FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks at Visit to a USAID High Impact Microfinance Infrastructure Initiative Site
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Manger Square, Bethlehem
November 6, 2013
MAYOR BABOUN: (Via interpreter) Yes. Your Excellency, Mr. John Kerry, Secretary of the United States; His Excellency, Dr. Mustafa, Deputy Prime Minister and representative of the President; Your Excellencies and eminent attendees and distinguished audience, on behalf of myself and on behalf of the municipality of Bethlehem and the people and residents of the City of the Nativity, I would like to welcome you in the city of peace, the Nativity of Jesus Christ.
Allow me at the beginning to praise the role of the United States and its incessant efforts in making peace in the Holy Land, and also in supporting economical development projects in Palestine on the whole and in the city of Bethlehem in particular. USAID is considered to be our primary and closest partner. It works on developing vital sectors in the city of Bethlehem, especially infrastructure, tourism, public services, and it also assists us through its implementing agencies, including (inaudible). It participates in putting down a smart and effective plan for the future of the city, thus contributing to the restoration of the glory of Bethlehem and making it a bright star in the skies of the world.
Your Excellency, Secretary of State, your visit to the city of Bethlehem carries a very noble message. It comes at a time when the city of peace, the capital of peace, is suffering from a very painful situation. There is a war that is besieging it and there are settlements that are being built on the land of its citizens. And more importantly, it’s under a siege that is separating it from its historic twin, which is the city of Jerusalem. This geographic siege is also a siege and – for the historic city, a message of the city of Bethlehem, the eternal message for peace and love.
Our dear guests in the city of Bethlehem, our hands are extended to peace and they are still extended, both at the level of the leadership and the people. But it is the peace that is based on justice, equality, and international legitimacy. This is the kind of peace that will last and stay, and we believe that your role is very important in achieving this goal. Your family name is an indication to the role and part that you have to play. Your name is Kerry and you are the carrier of peace. (Applause.)
I thank you once again, and I would like to extend to you and your family a visit to – an invitation to visit Bethlehem and take part in the Christmas celebrations that will take place on December 24th.
And now, I call to the podium the Deputy Prime Minister for Economic Affairs, Dr. Mohammad Mustafa.
DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER MUSTAFA: Thank you, Mayor. This is a great speech, great impression, this very important guest of Palestine, Secretary Kerry. On behalf of the President, President Abbas, the senior government, and our people, people of Palestine, I’d like to welcome the Honorable Secretary of State John Kerry in Bethlehem, in Palestine. Now I’m going to turn (inaudible).
(Via interpreter) We gather here today in Bethlehem to inaugurate one of the many USAID programs that are spread throughout the West Bank and that are aimed to enhance the infrastructure of the future independent Palestinian state. I would also like to thank its representative and Administrator, Mr. Raj Shah, who is here today.
Mr. Secretary, our people are looking forward to their independence, and for that reason, the economic and political efforts that you are exerting are very important, and we very much appreciate them and look forward to (inaudible).
As we launch this project, Mr. Secretary, we remember the difficult economic situation not just in Bethlehem, but in all Palestinian cities that are lacking in jobs and in development and other economic arenas. And these are very fundamental issues that our sovereign independent state would be in need of. And we would also like to mention the efforts of the friendly donor countries and their assistance to us, especially the U.S. and USAID. We would also like to mention the economic initiative that you, Mr. Secretary, launched a while ago in partnership with the Palestinian Government and the Quartet, which are poised to launch this partnership also with the private sector here.
Mr. Secretary, ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of the Palestinian people, I would like to thank you personally and also thank President Obama and the friendly American people for the support that they’re extending not just to the city of peace, but to the rest of Palestinian cities. We would also like to thank you for your courage and commitment to a last and just peace between Israel and the Palestine. For our part, we are committed to do our share in order to attain peace. This peace would enable every man, woman, and child in Palestine to exercise their full rights in an independent and prosperous Palestinian state and also contribute to peace in the entire region.
And now, I am pleased to call on Mr. Kerry to give his speech. (Applause.)
SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you very much, Deputy Prime Minister Mustafa. Thank you for your efforts, your friendship. And thank you, Mayor Baboun, for your wonderful welcome to the city of peace, the Church of the Nativity, an historic city and a meaningful one to everybody in the world.
It’s wonderful to be back here, especially on a very beautiful day like today, and I’m delighted to see the ministers here. Thank you for joining us. And I particularly appreciate the efforts that Deputy Prime Minister Mustafa is making to help create transformation economically, to help create opportunity and prosperity for the Palestinian people.
I want to acknowledge Dr. Raj Shah, who is standing behind me, who is our outstanding Administrator of USAID and his team, who have been working very hard throughout the West Bank and the territories to help provide assistance to Palestinian people. Over the last five years, USAID has done extraordinary work here which is not known to many people, but in the West Bank and Gaza, USAID has been involved in rehabilitating over 350 kilometers of roads. That is no small feat.
And there’s very special meaning for me to be back in Bethlehem, especially meaningful to be in Manger Square as we begin to approach the holiday season and Christmas. I’ve been here before. I have always wanted to be here for Christmas, and one of these days, I will.
The last time I was here was a few months ago when President Obama and I had the privilege of visiting the Church of the Nativity with Abu Mazen. And during that same visit, President Obama articulated the long held belief of all of us in the United States – that peace is necessary, peace is just, and peace is possible. Since then, both the Israeli and Palestinian leadership have made courageous decisions, difficult decisions, to come back to the peace talks. As in any negotiation, there will be moments of up and moments of down and it goes back and forth, but I can tell you President Obama and I are determined, and neither of us will stop in our efforts to pursue the possibility. We are determined to try to bring lasting peace to the people of this region. And we are convinced that despite the difficulties, both leaders – President Abbas, Prime Minister Netanyahu – are also determined to work towards this goal.
Even as we work towards this goal, we, the United States, remain deeply committed to a peaceful, prosperous future for both Israelis and Palestinians. We need to develop the economies to show both peoples that peace has the benefits of economic opportunity and prosperity and a better quality of life. So I want to underscore the two-state solution that we seek is not an end unto itself. Our concern is not just whether or not people can define where the borders fall on the map, but whether or not people are able to map out a better future for themselves and their children.
And that’s what brings us to Bethlehem today – the thriving economies, the shared prosperity that we seek, the dreams of the kids that I just met over here who are part of the youth council who want to see more economic development, more jobs and opportunity in their beloved Bethlehem. These things will require investment, capital, innovation, infrastructure.
So I appreciate Mayor Baboun’s reference to the fact that I am working to be the carrier of peace, but today, I get to be the carrier of some money. (Laughter.) Today, I am proud to announce that on behalf of the American people, we will deliver an additional $75 million from micro-infrastructure projects that will begin within the next six months. (Applause.) Combined with the 25 million that the United States pledged in September just a couple months ago, we have now committed $100 million to support micro-infrastructure initiatives in the West Bank, and they will help bring real improvement to Palestinian communities and lives.
Here’s what these investments will mean. They will mean more health commitments, better transportation networks, new community centers and schools. And while the international community can help, the Palestinian Authority and municipal authorities will always be the key and the key partners in these local endeavors. In fact, the Palestinian Authority has already identified some 200 projects which we are seeking additional funding – an additional 50 million from other donors. I’m pleased to announce today that Germany has committed more than $10 million towards this initiative, and we are absolutely confident that in the days ahead, more countries will be joining up and helping in this initiative.
Now, as you can see from the work that’s going on right here on this street, some of this work that we’re talking about is happening right here in Bethlehem, even as we speak. One of the projects that we’re talking about is improving three kilometers of roads between now and next May so that we can enhance travelers’ safety, reduce travel times, and promote economic development and tourism. By better connecting Manger Square to the city of Bethlehem, we’ll better connect people with jobs and better connect tourists and pilgrims to this holy place.
I want you to imagine the possibilities of peace. Nowhere better represents the untapped potential of the Palestinian economy than where we are standing today. Just imagine the potential tourism – global tourism in unprecedented numbers that can begin to build and grow and develop this region as a whole if peace were able to be achieved.
Now, let me emphasize – and I want to totally emphasize this – I’ve said many times economic support is not a substitute for a negotiated political settlement. The Palestinian economy will not be built on foreign aid alone. It will be built on the hard work and the entrepreneurship of the Palestinian people, and it would be built on the foundation of a politically arrived-at peace. And that’s why this kind of project is just one of the ways that we will be supporting the international – the region’s economy.
Over the longer term, we’re going to need to work on ways to unleash the full potential of the Palestinian private sector, and we’re working very closely with Deputy Prime Minister Mustafa and others in order to develop the private sector-led Palestinian Economic Initiative which can bring even more jobs and transformational growth to the region.
I know that in the days ahead, there will be more announcements of the possibilities of what could be achieved. I emphasize that the challenges on the road to peace are too well known to every single one of us. We’ve seen the disappointments. We know how complicated it could be. But what is clear and must remain clear in everybody’s vision are the benefits that can come with peace. This is a road not just worth building here, but it’s a road worth traveling on, all of us, working to find ways to put the past behind us and build a future for our children and for their children in future generations.
Thank you for the privilege of being with you. Shukran. (Applause.)
