SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S MAKES REMARKS WITH NORWEGIAN FOREIGN MINISTER BORGE BRENDE

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Remarks With Norwegian Foreign Minister Borge Brende Before Their Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Treaty Room
Washington, DC
November 15, 2013

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you very much. I’m really happy to welcome His Excellency, the Foreign Minister of Norway Borge Brende. It’s very, very nice to have him here. There’s no way to exaggerate the enormous amount of good work and cooperation and partnership that Norway has with the United States, but most importantly, Norway is just a huge global citizen. And I want to thank the Government of Norway and the people of Norway for the incredible role that they play on rule of law, on civil society, on humanitarian assistance, on global environmental issues, on humanitarian issues of grave concern, on proliferation.

Recently, Norway has stepped up and offered to be helpful with ships to be able to transport chemical weapons out of Syria. They have – when I traveled to the Sudan some time ago, I would run into the Norwegian oil minister who would be there helping to work on the solutions to the Sudanese oil issues. Norway is a terrific partner, a NATO ally, a great friend of the United States. And so I’m really happy to welcome the Foreign Minister – the new Foreign Minister here.

I had the privilege of living in Norway for a couple of years a long time ago, so I have a special affinity for Norway and Norwegians, but leaving that aside, the amount of global engagement that Norway executes is really astounding for the size of the country, and we all marvel at it.

Finally, they are also a terrific partner on the Arctic and on global climate change, which is a challenge that we all share.

So I’m very, very happy to welcome you here, it’s good to have you, and I look forward to have conversations.

FOREIGN MINISTER BRENDE: Thank you so much. Thank you.

QUESTION: Can you say something in Norwegian?

SECRETARY KERRY: (In Norwegian.) (Laughter.) I learned how to say a few things here and there.

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, now that --

SECRETARY KERRY: No, no, no. Let me – I want the Minister to have a chance to say hello and then we’re going to go talk. Thank you.

FOREIGN MINISTER BRENDE: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Secretary Kerry, thank you for those very warm words. We in Norway strongly feel that the friendship between our two countries is very important to us, and the importance is growing. I think this also shows how close we are. We meet after a short time. And as the Secretary also strongly underlined, we will today discuss the humanitarian situation in Syria that is appalling, but we also are committed from the Norwegian side to now support the Security Resolution 2119 to make sure that weapons of mass destruction, chemical weapons, again, cannot be used against the people of Syria. The implementation of this resolution is extremely important.

We thank you, Mr. Secretary, for your leadership in this. I think without your courage – personal courage – that would not have happened. We from the Norwegian side – I’ll share also more details with the Secretary – we are committed, of course, on financing the whole operation with serious money to OPCW. We also will have Norwegian ships supporting the transportation. And we’re also stepping up further on the humanitarian relief. Already, we are the sixth largest donor. And we will also work heavily on making sure that the presidential statement in the Security Council on access to all the people suffering – the IDPs inside Syria – will be enforced. This is of extremely high importance.

Also, we are very supportive of the work that you, Mr. Secretary, are now doing on Israel-Palestine. We’re trying our best, as the leaders of the AHLC group, the donor group for PA. We know that the Palestinian areas have fundamental challenges now on the growing deficit, and Norway will follow up to make sure that the economic piece of Palestine is dealt with in a proactive way. And I would say, Mr. Secretary, we know that if you personally hadn’t stepped up and also made sure that Mr. Abbas and Mr. Netanyahu came together, this would not have happened. And in politics, people do make a difference, and if we in any way can support your work now on this, we are there.

Also on Iran, of course, this is the big issue. We support your leadership there and we hope that there will be a good deal for the world, because the alternatives, we do know they’re not good either.

On NATO, this is crucial importance for Norway. We have a huge discussion now also in Europe on the Eastern Partnership. For us, it is important that these countries can make a choice themself. This is fundamental in Europe, and this is a core value for us.

SECRETARY KERRY: Good.

FOREIGN MINISTER BRENDE: So again, thank you, Mr. Secretary, for receiving us and thank you for your kind words about Norway.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you, everybody. Appreciate it.

FOREIGN MINISTER BRENDE: Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you.

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S REMARKS AFTER LONDON 11 MINISTERIAL MEETING

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Remarks at a Press Availability After the London 11 Ministerial Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Foreign & Commonwealth Office
London, United Kingdom
October 22, 2013


SECRETARY KERRY: Good afternoon, everybody. Thank you for your patience. It’s a great privilege to be back in London and to be here with all of my fellow ministers who are part of the so-called London 11, which has been the principal support group and organizing entity to assist the Syrian opposition. And I want to thank our terrific host, Foreign Secretary William Hague, who ran a very effective, focused meeting this morning, and who has welcomed us with a great and traditional hospitality. We’re happy to be here.

I also want to thank the Joint Special Representative Lakhdar Brahimi, who is out in the region now meeting with various parties in preparation for the possibilities of the Geneva conference. And we’re grateful to him and to his team for their efforts.

Needless to say, we came here to London – I think this is the fourth or fifth meeting that I have taken part in as part of the London 11 – in order to reaffirm the international community’s strong commitment to trying to end the bloodshed in Syria, and to try to bring stability to that war-torn country, and to provide sanctuary, and ultimately, an opportunity to return to their country for the millions of refugees and displaced people.

When we last met, we spoke with one voice about the need to move towards a transitional government with full executive authority by mutual consent. Those are not my words; those are the words of the Geneva communique of June 2012, known as Geneva 1. And in that communique, the United Nations and other representative entities in many countries, including Russia, signed on to a communique which called for a transition government in Syria.

What we did today was increase our commitment to the convening of the Geneva conference for the specific purpose of implementing the Geneva 1 communique. We agreed to increase today our coordinated assistance to the opposition, including to the Syrian Opposition Coalition – the legitimate representative of the Syrian people. And we also committed to do more to assist the brave people who are on the ground in Syria. We also agreed to direct military aid exclusively through the Supreme Military Council from those countries that have chosen to do so or are able to do so, as they fight – that is, the Supreme Military Council fights to curtail the influence of extremists, to isolate the extremists, and to change the balance on the ground.

Now as these efforts all occur simultaneously, we are convinced, based on the meeting we had here today, that those increased efforts will create their own synergy that will help the opposition to continue to be able to grow stronger. So far, the United States has committed a significant amount of funding to both the humanitarian effort and to the effort to assist the Syrian opposition. We’ve now totaled shy of $2 billion, a large – the largest proportion of it, I might add, humanitarian assistance. And we are proud that the United States is the largest humanitarian donor in order to try to address the growing humanitarian catastrophe that exists on the ground.

President Obama recently announced that the United States will provide an additional $339 million in humanitarian assistance on top of the more than billion that we’ve already put in. But one thing is clear, and one thing really was made even more clear in the meetings that we had this morning: I don’t know anybody, including the Russians and others in the region who are not part of this support group, who believe that there is a military solution to this conflict. It is clear that both sides will continue to fight, and to fight, and to fight. And in the end, the greatest victims, the people who suffer the most, are the Syrian people themselves, who are being driven from their homes and killed in the most wanton violence, and who are having an increasingly profound impact on surrounding countries that are seeing their lives affected as a consequence of the outflow of refugees. This war will not come to an end on the battlefield, I believe, and I think most people believe. It will come to an end through a negotiated settlement.

Joint Special Representative Brahimi and the Russians and we have come together and consulted closely in an effort to try to define a path forward for convening the Geneva 2 conference as soon as it is practical to do so. And Special Representative Brahimi is making his judgments now. There will be a meeting; you will hear shortly from the Syrian opposition. They will be meeting in about a little more than a week’s time for their own general assembly to make their own decisions, and subsequently other decisions will be made with respect to this.

But we believe that the London 11 that came together today, Europeans and Arabs, Turks, members of this support group, came together and all agreed that it is imperative that we try to get to the negotiating table and try to save the lives and to save the existence of the state of Syria itself.

The only alternative to a negotiated settlement is continued, if not increased, killing. We’ve seen children napalmed. We’ve seen university students bombed at their desks. We’ve seen hospitals, which are supposed to take care of people, become the targets. This is a tragedy, and right now it is one of the great tragedies on the face of this planet, and it deserves the focus and attention of all of us to try to bring it to an end.

We believe that the path of war will simply lead to the implosion of the state of Syria. It will lead to the rise of extremist groups and extremism itself. It will lead to more refugees spilling over the borders and putting strains on surrounding countries. And it will further destabilize the region and lead ultimately to the disintegration of the Syrian state. All of this makes this challenge a global challenge, an international challenge of the greatest proportions.

So that’s why we’re here. That’s why we came to London today – to demonstrate our support for the moderate opposition and to create the conditions for settlement that implements the Geneva communique and brings the bloodshed to an end. Our job as the 11 states who form the core group of the Friends of Syria is to do everything in our power to help the opposition be able to come together with a strong, unified position and a representative body at Geneva so that they can negotiate effectively.

The agreement that led to the strong and unprecedented UN Security Council resolution to eliminate Syria’s chemical weapons – actually the concept first floated right here at this podium in this room – that initiative has become a very important step forward in this overall effort. The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons is now making progress on the ground, on identifying Syria’s chemical weapons and destroying its mixing and filling equipment.

