fourth Geneva Conventions?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, what we have said, and what President Obama said again in his speech to the United Nations, is that we continue to have very serious questions about the legitimacy of the settlements that Israel has promoted. We understand that to a large extent, it has to do with their security needs and fears about trying to have a defensible perimeter around Israel.

But we also are committed to a two-state solution. And as President Obama said, that two-state solution will take place in the territory occupied by Israel since 1967. The question is how we get to it. And that’s what we’re trying to achieve.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, thank you very much for your time.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you, Kim.

QUESTION: Thank you. It’s always a pleasure.

Roundtable with Senior Pakistani Editors

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Lahore, Pakistan

October 30, 2009

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, thank you all very much. And I what I hope we can do in the time that we have is just have a very free-wheeling conversation. I will answer as many questions as we can get to in the time allotted. I am very determined on this trip to, as you have seen, go into many different settings and have people ask the questions that are on their minds. It has troubled me to see the level of distrust and just misperception that seems to have grown up over the last several years between our two countries and our people. And since I believe strongly in the importance of the relationship between the United States and Pakistan, I wanted on this trip to very openly answer as many questions as I could. Obviously, we’ve done the official part, and there’s more of that to come, but the town halls I’m doing, the media interviewing that I’m doing – it is all, for me, aimed at both understanding better some of the source of the objections or criticism, but also demonstrating clearly that we want to listen, we want to consult, we really want to put this relationship on a very strong and broad foundation.

So with that, let me throw it open.

MODERATOR: (Inaudible) asked me to moderate. There isn’t much call for moderation. There are only six of us here. (Laughter.)

MODERATOR: But I think what we need to do is just introduce ourselves very briefly to you.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Excellent.

MODERATOR: I edit various newspapers and do a program on television. I also write what you read in The Economist about Pakistan from time to time.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I do read The Economist, so, excellent.

QUESTION: I am (inaudible). I work with Dawn (inaudible).

SECRETARY CLINTON: Excellent.

MODERATOR: Dawn is our leading English-language newspaper.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes. And I’ve been interviewed twice by your correspondent in Washington.

QUESTION: I’m (inaudible) Pakistan. And I am president of (inaudible) Pakistan newspaper.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, great.

MODERATOR: The newspaper society is the apex body of all publishers.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, indeed. Well, that’s a distinguished position. Thank you.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) I represent (inaudible) which is a monthly magazine (inaudible) Lahore.

QUESTION: I am Jugnu Mohsin. I am the publisher and managing editor of the weekly The Friday Times and (inaudible) magazine. I also do – I am a trustee of a social services NGO which is based outside Lahore, and I work with women and schoolchildren. And I’m the better half in that relationship.

MODERATOR: Even if you say so yourself. (Laughter.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, this is the second time where I have been exhausted after hearing you all (inaudible). (Laughter.) You do so many different things. You wear so many different hats. It’s quite impressive.

So who wishes to begin? Najam, do you want to?

MODERATOR: (Inaudible).

QUESTION: Thank you, sir.

QUESTION: Madame (inaudible) I welcome you to this city of Lahore, which is the capital – cultural capital of Pakistan and considered to be the heart of Pakistan. So you are here in the heart of Pakistan.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Indeed.

QUESTION: Therefore, we should talk heart-to-heart.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.

QUESTION: I think it would be better. I would like to relate a verse from our poet (inaudible), the Shakespeare to South Asia. He has said (in foreign language). My friends, alas, are purveyors of wise advice, where all I need is a healing hand and a (inaudible) upon my wound. I want to say only this (inaudible) and a (inaudible). I want to say only this (inaudible).

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you.

MODERATOR: Would you like to?

QUESTION: Well, two things, Secretary. One, I’m sort of wondering when the Obama Administration and you and your colleagues are going to make up your minds about what do in Afghanistan. Two, I want to know whether you are aware of the fact that the decision not to send troops will be seen as defeat in this country? And three, I’d like to as, you at some stage about what you intend to do to specifically help the women of this country, the rural women of this country, which I can tell you is the area of most potential and the area which is most neglected.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Right. Well, three very important questions. First, let me put the first about the President’s decision in context. When the President was inaugurated, he inherited the Bush policy which, until November of 2008, had been a policy that had a limited military commitment. There were only 30,000 American troops. In November 2008, President Bush ordered additional troops and then left office. When President Obama came in, there was a set of requests that were pending for the President to have to address, which he did. And we did a very intense but short review of what we saw happening in Afghanistan. We realized that Pakistan was greatly impacted by what went on in Afghanistan and that to look at one without the other was a mistake because of the nature of this threat.

The President decided to appoint Ambassador Holbrooke as a special representative to both countries. He also decided to send additional troops. But at the time – and he decided to change commanders. Well, those are all very important decisions. At the time, he said we will reevaluate where we are after the Afghan election. He said that back in March when he made his initial presentation, because he wanted – and I thought it was a very judicious approach – he wanted to see what was going to happen with the troops who were put in, what was going to happen with the election.

Now, as you know, the election is not yet over. We are still waiting for it to be resolved. And that has affected the timetable of the President’s deliberations, because clearly, everyone knows that we have to create a new set of expectations with the leadership of Afghanistan, that Afghanistan has to take greater and greater responsibility, as Pakistan is now, for its own security. We have to be much more effective in helping Afghanistan build a security force, both an army and a police force, that is up to the challenge that they confront. We have to have a different set of expectations than were apparently presented by the prior administration to the Afghan leadership as to accountability, rule of law, transparency, corruption, and other building blocks of stability and security.

So the President has engaged in a very thoughtful deliberative process. I’m not going to preempt his decision making, but I would imagine that he will be coming to a decision sometime after the Afghan election is finally resolved. Because if you look at General McChrystal’s report, it is certainly a military report, but it is also a call to action for the Afghan army and for the Afghan military – I’m sorry, for the Afghan Government, both civilian and military. And we have to be sure that the Afghan people and their leadership, however their election turns out, are committed.
And so that’s the kind of context, and the decision should be sometime after the Afghan election.

I think the President is well aware that it’s important that he show resolve, that he show a commitment to seeing this effort through. I believe he absolutely would agree with what I just said if he were sitting here. But I think he’s trying to determine what is the best way to effectuate that commitment. The strategy will not change. I mean, the strategy remains the same: to defeat al-Qaida and their extremist allies, but to be slightly more focused on who are those extremist allies, where are they, how best to go after them, what does the role of government in Afghanistan have to do to be an effective counterpoint to the Taliban, and all of the other aspects of this approach. So I think that the President has reached out and listened to a broad array of opinions and has heard everything you can imagine. And then it’s up to him. He gets to make this decision, and I’m sure he will soon.

On the last question, which is very near to my heart, to go back to the heart-to-heart, there is no doubt that improving opportunities for women in Pakistan is one of the best ways to secure democracy and to improve economic opportunity. This is a given. It is what we know from every World Bank study, every United Nations study, from every government and society experience.

Yesterday, I participated with President Zardari in the Benazir Income Support Program. And I handed certificates to eight or nine women who had come from all over the country who had been selected in the prior lottery. And I’ve been privileged to visit Pakistan. I’ve been in many places in South Asia, East Asia, Africa, Latin America. And trying to give women income support apart from their husbands and their families has the best payoff of any direct program you can do. We’ve learned this over 30 years of practice. I’ve seen the effects of it. One of the most interesting programs that is going on right now are women in India and women in Pakistan actually working together on microfinance.

QUESTION: That’s right.

SECRETARY CLINTON: And it’s that kind of confidence building, relationship building that may just start at the bottom grassroots but which can change attitudes. I remember in Bangladesh going to a Muslim village, and the women from a nearby Hindu village were brought over, so I was addressing an audience of both Muslim and Hindu women who were all in this microfinance program. And it’s the little things. So when I asked, “Well, what difference has this $50 loan made?” One woman said, “It allows me to contribute to my family, and my husband respects that. It has allowed me to have my own life because my mother-in-law knows I’m contributing.”

Human rights, as one of my heroines, Eleanor Roosevelt, once said, start in those small places near to home. They start in the family. They start in the neighborhood, in the village, in the school. And we have to do more. And I think the United States stands ready to help Pakistan support programs that are really aimed at empowering, educating women. And if you have ideas, we are more than ready to entertain those, because I have just seen with my own eyes what a difference it makes.

QUESTION: Absolutely. I wanted to ask you about this (inaudible) on the fast track?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Right.

QUESTION: And there is (inaudible) making it conditional on the resolution of the Kashmir issue. I wonder – I just want to know if there is a (inaudible) and what is (inaudible)?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, first, with respect to the transit trade agreement, Afghanistan and Pakistan first started talking about a transit trade agreement, I think, in 1964. Richard, 1964?

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, it was never resolved. And what we discussed when we had the Afghanistan-Pakistan leadership in Washington was what steps could be taken in a relatively short period of time to increase economic opportunities and promote trade. And there were two that were mentioned. The first is the transit trade agreement. I got a report about that yesterday in Islamabad. I was told that it is on track to be resolved by the end of the year. Part of the hold-up is because of the Afghan elections. They don’t have a government, so they – the Pakistanis have really moved quite forward in trying to get this resolved. But since August or July when the campaign started, the Government in Afghanistan has not been able to resolve their part of it. But we hope that shortly after the election is determined and the new government is seated, there will be an agreement. There are a couple of minor outstanding issues that have to be resolved.

The second – but let me just say that the reason why this is so important is it opens up Pakistan to Central Asia in a way that will expedite traffic and trade. During the United Nations General assembly, I met with leaders from all the Central Asian countries. And I can’t remember whether it was Uzbekistan or Tajikistan, but one of the countries said to me that they were hoping that there would be a very good relationship between Afghanistan and Pakistan so that they could facilitate trade down to your ports. And one of – apparently, I don’t know this, but I was told, Pakistan makes great cement and that the cement is really valued in Central Asia, but it’s hard to get it. So it’s that kind of little thing that stuck in my mind, and it was a reminder that trade is based on millions of individual transactions, and you have to make it as easy as possible for those transactions. And this transit agreement, I believe, will do that.

The other point which you made I agree with wholeheartedly, and I said that several times in the last two days. Opening up trade with India will have so many positive effects for Pakistan. The trade between India and Pakistan will explode and it will be far more advantageous, in our assessment, to Pakistan. Business people, I think, are there. I think people – business people here in Lahore, from what I’m told, are very willing to have trade opened. Of course, Lahore and Punjab would be the greatest beneficiaries because of the proximity. But it is something that would make a huge difference.

And I’m hoping that the dialogue begins again between India and Pakistan. It should not be a zero-sum game. There is more win-win situations that could be developed between the two countries, and trade would have an immediate positive effect on the Pakistani economy.

Did you want to follow up?