Showing posts with label USAID. Show all posts
Showing posts with label USAID. Show all posts
Thursday, November 7, 2013
Friday, August 23, 2013
ASSISTANT SECRETARY BARTON'S REMARKS AT SOCIETY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLENARY SESSION
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Keynote Remarks at the Society for International Development Plenary Session
Rick Barton
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations
SID Plenary Session
Washington, DC
June 21, 2013
ASSISTANT SECRETARY BARTON: Good afternoon and thank you all for being here. Thanks to John, Daniel, Rodney Bent, and to everyone who put this together. Thanks most of all to all of you here for all of your years of fine work in this field. I had a chance to meet with you when this was a much smaller group, and there were these Saturday workshops, and there seemed to be only about 25 people in the room. Now they have me in front of a blinding spotlight, in front of thousands, so you’ve been doing well. It’s a sign of the great work you’ve been doing.
I thought I would try to spend ten minutes, and sadly, I don’t have a watch because I’ve got poison ivy, but you’ll give me a signal here. I want to bring you up to date on what we’ve been doing to just set the table for a conversation, because I see you’ve had keynote speeches and keynote addresses, and I thought maybe a keynote conversation would be the best we could do in this slot right after your break.
I’ll give you a brief update on this one year that we’ve been in existence, because I think it’s quite telling in a lot of ways, and give you a sense of how we’re gaining traction. I’ll also talk about a couple of the nagging problems that we’re facing that some of you, obviously, are addressing, and then, just quickly summarize what the ambition is going forward. I’ll put them all in a summary fashion so that it sets up the question and answer and the conversation with all of you.
This new bureau, CSO, was created at the State Department a year ago, as part of the QDDR process with a very simple mission, which was to make the U.S. Government more effective and more coherent in addressing conflict and crisis cases in order to break cycles of violence. So it’s a pretty ambitious mission. What we’ve tried to do this year is focus 80 percent of our effort in four major engagements—Kenya and election-related violence, Syria, Burma—the peace process—and Honduras, Northern Central America’s issue with the proliferation of homicide and the loss of state control. I know that many of you work in these spaces, but we’ve also been in ten other countries to try to work across the conflict spectrum in every part of the world with a range of initiatives, always looking for multiple partners and being as opportunistic in that regard as possible, and with a default position that is to build on the best available local opportunities.
I think we’ve gained traction in doing that by really emphasizing a few things. First, we try to go into places that really matter to the U.S. Government as opposed to spreading ourselves all over the world at the same time with something relatively new. So we’ve focused on places that matter, and when we’ve looked at those places, we’ve tried to see if there is a “ripeness of place,” whether going in at this time would actually make any difference. We also make sure that we have rigorous, joint, independent analysis. I’m sure that we all know that if we send in an agronomist, the answer may well be that there’s an agronomy problem. If we send in a refugee person, there are always refugees. If we send in a counterterrorism person, the answer might well be terrorism. The United States should avoid showing up in a place in all of our splendor; it makes more sense to focus on what’s most important, where we can make the greatest progress. That’s what we’ve been trying to bring to the policy and strategy-shaping side of this conversation. Make sure that we have an emphasis on what appears to be the most important issue. Then we want to see the implementation being done by those who are the most capable. That’s not a default position to anybody, no sense of entitlement. We’re not trying to elbow our way into the room, but we look for who is the best placed to do the necessary work. It can be anyone from one of our international partners, to a private firm, to obviously, USAID, who is our most common, most regular partner, but also the Department of Defense or whoever seems to be best placed at the UN.
One brief example I’d like to give you involves Kenya. I think almost everyone realized that if Kenya went back in to a cycle that it had faced five years ago when its last election occurred, when over a thousand people were killed, hundreds of thousands left their homes, and really the political elite that had driven that very negative process were back in the same place that they had been four years before, that Kenya, the country that we all count on as an anchor in the region, and is really an anchor in Africa, would be at risk.
AID’s Democracy and Governance office put together a meeting for us in the Rift Valley, which we had looked at as one of the two hot spots in the country. At that meeting, they had the 15 or so critical partners of the U.S. Government. Since over $600 million of our $800 million portfolio there was really in the health space, we needed to have some of the people who were working on AIDS, as well as agronomy, and the range of issues that AID and the U.S. Government were advancing. When we had that conversation, it was a slightly different one than usual. We didn’t ask people to give us their portfolios to describe their own work. Instead, the conversation started off with: “What do you think is the most important problem in your country this year?” And every single Kenyan in the room, said: “Election-related violence. If Kenya falls into violence, everything that we’re doing will not matter.”
Then we asked, “Are you doing everything that you can to help prevent that?” And they all said no. So we said, “Would you like to do more?” And they replied, “Yes, of course, because this is what’s most important to our country.” Then we got to: “What might you bring to this particular challenge—hot spots, a police capacity that is not able to respond, a very rich civil society that might not be engaged in this problem, a political elite that seems to be manipulating people, and obviously the problem of idle youth and a labor force that was available if needed.” The first person to speak was the agronomist, and he said, “You know, I don’t really have much that I can bring to this problem. I have only 4,000 people involved in my program in this area of the country.” I said to him, as a former politician, that you can get elected governor of any state in the United States except for Texas with 4,000 people.
The next person to speak was from the AIDS program, and he said that he visits just 200,000 households in this area a week, and didn’t know if that would be of any value. We had two people on the ground who were meeting with the Catholic and Episcopal bishops; they were meeting with the elders, systematically going around, and we had a number of wonderful AID programs, and OTI had some great activities out there. But the opportunity that quickly presented itself was that there was this immense wealth of talent, they all knew what the most critical problem was, and all they really needed was to take their asset base—their connections, their communities—and direct them toward the biggest problem in the country without totally interrupting their own work and compromising that.
What they needed was additional Kenyan help to use their resource base to direct it to that problem. So that’s something we were able to contribute, in a very timely fashion. Part of what we do is to look at that 12-to-18 month period—when it’s hard for some of the more normal programs to get going and to really accelerate what we’re doing.
Very quickly, here are a couple of nagging problems that I know some of you are working on—to stimulate the conversation. The first one is near-term public safety. I think all of us find that this is a real challenge in trying to do our work; it’s obviously the consuming interest of any local citizen. Part of what we’ve started to find is that there really are capabilities in the local police, in particular, that we are underestimating, and we have to find ways to take advantage of. In Kenya all of those citizen groups became an early-warning system for the police, but they also created a demand on the police, so that the police knew they were not only getting help from the community, but there was an expectation that they would actually have to do something.
We found the same thing in Honduras, where a new tax has been passed. But the likelihood that the tax would be collected well, appropriated wisely, and spent appropriately was not that great. So that was a chance to take advantage of another local opportunity.
The final thing I’d like to say about nagging problems involves our ability to generate fresh ideas. From the time I had with the UN, this particular administration was being welcomed back into the world community in a way that we may have drifted away from during the first part of this century. But then the expectation was very quickly about what ideas we have to solve these nagging problems. So it’s not enough just to be there and have people thinking favorably of you, but what are you doing?
I think that some of our own behavior continues to get in the way of our being the idea generators that we need to be. In particular, I think that we have a sense of entitlement to certain spaces, with the sense that “I do that work, why are you in this space?” Whether it’s policy discussions, and oftentimes, the State Department has an off-putting way with AID, the Department of Defense, by saying that we’ll handle the policy and the strategy, or whether it’s in implementation, where I’ve had people say to me, “I’m not sure we need you in this country, I think we’ve got this problem solved,” and I’m thinking that this person, with six Greek gods, would still be overwhelmed. But there is this sense of a proprietary interest which is keeping us from solving problems.
So what I’d like to do is offer a new metaphor for how we should think about these things: One of the ways that we’ve looked at these problems in the government is by saying: “Stay in your lane,” and my feeling about staying in your lane these days is that this is a very 20th century idea. Now, staying in your lane brings to my mind the picture of a swim meet and people swimming up and down in their lanes, but the games that we’re playing look an awful lot more like water polo. It’s the same pool, it takes many of the same skills, but people are pushing you to the bottom of the pool on regular occasions, there is a net at the end, there is a ball…there are significant differences, it’s much more chaotic, much more dynamic, and we’ve got to get out of this “stay in your lane” mentality.
I remember being at the White House for a meeting with Samantha Power, and she started off her comments by saying, “Well, I know this is way outside of my lane.” As it turned out, this was the most valuable contribution that anyone made throughout the meeting. And I remember saying to her after the meeting, “Samantha, please stay out of your lane from here on out.” So I invite all of you to do the same because I think we clearly need that if we’re going to fulfill the potential we have in these places.
Finally, I would say that I think we can make a difference in these conflict places. Obviously, I felt this over the 18 years that I’ve worked in this space and in the conflicts that I’ve been in. But to do that, we’re going to have to get more coherent, we’re going to have to get more effective, we’re going to have to get more inclusive of each other, and I think if we do, this will be a more peaceful world. I look forward to your questions and comments, and this conversation. Thank you.
MODERATOR: Thanks Rick, thank you so much. You can see why Rick is such a beloved and missed figure at CSIS. He’s smart, he understands the politics, he’s also got lots of ideas and I think it’s great he’s in public service, and I admire your public service very much, Rick, so thanks for being with us today. There are a lot of smart people in this room who think about the issues of conflict and development—I’m looking at Arthur Keys, I’m looking at Rodney Bent, I’m looking at Matt McLean, I’m also thinking of…there are a number of groups here who do community policing work, there are some folks here from ICMA, I know Creative Associates does that, but first, Arthur, I’m going to put you on the spot, everyone knows I’m doing this now. Could you bring up the microphone to Arthur Keys, who’s the CEO of IRD. Arthur, you think quite a lot about the issue of conflict and development. If you would, just kick off the conversation.