And everyone here should ask themselves, if it is possible for us to have an agreement which allows people to get on the ground and go into communities and get ahold of chemical weapons, is it really not possible for us to have people on the ground who can go in and get food and medicine to people who are starving and dying for the lack of it. Surely we have the ability to be able to do that, and that is something we are going to focus on increasingly in the days ahead.

The United States has also provided armored vehicles to the United Nations to support the UN and the OPCW efforts to verify and destroy Syria’s chemical weapons, and we’re going to continue to explore ways to do more.

But I just have to say to all of you, we cannot stop there. Removing the chemical weapons does not remove the crisis. And it doesn’t remove the humanitarian catastrophe that is unfolding before the world’s eyes. It doesn’t change the situation for people who are under fire from Assad’s artillery or his bombs, his airplanes, his Scuds. Assad continues to deploy ballistic missiles and other conventional weapons, and he’s using his air force to rain down terror on the people of his country. Innocent men, women, and children are starving, as I mentioned a moment ago, while the Assad regime continues to block humanitarian access.

So I think the stakes could not be more clear: The killing of well more than a hundred thousand people, innocent men, women, and children, the destabilization of an entire region, the displacement of millions of people inside of Syria, the creating of refugees by the millions outside of Syria, and the potential for a beautiful and ancient country to be fully destroyed by sectarian and extremist violence is what is at stake here. And that is why the 11 of us are committed to pursuing every avenue available to bring this tragic conflict to an end.

I want to just end by saying that the Geneva communique is more than a piece of paper, and it should not be a forgotten level of diplomacy. It is the roadmap that leads to a new future, and it’s a future that can end the bloodshed in Syria, can respond to the humanitarian catastrophe, and it rids the country of violent extremist groups. That’s our goal.

What we seek is a unified, pluralistic Syria, one that is representative of all of its people’s aspirations, one that protects minority and majority alike, all religions, all points of view, all politics, all sectarian affiliations – Kurds, Christians, Druze, Ismaili, Alawi, and any other minority group must be protected. So that is our goal. That’s what brought us here. We’re in the important days of trying to make this conference happen. I believe it can, and we’re going to stay at it until it does.

On that, I’m happy to answer any questions.

MS. PSAKI: The first question will be from Michael Gordon of The New York Times.

QUESTION: Sir, one stated purpose of the meeting here today was to bolster the moderate Syrian opposition, and indeed the communique talks of stepping up support to that opposition, but there are no specifics. Can you tell us specifically what concrete support – financial, military, or materiel – will be given to the opposition as a direct result of today’s meeting?

And a related question is the communique lists a host of confidence-building measures, such as humanitarian corridors or the release of people who have been arbitrarily detained. Are any of these steps to be taken prior to the holding of Geneva 2, or are these long-range goals for the culmination of that negotiation?

And lastly, have all of the moderate opposition committed to attending a Geneva 2? The communique makes clear that there’s no role for Assad in a transitional body, but it may take quite a long time for there to be such a body since it’s by mutual consent. Indeed, it may never happen. And people like Mr. Jarba and others have asked for an upfront commitment that Assad will go before attending. Have all the moderate opposition agreed to attend? And if not, what are you going to do to persuade them to attend?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, let me clarify. Let me be absolutely clear. The opposition is not saying that Assad has to go before this negotiation. That is not what they’re saying. That is the formula that this process was stuck in before I went to Russia last May and met with President Putin and Foreign Minister Lavrov, and it was agreed that we needed to get to the conference in order to have the discussion and reach mutual agreement. You can’t reach mutual consent if you’re not talking to anybody. There’s no mutuality. There’s no potential of consent.

So the fact is that you have to go engage in the discussion and then see. What the opposition has said is their condition is that the intent of this is to see that Assad goes, which, in fact, is what happens if you implement Geneva 1. Geneva 1 contemplates a transition government by mutual consent with full executive authority. There isn’t anybody in the world who believes that the opposition is going to give consent to Assad to be part of that. Now, Assad also can veto other people.

So the trick here is to find the people who would be acceptable to both sides, who would have the respect of the Syrian people, and be able to manage a transition government that allows the people of Syria to choose their future. But one thing is guaranteed: There’s no way that mutual consent includes Bashar al-Assad. And the position of the United States has not changed. We believe that he has lost all legitimacy, all capacity to govern the country, and therefore it’s hard to imagine any resolution in any other way.

Now, he obviously has different plans. We understand that. But the Russians have said that he accepts Geneva 1, and the Russians have said that they will make sure that the regime is there and negotiating in good faith. And we accept the Russian statements on face value and we expect them to be there and negotiate in good faith. The opposition has told us in the past that it’s their intention to do it, but they have to make up their mind in their new format in about a week when they meet for their assembly, and none of us are going to prejudge or precondition what they will choose to do in that process.

MS. PSAKI: The next question will be from Jonathan Rugman from Channel 4 News.

QUESTION: Mr. Kerry, Saudi diplomats are letting it be known that they will limit their dealings with Washington in protest at what they see as the lack of action on Syria. What has the Saudi Foreign Minister told you about that? Is this a serious rift with your Saudi allies?

And secondly, do you think this conference in Geneva will happen next month or not, or are the prospects as gloomy as today’s very English weather? (Laughter.)

SECRETARY KERRY: I thought it was pretty nice out, actually. It didn’t seem all that gloomy. First of all, Prince Saud al-Faisal, who is the Foreign Minister of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, told me yesterday at a meeting that we had in Paris – two meetings we had, actually – and again today that Saudi Arabia is taking part in, working with, cooperating with us. And Saudi Arabia today signed onto this communique and was part of its formulation and the discussions we had today.

So all I can tell you is that Saudi Arabia and the United States agree on a great deal here going forward. We work closely with Saudi Arabia on a range of regional, political, and security issues, including Syria, Iran, Middle East peace, Egypt. We’re still working with them on those. We know that the Saudis were obviously disappointed that the strike didn’t take place and have questions about some of the other things that may be happening in the region. It’s our obligation to work closely with them, as I am doing. The President asked me to come and have the conversations that we’ve had. I think they were very, very constructive. And I am convinced we are on the same page as we are proceeding forward, and I look forward to working very closely with our Saudi friends and allies.

QUESTION: Will the conference happen in the next month?

SECRETARY KERRY: I believe the conference can happen next month. I’m hoping it will happen next month. Both Foreign Minister Lavrov and I in our conversations with UN officials have expressed our hopes that it can happen next month. But obviously, there are other players, and we’re not going to sit here and we do not have the right to make the decision for other players. They’re independent, and they have to exercise their own rights here.

The opposition has a series of steps that it’s taking. We respect those steps. You’ll hear from President Jarba. And we respect their process by which they need to decide how to come to the table if they come to the table. But I’m confident that in the end the opposition will decide this is in their best interest. You can win at the negotiating table what it may take a long time and a lot of loss of life, a lot of bloodshed, and potential destruction to win on the battlefield. So I think they see that. I think they see something very positive in that, and our hope is that this conference can begin.

It will never be easy. I don’t want to suggest to anybody here that just because everybody says yes and you have the conference and you go to the meeting that this is going to be easy. It’s not. But it is far better to be at that table, working diplomatically, laying out a groundwork and a framework, and allowing nations to come to the table and help to work their will as to how we can resolve this crisis. And it would be irresponsible on all of our part simply to let this mayhem and chaos grow at the expense of the Syrian people and the region while we do nothing. That is obviously unacceptable. So the best thing to do is try to get to that table, and that’s what we’re trying to do.

MS. PSAKI: Lara Jakes, from AP.

QUESTION: Thanks. I’d like to go back to some of your comments about the Saudi issue. How do you square what your takeaway was from Prince Faisal yesterday to what Prince Bandar is quoted today saying describing this rift? It sounds like you don’t think that that is a – going to be a durable shift away or a durable problem and policy issue between Saudi and the U.S. But how would you answer specifically some of the issues that the Sauds have had with U.S. policy, specifically that the U.S. has – they would say that the U.S. has done little to back the Syrian opposition. They would say that the U.S. picked the wrong horse in Egypt when it worked with the Muslim Brotherhood. And they would --

SECRETARY KERRY: When it did what?

QUESTION: When they worked with the Muslim Brotherhood, when the U.S. worked with the Muslim Brotherhood. And they would say that they fear that Washington is cutting a deal with Iran that would hurt Saudi interests.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I’m very familiar with their concerns. And as I say, I spent a really delightful and very, very constructive several hours yesterday with His Highness Prince Saud al-Faisal. And we discussed every single one of these things, and I explained exactly where the United States is coming from, what we think about each of these issues. And we will continue to consult with our Saudi friends, as we always have in the past. And I think – I think Prince Saud and I left that meeting with a strong agreed-upon sense of what is important to both of us and of how we are going to continue to work together in order to achieve our ends and our goals together.