QUESTION: Yes, about the relationship, because the --

SECRETARY CLINTON: About the what?

QUESTION: As you mentioned before, Pakistan has (inaudible) made normalization of trade conditional on Kashmir resolution.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Right, right.

QUESTION: But is there – is there any movement on that? What is in it for Pakistan and --

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well --

QUESTION: Trade is very good thing. And Pakistan does not need to (inaudible) trade route. But on that Pakistan can do on its own and with (inaudible) already (inaudible) Afghan transit (inaudible) --

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, you don’t.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, you have trade, but it is – there’s no agreement.

QUESTION: Transit trade we have.

QUESTION: But transit trade is from Karachi to --

QUESTION: Yes.

QUESTION: Not from (inaudible).

QUESTION: No, but there has been some Afghan-Pakistan trade --

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, no, there is some trade going on. But there’s no framework agreement that decides on tariffs and decides on which trucks can cross the border. I mean, all of the things that go into an agreement, that’s why this agreement is so important, because the trickle of trade that you do have could be a flood of trade if this agreement were in place.

But with respect to your other question, we are encouraging the Indians and the Pakistani Government to go back to the dialogue that they were engaged in to look at all of these issues. Trade should be on the agenda, along with Kashmir and everything else. And we hope that there will be a resumption of that dialogue. I certainly think it is in the best interest of Pakistan that it be resumed. It’s up to Pakistan to decide if it’s an all-or-nothing agreement. I’ve talked to many Pakistani friends and they have different approaches. Some say, look, it has to be everything, and everything has to be conditioned on Kashmir. Others say, you know, if we had incremental agreements, we could get closer to an agreement in Kashmir because we would build more confidence between us.

So, I mean, that’s up to the Pakistanis. We’re not in a position to say here’s what you should do and what we expect. That’s not our business. We just want to encourage the dialogue to begin again because there are so many benefits that Pakistan could realize by this.

QUESTION: There are a couple of issues here to take up from where she left. You know, as soon as this agreement was announced in Washington, I think – or was it New York – the Pakistani Foreign Office here came under enormous pressure from the security establishment, and they gave a statement downplaying this whole thing. And we were --

SECRETARY CLINTON: The trade agreement.

QUESTION: The trade. And the perception in the security apparatus here is that the government is soft on India, the government is soft on the United States, and the government is not looking after the security interests of this country properly, which is why the Foreign Office then comes under pressure. Which is where this questions from, is there a quid pro quo?

The second issue is that after Musharraf (inaudible) really went off the agenda, in a sense. He was moving forward in very interesting areas which civilian governments had not been allowed to move on, but the army moved on those areas because it thought that this was a time to do so. Interestingly enough, the situation now is that all these things are hostages, are held hostage to this whole resumption of the Composite Dialogue.

And as far as we can tell, in all honesty, India is putting forward conditions which are not going to be easy to meet in terms of the ground situation over here. Maybe in three or four or five years’ time, some action can be taken to dismantle certain groups and things like that. But right now, the government is certainly not in a position to do that. And the establishment – the security establishment is not interested in doing that.

Why is it that although Mr. Holbrooke is a regional envoy, the fact is that India-Pakistan problems are impinging on Afghanistan as well, which is where all your problems with (inaudible) and everybody else is coming from, and which is why the attacks on the embassies take place or the consulates take place?

We definitely feel – those of us who support this entire process, we definitely feel that you and Ambassador Holbrooke should be playing a more active role in trying to persuade the Indians to get back on track and not put these conditions on their Composite Dialogue, because that is exactly what the terrorists want. They will derail – and something else, another Mumbai and this whole thing will be derailed. And then the Pakistani establishment will come to you and say sorry, we’re involved on the other side. You can go and fight your own war. This – we have to worry about the other thing.

And something like that can happen. And the Indians and the Pakistani have to, in a sense, preempt it. If they can’t preempt it, they have to sort out – sort this out that if and when it happens, they will not revert back to the warmongering hysteria that characterized the attack on Mumbai. What happened the last time, Madame Secretary, is that it took 24 hours for the Pakistani media to become anti-India all over again – 24 hours.

QUESTION: That’s right.

QUESTION: It took five years to get them on – to back to the peace process under Musharraf, and then under this government, and it took 24 hours after Mumbai – state of denial over here in the government, in the security administration, and in the media, for us to get back into the anti-India mode, so much so that some Taliban leaders were then called in to give statements saying that if there is a problem with India, they will give up the war with the Pakistani – against the Pakistanis and join the Pakistani army to defeat you.

QUESTION: To fight India.

QUESTION: So I think, you know, the thing is that we really need to get Ambassador Holbrooke to go to Delhi more often. I know the Indians are very sensitive about this. And – but I think just as some of us have been urging him to go to Saudi Arabia more often – (laughter) – I think he needs to go India more often, and I think you need to talk to the Indians also in the longer-term interests of the region. On the one hand, the Indians say that if the Americans were to pull out of here, it would be a disaster. And similarly, they also say that if the Taliban were to do things in Pakistan, then there would be a spillover.

Well, then the logical consequence of that is that the Indians should be talking to the Pakistani Government and to the Pakistani security establishment about resolving some of these things. And instead of doing that, what we now have is unresolved issues of the past, and now the new issues of water. I mean, we have water problems in this country, upper riparian versus lower riparian, Sindh Province versus Punjab Province. We can’t agree amongst ourselves over water here. And now the old Indus Waters Treaty that governs water distribution between India and Pakistan is being challenged. The Indians are building dams, we are building dams. We are in a rush to do this and we are in a rush to do that. This is conflict all over again.

And I think part of your difficulties in Afghanistan have to do with my assessment with your inability to address the Pakistani security establishment’s concerns or their mindset, which has taken a long time to build. And it – a lot of it is related to India. Therefore, I think you need to bring India into the loop more than you are doing right now if you really want to be successful in your endeavors in Afghanistan.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I appreciate your comments, because I think it reflects a perspective that we have to be aware of and take into account. But let me share my perspective because it is somewhat different. When President Obama became President, as you recall, the Pakistani Government and the security establishment had decided that they would accommodate the Pakistani Taliban, and they proceeded to do so. They signed agreements. And now, this was not done by the civilian democratic government alone. This was agreed upon by the military and civilian leadership. So they signed agreements in Swat, for example. They made deals in Waziristan. They thought they could buy off the Pakistani Taliban by giving them some autonomy and some leeway in certain areas that are quite far from Lahore or Islamabad, et cetera. That was the state of play when we came into office.

Within 60 days, it became apparent that this was not working, that the agreement for some kind of a Sharia state, some kind of a Talibanist/Talibanized area was not enough for the Pakistani Taliban, which I believe is, in large measure, due because they’re no longer indigenous. They are part of a syndicate of terrorism that takes both inspiration and other aid from al-Qaida, and that some of the fighters that are you are up against are not Pakistanis, they are Uzbeks and Saudis and people from other countries. So your government, both your military and your civilian government – remember, the civilian government was new and our government was obviously new – but your civilian government and your military concluded that this approach was not working. And so we saw the action pushing the Taliban out of Buner, pushing them out of Swat, and now we’re seeing the action in Waziristan.

From my perspective, that was a sea change by both your civilian and your military establishments. So maybe it’s just a difference in time that we are looking at. But I think the actions that your government are now taking in concert between the civilian and the military are in the best interest of Pakistan, but they are incredibly consuming. It’s kind of hard to think about a lot of things when you’re moving 25,000 troops to fight an entrenched foe.

At the same time, I know that there is a renewed interest on the part of the government in both countries of trying to get back to the dialogue. Obviously, that’s ultimately in the hands of the two governments, but we are certainly encouraging it. So I’ve been to Delhi. Richard’s been to Delhi. We have conveyed that. We’ve been to Islamabad. We have conveyed that. We would like to see that because we think that both India and Pakistan face a common foe now.

Mumbai was a terrible shock to the Indians, in part because they had a situation that lasted for three days with massive television coverage. I mean, one bomb is horrible enough, but three days of seiging and killing and firebombing. And we lost six Americans in Mumbai. So obviously, we take it very seriously. And I know that the effort that Prime Minister Singh put forth to avoid a reaction was extraordinary, and it was in the middle of his election. And you know. I mean, you follow this. The voices were loud: We have to retaliate. And he would not permit that to happen.

Now, the problem in both countries is that progress can be derailed by extremists. You have yours, they have theirs, and we know that. So it takes a lot of commitment to be able to get this dialogue back on track. And the Indians, I know, are talking with your government about the trial of the Mumbai defendants. They obviously take that very seriously, as they understandably would. Your government is talking to the Indians about how there can be clear lines of communication so that people don’t jump to conclusions. So there’s a lot going on. And we’re encouraging it, and we think that it would be so much in the best interests of both countries to build on what was done. There’s a lot of activity going on through Kashmir that hasn’t stopped – the bus routes, the trucking routes. There’s a lot of things that are going east – going back and forth between India and Pakistan that haven’t been derailed. But progress hasn’t continued and there’s a lot more that could be done, so we are going to do everything we can to try to make it happen. But you are right to point out that your government has to speak with one voice. That’s the thing that has to happen so that your military and civilian leadership together have to say this is what we want. And I think that is a very important development.

QUESTION: I don’t want to belabor the point, but you know what’s happened in the last two weeks is that the government and the military are speaking with one voice, and unfortunately, that voice is not terribly good. They’re raising the Kashmir issue again. They’re accusing India of fomenting trouble in Balochistan, and they’re – now the interior minister is openly coming out with statements that are as hostile to India as the Indians have been making against Pakistan. Things are not good. Instead of progress, I see a decline in India-Pakistan relations right now, and I’m very worried. I’m deeply worried and deeply alarmed. If there are forces here that want to derail the war on terror --

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.

QUESTION: -- then this is the best thing to do.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Right, right.

QUESTION: So I really --

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, no, I understand this is a constantly challenging environment, and I can only assure you that we are doing everything we can to encourage your government, both military and civilian, to reopen that dialogue and to start building that confidence and to start moving forward together. Because if that doesn't happen, both sides are victims of the same threat.

QUESTION: But you see, many Pakistanis believe that India is doing some mischief in Balochistan, and there are so many conflicts in Afghanistan and NATO forces are there, your forces are there, and their (inaudible) because some people (inaudible) are encouraging India to do some mischief in Balochistan. And President Musharraf (inaudible) I believe 200 percent it is true that India is doing mischief in Balochistan. And now (inaudible) our interior ministry is repeatedly (inaudible) like that. We want to know what’s the reality, and why it’s not being contradicted by you and scoffed by you.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, first of all, we have no evidence of that. I mean, we just have no evidence of that. So from our perspective, we believe that anything like that, any charge that might be made like that – and Balochistan, as you know, is very – is a very volatile region. Look what happened with Iran just the other day. So who knows what’s happening in Balochistan. It is something that is very complex. There seem to be many players. I don’t know who they are, but we are not and we don’t know who is. I mean, we were blamed for the attack on Iran. We have nothing to do with that group in Balochistan.