ARTHUR KEYS: Rick, I’m going to put you on the spot. It seems like a real hot spot in Syria. What creative and positive scenarios do you see there from the U.S. Government and NGO perspective?
MODERATOR: Why don’t I bunch a couple? Matt, you’ve been part of a small business thinking about the intersection between civil-military affairs and government for a long time, as well. Both at AID as a member of the National Security Council, and perhaps other government agencies in another life, but I won’t say which ones. I can’t remember at this point what the other ones were. Can we get a microphone over here to my friend Matt McLean? … Matt? And Rodney, I’m going to ask you to comment, as well.
MATT MCLEAN: Rick, good to see you again. Recalling my NSC days, one of my chief responsibilities at the White House was to integrate different agency activities and keep the policy in line, so in that capacity you’re dealing with a number of different conflict and post-conflict places around the world. Really, there are two parts to the question. One, what are the key instruments that the US government brings to bear? And two, how do you get that coordinated across different agencies and what are some of the challenges there?
MODERATOR: And let me just do one more—we’re doing this World Bank style.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY BARTON: Make sure I heard that, Matt. I’m sorry.
MODERATOR: Matt, could you just repeat that?
MATT MCLEAN: Sure—the question is what are some of the key instruments that the U.S. Government can bring to bear in conflict and post-conflict situations? Particularly, there are some that are going to be tier 1, and some places that are not so tier 1. And secondly, how do you at the State Department help leverage, or encourage, or motivate, or whip up different agencies into their “swim lanes,” if you will, so we’re working toward a common objective?
MODERATOR: Okay, Rodney, Alonzo, I’m going to want you to comment, as well. Please, Rodney.
RODNEY BENT: (laughs) This feels like a collective punishment.
MODERATOR: It is!
RODNEY BENT: Never sit in the front of the classroom.
MODERATOR: I know, exactly. I can see you guys, you’re in my line of fire because of the bright lights.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY BARTON: If he does this just right, I’ll get all the questions, and we’ll run out of time.
MODERATOR: (laughs) Exactly!
RODNEY BENT: That would be the typical Congressional appropriator move. Rick, it’s great to see you again. Congratulations on your job. I want to latch together two parts of your past—your UN work, and piggy-backing a little bit on Matt’s question, it’s not just using UN agencies—I’m sorry—U.S. Government agencies, what do you see as the possibilities, and going back to Arthur’s question about Syria, of working more internationally. What do you see as the strengths and weaknesses of either group?
MODERATOR: Okay, Alonzo? Could I ask you also to comment as the former mission director in Afghanistan, among the many other jobs you’ve held?
ALONZO: Rick, once again, I want to echo the comments of Dan, and thank you for your continued government service at an excellent level. One of the questions I have is that we learned a lot of lessons from 2005, or 2004-2010 in regards to intergovernmental relations, trying to do a whole-of-government approach to addressing the problems we’re having in a lot of conflict areas. It seems as though over the past couple of years that that whole approach has gone away. Clearly there were a lot of lessons learned over that process, and I want to get a sense from you of how much of that we’ve taken away if the demand goes up again and we have another Afghanistan situation.
MODERATOR: Those will be the questions, Rick. Those four. I promise.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY BARTON: Okay, thank you. Let me see if I can get through these. How much time do we have?
MODERATOR: Five minutes.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY BARTON: Okay, so concise answers to good, tough questions.
Syria obviously is just a brutal challenge right now, and I want to set up the challenge in a slightly different way. When the revolution started, we didn’t really know the people who started it, so we didn’t have a good base of knowledge of the place, and I’ve believed for some time that one of the critical weaknesses in the way that the US has approached many of these interventions is that we didn’t know the places we went into. Afghanistan and Iraq were good examples of getting ahead of our familiarity with a place. And aside from knowledge, you have to have a common view of what the case is—which I felt we lacked in Afghanistan, where we were fighting terrorism and we were building a model democracy, and we would compromise one for the other at almost any moment. That’s not a particularly good way to move ahead.
In Syria, the problem was compounded by closing the embassy and having to work out of neighboring countries. So we didn’t really know the people, we didn’t know the place that well, and then we’re not able to work in the country because of the nature of the conflict. So over the last year we’ve tried to broaden our knowledge of the Syrians, and the depth of our familiarity with them. We’ve used a number of methods to do that, but basically training and equipping the non-violent opposition, the people who had started the revolution. We’ve done that to make them more capable for today and for tomorrow, so we want them to be more capable as a means of bringing an end to the conflict, but also when the conflict ends so that there will be some base of people who are going to be able to continue furthering some of the goals of the revolution when it started. I think right now, as people look at this, they see fragmentation as being the logical outcome of the conflict, and I think that part of it is that you have to prepare for the best-case scenario, because if you go the current direction of the status quo, the situation probably isn’t going to be getting better. I think we have a better idea of what to do if things really go to hell, so you have to imagine what would be a positive scenario.
My feeling now is that the most positive scenario is a fragmentation, with part of the people who are really dedicated to some of the founding ideals of the revolution, which is to function in a more open, more democratic, and more peaceful way. I think that is a possibility, and what we are trying to prepare for. Part of that is to give the training and equipping for communications, so we’ve helped to establish a nation-wide FM network so that the opposition can talk to the people without networking through the regime. We’ve done a lot of other mass media stuff that we think is useful, and we have a base of over 500 Syrians that we’re working with on a regular basis. We’re also looking at going to Congress for more flexibility to help pay for stipends for the defected police and others who are providing for public safety in some of those pockets that the opposition has taken control of. There is still the larger problem of the conflict, which as you know, is obviously the overriding concern. But within that, there is an awful lot that can be done, and that is what we’re trying to do, but the bombing is still the first thing that every Syrian talks to you about, and obviously that issue is still hanging out there.
I think I can do Matt and Rodney’s questions together. One of the key instruments the U.S. Government has is the ability to mobilize—to mobilize its allies, to mobilize the organizations that we’re a part of, and to mobilize our own government. But sometimes one of the problems when we get mobilized is that everyone brings their favorite toy, what they’re used to bringing. I think that comes back to having some greater coherence, and if we really do insist on what is the most important challenge of the place as opposed to everyone showing up in their splendor. I’ve been in endless meetings over the years where people say—the first question that’s asked is we’ve got a terrible situation, what can the United States do? I happen to think that’s the wrong problem, the wrong set of questions. The right question is: What is most needed? Because if we can actually get the people working on the place motivated around what’s most needed, we have a much greater chance of success than if we just bring the splendor of all of our own programs.
Up until about two weeks ago when Van Cliburn died, I described it as the Van Cliburn effect, and there he was on the front page of The New York Times, and I had to stop using his name. Does anybody remember who Van Cliburn was? Remember, he looked like the central casting concert pianist—he had the white hair, he had the tails, he looked spectacular. And he’d sit down, flip up the tails, and he’d sit down—that’s sort of what the U.S. Government does. We arrive in these places, and we have all of this talent, and some money…remember there were some people who said we’d have been better off in Bosnia if we had everything in play, so we put everything in play in Iraq, and it didn’t turn out to be that much more successful, but we’re doing cross finger drills and a whole variety of other things. I think these are places that are just so complex and so difficult to work in—tougher than Washington—and how tough is it to get anything done in Washington? Brutally difficult. So let’s focus on the two or three things that can be felt by the people of the country, because they generally have something that matters more to them than everything else. It’s not like we have a gigantic matrix—we’re not going to get everything right in that country, so we have got to give them hope, we’ve got to give them confidence, we’ve got to get some momentum going, and that’s why focusing on what’s most important to them is what is going to make us the most successful. I think that’s something the United States Government has a real capacity to do, but we’ve got to have self-discipline to do that, as well.
Obviously, the international community is a natural partner. We have about seven countries that are looking at these problems the same way we are and putting money to it, but we’re all fairly small still, and the league is just developing, but I think that’s one way we’ll get more influence.
Alonzo, just finally—I’m sorry to go over a minute or two, here—in terms of the whole of government, I’m finding that there’s tremendous openness to working in partnership within the U.S. Government, and very few people who want to lone-wolf any one of these problems right now. What we’re trying to do is to say: Let’s try to do something concrete. Let’s not just build rosters. This is not a bureaucratic exercise, building capacities…let’s take a real problem, and show that by working together, we can actually have more impact on it. And let’s show the capacity as a result of successes, rather than the more bureaucratic way, which is to say, you give me 300 million bucks, you give me 300 people, and I’ll deliver this for you tomorrow. I think that this model is not going to work quite as well these days as taking on real cases, finding how we complement each other, and then making sure that the people who are best suited have the most leadership responsibility, and has more implementation responsibility, and not a natural default to either a bureau, or an agency or any other part of the government.
It’s hard to do that. It doesn’t sit quite right with our practices, but our practices have not been so endearing that every taxpayer in the country is cheering us right now. I think we have an opportunity to try something a little bit different and probably build more support.
Thank you.
MODERATOR: Thank you all very much. Please join me in thanking Rick Barton.
(Applause)
Thursday, July 4, 2013
U.S. TERROIST DESIGNATION OF MOHAMED HAMZA
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Terrorist Designation of Abd Al-Ra'Ouf Abu Zaid Mohamed Hamza
Media Note
Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
July 3, 2013
The U.S. Department of State has designated Abd Al-Ra’Ouf Abu Zaid Mohamed Hamza under Executive Order 13224, which targets terrorists and those providing support to terrorists or acts of terrorism. As a result of this designation, all property subject to U.S. jurisdiction in which Hamza has any interest is blocked and any assets he may have under U.S. jurisdiction are frozen. U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with him.