Now, I saw the comments that were printed today. They were printed from several days ago, before this conversation took place. I think people need to touch base and kind of get a sense of – from Prince Saud himself, who is the foreign minister, exactly how he sees this.

But I will tell you that on Egypt both of our countries want to see a successful return to an inclusive, democratic government with progress on the interim government’s specified roadmap. We want to see that. And while, yes, the United States engaged diplomatically with the prior government, the prior government was elected by the people of Egypt and duly sworn in. And we have interests in the region that mandated government-to-government dealings. But we understand fully the failures of that government, and we understand fully some of the deep-rooted feelings with respect to the Brotherhood in that region. And I think the United States is perfectly capable of making distinctions between its own philosophical groundings and values and the necessity to government-to-government do things with respect to security, peace process, Sinai, and other issues of national consequence to us.

On the Middle East peace, Saudi Arabia has been a critical partner. Just yesterday, we reaffirmed the Saudi commitment to the – the Saudi commitment to its own initiative, a very significant initiative. And I praised Prince Saud’s description of the – of his vision and the Saudi vision for the peace that waits for Israel, providing we can move the process, which they are committed to and very much a part of. We can move that forward. They are a partner in that effort through their role in the Arab League, as well as their authorship of the Arab Peace Initiative.

In addition, we both share – Saudi Arabia and the United States share with almost every other country in the region deep concern about Iran’s nuclear program and its impact on the region. And we had a very frank conversation yesterday about that. I think they understand exactly what the United States is engaged in, and I reaffirmed President Obama’s commitment that he will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon. And I reiterated our position in any negotiation that our eyes are wide open, actions are what will speak to us, not words, and no deal is better than a bad deal.

So I think there’s a clear understanding in our relationship going forward, and I have great confidence that the United States and Saudi Arabia will continue to be the close and important friends and allies that we’ve been.

MS. PSAKI: The final question is from Mina al-Oraibi.

QUESTION: Thank you. Mina al-Oraibi, Alsharq Al-Awsat newspaper. Secretary Kerry, I wanted to ask you about the transitional governing body. Once there is an agreement on this, it’s meant to have full executive powers. But would it be possible for President Assad to remain as president, hand over some powers, and then run for the elections as he spoke about yesterday and he’s spoken repeatedly? And the communique says that this is not to be an open-ended process. Can you see a timeframe for it?

If I can ask you also about Iran: Since your meeting with Foreign Minister Zarif, have you seen the Iranians being more constructive when it comes to Syria? Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, with respect to Syria? Well, Syria wasn’t a topic of our conversation. The topic of our conversation was their nuclear program. So --

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

SECRETARY KERRY: We have not seen a significant change in that period of time with respect to Syria. And needless to say, it would certainly be welcome and it would be a very important sign with respect to good faith in terms of resolving the regional issues and showing a desire to have stability over business as usual. So we would certainly welcome it, but it was not a topic of the conversation, and I want to stress that. We were uniquely talking about how we would proceed with respect to the nuclear negotiations.

With respect to Assad and the timeframe, it means what it says. The language is very clear. The language says that there should be no delay in this process, that this will not be open-ended, and that it ought to, if you’re acting in good faith, be able to be completed in – within months, within some period of months. Now, that gives you a timeframe. And I think that it would be wrong to pre-judge what that is. We will know if they’re serious very quickly. It’s not hard to show you’re serious about setting up a transitional government, and I think very early on we’ll be able to see if people are offering up real people who have real capacity to do it who could legitimately be acceptable to both sides, rather than offering up people who have blood on their hands who are a mere continuation of the Assad regime itself. So this will not be hard to discern.

And finally, with respect to Assad himself and his continuance, the question you asked, that’s for the parties to negotiate. That’s not for us to predetermine. The key is that you have full executive authority that is transferred. That means you’re not playing games and someone isn’t pulling the strings from behind the scenes and the people who are there are legitimately moving for all Syrians to protect all Syrians and send a message about a fair, free, transparent, accountable, accessible election for everybody to be able to choose the future of Syria. That’s the standard. And within that standard, the parties will have to decide. We’re – it’s not our decision to make. You have two sides negotiating. Others will be there, but this will be negotiated by the opposition represented by one delegation, by the Syrian opposition, who will bring others in with them, but one delegation on each side, and they will make that decision.

MS. PSAKI: Thank you, everyone.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you all very much. Good to be with you. Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY MEETS WITH LEADERS OF HUMANITARIAN ORGANIATIONS

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 
Secretary Kerry's Meeting With Leaders of United Nations Humanitarian Agencies and Other International Humanitarian Organizations

Media Note
Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
July 23, 2013

Secretary of State John Kerry met today with leaders of several United Nations agencies and other international humanitarian organizations to reinforce the unwavering U.S. commitment to addressing the Syria humanitarian crisis, to hear from these leaders about the crucial work their organizations are doing to respond to the needs of the Syrian people, and to discuss ways to address challenges in delivering aid.

The Secretary thanked the leaders for their tireless efforts and the work of their respective organizations. They included the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA); the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR); the World Food Program (WFP); the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA); the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF); the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and the World Health Organization (WHO).

Before meeting with Secretary Kerry, the leaders of the humanitarian agencies met with U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Administrator Raj Shah, underscoring the United States’ ongoing efforts focused on addressing this humanitarian crisis.

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY MAKES REMARKS WITH JORDANIAN FOREIGN MINISTER JUDEH

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Remarks With Jordanian Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh After Their Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Amman, Jordan
July 17, 2013

FOREIGN MINISTER JUDEH: (Via interpreter) (In progress) -- on his fifth or sixth visit to the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in (inaudible) a while ago we had the honor of meeting (inaudible) with the delegation assigned by the Arab League Committee on the Peace Initiative.
And last April we had a meeting in Washington and we agreed that we will have regular communication with Mr. Kerry, Secretary of State, in order to discuss all the developments and all the personal efforts with regard to reviving the peace negotiations. Actually, it was a very good meeting and (inaudible) commitment of President Barack Obama and all the stakeholders in terms of commitment to the peace process in order to secure stability, prosperity, and peace for the region. So the objective of our meeting today was to review and to listen to the developments, especially in terms of the intensive efforts exerted by Secretary of State Mr. Kerry with the other stakeholders. And we really listened to everybody, commending this great effort, and we will keep you posted with the recent developments on this issue.

And also, we agreed as a delegation – ministerial delegation assigned by the Arab League – to communicate and to keep ourselves and each other posted on the developments in the region and the efforts here to seek a political solution. And all of you know our position with regard to stopping violence and destruction and to have a peaceful solution to maintain security in Syria and to achieve its sovereignty and to protect its great people. And in his meetings with the Russian officials some months ago and the interaction which led to the agreement on organizing an international conference in order to find a political solution, all of these meetings were very encouraging.

There were meetings in Amman, Istanbul, and Rome and in Doha for the 11 (inaudible) group, and – or London group – and there was an agreement to go forward on this track. Also there is great focus by the Secretary of State in terms of the repercussions of the Syrian situation on Jordan. Jordan is hosting about 550,000 refugees on its territories, from Syria of course. And from this platform I would like to express appreciation of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, to the American administration and to all the relevant agencies for their help to Jordan to host these refugees. We really appreciate this support.

There is other support given to us by other international sources, however, still we are in need for more support in order to deliver the required services for the refugees, especially when it comes to the sensitive sectors that were impacted with this inflow of refugees. And here we are speaking about the sectors of energy, health, education, and environment, and the business sector. Of course, we commend all of the efforts made by our – by the American administration all over the world in order to help Jordan in this issue.

And we had talks about other files that are of mutual interest for us, especially the bilateral relations between Jordan and the U.S. These are distinct relations and His Majesty, the King, had a meeting recently with President Barack Obama in Washington, and there was a visit by President Obama to Jordan. Actually, there were two meetings in like four to five weeks only. This is but an indicator to the mutual interest and attention given by His Majesty, the King, and President Barack Obama to the distinct relations. We really appreciate the help and the assistance of America in all the sectors. We always say that such support reflects the historical relations between us.

Again, I welcome John Kerry, my friend, and the person who has all the knowledge. Actually, his experience talks for itself, especially when it comes to the sensitive files in our region with his long history and his wise decisions. Actually, we can see a niche of hope, especially when it comes to the file of peace between the Palestinians and Israelis. I give the floor to you (inaudible).

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, Mr. Foreign Minister (inaudible).

QUESTION: We can’t hear you. Thank you. (Laughter.) (inaudible).

SECRETARY KERRY: Maybe it’s because of Ramadan. (Laughter.)

It’s an honor to be here with all of you. Thank you very, very much. And particularly I am pleased to be back here with my friend, Nasser. We really are good friends. Sometimes that word is used in this business and it’s thrown around lightly, but he and I have had the pleasure of spending a great deal of time together, well before I became Secretary of State, when I was a senator, and I appreciate his energy, his knowledge, and his commitment to solving difficult problems. He is not a foreign minister who sits bashfully on the sidelines. He’s willing to tackle the tough issues.