So look, I think that the point that you were making is the right point. If this is not addressed by the two countries, then anything any of us say on the outside is not going to make a difference. The two countries have got to get back to working together; otherwise, this could spin out of control again, which is Najam’s point. And the terrorists know that. Why do you think they attacked Mumbai? They attacked Mumbai because there was too much progress going on between India and Pakistan. They don’t want India and Pakistan to come to any kind of accommodation.

So we are dealing with a very sophisticated enemy, and I think we have to get to the facts, whatever they might be, between the two countries. And I know that when Prime Minister Singh met with – I can’t remember whether it was your president or your prime minister – and he specifically addressed that charge. And I think that that needs to – there needs to be exchanges of information, but it only can happen in some kind of confidence-building dialogue process. I don’t think it can happen on a one-off, call me up and tell me what you know here, call me up and tell me what you know there.

Now, India has had its embassy bombed twice in Kabul, and they believe that Pakistani elements were involved in bombing their embassies. I don’t know if that’s true, but certainly the Pakistani Government should say, look, no, that’s not true, we had nothing to do with that. All of these issues have such potential for derailing everything, and that’s I guess, Najam’s point is we know that there are forces in both countries who benefit from this state of hostility and tension. The countries don’t benefit. The people don’t benefit. So how do you get – how do you marginalize and isolate those elements in both countries? And that can only come from leadership.

QUESTION: But the Government of Pakistan has not provided you any information or any evidence about the years of activity in Afghanistan or Balochistan?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Not that I’ve seen. Others in my government may have. I have not seen it. I have not seen anything like that. So I can’t agree with you because I personally don’t have any information. And I know what Prime Minister Singh said and I know what he said when he met with your leadership.

But let’s, for the sake of argument, let’s assume it’s true. Well, where does that lead you? The Indians think that your government was involved in the Mumbai attacks. Where does that lead us? I mean, at some point, we’ve got to get out of this zero-sum analysis. So even if you were to think the worst about each other, that the order to attack Mumbai came from government officials and the order to do whatever they were doing somewhere else in Pakistan came from the other side, then isn’t that even a stronger argument to increase confidence-building measures and to try to prevent those elements in each of your countries who are determined to prevent any kind of agreement between India and Pakistan, whoever they might be?

QUESTION: No, I think the point we are making is that India should not put conditions on the resumptions of the dialogue. That’s the best way to thwart all this – start talking. And the Indian prime minister --

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I will certainly --

QUESTION: -- wanted to move on this and I think the Indian media and others stopped him from doing so.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Right, yes.

QUESTION: He’s just won a strong election. This was not even an issue in the election. This is the time for him to make this, and I think whatever the United States can do to get that resumption of that dialogue --

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I want to assure you we are doing everything we can. I want you to know that. This is something that is very important because of our relationships with both countries, and we think it would be in the interest of both countries for this to happen.

QUESTION: My question is more about perception than about all of these facts that you have discussed so far. I think many journalists here and in the U.S. have written about that, and that is the tone of the relationships between Pakistan and the United States of America. It has become very sort of overbearing for the people of Pakistan to keep listening from the U.S., do more, do more, and then many thing else, and then Kerry-Lugar bill comes in, and then it brings in a lot of conditionalities. I’m not going into in terms of the details of those conditionalities (inaudible). But I’m just concerned about the tone of this relationship. Can’t something be done to make a relationship which is…

QUESTION: More alatable to us here? (Laughter)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, why don’t you tell me what that would be, because as I have said for the last two days, we certainly saw the Kerry-Lugar bill as a visible commitment of our government to the partnership we want to build even more strongly between our countries. And so why don’t you tell me, like you were telling me very helpfully about what you would like to see happen with India? So what is it that we could do? Because I think the Kerry-Lugar bill is a perfect example. For the United States Congress to pass a bill unanimously saying that we want to give $7.5 billion to Pakistan in a time of global recession when we have a 10 percent unemployment rate, and then for Pakistani press and others to say we don’t want that, that’s insulting – I mean, it was shocking to us. So clearly, there is a failure to communicate effectively. So what could we do that would be more helpful or more useful?

QUESTION: I think in my personal opinion, there is a lot of cultural gap involved here. What you think is a help or assistance to Pakistan, when it is couched in certain words and phrases, it becomes an insult for the Pakistani media and the public opinion in general. So I think instead of creating a language or focusing on the language that is very prevalent in the United States for its very own cultural reasons, I think when you’re dealing with countries like Pakistan which are very sensitive about their own identity, which take a lot of pride in their so-called sovereignty, there needs to be some cultural sensitivity involved when you word your legislation, when you word your statements, when you word your interactions with our people, with our government like this. In my personal opinion.

QUESTION: My concern is about the – I think the (inaudible) as we were discussing earlier that the Pakistani Government (inaudible) Swat, and (inaudible) it was a very, very localized problem. And then (inaudible) India and other countries is that the impression one gets is that everybody wants just (inaudible) that there is (inaudible) Pakistan at the epicenter. But it is (inaudible) from Pakistan, it is very widely spread, and we think – the people of Pakistan think that it is being fought in our backyard while the rest of the people who could have played a part in it, in fighting it, are not participating (inaudible) there is too much U.S., there is too much Pakistan in it, and it leads to certain kind of reactions in Pakistan especially.

My point is – my question is why can’t we involve other countries? I mean, if you want to make it truly global war against terror. (inaudible) to just involve the rest of the world? And when – so that it becomes truly (inaudible) from the world. Right now, what we are doing is just – in my opinion, just – we are just fighting symptoms and we are not really closing those channels from where the money comes in, their cash flows and all these things. I mean, they are countries which are openly supporting these elements.

So what are we doing on the world stage globally just to show the Pakistanis that it is not only just a war of the U.S. that we are fighting, it’s a war of (inaudible)? And again, what are you doing just – what is the U.S. doing just (inaudible) close those channels? They’re just a (inaudible) between two resourceful enemies, it seems. I mean, we are just providing them with foot soldiers, but they have the money, they are fighting it out with the U.S., which is (inaudible) more resourceful. But they have the resources. What have you done to just snap those supply lines?

SECRETARY CLINTON: We’ve done a lot, and we have worked with the international community. We have, I think, a very vigorous effort to go after the funding that comes to the Taliban and al-Qaida. We’ve been partially successful, but not fully. We are trying to eliminate the funding that comes from the drug trade. We’ve adopted a more successful policy in going after the drug traffickers instead of going after the poor farmers who were growing the poppies. We have, I think, 42 nations with troops in Afghanistan, including Muslim nations like Turkey and the UAE and others.

So this is an international effort. Now, because of Pakistan’s sovereignty, you only have Pakistani military assets, except you have a lot of American equipment, you have equipment from other countries. I know that your military doesn't just buy from us. It buys from China, it buys from Russia, it buys from a lot of places. So in that sense, your military is going out looking for the assets it needs to take these people out.

But let me ask you something. Al-Qaida has had safe haven in Pakistan since 2002. I find it hard to believe that nobody in your government knows where they are and couldn't get them if they really wanted to. And maybe that’s the case. Maybe they’re not getable. I don’t know. But that’s something that in respect for your sovereignty, al-Qaida has run attacks against Indonesia, Spain, Great Britain, the United States, other countries, the Philippines, et cetera, through either direct or indirect approaches. So the world has an interest in seeing the capture and killing of the people who are the masterminds of this terrorist syndicate, but so far as we know, they’re in Pakistan.

So I think I am more than willing to hear every complaint about the United States. I am more than willing to do my best both to answer but also to change where we can so that we do have better communication and we have better understanding. But this is a two-way street. If we’re going to have a mature partnership where we work together on matters that really are in the best interest of both of our countries, then there are issues that not just the United States but others have with your government and your military security establishment.

So I think that that’s what I’m looking for. I don’t believe in dancing around difficult issues, because I don’t think that benefits anybody. And I think part of the problem that we’re facing in terms of the deficit of trust that has been talked about is that we haven’t taken seriously a lot of the concerns. I’m here to take them seriously. But I ask in the pursuit of mutual respect that you take seriously our concerns so that it’s not just a one-sided argument. And I believe that if we do that, we may still not agree or there may still be answers like, well, I don’t know what is happening in this province of your country or I don’t know what the reasons are that al-Qaida has a safe haven in your country, but let’s explore it and let’s try to be honest about it and figure out what we can do.

Because the enemy that we face – there’s no doubt that from what we believe, that many of the horrific attacks that took place in Lahore, the planning of the attacks on the military headquarters, the ISI, the university, et cetera, al-Qaida’s hand is in there. They train people. They fund people. And we’re doing our level best to break them up, to kill them, to capture them, to end their role in this terrorist network, which we think would be to Pakistan’s benefit. Because a lot of the people that you’re fighting now, they are influenced by, trained by, and fight alongside foreign fighters who were recruited and brought to Pakistan by the al-Qaida network. And I --

MODERATOR: Would you like to tell the Secretary about – you know, she asked – she said what do you think the United States should be doing in terms of the sensitivities that (inaudible) talking about.

QUESTION: I also want to make a point on that, yes.

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

QUESTION: Secretary, you – I know that there’s an argument against micromanagement and I know that there’s an argument against sort of excessive toing and froing, et cetera. But since we’re there already in many ways, including the Kerry-Lugar and other things, I know you’re aware of the potential for better understanding by managing the political leadership of the Punjab, particularly Mian Shahbaz Sharif, who has a lot of personal respect for you and for President Clinton. He is the leader of the Punjab, which is also the province from which the military is drawn, which is also the province which – parts of it – which have this – harbored this anti-India status quo pro military (inaudible) sort of mindset, if you like.

QUESTION: And now the terrorists.

QUESTION: And now the terrorists. The so-called Pakistai mindset, which, may I tell you, I come from a rural background 60 miles south of Lahore, and we don’t share that mindset, which is that, you know, we have to have enemies all around in order to sort of (inaudible) having these inside you. Are you seriously in touch with him and his party with regard to what a helpful role they can play in allaying these kind of misperceptions and fears that (inaudible) just mentioned, that (inaudible) spoke about? For instance, if Mian Shahbaz Sharif’s attitude towards the criticism of the bill had been more – less politically opportunist, let’s say, and more, let’s say, reasonable, rational, don’t you think it might have helped shape public opinion in Pakistan enormously and have also put naysayers in their place? And don’t you think that you need to talk to him more often – you personally, I think – and work with the political opposition, and also get them something from the government which they want in order to be able to work together in terms of the charter of democracy so that their fears about all-powerful presidencies, et cetera, can be allayed somewhat? A little bit of give and take so that the civilian process can move forward and not face the kind of challenges that can derail it?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I think you make some excellent points, and I am going to see both Sharifs later today and we will have a broad-ranging discussion. But I think it is important to create an atmosphere in which the political parties, even if they’re in opposition, work together on some kind of common national agenda.