Hamza, with three co-conspirators, participated in an armed attack in Khartoum, Sudan on January 1, 2008, which resulted in the deaths of a U.S. diplomat serving with the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), John Michael Granville, and a locally employed U.S. Embassy staff member, Adbelrahman Abbas Rahama. The attack occurred when Granville and Abbas were leaving a New Year’s Eve party in Khartoum. Granville worked on democracy and governance programs for USAID.
The four men were convicted of murder and sentenced to death in a Sudanese criminal court in 2009. In 2010, the four men escaped from a maximum security prison, killing a Sudanese police officer and wounding another in the process. Shortly thereafter, Hamza was recaptured and is currently in prison in Khartoum. Another escapee was reportedly killed in Somalia in 2011, and the other two remain fugitives at large. These two fugitives, Abdelbasit Alhaj Alhasan Haj Hamad and Mohamed Makawi Ibrahim Mohamed, were designated as Specially Designated Global Terrorists under E.O. 13224 on January 8, 2013 and remain at large. The U.S. Department of State’s Rewards for Justice program has authorized rewards of up to $5 million each for information leading to the capture of the two fugitives.
In making this designation, the Department seeks to emphasize to the public and, in particular, to the Granville and Abbas families, our commitment to justice prevailing in this case.
Terrorist Designation of Abd Al-Ra'Ouf Abu Zaid Mohamed Hamza
Media Note
Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
July 3, 2013
The U.S. Department of State has designated Abd Al-Ra’Ouf Abu Zaid Mohamed Hamza under Executive Order 13224, which targets terrorists and those providing support to terrorists or acts of terrorism. As a result of this designation, all property subject to U.S. jurisdiction in which Hamza has any interest is blocked and any assets he may have under U.S. jurisdiction are frozen. U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with him.
Hamza, with three co-conspirators, participated in an armed attack in Khartoum, Sudan on January 1, 2008, which resulted in the deaths of a U.S. diplomat serving with the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), John Michael Granville, and a locally employed U.S. Embassy staff member, Adbelrahman Abbas Rahama. The attack occurred when Granville and Abbas were leaving a New Year’s Eve party in Khartoum. Granville worked on democracy and governance programs for USAID.
The four men were convicted of murder and sentenced to death in a Sudanese criminal court in 2009. In 2010, the four men escaped from a maximum security prison, killing a Sudanese police officer and wounding another in the process. Shortly thereafter, Hamza was recaptured and is currently in prison in Khartoum. Another escapee was reportedly killed in Somalia in 2011, and the other two remain fugitives at large. These two fugitives, Abdelbasit Alhaj Alhasan Haj Hamad and Mohamed Makawi Ibrahim Mohamed, were designated as Specially Designated Global Terrorists under E.O. 13224 on January 8, 2013 and remain at large. The U.S. Department of State’s Rewards for Justice program has authorized rewards of up to $5 million each for information leading to the capture of the two fugitives.
In making this designation, the Department seeks to emphasize to the public and, in particular, to the Granville and Abbas families, our commitment to justice prevailing in this case.
Wednesday, May 15, 2013
ROBERT HORMATS REMARK'S AT 2013 GLOBAL DIASPORA FORUM
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
2013 Global Diaspora Forum
Remarks
Robert D. Hormats
Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment
Keynote Address
Washington, DC
May 14, 2013
Thank you, Thomas [Debass, the Acting Special Representative of the Secretary’s Office of Global Partnerships, U.S. Department of State], for that very warm introduction.
The diaspora experience has long been "America’s Story." As Russell Shorto’s remarkable book, The Island at the Center of the World, details, at the time the Dutch ceded Manhattan to the British, in 1664, there were only 400 inhabitants on the island. Yet, they were a very diverse group indeed; they spoke 18 different languages—a microcosm of the much larger diaspora that was to follow.
Seventeenth-century Manhattan—enriched by inhabitants from many parts of the world—was truly multi-ethnic. Its citizens were creative and entrepreneurial. They valued free trade, individual rights, and religious freedom. And they valued opportunity.
Centuries later, this description of Dutch Manhattan not only fits New York, but also the United States as a whole. Today, almost one quarter of Americans are first- or second-generation diasporans.
In New York, 41 percent of students in the city’s schools speak a language other than English at home. Los Angeles has identified 109 different languages its students use at home. Many other American cities, and many smaller towns as well, are enriched by immigrant communities that speak many languages.
People who have migrated here from all over the world call America home, and cherish their American citizenship. They also significantly enrich our society and our country. The creativity and success of America have been strengthened by new waves of people from distant lands who bring their talents, hard work, innovativeness, and varied backgrounds together to add dynamism to our economy and our country.
My grandparents came from Eastern and Central Europe. Getting here wasn’t easy. Neither was life when they first arrived. But America welcomed them and gave them opportunity. And they sought throughout their lives to give back to America. I like to feel that in some small way, I am following in their footsteps of trying to give back in gratitude for the welcome America gave them and the opportunity it has given all of us. There are millions like me with similar stories.
The Importance of the Global Diaspora Forum
Let me now share a few thoughts on why I think this Forum is so important.
The goal of this forum is to underscore that in many ways America’s story is the world’s story. The incredibly important role of diaspora communities in America’s success is well known. And I’ll shortly describe a few examples. But I also want to underscore that this is not a one-way street.
Diasporans are our grass-roots ambassadors. They offer unique expertise, insight, and personal commitment. They bring language and cultural familiarity with other parts of the world. They understand business opportunities and risks in their home countries. They are often members of large personal and professional networks with people of similar backgrounds. And they often return to their countries of origin to tell people there about America. When they do, they are widely seen as credible and enthusiastic ambassadors.
Just as importantly, they are uniquely motivated. For diaspora communities, diplomacy and development in their countries of origin are intrinsic and personal, not simply policy issues. Supporting higher living standards, economic growth, and political stability in their countries of origin or heritage is about helping their friends and families.
Remittances are one basic connection, and provide an important lifeline for millions of households around the globe. According to the Hudson Institute, in 2010, remittances from the United States to other countries totaled $95.8 billion. Diaspora communities also provide critical business linkages to global markets for countries that may be struggling to capture the benefits of globalization.
Diasporans are also important sources of innovation for America. In the United States, immigrant-owned companies generate an estimated $67 billion in business each year. Strikingly, immigrants are 30 percent more likely to form new businesses than U.S.-born citizens.
In 2011, we in the State Department launched the International Diaspora Engagement Alliance, a unique multi-stakeholder platform for partnership-building with diaspora communities. This platform harnesses the investment power of more than 1,500 diaspora groups to promote innovation, entrepreneurship, and philanthropy in their countries of heritage. It also seeks to strengthen our linkages in areas such as the sciences and medical research.
Diaspora Communities in the Sciences
U.S. universities have long attracted the best scientific, medical, and engineering talent from around the world and, through them, built partnerships to share and promote innovative ideas, medical cures, and cutting edge technology with their counterparts around the world. Albert Einstein, Andy Grove, and Sergey Brin are only three famous examples.
In the United States, a quarter of foreign-born workers with college degrees are employed in scientific and engineering professions. The medical profession benefits from similar numbers. From 1990 to 2004, almost half of U.S. Nobel laureates in science fields were immigrants. Many remain in close touch with their countries of origin, and are powerful multipliers for diplomacy, development, medicine, and science.
Nowhere is the role of diasporans more prominent than in Silicon Valley—the innovation capital of the world: 52 percent of all startups there have been founded by immigrants. Among U.S. technology companies founded between 1995 and 2005, 25 percent had a chief executive or lead technologist who was foreign-born. These companies generated $52 billion in revenue and employed 450,000 workers in 2005. So when anyone argues that immigration costs jobs for others, the facts demonstrate quite the opposite. Immigration, across many decades and generations, creates jobs for hundreds of thousands of people.
Let me cite a couple of examples to demonstrate the power of diaspora networks. First, I’d like to mention Dr. Wole Soboyejo, a Nigerian-American professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering at Princeton. He splits his time between research in the United States and his role as President of the African University of Science and Technology in Abuja. Investments like this in Nigeria’s engineering talent are facilitating cutting edge innovation that will benefit both Africa and the world. I am delighted that Dr. Soboyejo is with us today to share his story.
Another diaspora innovator is Aishwarya Ratan, who has worked on optimizing data entries for local microcredit co-ops in India and who presented on behavioral insights to financial inclusion at the Google "Solve for X" session yesterday. Her system holds tremendous promise in India and other developing countries. Indeed, microfinance co-ops serve 86 million households in India. Improving record keeping could help expand borrowing from banks. Ratan’s day job is Director of the Microsavings and Payments Innovation Initiative at Yale University.
Programs for Enhancing the Impact of Diaspora Networks
The cases of Dr. Soboyejo and Aishwarya Ratan show how, on a personal level, members of diaspora communities can make a difference.
There is also a lot of work underway at the State Department and USAID to facilitate connections between diaspora groups and increase their impact on development.
Last year at this forum, we announced a new initiative called Networks of Diasporas for Engineers and Scientists, or NODES—a partnership between the Department of State, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the National Academy of Sciences. The basic idea is simple—to connect diaspora scientists across boundaries by fostering knowledge networks; the sharing of best practices; the identification of capacity-building tools; and the creation of links between professional societies, universities, NGOs, and government agencies at home and abroad.
In the past year, NODES convened scientists and diaspora groups from more than 30 countries at the nation’s largest scientific meeting and built a set of knowledge resources that we are sharing with this actively expanding network.