And the reason I find myself here again is not just the privilege of meeting with the Arab Peace Initiative Follow-Up Committee, which was a very important meeting, as Nasser said, but also because Jordan is so engaged in meeting its own challenges here at home but also helping to deal with challenges around it. And this is a region which, for better or worse, is not particularly quiet these days. There’s a lot going on with Syria, Egypt, Iran, the challenges of the Middle East peace process, and all of the normal challenges of economies and of the modern world.


So I’m here to follow up with the Arab Peace Initiative Follow-On Committee. I made a promise when we met in Washington earlier in April. I promised that we would keep up with our efforts on the Middle East and that I would brief them regularly. And since they traveled to Washington last time to come for a very important announcement, I came here this time in order to be able to meet with everybody and make it easier for their travel.


We continued the conversation today that we began in Washington. I think everybody knows that the Arab Peace Committee has – and the Arab League itself; Secretary General Nabil Elaraby was here today – has really long played a very important role in the path leading to the Arab Peace Initiative. And the Arab Peace Initiative, which King Abdullah put forward a number of years ago, I have said before, was a very important departure point and one which never received the full attention and focus that it should have.

I’m glad that it is today because it promises to open up significant potential for normalized relations, for the potential for trade and growth in historic and very important ways. And it promises Israel – Israel needs to look hard at this initiative, which promises Israel peace with 22 Arab nations and 35 Muslim nations, a total of 57 nations that are standing and waiting for the possibility of making peace with Israel.

Their willingness that they brought to Washington in April was very significant, because at that time they not only restated the commitment to a two-state solution, the only solution that is real, but they also included the potential of land swaps, as a mechanism for achieving that solution. And that was another historic moment and historic departure by the Arab community. It underscores what all of us really know, and that is that peace would benefit not only the security and opportunity and legitimate aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians, but very significantly it would contribute enormously to the stability and the prosperity throughout the entire region. Every country in the region – and particularly Jordan, the neighbor of Palestine and of Israel, which already cooperates in many ways to help create stability and peace – would also benefit enormously from progress.

Peace is in the common interest of everybody in this region. And as many ministers said to me today in the meeting that we had – many of them – they said that the core issue of instability in this region and in many other parts of the world is the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The only way to resolve that is through direct negotiations, and the only ones who can make that happen are not President Obama, John Kerry, Nasser Judeh, but it is the parties themselves. They have to make that decision.

I have stayed in very close contact with both Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas. And I know that despite everything else that is happening in the region, despite all of the pressures of neighboring states, of refugees, of conflict, despite the pressures of a volatile neighborhood, the fact is that both sides continue to work up to this point in good faith in a good effort in order to try to find a way to succeed.

Now, when this process started several months ago, there were very wide gaps, very significant gaps between the two sides. And I think Nasser would agree with me that through hard and deliberate, patient work, and most importantly through quiet work, we have been able to narrow those gaps very significantly. And so we continue to get closer, and I continue to remain hopeful that the sides will soon be able to come to sit at the same table.

Now, there are still some elements and some language that needs to be agreed upon and worked out. This is normal, and I’m not going to detail the specifics. But as this important, quiet process continues to unfold, we want to make sure that we keep it quiet, because that’s honestly the only way that it works. And everybody has agreed on that.

I would caution everybody to resist the temptation to speculate about where things stand or what is possible. The easiest bet among Middle East prognosticators has always been on predicting impasse. That’s always been the easiest bet, and I understand that. But I also know that through the efforts that are being made now, the best hope for a different outcome is to have a quiet process that is working the way the parties are working now, and I congratulate them both for doing that.

It is fair to say that that initiative, peace within the Middle East, and the Arab-Israeli conflict has always been one of the most difficult challenges on the face of the planet. Decades of close calls, of near breakthroughs, and many disappointments make it very clear how tough it is. But while the conflict has indeed persisted for a long time, it is more and more true today than ever before that the time to resolve it is narrowing.

So that’s why Nasser and I and King Abdullah, President Obama, all of us join together in encouraging both sides to think very carefully about their words and their actions. That’s why we encourage them to promote trust and not to take steps that would undermine that trust. And that’s why we urge everybody to remain committed to creating a climate that is conducive to a peace that is worthy of the people that they all represent.

In my meetings yesterday and today, we also talked about our continuing concerns with Syria. Syria is one of the principal reasons that I came out here to talk now. And we had a good conversation with a number of different ministers about that and also with King Abdullah today, and we will continue our conversations both later and tomorrow morning in order to discuss the challenges that lie ahead.

We’re very, very grateful – we, the United States, the global community – are very grateful to Jordan and to King Abdullah, to all the citizens of the Hashemite Kingdom. We thank you for having the hearts and the willingness to open your arms to so many refugees. We know it is very, very difficult. It’s a challenge. And the generosity that you have shown is an example, really, to the world. And we understand that it puts a strain on your society. It has an impact on work, on workers, on wages, on housing, on all of these issues, water. Everything is affected. And so we all have an obligation to try to help and to meet your needs, and we will try to live up to that obligation.

We discussed today the United States’ ongoing financial support and other efforts to help Jordan and others to care for the Syrians who have been driven from their homes by the violence. And we also discussed coordination on issues in the days ahead. And all of us – all the ministers here today – still agree that a political solution is the only real solution ultimately to the challenge of Syria. Our shared focus remains on how to achieve that, and we all need to work together to strengthen the opposition and to create a dialogue that puts the people of Syria ahead of any sectarian interests, ahead of any party interests, and certainly ahead of any personal interest.

Now, one final thing I will say quickly: We also, needless to say, discussed Egypt. The challenge of Egypt is very real. Egypt is important, and it’s important that I came here to discuss it, because Egypt is vital to the security of the region, it is vital to some of the flow of supplies to the region, it is vital to the security of the Sinai, it is vital to the security of Gaza and to the maintenance of the Gaza ceasefire, and in the end, it is also vital to the peace treaty between it and Israel. And I stand in another country that has had the courage to sign a peace treaty and that is working towards peace.

So that’s why it was important that we discuss this. We remain broadly committed to an inclusive democratic process in Egypt. And I think all of the – we all today committed ourselves to embrace the notion that all groups, all parties, all points of view, all religions, all minorities need to be welcomed and accepted into the political solution and the political future of Egypt. And we were very pleased to see the increasing commitment day to day to making sure that Egypt will move rapidly to the constitutional process that will guarantee the democracy for all of its citizens.

So I thank you again for the privilege of being here, Nasser. Thank you for your help on so many different issues, and we look forward to taking a few questions.

FOREIGN MINISTER JUDEH: Thank you very much. Thank you very much, John, and we’ll take two questions from the Jordanian side and two questions from the U.S. side. So (inaudible) will start, and we’ll take a U.S. and then we’ll come back.

QUESTION: (Via interpreter) What are the proposals that Kerry spoke about which Abbas wants to discuss with the Palestinian Authority tonight?

FOREIGN MINISTER JUDEH: (Via interpreter) I think that Kerry has stressed that the effectiveness of this track is – (in English) – quiet, to use the English word – (continuing via interpreter) and that the efforts that are being exerted and the communications need and all the proposals that he has suggested and discussed with both sides are still away from lights. And I think that we have already witnessed in decisive milestones in the Arab-Israeli conflict that some negotiations came to a failure just because of disclosing everything internationally. And I think that the effectiveness of this effort and exercise by John Kerry is that it is away from light, and I think it will result in reviving the negotiations between the two sides and handling all the political solution issues. Again, I confirm Jordan is a stakeholder here. It has an interest. It is not political mediator agency. It is our interest to have an independent Palestinian state on its territory with Eastern Jerusalem as its capital and to solve all the pending problems. This is our real interest here in Jordan. That’s why we commend the efforts by Minister Kerry and we want to have the two-state solution. And we reiterate what he has already said that these negotiations must be kept away from lights. Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Matt Lee, AP.

QUESTION: Ah, yes. Will I need a mike?

SECRETARY KERRY: I think they’ll get you a mike. Yeah.

QUESTION: All right. So Mr. Secretary, recognizing that you want to keep all of this quiet and not give any details, the Arab League statement that did come out after your meeting does mention that they support your efforts and especially, quote, “the new and important political, economic, and security elements.” I’m assuming you’re not going to get into what these – specifically what these new important elements are, but could you at least say if there are, then? And if you could or would just try to describe them in a way that you think would not jeopardize the --

SECRETARY KERRY: Sure.

QUESTION: -- resumption of talks. Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I think – Matt, thank you. It’s a good question, and I’m happy to talk about a couple of them, specifically the economic and the security. Generically, I’ll talk about the security.

I’ve talked about the economic previously, but I’m going to repeat this. What we have designed together with major business leaders and particularly the leadership of a number of consultants of major international consultant firms who have now compiled about eight years of man-hours through two months of work, and they have done an analysis of the economic challenges of the Palestinian territories, looking at the sectors of the economy – tourism, manufacturing, infrastructure, energy, water, and so forth. And the analysis has been made with a view to trying to figure out: How do we have a transformative initiative that actually impacts the lives of Palestinians in a way that they will feel quickly, not rhetorical, but real, on-the-ground steps?