QUESTION: Absolutely.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Because it is important to have a stability within democracy in Pakistan, because it is still evolving. You know what you went through and had lack of democracy. So I do think that the political parties and the personalities should look for ways to cooperate and work together.

We were disappointed by the criticism because some of the criticism was just totally unrelated to the facts. And we reached out. I know that our ambassador and Ambassador Holbrooke and others talked to many people, and Senator Kerry came. So we did try to explain what our legislative language is like, that what we were talking about was not in any way unique to the Pakistani legislation, that we have all kinds of accountability that we impose on ourselves when we give aid, especially this amount of aid, that we have to answer to the taxpayer and to the public. So there was a lot that kind of just was ordinary legislative language in that bill that should not have raised those concerns.

And remember, this was just what we call an authorizing bill. This bill just created the opportunity for us to go to the Congress to ask for the money. But you’ve got to understand, I mean, the Congress is sitting there saying, God, I have all these unemployed people in my district, we are in tough shape in America, and this Administration is asking us to put a $7.5 billion commitment on the table? Well, they say it’s important because they really want to bolster democracy in Pakistan and they really want to create a good partnership. Okay, I’ll do it. Then they pick up the papers and they read that the people in Pakistan don’t want it. So I had members of Congress calling me and saying, well, look, if they don’t want it, why give it to them. So as I said to the press roundtable yesterday, nobody is making Pakistan take any aid. That is up to you. That is your decision. We thought – we have worked with successive governments in Pakistan, but the discussion about this bill goes back a couple of years because it started as a Biden-Lugar bill when Joe was still in the Senate. So it’s been through a lot of hands in Pakistan. It’s been through a lot of review – different administrations going from Musharraf through Zardari. Lots of people have looked at it. So when the criticism became so vocal, a lot of members of Congress are scratching their heads. I mean, they don’t understand all this nuance. They think, well, we’re trying to help somebody, we like Pakistan, we think they’re a good partner, and they’re being very brave in this fight against terrorism and it’s got to be a big challenge for them to deal with, so let’s help them. And I mean, nobody is going to make you take the help. That’s your choice.

QUESTION: But we were happy to hear from your ambassador that this was a mistake. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: One clause.

STAFF: Madame Secretary, we’ve got a signal from Huma.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, okay.

QUESTION: You were talking of cultural (inaudible) aspect (inaudible) our own cultural values. Our (inaudible) says that (speaking in foreign language), I love you so much that I have complained against you at every moment. (Laughter.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: Sounds like a marriage. (Laughter.) Well, we don’t want a divorce. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Did you understand the nuance?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.

QUESTION: The criticism here?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.

QUESTION: And where it’s coming from?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.

QUESTION: How it’s motivated and why it’s motivated? The people of this country want the help, so you have to explain this to Congress. It’s not we the people rejecting it.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Right, right.

QUESTION: Other people are rejecting it for their own reasons.

QUESTION: Just you last night in your interaction with the media person (inaudible) anchors.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Anchors.

QUESTION: You said that there are conditions (inaudible) when the aid is provided to them.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Right.

QUESTION: And although it was not a good example, Colombia, but you did mention that. But what do you want to say?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, yeah, there are conditions. Absolutely. There are conditions on Israel, on Egypt, on --

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: What?

QUESTION: Why do you think you establishing (inaudible) these settlements and refusing to accept the UN resolutions, killing the Palestinians, and that aid is there? That aid flows there. (Inaudible.) We have people here in Pakistan --

SECRETARY CLINTON: But that proves my point. It is that we put conditions that we are subject to. The money goes, and then we decide whether we’re going to continue the money. But it’s up to the countries to determine how it’s going to be used within the categories of the aid. So it is true that we have conditions in a lot of our aid programs because we have to answer to our people. And – but that doesn't micromanage the country that the aid is going to.

QUESTION: Because (inaudible).

SECRETARY CLINTON: I think that, look, we all know that the Israeli-Palestinian issue is one that is a very serious and difficult problem that we are working hard also to try to resolve. We inherited a lot of problems. If you remember, when my husband left office, we were very close to an agreement because he worked on it all the time. The next administration did not make it a priority and did not really do much until toward the end. And unfortunately, we are trying to make up for some lost time, in my opinion.

So I can’t snap my fingers, just because we have a new administration with an inspirational young president, everybody’s going to do what we tell them to do, as evidenced by the reaction we got here. (Laughter.) So my view is we are doing the best we can, and we are trying to make a difference, and we are certainly listening and consulting and trying to be more sensitive so that people know what our intentions and our motivations are. Because we do want to see progress on all of these difficult issues – India, Pakistan, Israel, Palestinians. I mean, there are lots of very thorny problems that surely predate this Administration that are not going to be solved overnight. But I can guarantee you we’re going to work every day to try to help solve them, and that’s what we’re trying to do. And I’m --

QUESTION: You see the hundreds of Pakistanis have become the victim of this terrorist attacks. They are wounded. They are killed. They are handicapped. Well, will you please like to allocate some portion of your assistance for those people (inaudible)?

SECRETARY CLINTON: That’s a good idea. Of course. And in fact, I announced yesterday we’re going to be providing more assistance, more humanitarian assistance.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) specifically for that.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, again, this is up to your government. If your government asks --

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, no. No, we are more than happy to do it. But the way this works is we are trying to respond to the needs and requests of the Pakistani Government. We’re not coming in to say here’s what you should do and here’s the money to do it. What this whole process has been about is what do you need and how can we help you meet your needs as you define them. If your government says this is a need, we will certainly work to fulfill it.

QUESTION: It’s good for people (inaudible).

SECRETARY CLINTON: Absolutely.

QUESTION: I just want to leave you with one thought. After the Kerry-Lugar bill, the next big thing that’s going to come up is going to be the role of private security companies that assist your administration here and your personnel over here. There is a lot of misinformation going around, but there are also opportunities for exploitation of that. I would urge you to talk seriously with the Pakistan Government and with the Pakistani security establishment in order to minimize the blowback effect of anything – any unpleasant incident or anything like that. This is on the cards. Small things are going to be blown up. You are going to have a thing on your hands. It’s very important for you to be sensitized.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you. Thank you very much. Well, certainly, we’ll do our very best to try to set the record straight and meet the legitimate concerns. Some things we’ll agree on and some things we will not, but I think that the larger hope is that we’re going to be able to work together and actually see progress between us.

QUESTION: Thank you so much.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you all very much.

Briefing on the Situation in Honduras

Thomas A. Shannon, Jr.
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs

Via DVC from Tegucigalpa, Honduras

Tegucigalpa, Honduras

MODERATOR: Assistant Secretary Shannon, thanks very much for joining us today and briefing our Washington-based press corps. We understand you’ll start off with a brief statement and then give it back to us for the first question.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: Thank you very much. I’m delighted to be talking to you all from Tegucigalpa. As I stated previously, our delegation here – Ambassador Craig Kelly, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Western Hemisphere Affairs, and Dan Restrepo, the Special Assistant to the President for Western Hemisphere Affairs – were sent – we were sent to Tegucigalpa by Secretary Clinton and President Obama to underscore U.S. interest and support for the national dialogue which is underway now and to underscore the necessity of an agreement within that national dialogue in order to win broad support in the international community for the elections that Honduras will face on November 29^th.

From our point of view, an agreement within the national dialogue opens a large space for members of the international community to assist Honduras in this election process, to observe the elections, and to have a process that is peaceful and which produces leadership that is widely recognized throughout the hemisphere as legitimate. This will be important as a way of creating a pathway for Honduras to reintegrate itself into the inter-American community, to not – and not just the OAS, but also the Inter-American Development Bank and its other institutions, and to access development funding through the international financial institutions.

At the end of the day, we respect Honduras’s sovereignty, we respect its democracy and its constitutional institutions. And at the end of the day, a solution to this crisis, which is Honduran in origin, will be Honduran also. But we believe the solution will be more enduring and more peaceful if it is accompanied by the larger inter-American community and other members of the international community that are interested. Secretary Clinton and President Obama instructed us to come down and try to ensure that this national dialogue continues, that it continues on a sound basis, and to reassure the Honduran people and Honduras’s political leaders that the United States is prepared to work with members of the international community to provide the guarantees and incentives necessary to ensure that any agreement reached in the national dialogue is implemented in a transparent and effective fashion.

The negotiators are meeting now. They’ve done a lot of work, a lot of important work, and I think the Honduran people can be very proud of what these negotiators have accomplished. But they’re dealing with a tough issue, and that’s the larger issue of what the San Jose Accords called restitution. And this is an issue that both sides feel deeply about, but both sides have been working to structure or fashion a solution that meets their different needs and interests. From our point of view, the deal’s on the table. This is not really a question of drafting or of shaping a paragraph. It’s really a question of political will. And that’s why it was so important, I think, for us to come to Honduras at this moment to make clear to all Hondurans that we believe the political will that is displayed and expressed by Honduras’s leaders should respect the democratic vocation of the Honduran people and the democratic aspirations of the Honduran people, and the desire of Honduras to return to a larger democratic community in the Americas.

So let me stop there and take your questions.

MODERATOR: Go ahead. Please give your name.

QUESTION: Sergio Davila from Brazilian Folha de Sao Paulo. The Brazilian Government and a large group of countries in the region said again this week that they will not recognize the elections in Honduras is President Zelaya is not back to the presidency. Will the U.S. do the same?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: What we’re focused on right now is the national dialogue and winning agreement in the national dialogue. Because at the end of the day, our point of view is the international community cannot argue with what Hondurans determine and decide themselves. In other words, if there’s an agreement in the national dialogue, we think that is sufficient to open a space for international support for Honduras’s elections. And we have to respect the ability of Hondurans to come to terms within that dialogue.

QUESTION: Debbie Charles with Reuters. You said that – in Spanish, you were saying that time is running out. Do you feel that your presence there is actually going to result in something? I mean, you’re staying longer. Are you trying to leave with something already finished, or what? And is the United States doing enough –

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: We’d like that, obviously. When we say time is running out, of course, today is October 29^th. There’s only 30 days until the elections on November 29^th. And from our point of view, as I mentioned earlier, this really isn’t a complicated question of negotiation as much as it is a question of expressing political will. And that’s why we came, to underscore our interest in ensuring that the political will is there to do a deal. So we’ve decided to stay longer because we’ve asked – we’ve been asked to stay by different groups participating in this negotiation. And it’s our hope that an agreement will emerge soon.