Many diaspora communities are also ramping up their programs to create positive change. In the past year, a number of diaspora communities have hosted conferences and diaspora forums. Among others, Jamaicans, Albanians, Haitians, and Guineans have recently held forums aimed at engaging and reorganizing their diaspora communities.
Governments are also getting into the act. Last July, under the leadership of my very good friend Dino Djalal, Indonesia’s outstanding Ambassador to the United States—who is present here today—the Indonesian Embassy organized the first-ever world Congress of Indonesian Diasporas in Los Angeles.
Diaspora Communities from the Middle East
The State Department has worked hard over the past couple of years to strengthen the links between the American diaspora communities from the Middle East countries in transition and their home countries. The numbers are large—there are, for example, nearly 200,000 Egyptians living in the U.S.
The potential of these diaspora communities is vast, and goes far beyond serving as a source for remittance flows, as important as they are. They offer critical sources of investment capital and business skills that the Middle East countries in transition need to tap in order to place themselves on a sustainable path to development.
Diaspora communities are also contributing by way of volunteerism. These communities volunteer their time and expertise. And we are currently thinking through ways to partner with various organizations to amplify volunteer efforts by diaspora communities from the Middle East in order to scale up and strengthen capacity-building in the region and across a number of key areas, including economic development and civil society.
There is a critical confidence aspect as well. We have encouraged the governments in the region to reach out to their diaspora communities to encourage them to do business and invest in their countries of origin. If they succeed, the impact on confidence could be large, as markets see the overseas investors most knowledgeable about these countries investing their funds.
In addition, scientific diasporas in the United States can be especially helpful in maintaining contacts with scientific communities in their countries of origin. For example, there are 470,000 Iranians living in the U.S. The Iranian diaspora have contributed significantly to the U.S. National Academy of Sciences’ workshops that have taken place over the past decade in conjunction with the Iranian scientific community.
These workshops have covered topics of benefit to both countries, including food-borne diseases, water conservation reuse and recycling, ecology of the Caspian Sea, drought forecasting and management, and improving earthquake mitigation. Moreover, the premier scientific and technological university in Iran has more alumni in California than in any other part of the world. This is one of the most meaningful ways of maintaining links between the United States and Iran today.
In addition, our Global Innovation through Science and Technology initiative leverages diaspora members to serve as mentors and experts. Individuals such as Faysal Sohail, a venture capitalist with ties to Saudi Arabia, provide advice and guidance to aspiring young entrepreneurs from the Middle East, as well as Africa and Asia.
Conclusion
Deepening and expanding diaspora networks can do much to make America a more responsive and effective leader around the world. We can develop stronger bonds with other nations—through their civil societies, business leaders, religious communities, women, and minorities.
This Forum is a celebration of America’s diaspora communities. It is our hope that by bringing you together, we will create new opportunities for partnerships with the private sector, civil society, and public institutions in order to make your engagements with your countries of origin or heritage effective, scalable, and sustainable.
When I walk down the streets in my other home city—New York City—as I love to do, and did last Sunday with a very good friend of mine, I am always proud to see so many people from different countries, cultures, and ethnicities living together and working together. It makes me proud that America attracts and welcomes so many people from other parts of the world. We should celebrate our diversity, because that is what in many ways makes us Americans.
It also makes me proud when I see the contributions that wave after wave of immigrants have made.
And, for America to remain the world’s beacon, as well as its most dynamic economy and society, we need to keep our doors open and be a land of opportunity for all. We need to invite, welcome, and honor those from around the world who want to come here for a new life; who want to build new businesses, engage in the creation of new technologies, and contribute to our medical science; and who want to work hard and to make our nation a better place for themselves and their children. So many before them have done this, and it is in our nation’s interest that more people have the opportunity as well.
On behalf of State Department, I welcome your ideas and your support in this growing partnership, and warmly welcome you to this Forum. I thank you for coming and for your leadership, energy, commitment, and contributions to America.
Thank you.
2013 Global Diaspora Forum
Remarks
Robert D. Hormats
Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment
Keynote Address
Washington, DC
May 14, 2013
Thank you, Thomas [Debass, the Acting Special Representative of the Secretary’s Office of Global Partnerships, U.S. Department of State], for that very warm introduction.
The diaspora experience has long been "America’s Story." As Russell Shorto’s remarkable book, The Island at the Center of the World, details, at the time the Dutch ceded Manhattan to the British, in 1664, there were only 400 inhabitants on the island. Yet, they were a very diverse group indeed; they spoke 18 different languages—a microcosm of the much larger diaspora that was to follow.
Seventeenth-century Manhattan—enriched by inhabitants from many parts of the world—was truly multi-ethnic. Its citizens were creative and entrepreneurial. They valued free trade, individual rights, and religious freedom. And they valued opportunity.
Centuries later, this description of Dutch Manhattan not only fits New York, but also the United States as a whole. Today, almost one quarter of Americans are first- or second-generation diasporans.
In New York, 41 percent of students in the city’s schools speak a language other than English at home. Los Angeles has identified 109 different languages its students use at home. Many other American cities, and many smaller towns as well, are enriched by immigrant communities that speak many languages.
People who have migrated here from all over the world call America home, and cherish their American citizenship. They also significantly enrich our society and our country. The creativity and success of America have been strengthened by new waves of people from distant lands who bring their talents, hard work, innovativeness, and varied backgrounds together to add dynamism to our economy and our country.
My grandparents came from Eastern and Central Europe. Getting here wasn’t easy. Neither was life when they first arrived. But America welcomed them and gave them opportunity. And they sought throughout their lives to give back to America. I like to feel that in some small way, I am following in their footsteps of trying to give back in gratitude for the welcome America gave them and the opportunity it has given all of us. There are millions like me with similar stories.
The Importance of the Global Diaspora Forum
Let me now share a few thoughts on why I think this Forum is so important.
The goal of this forum is to underscore that in many ways America’s story is the world’s story. The incredibly important role of diaspora communities in America’s success is well known. And I’ll shortly describe a few examples. But I also want to underscore that this is not a one-way street.
Diasporans are our grass-roots ambassadors. They offer unique expertise, insight, and personal commitment. They bring language and cultural familiarity with other parts of the world. They understand business opportunities and risks in their home countries. They are often members of large personal and professional networks with people of similar backgrounds. And they often return to their countries of origin to tell people there about America. When they do, they are widely seen as credible and enthusiastic ambassadors.
Just as importantly, they are uniquely motivated. For diaspora communities, diplomacy and development in their countries of origin are intrinsic and personal, not simply policy issues. Supporting higher living standards, economic growth, and political stability in their countries of origin or heritage is about helping their friends and families.
Remittances are one basic connection, and provide an important lifeline for millions of households around the globe. According to the Hudson Institute, in 2010, remittances from the United States to other countries totaled $95.8 billion. Diaspora communities also provide critical business linkages to global markets for countries that may be struggling to capture the benefits of globalization.
Diasporans are also important sources of innovation for America. In the United States, immigrant-owned companies generate an estimated $67 billion in business each year. Strikingly, immigrants are 30 percent more likely to form new businesses than U.S.-born citizens.
In 2011, we in the State Department launched the International Diaspora Engagement Alliance, a unique multi-stakeholder platform for partnership-building with diaspora communities. This platform harnesses the investment power of more than 1,500 diaspora groups to promote innovation, entrepreneurship, and philanthropy in their countries of heritage. It also seeks to strengthen our linkages in areas such as the sciences and medical research.
Diaspora Communities in the Sciences
U.S. universities have long attracted the best scientific, medical, and engineering talent from around the world and, through them, built partnerships to share and promote innovative ideas, medical cures, and cutting edge technology with their counterparts around the world. Albert Einstein, Andy Grove, and Sergey Brin are only three famous examples.
In the United States, a quarter of foreign-born workers with college degrees are employed in scientific and engineering professions. The medical profession benefits from similar numbers. From 1990 to 2004, almost half of U.S. Nobel laureates in science fields were immigrants. Many remain in close touch with their countries of origin, and are powerful multipliers for diplomacy, development, medicine, and science.
Nowhere is the role of diasporans more prominent than in Silicon Valley—the innovation capital of the world: 52 percent of all startups there have been founded by immigrants. Among U.S. technology companies founded between 1995 and 2005, 25 percent had a chief executive or lead technologist who was foreign-born. These companies generated $52 billion in revenue and employed 450,000 workers in 2005. So when anyone argues that immigration costs jobs for others, the facts demonstrate quite the opposite. Immigration, across many decades and generations, creates jobs for hundreds of thousands of people.
Let me cite a couple of examples to demonstrate the power of diaspora networks. First, I’d like to mention Dr. Wole Soboyejo, a Nigerian-American professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering at Princeton. He splits his time between research in the United States and his role as President of the African University of Science and Technology in Abuja. Investments like this in Nigeria’s engineering talent are facilitating cutting edge innovation that will benefit both Africa and the world. I am delighted that Dr. Soboyejo is with us today to share his story.
Another diaspora innovator is Aishwarya Ratan, who has worked on optimizing data entries for local microcredit co-ops in India and who presented on behavioral insights to financial inclusion at the Google "Solve for X" session yesterday. Her system holds tremendous promise in India and other developing countries. Indeed, microfinance co-ops serve 86 million households in India. Improving record keeping could help expand borrowing from banks. Ratan’s day job is Director of the Microsavings and Payments Innovation Initiative at Yale University.