They have now laid out a set of projects, and we are working with Israel and with the Palestinians together in order to identify projects that could rapidly be invested in, rapidly be approved, that will have a direct impact on unemployment. Our hope is that, over the span of about three years, you could actually reduce the unemployment rate from 21 percent to 8 percent, that you could double the GDP of all of the Palestinian territory. And this initiative is not just for the West Bank; it’s also for Gaza. And our hope is – in the days ahead, our hope is to be able to have specific announcements about those projects and about these initiatives in order for people to see concrete, tangible ways in which their lives could change and in which a peace process could, in fact, attract investment and have a way of having an impact on life in Jordan and Israel as well.

Now, I’m not going to go into the details of it right now. That’s an outline. But I am excited about it, as are most of the people who’ve seen it. Many of the countries in the region have been briefed on this, the leaders of these countries, and they have committed themselves to be supportive of it providing we have the right framework within which to try to move forward. So that is basically the economic track that they are referring to.

On the security track, everybody knows that one of the greatest challenges to peace has always been the perception in Israel of the threat to Israel, and Israel’s security is paramount. It’s paramount to Israelis, obviously. It’s existential to any leader of Israel and to the Israeli people. But it’s also important to America, which supports Israel, and important to the allies and friends of Israel. And it is important, in fact, to the region – important to Jordan, important to the Palestinians – that there be security for the region.

One of the things that is mentioned prominently in the Arab Peace Initiative is a regional security concept. The Arab community is prepared to commit to a regional security framework, which has yet to be defined. So security is a very important component of any peace process. You must provide for the security of the Palestinians, the security of the Jordanians, the security of the region, and particularly, obviously, Israel will not sign a peace agreement if it does not feel that it will be secure.

We are addressing that through the efforts of General Allen, who has – is serving as a Special Advisor to the Secretary of Defense, and working with our team and with the Defense Department and with the Israeli forces, and will very soon be in the West Bank meeting with the Palestinians to make evaluations on a professional military basis about the nature of threats so that that evaluation can be factored in to any kind of negotiation in the future. Now, that’s a general concept of those two items.

On the political front, I’m going to leave that and not talk about that right now. It is obviously the most complicated. It has always been the most complicated. It is also the most important. The economic and the security are not substitutes. I want to repeat, emphasize, exclamation point – they are not substitutes for the political track. The political track is the centerpiece of any kind of peace effort, and I think it is best to leave those thoughts where they are, which is with the parties and out of the public discourse at this point in time.

FOREIGN MINISTER JUDEH: Without presuming to jump in and add to what the Secretary said, I just want to say that he was astute enough, as is expected of John Kerry, to mention the importance of the political track right at the end so that it can stay very, very present in our minds and in the minds of the skeptics out there who may think that the economic and the security are substitutes, as the Secretary said, to the political, which is of paramount importance. Because at the end of the day, it is the political solution that will pave the way for the economic and the security tracks to succeed. So thank you for mentioning that, sir.

MODERATOR: (Off mike.)

QUESTION: Taylor Luck, The Jordan Times newspaper. My question is to Mr. Secretary. You mentioned earlier about the importance of strengthening the Syrian opposition. Obviously, we saw in the Doha summit and the Friends of Syria group pledging or reiterating the pledge to provide support for the armed the opposition, and President Barack Obama also mentioned the U.S. ongoing support for the Syrian opposition.

My question is: Recently, there was a meeting of the Higher Syrian Revolutionary Council and there was a lot of discussion over the lack of arms and the lack of supply of arms that was pledged in Doha and by President Barack Obama. My question is: What is the reason behind the delay of this pledged military support? When might we see this military support reach the opposition, the – let’s say the moderate opposition within Syria, the Free Syrian Army? And how can the U.S. keep the trust of Syrian opposition forces if these delays continue?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, the United States, I’m proud to say, has provided very significant assistance over the course of the last year or more, huge humanitarian assistance, very significant assistance directly to the Syrian Opposition Coalition, and serious support to General Idris and to the Syrian military coalition.

Now, he has – there was a period of time where he felt that they needed more weaponry and they needed more ammunition and things like that. There are partners, support members of the so-called Friends of Syria who have been providing a lot of that. And there’s a great deal of weaponry that I know has been reaching the Syrian opposition in the course of the last weeks of a very different kind. And they’re also getting other kinds of assistance at this point in time.

So I believe that they are getting very significant assistance, but unfortunately, sometimes it takes longer than you would like because you need to get approvals, things have to go through Congress, things have to be approved, and so forth and so on. And it just takes longer than you’d like. But the fact is I am confident about the support that the Syrian opposition is receiving today and will continue to receive in the days ahead, not just from the United States but from lots of different players who are supportive of the opposition and believe that the combination of the Iranian Qods Force on the ground in Syria, and Hezbollah – a terrorist organization on the ground in Syria – and Russian support coming in has been the difference that’s tilted some of these initiatives to President Assad, but not for the long term.

And I think that’s why we continue to say the political solution is the ultimate solution. And so while we are supporting the opposition, and we’ve made that clear, we still believe very, very strongly that there’s an urgency to coming to the negotiating table and ending the violence and beginning to move towards a transition government that promises the people of Syria a future without violence and a future with a government of their choosing, not a government that has been imposed on them by killing huge numbers of innocent people and driving many others out of the country.

QUESTION: (Off-mike.)

SECRETARY KERRY: Oh, I’m sorry. All right. (Laughter.) Do you want to add anything to that, Minister? Are you happy to do that?

Anne Gearan.

FOREIGN MINISTER JUDEH: (Inaudible.)

QUESTION: Thank you. For both of you, first, do you believe Mohamed Morsy’s ouster in Egypt constitutes a military coup?

And to Secretary Kerry, do you support continuation of U.S. aid to Egypt? If so, how will you get around the U.S. legal restrictions on not providing aid to countries that have gone through a military coup?

And just very quickly on Syria. Now that there’s a new opposition leadership in place, do you – what gives you any confidence that that slate will be able to do any better of a job than the previous one in presenting a united and competent alternative to Assad? Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Okay. Thank you, Anne. Well, on the issue of a coup, this is obviously an extremely complex and difficult situation. And President Obama has made clear our very deep concern about the decision of the Egyptian armed forces to remove the President from power and suspend the constitution. But the fact is, we need to take the time necessary, because of the complexity of this situation, to evaluate what has taken place, to review all of our requirements under the law, and to make it consistent with our policy objectives as is appropriate with that appropriate interpretation under the law. So that’s exactly what we’re doing right now, and I’m not going to rush to judgment on it. I’m going to wait till our lawyers have done their homework, till I have the appropriate facts and information in front of us.

I will say this: That what complicates it, obviously, is that you had an extraordinary situation in Egypt of life and death, of the potential of civil war and enormous violence, and you now have a constitutional process proceeding forward very rapidly. So we have to measure all of those facts against the law, and that’s exactly what we will do.

That said, what makes me confident about the opposition? I can’t tell you that I know with certainty where they will take Egypt. At first blush, I will tell you that I’ve looked at the lineup of the people, I know a number of them personally, and I know they are extremely competent people. I also know that Egypt has been in need of making critical decisions, like the IMF decision, for some period of time because of this fiscal crisis, and I understand this group, this new government, is determined to make an IMF agreement and to begin to restore the finances of the country.

Obviously, some people have enormous confidence in them because something like $13 billion has flowed into the country in terms of new central bank funds and cash, which gives them some leeway to be able to make some of these decisions.

So the proof will be in the pudding. I’m not going to stand here and predict what they’re going to do. Very clearly, order needs to be restored to the streets. Stability needs to be restored. Violence needs to be ended. Rights need to be protected. Jobs need to be created. And the country needs to be able to return to normal business. My hope is, and President Obama’s hope – President Obama has been very clear about this – we want everybody to participate. And we are concerned about political arrests. And we’re concerned about the freedom of people to be able to participate, because we think that’s an important part of the restoration of the heart and soul of Egypt.

So our hope is that in the days ahead, this situation will become much clearer. And it’s much too early to make pronouncements or judge where it’s going to go. What we want, what President Obama is committed to, is a country that has a democratic constitutional process that everybody can participate in without fear of retribution, without arrest, and that the country will move forward on a democratic path. And we’ll cope with the rest of these issues as they come along.

FOREIGN MINISTER JUDEH: Well, I just came back from a very quick visit to Egypt a couple of days ago. His Majesty the King dispatched me there to talk to the Egyptian leadership. I saw the interim president. I had a good conversation with him, was extremely reassured of the political – of the implementation of the political roadmap that they’ve set out for themselves, which includes constitutional amendments, a national meeting that will include all the different elements of the political spectrum in Egypt, followed possibly by a referendum and then parliamentary elections and the opening of a candidature for presidency and then presidential elections.

So they are very, very comfortable that they are heading, as the Secretary of State described it, as a constitutional process that is taking them in the right direction, which is forward, and in a timelined, benchmarked fashion.