QUESTION: Before you leave? Do you hope that happens before you leave?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: We would like that very much.

QUESTION: Thanks. I’m Julio Marenco with La Prensa Grafica. The representative from President Micheletti, Vilma Morales, suggested yesterday that they are willing to reinstate Mr. Zelaya to the presidency after the elections. Would you accept something like that?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: In this process, the question really isn’t what we would accept. The question is what the Hondurans can negotiate among themselves and what Hondurans are prepared to accept. Again, that’s what’s been so important about how the OAS and the international community has fashioned its approach to Honduras. Obviously, we started with the important principles that are based in the Inter-American Democratic Charter and the charter of the OAS, which is the respect for democracy and democratic institutions and constitutionality.

But at the same time, as we expressed our principles, the OAS and the United States looked for a way to address those principles in a pragmatic fashion that recognized Honduras’s reality. And that required us to construct a dialogue process that had Hondurans talking to each other. In other words, this wasn’t about the OAS or the international community trying to impose a solution. We’ve seen that fail elsewhere. We know that solutions to be enduring and peaceful have to be rooted in, in this instance, in Honduran soil. And so in that regard, our purpose has always been to respect our principles, but to do so in a context in which Hondurans themselves were going to fashion their solutions.

QUESTION: Matt Lee with AP. I’m just wondering if you could give a more direct answer to the first question that was asked by my Brazilian colleague, which was, as you may remember, is the United States willing to accept an agreement that does not include the return of President Zelaya or the restitution of – his restitution to power.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: We’re not going to anticipate what the negotiators are going to work on, but I will say that we – and not just the United States, but the rest of the inter-American community – have constructed these negotiations in a way that the solution be Honduran. And therefore, from our point of view, a deal is a deal. What the Hondurans can determine to decide among themselves, we’ll accept.

QUESTION: Well, that seems to be quite a climb down from your initial position immediately after the coup.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: I would disagree with that. As I just noted, in the aftermath of the coup --

QUESTION: I’m sorry. What was your position immediately after the coup? I thought it was that you wanted Zelaya back and in power. And now you’re saying that something short of that is acceptable.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: No, I didn’t say that. What I said – and I’ll say it again – is that we constructed a process with our partners in the OAS and elsewhere in the international community to express our commitment to democratic principles and processes, as encapsulated in the Inter-American Democratic Charter. But we also created a process that would have Hondurans speaking to each other, and that ultimately this process had to be resolved by Hondurans. But as we did so, what we were doing was respecting what we believe – and as I mentioned earlier – is the democratic vocation of Hondurans and Honduras, and a longstanding commitment to democracy and constitutionality, which has been consolidating itself over time.

And the real tragedy that Honduras has faced at this point is that the events of June 28^th have shaken that process of consolidation in a fundamental way. But it’s important to understand that June 28^th was the product not of just a particular series of events, but of a larger and more fundamental problem inside Honduran society, which is going to have to be addressed by the next government. And this is one of the reasons why it’s so important for us to construct a pathway that will allow the international community to work with Hondurans as they move forward, and why an agreement in the national dialogue is so important. Because the next president of Honduras has in front of him a huge challenge, which is not just to win the confidence of the international community and gain access again to the resources and technical expertise that is offered in the international community, but also to being a profounder national dialogue in Honduras that will allow Honduras to strengthen its democracy, strengthen its institutions, and emerge in a much stronger position than when it began.

And as I noted previously, today is the 11^th anniversary of Hurricane Mitch hitting Honduran soil. And what I said was that at that time, Hondurans showed enormous courage and determination to rebuild their society and their country, to rebuild their cities, their infrastructure, their towns, and their economy. And they have a lot to be proud of in that regard. But they were able to do so at the speed they did because of the help they got from the international community.

The crisis that was brought on by June 28^th was not a natural crisis. It was a man-made crisis. But it’s one that has had also a terrible impact on Honduras. And what we are saying to our partners here in Honduras is that the international community stands ready to help, but that in order for that help to be widespread and to enjoy broad consensus within the inter-American community, we need an agreement within the national dialogue.

QUESTION: Okay. All that is well and good, but I really need to get a – I really need to get an answer to the question. Is it or is it not U.S. policy, the U.S. position, that Zelaya must be restored to power? Is that still the U.S. position or not? Just a yes or no. And Hurricane Mitch and all that and them coming together is great, but –

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: Well, I appreciate your persistence – (laughter) – but I would say that the question of restitution has been a central question not just for the United States but for the entire international community. And OAS resolutions and UN resolutions have clearly indicated that President Zelaya should be returned to office. But we recognize that we are operating in an environment in which, at the end of the day, Hondurans have to make this decision.

QUESTION: Okay. So that seems to be no, right?

MODERATOR: Next question.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: What’s important to note here is that the negotiators represent both sides of this dispute, and they are fashioning an agreement around restitution which we believe can be successful.

MODERATOR: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you. Mr. Shannon, it’s Sonia Schott. The international community, the OAS, seems to be divided regarding Honduras. So how do you expect that the OAS or the international community could reach or could help in a consensus to reach a solution in Honduras when the international community and the OAS is divided? And I would like to hear what is your perception on the OAS role in the Honduran crisis. Thank you.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: I would argue, actually, that the OAS is not divided and has shown throughout this crisis a remarkable consistency. Given the many differences that exist among countries and different appreciations of events in Honduras, in fact, I am not sure I can remember a moment in which the inter-American community has spoken so clearly on this, on such a challenge, or has been able to support over four months the different processes that we have seen evolve – first the San Jose process and now the Guaymuras process. So in that sense, I think the OAS has really played an important role and has really offered an important touchstone for Hondurans as they attempt to deal with this issue.

But obviously, we have in front of us the final part of this negotiation. It’s our hope that it ends successfully. That’s why we’re here. But we’re not diminishing the difficulty of the challenge that still sits in front of the negotiators. And so it’s our hope that with an agreement, the consensus that we have seen in the OAS can be maintained.

MODERATOR: Elise.

QUESTION: Tom, it’s Elise Labott. I understand what you’re saying about, you know, that the solution has to be Honduras, but in the beginning, just to kind of follow up on Matt’s point in a different way, in the beginning, not only the United States but the international community was so insistent that Zelaya return because you didn’t want to set a precedent for other – you know, for a whole ‘nother round of military coups or any type of coups in the region. And so what do you say to critics that would charge this does set a precedent that all an opposition needs to do is show some fortitude and the international community will come along to your point of view; and even if you can get some negotiations together, that this will set a precedent for other movements that feel that if they have the fortitude, they can change the government in a non-constitutional way?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: Well, I think at this point, the message is still clear. Again, we still have some steps to go in this negotiation process. But it’s important to remember that President Zelaya is represented in this negotiation process, and anything that is agreed to in that process is going to be agreed to by President Zelaya. And so in that sense --

QUESTION: Well, does he really have a choice, though? I mean, isn’t this kind of window dressing? Isn’t this kind of window dressing –

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: No, I mean, I met with --

QUESTION: -- would have at this point?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: No, this is a real process, this negotiation. It’s not an issue of window dressing. And we met with President Zelaya yesterday, and his communication with his negotiators is fluid and his negotiators represent his interests. And this is – when I talk about the importance of an agreement within the national dialogue, it’s important to understand that these agreements can’t be imposed. In other words, it’s not one side imposing an agreement on another side. Either side of this negotiation can get up and walk whenever they want to. Obviously, we’re very intent on seeing a solution that meets Honduras’s broad interests. But I think – I mean, I understand the question. I understand the point you’re trying to make, and it’s an important one. But I think it’s premature, because I think we’re still at a moment in which we can send a very strong message to the international community that coups won’t be tolerated and that countries such as Honduras have the capability within their democracy to resolve this kind of problem.

MODERATOR: Last question.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) from Perfil Argentina. Hello, Tom Shannon. I want to ask you a question. Do you have meet with the candidates that are participating in these elections for being president, and there I want to know if they agree to receive the government from the coup government or they really want to receive the government from an elected democratic president? What’s their perception on this talking about the future, really?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: Yeah. We did meet with the presidential candidates last night, and I had met with several of them during my earlier visit as part of an OAS delegation. And we have regular communication with all of them, and they represent a broad political spectrum. But what was striking about last night’s meeting with the presidential candidates is that, in spite of that spectrum, they were all agreed that an agreement within the national dialogue was absolutely essential to the ability of the elections on November 29^th to go forward in a peaceful and productive fashion. And I think that answers your question. I think it indicates that all of the candidates recognize that once elected, whoever that is, that person will face an enormous challenge, and that challenge will be more successfully faced with broad support across Honduran society, broad recognition of legitimacy, and broad support from the international community.

MODERATOR: Great. Assistant Secretary, thank you very much for your time. We’ll have to stop there for the daily briefing.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: Thank you.

Breakthrough in Honduras

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Islamabad, Pakistan

October 30, 2009

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton delivered the following remarks Friday morning, October 30, 2009, in Islamabad, Pakistan:

I'm very pleased to announce that we've had a breakthrough in negotiations in Honduras.

I want to congratulate the people of Honduras as well as President Zelaya and Mr. Micheletti for reaching an historic agreement. I also congratulate Costa Rican President Oscar Arias for the important role he has played in fashioning the San Jose process and the OAS for its role in facilitating the successful round of talks.

As you know, I sent Assistant Secretary Tom Shannon and his deputy Craig Kelly and the White House NSC representative for the Western Hemisphere Dan Restrepo to Honduras yesterday after speaking with both President Zelaya and Mr. Micheletti last Friday to urge them finally, once and for all to reach an agreement.

I cannot think of another example of a country in Latin America that having suffered a rupture of its democratic and constitutional order overcame such a crisis through negotiation and dialogue.

This is a big step forward for the Inter-American system and its commitment to democracy as embodied in the Inter-American Democratic Charter. I'm very proud that I was part of the process, that the United States was instrumental in the process. But I'm mostly proud of the people of Honduras who have worked very hard to have this matter resolved peacefully.

We're looking forward to the elections that will be held on November 29, and working with the people and government of Honduras to realize the full return of democracy and a better future for the Honduran people.

Special Press Briefing by U.S. Delegation to Honduras

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

October 29, 2009

Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Tom Shannon, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Craig Kelly, and White House Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Western Hemisphere Affairs Dan Restrepo will brief the press by digital video conference (DVC) from Honduras on Thursday, October 29 at 12:00 noon (Spanish language version) and 12:30 p.m.(English language version) EDT in the Carl T. Rowan Press Briefing Room of the Department of State.