Programs for Enhancing the Impact of Diaspora Networks
The cases of Dr. Soboyejo and Aishwarya Ratan show how, on a personal level, members of diaspora communities can make a difference.
There is also a lot of work underway at the State Department and USAID to facilitate connections between diaspora groups and increase their impact on development.
Last year at this forum, we announced a new initiative called Networks of Diasporas for Engineers and Scientists, or NODES—a partnership between the Department of State, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the National Academy of Sciences. The basic idea is simple—to connect diaspora scientists across boundaries by fostering knowledge networks; the sharing of best practices; the identification of capacity-building tools; and the creation of links between professional societies, universities, NGOs, and government agencies at home and abroad.
In the past year, NODES convened scientists and diaspora groups from more than 30 countries at the nation’s largest scientific meeting and built a set of knowledge resources that we are sharing with this actively expanding network.
Many diaspora communities are also ramping up their programs to create positive change. In the past year, a number of diaspora communities have hosted conferences and diaspora forums. Among others, Jamaicans, Albanians, Haitians, and Guineans have recently held forums aimed at engaging and reorganizing their diaspora communities.
Governments are also getting into the act. Last July, under the leadership of my very good friend Dino Djalal, Indonesia’s outstanding Ambassador to the United States—who is present here today—the Indonesian Embassy organized the first-ever world Congress of Indonesian Diasporas in Los Angeles.
Diaspora Communities from the Middle East
The State Department has worked hard over the past couple of years to strengthen the links between the American diaspora communities from the Middle East countries in transition and their home countries. The numbers are large—there are, for example, nearly 200,000 Egyptians living in the U.S.
The potential of these diaspora communities is vast, and goes far beyond serving as a source for remittance flows, as important as they are. They offer critical sources of investment capital and business skills that the Middle East countries in transition need to tap in order to place themselves on a sustainable path to development.
Diaspora communities are also contributing by way of volunteerism. These communities volunteer their time and expertise. And we are currently thinking through ways to partner with various organizations to amplify volunteer efforts by diaspora communities from the Middle East in order to scale up and strengthen capacity-building in the region and across a number of key areas, including economic development and civil society.
There is a critical confidence aspect as well. We have encouraged the governments in the region to reach out to their diaspora communities to encourage them to do business and invest in their countries of origin. If they succeed, the impact on confidence could be large, as markets see the overseas investors most knowledgeable about these countries investing their funds.
In addition, scientific diasporas in the United States can be especially helpful in maintaining contacts with scientific communities in their countries of origin. For example, there are 470,000 Iranians living in the U.S. The Iranian diaspora have contributed significantly to the U.S. National Academy of Sciences’ workshops that have taken place over the past decade in conjunction with the Iranian scientific community.
These workshops have covered topics of benefit to both countries, including food-borne diseases, water conservation reuse and recycling, ecology of the Caspian Sea, drought forecasting and management, and improving earthquake mitigation. Moreover, the premier scientific and technological university in Iran has more alumni in California than in any other part of the world. This is one of the most meaningful ways of maintaining links between the United States and Iran today.
In addition, our Global Innovation through Science and Technology initiative leverages diaspora members to serve as mentors and experts. Individuals such as Faysal Sohail, a venture capitalist with ties to Saudi Arabia, provide advice and guidance to aspiring young entrepreneurs from the Middle East, as well as Africa and Asia.
Conclusion
Deepening and expanding diaspora networks can do much to make America a more responsive and effective leader around the world. We can develop stronger bonds with other nations—through their civil societies, business leaders, religious communities, women, and minorities.
This Forum is a celebration of America’s diaspora communities. It is our hope that by bringing you together, we will create new opportunities for partnerships with the private sector, civil society, and public institutions in order to make your engagements with your countries of origin or heritage effective, scalable, and sustainable.
When I walk down the streets in my other home city—New York City—as I love to do, and did last Sunday with a very good friend of mine, I am always proud to see so many people from different countries, cultures, and ethnicities living together and working together. It makes me proud that America attracts and welcomes so many people from other parts of the world. We should celebrate our diversity, because that is what in many ways makes us Americans.
It also makes me proud when I see the contributions that wave after wave of immigrants have made.
And, for America to remain the world’s beacon, as well as its most dynamic economy and society, we need to keep our doors open and be a land of opportunity for all. We need to invite, welcome, and honor those from around the world who want to come here for a new life; who want to build new businesses, engage in the creation of new technologies, and contribute to our medical science; and who want to work hard and to make our nation a better place for themselves and their children. So many before them have done this, and it is in our nation’s interest that more people have the opportunity as well.
On behalf of State Department, I welcome your ideas and your support in this growing partnership, and warmly welcome you to this Forum. I thank you for coming and for your leadership, energy, commitment, and contributions to America.
Thank you.
Monday, May 6, 2013
SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S REMARKS AT AMERICAN FOREIGN SERVICE ASSOCIATION MEMORIAL PLAQUE CEREMONY
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks at the American Foreign Service Association Memorial Plaque Ceremony
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Treaty Room
Washington, DC
May 3, 2013
SECRETARY KERRY: Susan, thank you very much for your stewardship and that of AFSA, and a welcome to all of the extended members of the State Department family. We are deeply appreciative for everybody taking part in this ceremony as we mourn and we commemorate and we celebrate our fallen brothers and sisters in service. I want to welcome CIA Director Brennan, USAID Administrator Shah, and of course, the Vice President of the United States. And I also want to thank all of the leadership of the State Department that are here with us today, obviously.
The most important thank you that we can all give – and we do – is to the family members. I know this is a mixed day. It’s a hard day. It’s a day that brings back pain, but it’s also a day, I hope, of comfort and of pride in knowing that the contributions and the memories of your loved ones are a permanent part of the State Department, as strong as the marble which will carry their names for eternity.
Today we add eight names to our wall of honor, eight people who dedicated their lives to service. And to a person, each one sought out the most difficult assignments. They understood the risks, and still they raised their hands and they said: "Send me."
Anne Smedinghoff was just 25 years old when she was killed in Zabul province, Afghanistan. I met her on my trip to Afghanistan, about a week before her death. And I remember her face – her permanent smile – cutting through the chaos and the crowd. That’s exactly where Anne wanted to be, right in the thick of it. And she was killed carrying out a mission of hope, bringing books to Afghan children, who had no connection to her, but who she believed deserved the chance to improve their lives.
Ambassador Chris Stevens, who was killed in the terrorist attack at our diplomatic post in Benghazi, on September 11, 2012. Through all of the tributes and the memorials after his death, we have learned so much about who Chris was as a person and about his skill as a diplomat. Everyone felt like he was a personal friend. And in fact, for those of us on the Foreign Relations Committee, he was, because he worked there at one time. One Peace Corps volunteer even visited the town in Morocco where Chris served almost 30 years earlier. And the volunteer met a young Moroccan, who not only remembered the first words Chris taught him in English, but he said that Chris inspired him to become an English teacher himself.
Sean Smith was killed in the same attack as Ambassador Stevens. He was serving literally as a one-man band to keep the Benghazi post running. He was Information Management Officer, Financial Management Officer, Management Officer in general. And Sean, throughout his career, went places that other people didn’t. He was the first to volunteer for Haiti after the earthquake, the first to volunteer for Japan after the Fukushima disaster. And so of course, he stepped up to serve in Benghazi. But with as much time and passion as he devoted to work, he also built a very rich network of friends. His love for the San Diego Chargers was legendary – as were his Super Bowl parties – and he was an accomplished online gamer. He leaves behind his wife, Heather, two young children. And I hope they know how much we are all diminished by Sean’s loss.
Today we also honor two true warriors – both trained Navy SEALs, both fierce patriots with loving hearts. Ty Woods and Glen Doherty died defending the U.S. annex in Benghazi. And thanks to their bravery and their sacrifice, 30 Americans escaped the attack. Thirty Americans are alive today because of Ty and Glen.
Ty Woods was a guy who was always looking for a challenge, always waiting for the phone to ring and for the next big mission. Even though he got a scholarship to wrestle for the University of Oregon, Ty joined the SEALs at 18 because he thought it was the biggest challenge that he could set for himself. He earned a Bronze Star and a Combat V, but he also had a healer’s touch, and he eventually became a registered nurse and a certified paramedic. Over the years, he become an instructor and a mentor to younger SEALs, even after he retired from the Navy and began defending our embassies. Ty’s close-knit group of friends still miss him deeply, as do we. And our thoughts are with his wife, Dorothy, and their infant son.
Glen Doherty protected our diplomatic posts around the globe from Iraq to Afghanistan, and finally, to Libya. According to his SEAL buddies, Glen was, without a doubt, the most liked man you could ever hope to meet. Whether he was skiing or surfing, running or rafting, Glen always wanted to be doing something and always wanted to be connecting with other people. He wanted to be the man in the arena, the "doer of deeds," as Teddy Roosevelt said. And Glen actually carried that famous speech with him for years as an inspiration. It spoke to the part of him that wanted to protect people and ultimately led him to sacrifice himself defending others. Glen was from my home state of Massachusetts, and I’ll never forget how the people of Boston came out to honor him, thousands of people standing watch in the street as his casket came by.
Ragaei Abdelfattah. He was killed during a suicide attack in Afghanistan last August while working for USAID. He was Egyptian by birth, but his friends and family called him the biggest flag-waving American they ever knew. He loved bad chain restaurants – (laughter) – bad romantic comedies, and dark chocolate, which is always good. Throughout his life, Ragaei demonstrated a deep passion for helping people develop their full potential. In fact, after finishing his first year in Afghanistan – his first tour that is – he promptly signed up for the second because, in his own words he said, "I have more work to do here. One year was not enough."