Now to answer your question directly, without venturing into the legal or political interpretations of coup, my understanding, as is the understanding of many, is that a military coup results in the military taking over. And in this particular case, we saw the military, yes, intervening. This is not the first time that the military intervenes in the political life of Egypt. We’ve all accepted it in the past. But the military as an institution, I think, saw the potential for real danger and violence and fragmentation and the possibility of civil war with 20 million people out on the streets in different parts of Egypt. And they intervened to put the political constitutional process back on track.

And the biggest proof of the fact that they are not planning to run things in Egypt is that the head of the military, the Minister of Defense, the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces, is the First Deputy Prime Minister in the new government which was appointed yesterday. He’s not the prime minister, he’s not the president, he’s not the ruler of Egypt. He is someone who came out saying, “I am trying to implement a political roadmap that will lead to a constitutional process that will lead to a democratically-elected parliament and president.” And I think that we’ve got to give them the benefit of the doubt. They know best. And the military in Egypt has been the guarantor of peace and stability in many twists and turns in Egypt’s contemporary history.

Again, my visit a couple of days ago was extremely reassuring that the political process, the constitutional process, is very much on track.

SECRETARY KERRY: Just a footnote: I asked Nasser if he wants to come and be our counsel to the State Department in a few days. (Laughter.)

U.S. OFFICAL ASSURES LEBANESE PEOPLE OF U.S. COMMITMENT TO STABILITY

FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Press Availability in Beirut
Press Availability
William J. Burns
Deputy Secretary of State
Washington, DC
July 1, 2013
 Good afternoon. I am very pleased to be back in Beirut today and to stand with the Lebanese people during this very challenging time in the region -- one with significant implications for Lebanon’s future. I had productive meetings today with President Sleiman, Caretaker Prime Minister Mikati, Lebanese Armed Forces Commanding General Kahwagi, Speaker Berri, and other senior Lebanese leaders.


Let me begin by thanking President Sleiman for his hospitality. The President deserves recognition for his steadfast leadership during this difficult period of political transition at home and instability in the region. In today’s meeting, I emphasized the United States strong and enduring commitment to Lebanon’s stability, sovereignty, and independence, and our desire to continue to strengthen our long-standing partnership with the government and people of Lebanon. I also conveyed to the President our condolences and deepest sympathies for members of the Lebanese Armed Forces and innocent civilians killed and injured in last week’s violence in Sidon. I assured him of the United States unwavering support for the LAF, including training and equipment to assist security forces in their critical role of preserving Lebanon’s unity.

At a time of regional tumult and domestic uncertainty, it is deeply in the self-interest of all Lebanese to exercise restraint and respect for Lebanon’s stability and security, to defend the institutions of the state, and to preserve Lebanon’s democratic traditions. The decisions to delay elections scheduled for this year and boycott the Constitutional Council shake the confidence of the international community in Lebanon’s institutions. More importantly, these actions undermine the faith of the Lebanese people in their own government.

Despite its membership in the Lebanese Government, Hizballah has decided to put its own interests and those of its foreign backers above those of the Lebanese people. We condemn in the strongest terms Hizballah’s actions in Syria -- they directly contradict the organization’s commitment to the Baabda Declaration, stand in direct violation of Lebanon’s disassociation policy, and place the future of Lebanon at risk. We call on all parties to respect the disassociation policy and preserve Lebanese stability and unity.

We recognize the enormous burden the conflict in Syria places on Lebanon. The way in which the Lebanese Government and people have so generously opened their homes, schools, and communities to over 500,000 Syrian refugees has inspired us all.

Last week, President Obama announced an additional $300 million in humanitarian assistance for Syria and its neighbors. The single largest portion of these funds -- $72 million -- will help refugees in Lebanon and their host communities. We will continue to work with other donors and partners to ensure that the international community provides Lebanon with the urgent humanitarian and development assistance it needs.

Again, it’s a pleasure to be back in Lebanon, and now I’d be glad to take a few questions.

QUESTION: Do Hizballah’s actions in Syria reflect on its participation in the new government?

DEPUTY SECRETARY BURNS: As I made clear in my opening remarks, the United States condemns Hizballah’s intervention in Syria. That intervention may be in Hizballah’s interest, it may be in the interest of Iran, it may be in the interest of Bashar al-Assad, but it is certainly not in the interest of Lebanon or the Lebanese people. We continue to strongly support the disassociation policy, the policy to which Hizballah committed itself in the Baabda Declaration. We are deeply concerned that its intervention will undercut the interests not only of the Syrian people, but also the people of Lebanon.

QUESTION: Sir, you spoke of assistance to the LAF. Will assistance be in anyway affected by Hizballah’s [inaudible] in Saida alongside the Lebanese army?

DEPUTY SECRETARY BURNS: Our support for the LAF as an essential state institution in Lebanon, as I mentioned in my remarks, is strong and enduring. We have provided since 2006 nearly a billion dollars in training and equipment for the LAF and for the Internal Security Forces. We are determined to continue to provide that kind of support given the LAF’s role in helping to unite people across Lebanese society. I want to repeat again our condolences for the loss of life from the LAF and also innocent civilians in the clashes that took place in Sidon. I understand there is also an investigation into those clashes.

QUESTION: You spoke about certain measures to support Lebanon, especially as long as they show greater involvement of the Syrian problem in Lebanon. What are these measures? Any actions by the United Nations or others?

DEPUTY SECRETARY BURNS: There are a number of different ways in which the United States is determined, as Secretary Kerry promised in his telephone conversation with President Sleiman, to reinforce our commitment. Secretary Kerry’s call, President Obama’s earlier telephone conversation with President Sleiman, my visit, and the possible visit of Senator McCain and Senator Graham over the course of the next couple of days all are clear indications of continuing U.S. support. In terms of diplomatic support, we are going to continue to work with other friends and partners of Lebanon in this region and in the international community to strengthen our commitment to Lebanon’s sovereignty and unity.

I mentioned earlier a third dimension of our support, which is our continuing provision of training and equipment to the LAF and the ISF as well. We are also looking for ways that we can strengthen the economic relationship between Lebanon and the United States, which is important. The United States is already Lebanon’s number one trading partner, and I think there are a number of ways in which we can expand our trade and investment relationship in the future. Finally, I would reinforce our commitment to helping the Lebanese Government and the people of Lebanon to deal with the huge burden posed by refugees from Syria. And by that I mean, the $72 million for Lebanon that was announced recently by President Obama, which is part of our overall $160 million in humanitarian aid for Lebanon. This aid goes not only for Syrian refugees directly, but also to the Lebanese communities that host them – for their schools, for their hospitals, and for the kinds of institutions that are overburdened right now, but which are an important reflection of the generosity of the people of Lebanon. So there are a number of ways in which we’re going to continue to increase our support for Lebanon and for its people. Thank you very much.

U.S. CONDEMNS KURDISH DEMOCRATIC PARTY'S DEADLY RESPONSE TO DEMONSTRATIONS

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Situation in Amuda, Syria
Press Statement
Patrick Ventrell
Director, Office of Press Relations
Washington, DC
July 1, 2013　


The United States condemns the Kurdish Democratic Party’s (PYD) deadly response to peaceful demonstrations in the city of Amuda, where PYD authorities have killed six people, wounded dozens, and detained 90 activists during several days of clashes.

There is no justification for these attacks or the PYD’s attempts to repress freedoms of expression and assembly by silencing those who peacefully advocate for democracy and human rights. We are appalled by reports of the PYD torturing detainees and demand that it immediately and unconditionally release all detained activists.

The PYD must abandon its brutal tactics and respect the human rights and dignity of all Syrians. This violent suppression only serves the regime’s efforts to escalate tensions and divide the Syrian people.

REMARKS BY SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY AND SUADI FOREIGN MINISTER PRINCE SAUD AL-FAISAL

FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT

Remarks With Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal After Their Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
June 25, 2013

FOREIGN MINISTER SAUD: (Via interpreter) I would like to welcome His Excellency Mr. John Kerry, the U.S. Secretary of State, and his accompanying delegation to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. This, his third visit to the region, only asserts his personal concern with the region’s issues and the interests of the United States and those of its friends.

Secretary Kerry and I had a fruitful, constructive discussion today, just like we do in all of our transparent, open-minded meetings. We reviewed many regional and international issues, on top of which is the crisis in Syria and the developments on the Syrian, regional, and international arenas.

Perhaps the most ominous of these developments is the involvement of foreign forces, foremost of which is the motions of Hezbollah and others with support from Iran’s national guard in the mass murder of Syrians with unlimited military support from Russia. This critical turn of events cannot possibly be overlooked. Over and above the regime’s genocide against its own people, this adds an even deadlier element in the form of an all-out foreign invasion that breaks every international law, protocol, and principle. This violates the Syrian land and turns it into a battleground for global and regional conflicts and puts it under the mercy of sectarian struggles. Syria now can only be considered an occupied land. This requires a firm stand and speedy action from the international community. There no longer is rhyme or reason to let Russia’s open and fervent weaponization of the Syrian regime and the hordes of foreign forces backing it to go on unabated.