The U.S. delegation will brief the press on their visit to Honduras and answer questions from members of the press in both Tegucigalpa and Washington, DC. The U.S. delegation is in Honduras to meet with representatives from both sides and to discuss strategies to move the Guaymuras process forward.

This event is open to the press.

Media representatives may attend this event upon presentation of one of the following: (1) a U.S. Government-issued identification card (Department of State, White House, Congress, Department of Defense or Foreign Press Center), (2) a media-issued photo identification card, or
(3) a letter from their employer on letterhead verifying their employment as a journalist, accompanied by an official photo identification card (driver's license, passport).

Press should allow adequate time to process through security and be in the press briefing room 15 minutes prior to the scheduled event.

PRESS CONTACTS:

Office of Press Relations
U.S. Department of State
(202) 647-2492

Darla A. Jordan
U.S. Department of State
(202) 531-5678
JordanDA@state.gov

Secretary Clinton's Travel to the Middle East

Ian Kelly
Department Spokesman

Washington, DC

October 29, 2009

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Special Envoy for Middle East Peace Senator George Mitchell will hold bilateral meetings this weekend with Israeli and Palestinian leaders, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Mahmoud Abbas, in the region.

Senator Mitchell traveled to and is currently in the region in advance of Secretary Clinton, who already is traveling through the region. These meetings will build on the intensive work the Administration has engaged in with both sides since the trilateral meeting last month.

As President Obama has said, the Administration is committed to comprehensive peace, including a two-state solution. As Secretary Clinton reported to the President last week, challenges remain as we continue to work with both sides. Her visit reflects the Administration's commitment -- and her personal commitment -- to work through the challenges we face in pursuit of comprehensive Middle East peace.

Guinea: Travel Restrictions

Ian Kelly
Department Spokesman, Bureau of Public Affairs, Office of Press Relations

Washington, DC

October 29, 2009

On October 23, 2009, the United States imposed restrictions on travel to the United States by certain members of the military junta and the government, as well as other individuals who support policies or actions that undermine the restoration of democracy and the rule of law in Guinea.

The citizens of Guinea deserve the right to choose their own leaders after decades of authoritarian rule. The military junta in power has shown itself disrespectful of human rights and incapable of shepherding Guinea through a peaceful transition to democracy.

The United States Provides $45 Million for Higher Education Commission

Washington, DC

October 29, 2009

At a meeting with students at the Government College in Lahore today, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced a $45 million American contribution to the Government of Pakistan’s Higher Education Commission (HEC).

These funds will be used for 4 primary purposes:

• Expanding relationships between Pakistani universities and U.S. institutions through increasing additional academic exchanges
  
• Increasing university and technical education for students who have been displaced by violence and to those living in vulnerable areas such as southern Punjab and the North West Frontier Province, which serves students from the Federally Administered Tribal Areas.
  
• Enabling the Higher Education Commission to exempt displaced students from fees, expand opportunities for students to become health professionals, and expand engineering and women's education.
  
• Supporting infrastructure upgrades and improved teacher training at both vocational and university institutions.

This contribution is part of the $1 billion pledge made by the United States at the April 2009 Tokyo Donors’ Conference.  

U.S. Secretary of State Encourages Use of New Media Communications in Pakistan: 'Our Voice' Cell Phone Social Networking on #7111

Islamabad, Pakistan

October 29, 2009

At a town hall today with students at Government College in Lahore, Pakistan, Secretary Clinton announced support from the United States for the first Pakistani mobile phone-based social network, Humari Awaz (“Our Voice”), which will be available using the free SMS shortcode 7111.

95 million Pakistanis use mobile phones, far more than the number of computer and internet users in the country.

Humari Awaz will be available on all five mobile phone networks. The platform will leverage SMS technology and enable Pakistanis to build mobile-based networks around shared interests, themes and subjects.

In addition to linking friends and families, the network will also help a range of other users - from farmers and resellers who want to share market prices, to businesses that wish to communicate with their staff on the road, to news outlets that want to share information with targeted groups.
Humari Awaz participants also have the option to identify themselves or remain anonymous.

U.S. support for the program will cover the costs of the first 24 million Humari Awaz messages.

Humari Awaz demonstrates Secretary Clinton's continued support for using new technologies to create social networks that facilitate more people-to-people interactions.

To learn more about how to use Humari Awaz, SMS “HELP” or “MADAD” to 7111.

The United States Provides $45 Million for Higher Education Commission

Islamabad, Pakistan

October 28, 2009

At a meeting with students at the Government College in Lahore today, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced a $45 million American contribution to the Government of Pakistan’s Higher Education Commission (HEC).

These funds will be used for 4 primary purposes:

• Expanding relationships between Pakistani universities and U.S. institutions through increasing additional academic exchanges
• Increasing university and technical education for students who have been displaced by violence and to those living in vulnerable areas such as southern Punjab and the North West Frontier Province, which serves students from the Federally Administered Tribal Areas.
• Enabling the Higher Education Commission to exempt displaced students from fees, expand opportunities for students to become health professionals, and expand engineering and women's education.
• Supporting infrastructure upgrades and improved teacher training at both vocational and university institutions.

This contribution is part of the $1 billion pledge made by the United States at the April 2009 Tokyo Donors’ Conference.

Car Bomb in Peshawar

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Islamabad, Pakistan

October 28, 2009

The United States extends its deepest sympathy to the victims of today’s brutal attack in Peshawar, and to the families and friends of those killed and injured. There is no justification for killing innocent people.

This attack shows the lengths extremist elements are willing to go to force their agenda onto a people who only wish to go about their daily lives in peace.

We commend Pakistan for its courageous fight against extremism and the commitment of the Pakistani military to protect the security and well-being of the Pakistani people. We stand shoulder to shoulder with the Pakistani people in their aspirations for peace and security. We are committed to giving Pakistan the help it needs in order to defeat extremist violence.

###

The United States Pledges $56 Million for Humanitarian Assistance to Displaced Pakistanis

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

October 28, 2009

During her meeting in Islamabad with Pakistani Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani today, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pledged $56 million in additional American support for internally displaced persons in Pakistan. The funds will support the Government of Pakistan’s humanitarian relief and early recovery efforts in the Northwest Frontier Province (NWFP) and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA).

Of the total pledge, $25 million will be used to help returning refugees in the Buner, Swat, and Lower Dir districts in the NWFP. The U.S. is supporting early recovery programs that cover the basic needs of returnees in the six to nine months in the immediate aftermath of their return, with the ultimate goal of transitioning short-term emergency interventions to long-term development programming.

Twenty-one million dollars of the pledge will be directed through the U.N. World Food Programme to address a shortfall in funding for operations in Pakistan. The U.N. World Food Programme provides essential food assistance to many of Pakistan’s internally displaced people. During the past two years, the United States has provided nearly $158 million in food assistance to Pakistan.

Also included in this pledge is $10 million for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to assist Pakistanis newly displaced by the conflict in North and South Waziristan and to provide winterization support for longer-term displaced civilians in the Malakand Division. To date, the Pakistani government has registered more than 133,000 Pakistanis displaced from South and North Waziristan, more than 50,000 of whom were forced to flee in the last two weeks alone. With the onset of winter, it is crucial that the international community act now to address the acute needs of the recently displaced.

The United States provided over $281 million in humanitarian assistance to Pakistan during the past two years.

The U.S. Provides $103.5 Million in New Law Enforcement and Border Security Assistance

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

October 28, 2009

During her meeting in Islamabad with Pakistani Prime Minister Yousef Raza Gilani today, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton pledged $103.5 million in U.S. support for the Government of Pakistan’s priority law enforcement and border security programs. This new commitment brings total support for these programs in 2009 to $147.2 million.

To underscore the U.S. commitment to building the capacity of Pakistan’s law enforcement agencies, Secretary Clinton offered $37.5 million in new assistance to the Northwest Frontier Province (NWFP) Police and other law enforcement entities, including Levies from the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). The American contribution will support police training in areas such as leadership and human rights, the provision of commodities, and infrastructure support that will improve the capacity, mobility, and survivability of Pakistan’s police. This pledge follows a $9 million commitment made in July 2009 to train the NWFP Police Elite Force, to procure life-saving protective equipment and vehicles, and to rebuild and harden police stations in conflict-affected areas of the NWFP.

Secretary Clinton also announced the delivery of five additional Huey II helicopters, totaling $19.7 million, to the Ministry of Interior Air Wing. In addition, she announced $26 million in new funding for operations and maintenance support for the expanded fleet. Following the recent American contribution, the Air Wing now has 14 Huey-II helicopters and three Cessna Caravans. The U.S. Government has invested over $140 million in this aviation program since its inception in 2002.

The Secretary also reaffirmed U.S. commitment to Pakistan’s infrastructure development, announcing an additional $40 million contribution to build 87 additional kilometers of roads and bridges in the FATA and the NWFP. The United States has already provided $15 million for two road projects in the FATA. To date, the USG has built over 1,300 kilometers of roads in the FATA and NWFP, which have been accompanied by 1,000 small agriculture, water, and electric schemes. The road construction program has increased the geographic and economic mobility of Pakistan’s citizens and provided law enforcement access to previously inaccessible areas.

United States and Uganda Sign Open-Skies Agreement

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

October 28, 2009

The United States and Uganda signed an Open-Skies air services agreement on Tuesday, October 27, in Atlanta, at the U.S. Trade and Development Agency’s Conference on African Aviation.

Uganda’s Minister of Transport, the Honorable John Nasasira, and Susan Kurland, the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs, signed for their respective governments.

The Agreement, which entered into force upon signature, reflects the close and growing cooperation in developing economic ties between the United States and Uganda.

The United States has concluded over 90 Open Skies accords with economies around the world, including 20 such agreements on the continent of Africa.

Open Skies agreements have vastly expanded international passenger and cargo flights to and from the United States, promoting increased travel and trade, enhancing productivity, and spurring high-quality job opportunities and economic growth. Open Skies agreements do this by eliminating government interference in the commercial decisions of air carriers about routes, capacity, and pricing, freeing carriers to provide more affordable, convenient, and efficient air service for consumers.

United States and Ukraine Announce Bilateral Energy Security Working Group

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

October 28, 2009

The government of the United States and the government of Ukraine warmly welcome the creation of a Bilateral Energy Security Working Group (BESWG) under the auspices of the Strategic Partnership Commission. The BESWG is co-chaired by Ambassador Richard L. Morningstar, Special Envoy for Eurasian Energy, U.S. Department of State; and Sergiy Pavlusha, Deputy Minister, Ministry of Fuel and Energy, Ukraine. On the U.S. side, participants included representatives from the departments of Energy, Commerce and Labor; the National Security Council; and the Agency for International Development. On the Ukrainian side, participants included representatives from the Secretariat of the President, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Energoatom, and the Embassy of Ukraine in Washington.