Today we also add the names of two Foreign Service officers that we lost more than 40 years ago. It was another time, another war, but their devotion to their work was identical to the six that we lost this past year.
Joe Fandino served in the Air Force during the Korean War where he sat on the "black box" during missions, meaning it was his job to blow up the plane if it got into real trouble. So he was a man who understood high-stakes situations. He also had a tremendous sense of humor. On his first Foreign Service posting to the Dominican Republic, he was riding with the Ambassador, who just happened to be his future father-in-law, and the rioters began rocking the car. And the Ambassador asked, "Joe, what do you intend to do if things get really bad?" And Joe didn’t miss a beat. He just leapt up and said, "I’ll jump out of the car, tear off my tie, and yell ‘down with the Americans!’" (Laughter.) Joe’s family and friends cherish those memories of his charm and his ability to cut through the noise. He died in 1972 while serving in Vietnam with USAID.
Frank Savage used to ride his Harley around Europe while wearing a Levi jacket with a big American flag sewn onto the back of it. He was proud of his country, and he wanted everybody to know it. Frank volunteered to serve in Vietnam with USAID, and when he wasn’t on duty, he helped defend a local orphanage from Viet Cong attacks. He was severely injured in the 1965 terrorist bombing of My Canh, the floating restaurant, but after a year, he volunteered to go back. And Frank felt he that had a job to finish, which is characteristic of every single one of these people. Sadly, he became critically ill from his original wounds and he died in Saigon in 1967.
So when you look at situations where danger is part of daily life, you actually develop a different perspective about life itself. I remember that from my own tour of duty in Vietnam with the Navy, working alongside men who became my brothers. And we all came back after losing a lot of friends with a saying: Every day is extra.
Anne, Chris, Sean, Ty, Glen, Ragaei, Joe, and Frank didn’t get enough extra days. And their loss still is real and it’s raw. As friends, we miss their joy in living each day to its fullest, whether that was biking across the United States or talking with locals in a Libyan souk or building a replica of the Starship Enterprise entirely out of Legos. They did what made them happy. These were special people.
As a Department, we miss their love of this country, their belief in our work. And for those of us blessed with extra days, let each one of us honor their memory and recommit ourselves to the mission that they loved so much.
I served on the Foreign Relations Committee for 29 years. And for 26 of them, I was privileged to sit near the Vice President of the United States, then the chairman, and even before that, before he was chairman. I don’t think the United States of America has ever had a vice president who knows as much about foreign policy, as much about this Department, or who cares about it as much as Vice President Joseph Biden. And I’m privileged to introduce him to you now, the Vice President of the United States. (Applause.)
Remarks at the American Foreign Service Association Memorial Plaque Ceremony
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Treaty Room
Washington, DC
May 3, 2013
SECRETARY KERRY: Susan, thank you very much for your stewardship and that of AFSA, and a welcome to all of the extended members of the State Department family. We are deeply appreciative for everybody taking part in this ceremony as we mourn and we commemorate and we celebrate our fallen brothers and sisters in service. I want to welcome CIA Director Brennan, USAID Administrator Shah, and of course, the Vice President of the United States. And I also want to thank all of the leadership of the State Department that are here with us today, obviously.
The most important thank you that we can all give – and we do – is to the family members. I know this is a mixed day. It’s a hard day. It’s a day that brings back pain, but it’s also a day, I hope, of comfort and of pride in knowing that the contributions and the memories of your loved ones are a permanent part of the State Department, as strong as the marble which will carry their names for eternity.
Today we add eight names to our wall of honor, eight people who dedicated their lives to service. And to a person, each one sought out the most difficult assignments. They understood the risks, and still they raised their hands and they said: "Send me."
Anne Smedinghoff was just 25 years old when she was killed in Zabul province, Afghanistan. I met her on my trip to Afghanistan, about a week before her death. And I remember her face – her permanent smile – cutting through the chaos and the crowd. That’s exactly where Anne wanted to be, right in the thick of it. And she was killed carrying out a mission of hope, bringing books to Afghan children, who had no connection to her, but who she believed deserved the chance to improve their lives.
Ambassador Chris Stevens, who was killed in the terrorist attack at our diplomatic post in Benghazi, on September 11, 2012. Through all of the tributes and the memorials after his death, we have learned so much about who Chris was as a person and about his skill as a diplomat. Everyone felt like he was a personal friend. And in fact, for those of us on the Foreign Relations Committee, he was, because he worked there at one time. One Peace Corps volunteer even visited the town in Morocco where Chris served almost 30 years earlier. And the volunteer met a young Moroccan, who not only remembered the first words Chris taught him in English, but he said that Chris inspired him to become an English teacher himself.
Sean Smith was killed in the same attack as Ambassador Stevens. He was serving literally as a one-man band to keep the Benghazi post running. He was Information Management Officer, Financial Management Officer, Management Officer in general. And Sean, throughout his career, went places that other people didn’t. He was the first to volunteer for Haiti after the earthquake, the first to volunteer for Japan after the Fukushima disaster. And so of course, he stepped up to serve in Benghazi. But with as much time and passion as he devoted to work, he also built a very rich network of friends. His love for the San Diego Chargers was legendary – as were his Super Bowl parties – and he was an accomplished online gamer. He leaves behind his wife, Heather, two young children. And I hope they know how much we are all diminished by Sean’s loss.
Today we also honor two true warriors – both trained Navy SEALs, both fierce patriots with loving hearts. Ty Woods and Glen Doherty died defending the U.S. annex in Benghazi. And thanks to their bravery and their sacrifice, 30 Americans escaped the attack. Thirty Americans are alive today because of Ty and Glen.
Ty Woods was a guy who was always looking for a challenge, always waiting for the phone to ring and for the next big mission. Even though he got a scholarship to wrestle for the University of Oregon, Ty joined the SEALs at 18 because he thought it was the biggest challenge that he could set for himself. He earned a Bronze Star and a Combat V, but he also had a healer’s touch, and he eventually became a registered nurse and a certified paramedic. Over the years, he become an instructor and a mentor to younger SEALs, even after he retired from the Navy and began defending our embassies. Ty’s close-knit group of friends still miss him deeply, as do we. And our thoughts are with his wife, Dorothy, and their infant son.
Glen Doherty protected our diplomatic posts around the globe from Iraq to Afghanistan, and finally, to Libya. According to his SEAL buddies, Glen was, without a doubt, the most liked man you could ever hope to meet. Whether he was skiing or surfing, running or rafting, Glen always wanted to be doing something and always wanted to be connecting with other people. He wanted to be the man in the arena, the "doer of deeds," as Teddy Roosevelt said. And Glen actually carried that famous speech with him for years as an inspiration. It spoke to the part of him that wanted to protect people and ultimately led him to sacrifice himself defending others. Glen was from my home state of Massachusetts, and I’ll never forget how the people of Boston came out to honor him, thousands of people standing watch in the street as his casket came by.
Ragaei Abdelfattah. He was killed during a suicide attack in Afghanistan last August while working for USAID. He was Egyptian by birth, but his friends and family called him the biggest flag-waving American they ever knew. He loved bad chain restaurants – (laughter) – bad romantic comedies, and dark chocolate, which is always good. Throughout his life, Ragaei demonstrated a deep passion for helping people develop their full potential. In fact, after finishing his first year in Afghanistan – his first tour that is – he promptly signed up for the second because, in his own words he said, "I have more work to do here. One year was not enough."
Today we also add the names of two Foreign Service officers that we lost more than 40 years ago. It was another time, another war, but their devotion to their work was identical to the six that we lost this past year.
Joe Fandino served in the Air Force during the Korean War where he sat on the "black box" during missions, meaning it was his job to blow up the plane if it got into real trouble. So he was a man who understood high-stakes situations. He also had a tremendous sense of humor. On his first Foreign Service posting to the Dominican Republic, he was riding with the Ambassador, who just happened to be his future father-in-law, and the rioters began rocking the car. And the Ambassador asked, "Joe, what do you intend to do if things get really bad?" And Joe didn’t miss a beat. He just leapt up and said, "I’ll jump out of the car, tear off my tie, and yell ‘down with the Americans!’" (Laughter.) Joe’s family and friends cherish those memories of his charm and his ability to cut through the noise. He died in 1972 while serving in Vietnam with USAID.
Frank Savage used to ride his Harley around Europe while wearing a Levi jacket with a big American flag sewn onto the back of it. He was proud of his country, and he wanted everybody to know it. Frank volunteered to serve in Vietnam with USAID, and when he wasn’t on duty, he helped defend a local orphanage from Viet Cong attacks. He was severely injured in the 1965 terrorist bombing of My Canh, the floating restaurant, but after a year, he volunteered to go back. And Frank felt he that had a job to finish, which is characteristic of every single one of these people. Sadly, he became critically ill from his original wounds and he died in Saigon in 1967.
So when you look at situations where danger is part of daily life, you actually develop a different perspective about life itself. I remember that from my own tour of duty in Vietnam with the Navy, working alongside men who became my brothers. And we all came back after losing a lot of friends with a saying: Every day is extra.
Anne, Chris, Sean, Ty, Glen, Ragaei, Joe, and Frank didn’t get enough extra days. And their loss still is real and it’s raw. As friends, we miss their joy in living each day to its fullest, whether that was biking across the United States or talking with locals in a Libyan souk or building a replica of the Starship Enterprise entirely out of Legos. They did what made them happy. These were special people.