In the meantime, we are still failing to secure international protection for the Syrian people, or at least provide some sort of military assistance to help it defend itself against these abhorrent crimes being committed against it with nary an excuse. In this regard, the Kingdom demands a clear, unequivocal, international resolution that bans any sort of weaponry support for the Syrian regime, and declares null and void the legitimacy of that regime, which it had lost on day one of this crisis when it denied the simplest, most basic demands of its people, and waged a genocidal war against it instead. It lost its membership in both the Arab League and the Islamic Cooperation Organization, and the Gulf Cooperation Council had already reiterated its illegitimacy, a fact that has been further reaffirmed by the Friends of Syria meetings.

The regime’s illegitimacy eliminates any possibility of it being part of any arrangements or playing any role whatsoever in shaping the present and future of Syria, taking into consideration that the Syrian National Coalition now has the recognition of the international community as the sole representative of the Syrian people in its political and ethnic entirety. The Coalition is now ready to commence with the transitional ruling body with full-fledged authorities away from the pillars of the Syria regime and its cohorts who have blood on their hands.

At the same time, the Kingdom affirms the necessity of changing the balance of powers on the ground in favor of the Free Syrian people. This is the only way to bolster the chances of a peaceful solution, one that we will all seek at the upcoming Geneva 2 convention. I would like to commend the U.S. decision to send military aid to the Free Syrian Army, and express my relief for what I heard today from the U.S. Secretary of State concerning both changing the military balance of powers on the ground and maintaining the legitimacy of the Syrian National Coalition as the sole representative of the Syrian people.

I shouldn’t forget to underline the European Union’s resolution to lift the ban on arming the Syrian opposition. I call upon the EU to immediately put the resolution into action to counter the serious current developments on the Syrian ground.

We also reviewed the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the ongoing efforts to revive the peace process and the negotiations between the two sides. The Kingdom sees it vital that these efforts focus on resolving the conflict’s major issues after all else had failed at achieving any progress. All previous efforts had been dealing with the ramifications rather than the causes. Therefore there should be consensus towards a solution that is based on international resolutions and principles, agreements and understandings already signed, and the Arab Peace Initiative, so as to reach the goal of a sustainable, independent, and a contiguous Palestinian state.

I would like to thank the Secretary for his efforts in resolving this conflict, and we appreciate his efforts. Now I’d like to thank you all. The Secretary has the floor.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you, Your Royal Highness. Assalamu alaikum. It’s a privilege for me to be here again back in Saudi Arabia, and I’m happy to be in this very beautiful city, which is a great hub of innovation and a great history and the crossroads, obviously, for all the pilgrimage to Mecca, and important to the Kingdom. I’m particularly grateful to my friend, Prince Saud al-Faisal, for his welcome here. Always a great welcome and always a very enjoyable and frank conversation, and I respect and appreciate that.

As I think everybody knows, Saudi Arabia is one of our closest partners, and we are grateful for that. We work together on a host of key issues in the region, including the most important one of protecting stability for all of the countries in the region. And the relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia is critical, I think, to both of our countries.

So, first, I thank Saudi Arabia for its very important leadership and work within the Arab League and, in fact, internationally with the critical and sometimes not properly recognized initiative of His Majesty King Abdullah with the Arab Peace Initiative. This is a most important initiative. And while not everybody agrees with every portion of it, it is an effort, literally, to bring about peace, an offer of a future in which there is a normal set of relationships with real peace, with diplomatic recognition, commerce, trade, all that comes with that peace. And I think that the Arab League’s mission to Washington some weeks ago was an important step forward in helping to lay the groundwork for the possibility of peace between Israelis and Palestinians.

We believe, President Obama believes, that those negotiations should start as soon as is possible, and hopefully that they should conclude with two states living side by side in peace and security. And he has sent me out here to this region on a number of different occasions now in order to work with both the Israelis and the Palestinians, but also with the neighbors, in order to try to bring about the conditions for negotiations to take place, and ultimately notwithstanding all of the turmoil, notwithstanding all of the conflict, notwithstanding all of the counter-indications, to be able to bring about peace.

We need to be able to do that. And we share a belief with Saudi Arabia and many countries that these next weeks are perhaps – or at least this next period of time is an important period of time where decisions could be made that could affect this region for years to come.

We also discussed, as His Royal Highness has said, the crisis of Syria. I join His Royal Highness in making clear that this is a crisis that has been made worse, a situation that’s been made far more difficult and complicated by Assad’s invitation to Iran and to Hezbollah, Iran’s surrogate, to cross lines – international lines – and to become engaged on the ground in Syria. It is the Assad regime that has internationalized the violence on the ground in the worst of ways. And I would remind people, as I think His Royal Highness has and would join me, that peaceful demonstrations that asked for small amounts of reform were met with violence in the very beginning, and it is that violence that has grown, and now, because of the Assad regime’s decision, been internationalized.

I expressed our appreciation for Saudi Arabia’s leadership within the region, within the Arab League, in efforts to try to help us to find a political solution. We believe that the best solution is a political solution in which the people of Syria have an opportunity to be able to make a choice about their future. And we believe that every minority can be respected, that there could be diversity and pluralism, and that people could do so in a climate of peace in the absence of oppression and violence or the involvement of foreign fighters, providing the Assad regime is prepared to live by the framework that was created in the Geneva communique for a transition government with full executive powers chosen by mutual consent of all the parties, which really has the best chance of bringing about peace in Syria. We continue to believe, as His Royal Highness referred to, that the Geneva 2 offers the best opportunity to be able to try to bring that about.

And as countries like the United States and Saudi Arabia aid the opposition, we do so with the belief that it is done in the effort to try to bring people to the decision to go to Geneva and respect the Geneva 1 communique. Earlier this week, we agreed in Doha to do more to aid the opposition in order to help bring that about. And the President of the United States has made the decision to do more, and today I came here to talk with His Royal Highness the Foreign Minister in order to understand better what Saudi Arabia will be doing, what the countries in the region will be doing, and how we can coordinate those efforts in the best way to bring about the solution that we all hope for.

Finally, let me commend Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Cooperation Council for their support of President Hadi and the people of Yemen in their ongoing national dialogue and their broader transition process. This is critical to the future of Yemen, to the future of the region, and we agreed that there are ways that we can cooperate further on that, and we will.

All of these concerns and everything that we discussed today, frankly, has global consequences. And that is why our partnership, the partnership between the United States and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, is so essential. So I thank His Majesty, King Abdullah, and the I thank the Foreign Minister, my friend, Prince Saud al-Faisal for his welcome today, and I thank him most importantly for the serious purpose and serious discussion that he is engaged in and for the cooperation that we are both engaged in, in order to bring about peace and stability to this region.

Thank you, Your Royal Highness.

FOREIGN MINISTER SAUD: (Via interpreter) Thank you, Mr. Secretary, and before I close, I would like to congratulate Prince Tamim bin Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, the new prince of – the Emir of Qatar. And I would like to appreciate his father, Prince Hamad, for his efforts in developing Yemen and bolstering the relations between our two countries and our two peoples and his work on the issues of the region. And we pray for Qatar’s prosperity and advancement.

We will take your questions now.

MS. PSAKI: The U.S. question will be from Margaret Brennan of CBS News.

QUESTION: Margaret Brennan from CBS. Your Royal Highness, a lot has changed in terms of (inaudible) providing (inaudible). When will we see it make a difference on the ground? And (inaudible) that difference without outside military intervention? And Secretary Kerry, if you could explain more on how the U.S. is helping to coordinate on (inaudible) demonstration (inaudible). (Inaudible) Sergey Lavrov just said that (inaudible).

FOREIGN MINISTER SAUD: (Inaudible) and the corollary to that is (inaudible) a massive flow of money, of weapons to aid and abet (inaudible) genocide. This must end. And Saudi Arabia is not a country that interferes in internal affairs of countries. But an invaded country, where genocide is being perpetrated, is not a normal situation. And I can say with all clarity that we will help the Syrian people defend themselves. We will take our means we have – we are a small country. The aid we can provide is proportionate to our capabilities. But we will not stop helping them in the most effective way that we can, according to that capability.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, with respect to the (inaudible) technicalities of one particular type of aid versus another, or logistics, but it is obvious from the London 11 meeting that we had the other day, as well as from this meeting, that we are trying to coordinate. We’re trying to understand as well as possible what each nation is doing today, what they’re prepared to do, and obviously, how we can work in a way that isn’t at cross-purposes. We need to be coordinated. So that coordination effort was a subject of discussion today. And I think that given the fact that the President made the decision to provide additional assistance, we want to make sure that that’s being done in the most effective way possible.

We also wanted to – I wanted to hear from His Royal Highness the views of Saudi Arabia with respect to the strategy going forward, and larger concerns: What are the implications of Iran and Hezbollah, a terrorist organization, being involved across international lines in another country, in effect managing a war for that country? What are the impacts on our friends who are neighbors, on Jordan, on Israel, on Lebanon, on Turkey? These are all important considerations, and sometimes one needs to sit face to face in order to have an opportunity to be able to better understand our friends’ thinking on these issues. And that’s exactly what we did.