At the inaugural session of the BESWG on October 28, 2009, the two sides discussed the importance of working together to strengthen energy security for Ukraine and Europe. They evaluated results of the implementation of projects in Ukraine aimed at enhancing Ukraine’s energy security. In particular, the meeting focused on Ukraine’s energy sector reform initiatives, ongoing U.S. technical assistance to Ukraine in municipal heating reform and other sectors, and the potential for enhanced U.S.-Ukraine cooperation in energy efficiency and other new areas. The two sides also discussed promoting the participation of the U.S. and Ukrainian private sectors in energy development and the importance of successfully implementing cooperative projects in nuclear power.

United States Pledges $85 Million for the Benazir Bhutto Income Support Program

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

October 28, 2009

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton announced today an American contribution of $85 million to the Government of Pakistan’s Benazir Bhutto Income Support Program (BISP), that targets assistance to Pakistani women and families in need.

Secretary Clinton announced the U.S. contribution following her participation in the second monthly lottery hosted by President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani. The monthly lottery drawing, established in honor of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, provides cash loans of Rs. 300,000 ($3,600) for economically disadvantaged families to support income-generating entrepreneurship. The Secretary also helped distribute checks among the selected beneficiaries from September’s drawing.

In the spirit of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, for whom the program is named, the program aims to empower Pakistani women with households whose monthly income is less than Rs 6000 ($72). The program provides a lifeline for families who are struggling in the wake of rising food inflation. Every two months, the government sends checks of Rs 2000 ($24) to women across the country living in Pakistan’s poorest households.

To ensure the financial flow is transparent, the Pakistani government is selecting beneficiaries through a poverty targeting system developed by the World Bank, conducting monthly financial checks on payments and regular house-to-house checks to ascertain delivery of exact amounts to families.

The U.S. contribution is part of the $1 billion pledge made at the April 2009 Tokyo Donors’ Conference to support Pakistan’s development.

Meeting of the Shipping Coordinator Committee

Office of the Spokesman

Washington, DC

October 28, 2009

The Shipping Coordinating Committee (SHC) will conduct an open meeting at 9:30 AM on Friday, November 13, 2009, in Room 1303 of the United States Coast Guard Headquarters Building, 2100 Second Street, SW, Washington, DC 20593-0001. The primary purpose of the meeting is to prepare for the 26th Session of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) Assembly (A 26) to be held at the IMO Headquarters, United Kingdom from November 23 to December 4, 2009 and the 25th Session of the IMO Council Extraordinary Session (C ES 25) to be held at the IMO Headquarters, United Kingdom, from November 19 to November 20, 2009.

Members of the public may attend this meeting up to the seating capacity of the room. Persons planning to attend this meeting should contact the meeting coordinator; LCDR Jason Smith by e-mail at jason.e.smith2@uscg.mil, by phone at (202) 372-1376, by fax at (202) 372-1925, or in writing at Commandant (CG-5212), U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100 2nd Street, SW, Room 1308, Washington, DC 20593-0001 not later than 72 hours before the meeting. Please note that due to security considerations, two valid, government issued photo identifications must be presented to gain entrance to the Headquarters building. The Headquarters building is accessible by taxi and privately owned conveyance (public transportation is not generally available). However, parking in the vicinity of the building is extremely limited.

The United States is Concerned about Northern Yemen Humanitarian Situation

Ian Kelly
Department Spokesman

Washington, DC

October 28, 2009

The United States is increasingly concerned about the humanitarian situation in northern Yemen resulting from the ongoing conflict between the Government of Yemen and Al-Houthi opposition groups in Sa’ada governorate. The United States calls on all parties to return to the ceasefire that was established in 2008; to respect principles of international humanitarian law; and to avoid any action that would endanger the civilian population – including relief workers – in the affected areas. In the absence of a permanent ceasefire, we call on all parties to coordinate humanitarian pauses during the fighting to provide international relief agencies the opportunity to deliver urgently-needed food and medical supplies to tens of thousands of displaced Yemenis as well as civilians to escape the conflict zones.

The United States agrees with the Council of the European Union’s October 27 statement in support of a unified, stable, democratic and prosperous Yemen. The United States also joins the Council in recognizing the importance of a comprehensive approach to address the security, political, and economic challenges that Yemen faces and reiterates the United States’ readiness to support the Government of Yemen in its efforts to address these challenges.

International aid agencies estimate that as many as 55,000 Yemenis are newly displaced as a result of the latest round of fighting, which began in mid-August. An estimated 150,000 Yemenis have been uprooted as a result of this five-year-long conflict between the Government of Yemen and Houthi tribes. Violence and political disruption continue to hamper the distribution of humanitarian assistance in many areas. As winter approaches, it becomes even more critical that displaced people, and others affected by the conflict, receive timely assistance.

The United States has thus far provided over $8.7 million in FY 2009 to assist Yemenis displaced by recent fighting. The U.S. government provides food aid and supports emergency shelter, water, sanitation, hygiene and protection needs for the most vulnerable among the estimated 150,000 displaced persons and 25,000 vulnerable host families in Sa'ada, Hajjah, and Amran governorates, but significant needs remain. We urge other donor nations to support international relief agencies in alleviating the suffering caused by this ongoing humanitarian crisis.

Remarks With Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Islamabad, Pakistan

October 28, 2009

FOREIGN MINISTER QURESHI: Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. (Inaudible.) Let me welcome you, Madame Secretary, once again, to Pakistan to the Foreign Office. We’re delighted to have you here because we know that you’re a friend of Pakistan. We know what your views are for this region, for Pakistan, and certainly this visit of yours will build bridges and deepen our relationship further.

I think this visit is well timed, and I said this to Secretary Clinton. Because Pakistan, as you know, ladies and gentlemen, has entered a critical phase in its fight against extremism and terrorism. And to visit Pakistan at this stage to express solidarity with the people of Pakistan, I think, is an expression, a loud and clear message from the government, the Administration, and the people of the United States of America.

I think this trip is important because it is taking place when there is a democratic dispensation in Pakistan. And your Administration, Madame, has very clearly felt for the first time, in black and white, that we want to deal with a democracy. We uphold and share common democratic values. And I think for a country which is developing democratic institutions, that message is a powerful message for the people of Pakistan.

There is a policy shift that one sees in your approach, and that’s a very welcome shift. And the shift is that you move from individuals to people, and you want a people-centric relationship, and that, I think, is very important. We are democracies. You are a democracy, and you have supported the transition to democracy in Pakistan. And today, we are a democracy as well.

So democracies, I think, have to redraw terms of engagement. And today in our very constructive, very positive engagement that we’ve had this morning, we have sat and analyzed the way forward. What we have, what we – the baggage of history, the needs of our current times, and the future, the vision for the future. I have had the pleasure of sharing a roadmap for U.S.-Pakistan relations with Madame Secretary, and – which is my vision for the future, the way forward for the future.

What we need to do is to build a relationship, a relationship based on trust, a relationship based on mutual respect, and a relationship based on shared objectives. And today, in our engagement, we discussed how to reinforce the trust, how to understand and be sensitive to each other’s concerns, and how to identify and align our objectives, our strategic interests for the future. Democracies, as you know, ladies and gentlemen, cannot be oblivious of public opinion.

So there are fears and concerns on both sides. Let’s acknowledge and admit that. And we need to address them. And I think we have now in place a mechanism, a leadership on both sides, that is willing to address those fears and concerns, have the mindset to address those fears and concerns to our mutual benefit.

We also discussed the situation in Afghanistan. We both have a stake in Afghanistan. We both have an interest in a peaceful, stable Afghanistan. And we discussed the – Afghanistan. We discussed the new review that is taking place in the United States, and I requested the Secretary to share the views with us, take Pakistan’s input in that. And in my view, it will be useful.

And finally, we’ve had a very frank and a very honest discussion, and it started with history – you know, the seesaw in our relationship, the baggage that both of us carry of decades – over the last six decades. And we cannot ignore history. We should not ignore history. Keeping that in view, we have to build a relationship for the future. We have to regain each other’s confidence. And I think this Administration, ever since it’s come into office, from the trilateral process we’ve had in Washington and the various engagements – the appointment of the special representatives, the frequent interaction that we’ve had, is willing to engage and understands the importance of confidence in each other.

We both are of the view that our relationship has to go beyond terrorism. Terrorism and defeating – combating terrorism is a shared objective, but we have to go beyond that. When we need to – when we go beyond that, we have to help build each other’s strength. Pakistan is a resource-rich country. We need United States support and help in using our resources, wealth. We need greater market access, and we’ve talked about the FDA. We talked about how important it is to have trade as opposed to aid. Pakistan’s preference is trade.

We also discussed how important it is for Pakistan to resolve the energy crisis and the input that we have shared with each other through the task force that you set up of late. We have also talked about how important it is to build capacity of institutions, institutions that can deliver and improve the quality of life of the ordinary citizen of Pakistan by providing better health, education, you know, sanitation, pulling people out of poverty. And finally, we’ve discussed how we can be sensitive to each other’s core interests.

I think this engagement was very useful. I think, ma’am, your presence and your trip, which – and a comprehensive program that’s set forth would be very useful in adding a new chapter to our relations. So thank you for coming.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you so much, Minister Qureshi. And I believe this is the sixth time that we have met – three times in Washington and one in New York and one in Phuket, Thailand, and now back here in Islamabad – and I’m very pleased to have this opportunity to continue our in-depth discussions. And I thank you for the openness and the sharing of views that will really help us build the kind of partnership that will benefit both of our countries.

I’m also pleased to be here in Pakistan for my fifth trip. I well remember my first trip, nearly 15 years ago, when I was traveling with my daughter Chelsea. And together, we experienced the warmth and hospitality of the people of Pakistan. It was an extraordinary visit for both of us. And I remember the young people I met, the civil society leaders, the visit to the Faisal Mosque, my daughter discussing with the guides there the course in Islamic history she was taking in high school. I remember so well the faces of the people, the conversations that we had.

And for me, this is a personal privilege, as well as a high honor, representing President Obama and our government, because today, the people of Pakistan and the United States face shared challenges. And we are poised to benefit from shared opportunities. This is a critical moment. And the United States seeks to turn the page to a new partnership with not only the government, but the people of a democratic Pakistan.

We hope to build a strong relationship based on mutual respect and mutual shared responsibility. I am confident that if we listen to one another, we consult, we work closely together, we will succeed. Because while we may disagree from time to time, as friends and partners do, we are bound together by common interests and common values that are stronger than any of our differences. There are many areas where our nations already work together. Now, we seek to deepen those efforts and find additional opportunities for partnership. Again, not just government to government, but in the private sector, in universities, in nongovernmental organizations, civil society groups, religious institutions, and of course, and most importantly, people to people, which is the kind of diplomacy that I think has the longest benefit.