With respect to Egypt and the demonstrations, first of all, demonstrations are a very legitimate form of expression for citizens in any country. And it’s imperative, we hope, that those demonstrations will be peaceful, that the government would respect them, and that the people will respect their fellow citizens. So that is an important principle on which to begin, but obviously Egypt is going through a very difficult period. We have made many recommendations to our friends in Egypt. We are trying to help, as other countries are trying to help, to create a place for the opposition to be part of the political process in order to create some economic reforms that will help attract business and capital and begin to move their economy. And I think it’s up to the citizens of Egypt to make decisions as to whether or not they feel that all of those kinds of reforms and initiatives are taking place in a way that meets their needs.

That’s not our – that’s – we’re not involved in that. That’s their choice. This demonstration is spontaneous and comes from the Egyptian people. We hope that it will bring the government ultimately to a place where the reforms are effected and choices that need to be made about the economy are implemented. And we will obviously hope that it will not produce violence and be a moment of catalyzing, positive change for Egypt itself.

With respect to the comments – with respect to Mr. Snowden’s situation and the comments, I haven’t read the comments. I understand from – indirectly that it was a strong statement by the Foreign Minister. But I would simply appeal for calm and reasonableness in a moment where we don’t need to raise the level of confrontation over something as, frankly, basic and normal as this.

It is accurate that there is not an extradition treaty between Russia and the United States, so if you want to be technical, certainly there is no extradition treaty. But there are standards of behavior between sovereign nations. There are – there is common law. There is respect for rule of law. And we would simply call on our friends in Russia to respect the fact that a partner nation, a co-member of the Permanent Five of the United Nations has made a normal request under legal systems for law to be upheld.

And we would hope that as a nation, as a sovereign nation, Russia would not see its interests in siding with a person who is accused of breaking the law in another nation and who is a fugitive from justice according to international standards of law. So we simply call on them to – they don’t have to enforce the law, but they certainly can allow him to be subject to the laws of our land and our Constitution, which he is a citizen of. And that’s what we call on them to do.

We’re not looking for a confrontation. We’re not ordering anybody. We’re simply requesting, under a very normal procedure, for the transfer of somebody, just as we transferred to Russia seven people in the last two years that they requested that we did without any clamor, without any rancor, without any argument, and according to our sense of the appropriateness of meeting their request. And that’s what we would hope they would reciprocate with here today.

QUESTION: I have two questions. One is for Mr. Secretary and the other one for His Royal Highness. Mr. Secretary, I believe that there is a tremendous concern in the West and United States about – there was tremendous concern to arm the Syrian Free Army (inaudible) those are in relation to (inaudible). I believe that this concern has resulted in making Hezbollah and Iran more strong in the theater of operation in Syria. Now with the decision of the American Administration to arm the Free Syrian Army, I mean, are you going to arm them with the heavy weapons that could topple the regime or just to make the advance of power on the ground?

(Via translation.) Supporting the Syrian – the Syrian Free Army with (inaudible.)

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, let me just say very directly we never discussed the details of whatever class of weapons we might or might not be providing to anybody. That is not a matter of public discussion. And I think our goal, as I stated, is very clear. We do not want this to be a wider war. We do not want (inaudible) contribute to more bloodshed and a prolongation of the agony of the people of Syria. So our hope is to be able to speedily move to a place where the killing can end and the people of Syria will have a chance to choose their future. We believe that best is provided for through the Geneva process.

But we will continue to provide assistance to the Syrian military coalition and to the Syrian opposition in the interim and because we do not believe that it is appropriate for the Assad regime to have invited the Iranians and Hezbollah to cross international lines and to have their fighters on the ground. There are no United States fighters, there are no Saudi fighters, there are no Qatari fighters on the ground. The opposition was fighting. It is Assad who has grown this in its significance and global implications. And needless to say, we are responding appropriately and we will continue to respond appropriately as the President has said.

FOREIGN MINISTER SAUD: (Via interpreter.) The Kingdom’s aid to Syria – just like I said earlier, Syria is facing two things: genocide, unprecedented genocide in this region and a foreign invasion. The Syrians are calling out for the conscience – the collective conscience of the Arab, Islamic, and international communities to help them out and defend themselves against this unbelievable attack on them. Just like the Secretary said, what led to this situation are simple and basic demands by the Syrians to make their lives a little better. But the reaction, the violent reaction of the regime by killing the opposition and murdering those it considers to be opposition, made it inevitable for the Kingdom, which is an Arab country that’s a sister of Syria and has mutual interests with the Syrian people – it’s left with no choice but to help that people defend themselves. And the only restriction we – there is on the aid we can give to the Syrian opposition is our ability to help, our --

SECRETARY KERRY: Your call. It’s up to you. You can do whatever you want.

FOREIGN MINISTER SAUD: (Via interpreter.) The Secretary has an appointment.

QUESTION: (Via interpreter.) Concerning the Geneva 2, how will you hold the conference when the Syrian coalition will not participate? And what’s Saudi Arabia’s stand on calls for jihad? And what measures has it taken to – concerning that? And now the Syrian rebels, there is a rift among the alliance of the Syrian opposition. What is Saudi doing to alleviate that?

And Mr. Kerry, about (inaudible) agreement between Saudi Arabia and the U.S.A. that (inaudible) between Saudi and Arabia and the Americans. Why has that not include in this agreement?

SECRETARY KERRY: Oh, which agreement is that?

PARTICIPANT: The case of Hamid (inaudible), a Saudi citizen.

SECRETARY KERRY: I will have to investigate that. I can’t tell you exactly, but I will find out for you, and we’ll get back to you. Fair enough?

FOREIGN MINISTER SAUD: (Via interpreter.) A rift among Syrian – factions within the Syrian oppositions, this – it’s important for them to agree, so as to defend themselves better and to go on to rebuild Syria in a way that preserves the interests of everyone, of all sects and ethnicities.

What the Kingdom is doing in that regard, we are always trying to convince them to tell them to – to help them to understand that it’s in their best interest to agree. And we hope that these efforts continue so as we arrive at their goals.

Jihad is basically according to – determined by whatever one can achieve. One can do jihad with their hands or with their words. And we are doing it with all our efforts. Thank you.

UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL 23RD SESSION

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Key U.S. Outcomes at the UN Human Rights Council 23rd Session

Fact Sheet
Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
June 19, 2013

　
The 23rd Session of the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) underscored the importance of U.S. leadership to keep the HRC at the forefront of international efforts to promote and protect human rights. In this session, the United States ran an important consensus resolution on Freedom of Expression and the Empowerment of Women. As a member of the Council, the United States’ mission remains to highlight key human rights issues while vigorously opposing efforts to shield human rights violators.



MULTILATERAL RESPONSES TO COUNTRY SITUATIONS
Syria: The Council addressed the rapidly deteriorating situation in Syria by holding an Urgent Debate on the massacres in al-Qusayr and an Interactive Dialogue with the independent international Commission of Inquiry. At this session, the United States co-sponsored two resolutions on Syria, the first condemning the regime’s attack on al-Qusayr and calling for humanitarian access and accountability for the perpetrators of atrocities. The second resolution, on the continued widespread and systematic human rights violations committed by the Assad regime, condemning foreign combatants, particularly Hizbollah, noting concern about the reports of abuses committed by anti-government armed groups, and stressing access for the Commission of Inquiry.

Belarus: The Special Rapporteur on human rights in Belarus, Miklos Haraszti, presented his first report to the Council this session, addressing the deeply disturbing human rights situation in Belarus. Following a global lobbying effort by the United States and our partners, the Council extended the year-old mandate of the Special Rapporteur for another year.

Eritrea: The Council also extended the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on human rights in Eritrea for another year, maintaining the focus on a wide range of human rights violations by the Government of Eritrea against its people. The Special Rapporteur position was created last year and the mandate holder, Sheila Keetharuth, presented her first report to the Council during the current session.

Egypt NGO statement: The United States joined with Germany and Norway to condemn the conviction of foreign and Egyptian NGO workers earlier this month. The statement also expressed concern over proposed Egyptian legislation that would shrink the space for civil society in Egypt and limit the ability of NGOs to receive funds from outside the country.


CROSS-CUTTING HUMAN RIGHTS PRIORITIES
Freedom of Expression: The United States, along with Brazil, Canada, Egypt, Montenegro, Qatar, Romania, Sierra Leone, and the United Kingdom, led a resolution entitled "The Role of Freedom of Expression in Women’s Empowerment," which was adopted by consensus with more than 70 co-sponsors. The resolution affirms the fundamental role freedom of opinion and expression plays in the ability of women to participate fully in society at large, in particular in the realms of economic and political participation.

Women’s Human Rights: The 23rd Human Rights Council session emphasized protecting the rights of women and girls throughout the world. In addition to our Freedom of Expression resolution, the United States co-sponsored a resolution denouncing trafficking in persons for sexual exploitation, forced labor, and illegal removal of organs, among other abuses. The United States also co-sponsored a key resolution on protecting women from discrimination, which renewed for three years the mandate of the Working Group on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women.

Additionally, the United States joined 46 other states in co-sponsoring a resolution on eliminating all forms of violence against women, focusing on rape and sexual violence. The resolution condemned all forms of violence against women and renewed the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women.