In this regard, I am delighted that the foreign minister and I have agreed to resume and intensify the U.S.-Pakistan strategic dialogue, which I will personally oversee for my country. We want a comprehensive dialogue that is results-oriented.

Now it’s obvious that one important issue facing both of our nations is security. Pakistan is in the midst of an ongoing struggle against tenacious and brutal extremist groups who kill innocent people and terrorize communities. I know that in recent weeks, Pakistan has endured a barrage of attacks, and I would like to convey my sympathy and that of the American people to the people of Pakistan. But I want you to know that this fight is not Pakistan’s alone. These extremists are committed to destroying that which is dear to us as much as they are committed to destroying that which is dear to you and to all people. So this is our struggle as well, and we commend the Pakistani military for their courageous fight, and we commit to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Pakistani people in your fight for peace and security. We will give you the help that you need in order to achieve your goal.

But our relationship with Pakistan goes far beyond security. That may be what is in the headlines for obvious reasons. Today, we had more vicious and brutal attacks that killed more innocent people. The terrorists and extremists are very good at destroying, but they cannot build. That is where we have an advantage. Because today, the foreign minister and I discussed the ways in which our two nations can work more closely together on behalf of the people of Pakistan as you continue your journey toward an effective, responsive, and enduring democracy.

In this time of economic challenge, we want to help you to do what you believe is best for your country. In the economic arena, we want to help you with jobs and economic development and the infrastructure that will create investments – access to education, providing more support in healthcare, and in particular, improving the energy supply, something I have heard about in every meeting that I’ve had with any Pakistani since I became Secretary of State.

Pakistan’s energy shortfall poses serious challenges to your economy and to the lives of individual people and businesses. For months, families have endured sweltering heat and evenings spent in the dark without appliances or televisions or computers. And in some places, I’m told that it happened in my own country. Blackouts prompt an increase in crimes. Without power, some factories and small businesses have closed their door, which undermines economic growth. And America wants to help.

Our first initiatives in this field were launched by Ambassador Holbrooke and his team earlier this year. And they’ve been working closely with Ambassador Patterson and our Embassy here in Islamabad, who have been working closely with your government. We recently completed an extensive energy dialogue with the Pakistani Government, led on our side by our International Energy Coordinator David Goldwyn.

In this collaboration, our experts identified several ways that the United States can help. And today, I am very proud to announce the first phase of a signature energy program for Pakistan which will help repair facilities, improve local energy providers, and promote energy efficiency. These projects, designed in close collaboration with Pakistan’s government, will repair and upgrade key power stations across your country which currently operate well below full capacity.

We will help you install new and better equipment at the Tarbela Dam power station on the Indus River. And we will help you repair or replace more than 10,000 tube well pumps nationwide, which will both save energy and increase agricultural productivity. This first phase is only the beginning of our new emphasis on assisting Pakistan in its energy sector. And as we move forward, together, we will, if Congress approves future requests, do far more together.

The foreign minister and I discussed this and many other ways that our nation will strengthen and deepen our relationship. I shared with him, as he shared with me, some of the misperceptions, some of the stereotypes and misinformation that occasionally blocks both of our countries from fully understanding and appreciating each other. Over the course of my visit, I look forward to discussing many issues of concern with business leaders, members of parliament, representatives from civil society, students, women, citizens from the northwest and other parts of the country.

And of course, my time in Pakistan would not be complete without visits to some of Pakistan’s extraordinary cultural, religious, and historic sites that make your country so important to Islamic civilization and to the modern Muslim world.

But let me end with this point, the partnership between our countries is not limited to the halls of government. I enjoyed greatly my meeting and the gracious lunch which the foreign minister hosted. But he and I both know that in democracies, there has to be a partnership between the people, and that is what I am aiming to foster. We have a united and shared vision of the kind of future that our children in both countries should be able to enjoy, where each child doesn’t have to fear when he or she goes to school or to a market that they may not make it home safely, where the God-given abilities of each child can be nurtured, and then once again, see the fruits of that kind of investment in the benefits to families, communities, and to great nations. Our fates are intertwined in the 21^st century. We are interdependent and interconnected. And I’m betting that we can make the kind of future that the children of our two nations deserve.

Thank you very much.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary (inaudible).

SECRETARY CLINTON: It’s a hallmark of a democracy, Minister Qureshi.

FOREIGN MINISTER QURESHI: Yes. All is noisy. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, you said you want to turn the page in our relationship and correct some misperceptions. As you increase the amounts of U.S. economic assistance along the lines that you’ve discussed, how important is it that the Pakistani people themselves actually know that this assistance in very local projects comes from the United States? And how do you propose to tell them that when U.S. officials have so much difficulty traveling around the country?

And if I might, to the foreign minister, on the question of sharing information and your views on the Administration’s strategy review, you said that the Secretary is going to carry Pakistan’s views back. Do you feel like those views have been adequately represented thus far, and in particular, on the question of the U.S. decision to begin to remove some of its military units from the Afghan border?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Let me answer the question that was addressed to me and then say something about the question addressed to the foreign minister. Well, we’re talking right now in front of – I’ve lost count of how many cameras and how many journalists are in this audience – to convey both the intent of our Administration to turn that page, but also the specifics. I hope that in the coverage of my visit today there will be notice of the work we are doing together to improve the energy sector, to provide more reliable electricity for the people of Pakistan in a very specific proposal that I have just put forth. I will be visiting with many members of the Pakistani press over the next three days. I will be having town halls, both here and in Lahore. So we are going to reach out and make clear as best as I can what our intentions are and what our commitments are. And it is, of course, important that that be communicated not only in English, but in other languages as well, none of which, unfortunately, I can speak. But I know that others can and that we can convey the sincerity of our commitment.

With respect to the part of your question, Karen, about military outposts, it is actually true that we have more military presence on the border, but we have changed some of the outposts’ locations. We have consolidated into some bigger outposts. And we are looking to cooperate with the Pakistani military to determine how best we can jointly address the challenges along the border.

QUESTION: Ms. Clinton, please, if you don’t mind, Mr. Obama, your president, has been accorded the Nobel Peace Prize. And you see, this is the beginning of a long road and arming peace and fighting for peace and begging for peace at (inaudible). You see that if Mr. Obama fails to bring back peace in Afghanistan, a region like that, you would be in a position and plucking the courage to ask him to return that Nobel Peace Prize?

(Laughter.)

SECRETARY CLINTON: I’m very proud that President Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize. And the Nobel Committee made clear that in much of the world, his election represented a significant change that people felt toward our country, which certainly creates better conditions for the pursuit and achievement of peace. But as the President said, this is very hard work. We know that, but how much better it is to be on the side of the peacemakers. And that is certainly where President Obama is.

So we will be working closely together with partners and friends like Pakistan to try to realize the vision and the promise of peace. And I know that the hopes that have been raised by the President’s receipt of this prize are very high. But it is important that we hope for and work for peace together. And I am committed to doing whatever I can to realize the vision that that prize represents.

QUESTION: Thank you very much. Jill Dougherty from CNN. Mr. Foreign Minister, Secretary Clinton mentioned some terrorist attacks. In fact, this afternoon, there’s a report of an attack at a women’s market in Peshawar killing, it looks, at least 60 people, if not more. There’s been a series of attacks. Military operations have displaced two million people. You had that attack of the students at the Islamic University, et cetera. How – what do you say to Pakistanis who ask: Is the fight against extremism worth it, or could taking the fight to the terrorists actually be making their lives more dangerous?

And Secretary Clinton, if you had comments on that, I would – I’d be happy to hear that.

And also, there is a report in The New York Times that the brother of Hamid Karzai has been on the CIA payroll for eight years. What is your comment on that, please?

FOREIGN MINISTER QURESHI: Let me begin by condemning the terrorist attack in Peshawar this morning. I just learned about it just before we started our talks. Sixty innocent lives were lost and some have been injured. So I pray for a speedy recovery, and I condole with the families that have lost their near and dear ones.

We are facing this on a daily basis, but the resolve and the determination will not be shaken. People who are carrying out such heinous crimes, they want to shake our resolve. And I want to address them. We will not buckle. We will fight you. We will fight you because we want stability and peace in Pakistan. You are on the run, and we know that. We defeated you in Swat and Malakand. And the brave soldiers and officers of the Pakistan army will defeat you in Waziristan. You think by attacking innocent people and lives, you will shake our determination? No, sir, you will not. We will be more determined to fight you and defeat you for our own reasons, because we have a vision for Pakistan, and that vision does not fall in line with what you stand for.

QUESTION: This is (inaudible) Urdu newspaper (inaudible). Sir, my question is that, Madame Secretary, the people of Pakistan have great regard for you and your beloved husband because in the year 2000, your husband, Bill Clinton, has visited Pakistan, and he had asked that General Pervez Musharraf not to (inaudible) the democratically elected prime minister of Pakistan (inaudible). After saying that, I want to put my question that whether you are aware of the fact the popularity graph (inaudible) of United States in Pakistan is going down day by day. So far as (inaudible) is concerned, the people of Pakistan, the parliament, the political leaders, as well as the military leadership, has shown its apprehension and concern. What steps you are going to take to remove these concerns, madame? Thank you.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, thank you. And thank you for your kind words about the visit that I made with Chelsea in 1995 and the visit that my husband made in 2000. I recently reread his address to the Pakistani people, and believe strongly that what he said then has to be built on and followed through on, which is what President Obama is trying to do now. And we are committed to that. We feel very strongly, as the foreign minister said, that the extremists and the terrorists who deploy violence have to be defeated wherever they are. We have lost a number of brave young American soldiers in Afghanistan in this last – in these last months. We have watched with admiration and sadness at the sacrifice of the Pakistani soldiers as well. But this is, as the foreign minister said, a fight that cannot be avoided.

These attacks on innocent people are cowardly. They are not courageous. They are cowardly. If the people behind these attacks were so sure of their beliefs, let them join the political process. Let them come forth to the people of Pakistan in this democracy and make their case that they don’t want girls to go to school, that they want women to be kept back, that they believe that they have all the answers and that the rest of us who are people of faith have none. Let them make that case in the political arena and see how far they would get. They know they are on the losing side of history, but they are determined to take as many lives with them as their movement is finally exposed for the nihilistic, empty effort that it is.

So for us who believe that there can be differences among us, as there are differences of background, experience, culture, religion – all the differences that make life interesting and varied – we are willing to put our beliefs on the line in a democratic political process and let the people decide. And I commend the democratic Government of Pakistan for taking on this fight because it is not an easy one to undertake.

We’re going to do everything we can to speak directly to the people of Pakistan, which is what I’m here to do, to try to reverse, as you say, some of these misperceptions. I feel very strongly about it. Where there are