As a Department, we miss their love of this country, their belief in our work. And for those of us blessed with extra days, let each one of us honor their memory and recommit ourselves to the mission that they loved so much.
I served on the Foreign Relations Committee for 29 years. And for 26 of them, I was privileged to sit near the Vice President of the United States, then the chairman, and even before that, before he was chairman. I don’t think the United States of America has ever had a vice president who knows as much about foreign policy, as much about this Department, or who cares about it as much as Vice President Joseph Biden. And I’m privileged to introduce him to you now, the Vice President of the United States. (Applause.)
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL'S CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY REGADING SYSRIAN CRISIS
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
The Syrian Humanitarian Crisis
Testimony
Anne C. Richard
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration
Committee on Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South and Central Asian Affairs, United States Senate
Washington, DC
March 19, 2013
Introduction
Good afternoon, Chairman Casey, Ranking Member Risch, and Members of this committee. Thank you for hosting this hearing today on the humanitarian crisis inside Syria. I am pleased to be able to appear before the Committee with my colleague, USAID Assistant Administrator Nancy Lindborg. Our offices work closely together to provide critical humanitarian aid to those affected by the violence in Syria.
The two year anniversary of the Syria uprising coincides with another dark milestone: over one million refugees have now fled across Syria's borders into neighboring countries. More troubling news is that half of that number arrived in the last two months. The United Nations (UN) estimates that over 2.5 million people are displaced inside Syria and many more have been affected by the upheaval and fighting.
I would like to share with you the approach my bureau in the State Department is taking to address the crisis and how our efforts and USAID's work are complementary and mutually reinforcing... I shall first briefly comment on how the refugee crisis is affecting the neighboring countries, discuss the challenges we face in delivering humanitarian assistance to those in need throughout the region, and provide some specifics on the priorities of the Bureau for Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) and our diplomatic outreach to other countries.
Refugees in Neighboring Countries
Countries bordering Syria are approaching a dangerous saturation point with refugees. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, in January of this year, 2,000 people fled Syria every day. In February, the number climbed to 5,000 a day; and in March, we've seen 8,000 people a day crossing from Syria into Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq and Turkey. In addition to serving as evidence that life inside Syria has become extremely dangerous for many, the number and the rate are overwhelming the capacity of humanitarian aid organizations to meet the needs of these victims and are sorely testing the limits of host countries' abilities to provide safe shelter. If international borders are closed to Syrians seeking refuge, the awful tally of human destruction will only increase.
Jordan: There are approximately 350,000 refugees in Jordan according to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Approximately 70 percent of refugees in Jordan live outside of the refugee camps in cities and towns. Many have been taken in or helped by relatives, friends or even strangers. Only 30 percent live in the Za’atri refugee camp in northern Jordan. The Government of Jordan set up Za’atri in response to the large numbers of refugees crossing the border, and it has moved to set up another camp, as yet uninhabited, and initiated plans for another. Za’atri camp has been plagued by security problems and we have been in active conversations with the UNHCR and the Government of Jordan to improve the safety of refugees there as well as humanitarian workers.
Jordan is allowing refugees to cross its borders but is finding that its resources are stretched to help massive flows of refugees while providing services to its own citizens at the same time. We should note that we are concerned by reports that some Palestinian and Iraqi refugees have been turned around at the border and we have asked the Government of Jordan to let them cross. We’ve thanked the Government of Jordan for its ongoing assistance to the refugee population, and asked them to keep their borders open to all refugees. Knowing the significant economic cost associated with hosting hundreds of thousands of refugees, the U.S. government is providing Jordan with budget support.
Lebanon: Lebanon is hosting over 354,000 Syrian refugees. Lebanon has also taken in 32,000 Palestinian refugees who have fled the violence in Syria. Syrian refugees in Lebanon live in host communities and are not in camps, which allows for greater freedom of movement, greater possibilities for self-sufficiency and a semblance of a normal life. At the same time, the presence of so many refugees in a country of 4 million people taxes Lebanon’s infrastructure and resources and has increased tensions within the refugee-hosting communities. Hizballah's presence in southern Lebanon creates a challenge for UN agencies and non-governmental organizations (NGO) in providing aid, while its involvement in the Government of Lebanon complicates U.S. efforts to provide help during this crisis. Despite these strains, the Government of Lebanon continues to keep its borders open, though its leaders have warned that Lebanon has reached its saturation point and requires significant international assistance in order to support the refugees.
Iraq: Over 110,000 Syrian refugees have fled to Iraq, and most are now in Kurdistan. Domiz camp in Kurdistan accommodates approximately 54,000 persons, and two camps in Anbar province at Al-Qaim accommodate over 7,500 persons. In addition to those living in camps, there are many who live in villages and communities. In Kurdistan, Syrians are permitted to live and work in the community once they have registered.
Since October 21, 2012, the Government of Iraq has kept the Al-Qaim border crossing with Syria closed, except for medical emergencies and some family reunification cases. Local authorities and the Iraqi Ministry of Migration and Displacement state that the border is closed for security reasons. Syrian refugees in Anbar prior to the closure of the border are restricted to the camps, although some have family members nearby. The main reasons for return to Syria continue to be lack of freedom of movement out of the camp and lack of a way to earn a living. UNHCR continues to provide support to those expressing interest in returning to Syria but is not encouraging repatriation because conditions are not conducive to a safe return.
Turkey: Since the beginning of the crisis, the Government of Turkey has supported most of the humanitarian needs of the refugees from Syria who have crossed its border. In addition to 186,200 refugees registered in 17 camps set up by the government and 71,000 registered (or soon to be registered) outside of camps, the Government of Turkey estimates that an additional 100,000 unregistered refugees live in urban areas. While the government has previously focused its support for Syrian refugees on the camp-based populations, it is now beginning to address the needs of the out-of-camp Syrians by setting up centers where urban refugees can register for IDs and free health services. Turkey has a strong economy but is experiencing a decline in its once vibrant cross-border trade with Syria.
Challenges in Crisis Response
The challenges before us are many. USAID Nancy Lindborg’s testimony discusses access, security and funding issues. Therefore, I will focus on: (1) the need to work with host governments to ensure that they keep their borders open to refugees and have what they need to help the refugees; (2) specific contributions made by the PRM bureau; and (3) ensuring that other countries are contributing to humanitarian aspects of the crisis so that the UN and other humanitarian agencies have more of the support they need to respond.
Working with Host Governments
We recognize the huge strain that the influx of refugees is currently placing on countries that neighbor Syria. In both Jordan and Lebanon, government leaders are concerned about their capacity to absorb so many refugees. Iraq has expressed concerns that al-Qaeda and its Syria affiliate, al-Nusrah Front, are sending fighters and weapons across the border. Turkey, for the most part, has maintained an open border policy for all refugees, although each day it limits the number of refugees allowed to cross at border crossings with high traffic. It is essential that neighboring countries continue to keep their borders open for those refugees fleeing violence in Syria. In every meeting with officials from these countries, we thank them for allowing refugees to cross and discuss ways to help them uphold humanitarian principles while safeguarding their own security so that they are protected from a spillover of violence.
It is important that short-term relief programs link to longer-term development aid as part of overall U.S. government aid to the region. This is particularly the case in Jordan and Lebanon. We must leverage other aid and investments and incorporate refugees into the fabric of these countries, in order to minimize the costs that hosting refugees places on communities. This is an important area in which the State Department and USAID are working together.
Department of State Response
The Department and USAID lead the U.S. government’s humanitarian response and we work closely together in response to the crisis. Nancy Lindborg and I have traveled together to the region twice and were also recently joined by Ambassador Ford in Turkey, prior to our participation at the Kuwait Donors Conference in January. Our communications teams are taking advantage of maximizing every opportunity to get the message out to domestic and international audiences about the dimensions of the crisis and to highlight our government’s leadership role in responding.
That said, allow me to outline the role the State Department has in helping to get as much humanitarian aid into Syria as possible through partners. Over several decades, PRM has developed a privileged relationship with the humanitarian agencies of the United Nations, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and non-governmental organizations. These agencies are a key part of the international humanitarian system that is governed by humanitarian principles. They bring technical expertise and operational capacity to respond to this large-scale crisis. Of the nearly $385 million in humanitarian assistance that USAID and the State Department are providing in response to the Syria crisis, the State Department’s contributions total nearly $185 million. Our contributions provide life-saving emergency assistance to meet basic humanitarian needs, such as shelter, water, sanitation, and health both inside Syria and in host countries.
The delivery of assistance is often undertaken at great personal risk to those distributing the aid. For example, in the past couple of months, two UNHCR convoys and one UN interagency convoy have delivered aid into north-west Syria, where thousands of internally displaced people are in acute need of humanitarian help. The operations were carried out in collaboration with the Syrian Arab Red Crescent and the local community. Once the convoys moved across battle-lines into areas controlled by the opposition, the missions were facilitated by the Syrian Opposition Coalition. Such operations are dangerous and difficult, which underscores the need for unhindered and safe access for those providing humanitarian assistance inside Syria. We will continue to encourage the UN to do more such cross-line assistance deliveries, counting on the Syrian Opposition Coalition to help coordinate and negotiate safe access. While these convoys are good, much more is needed to ensure supplies consistently and safely reach people in need.
Of course, people in need are not concentrated in one area and instead can be found on both sides of shifting battle-lines. Humanitarian organizations provide aid in a neutral and impartial manner. The United Nations is seeking to get access to all communities in need on a regular basis. It is unacceptable and a violation of humanitarian principles for the Syrian regime to deny this access.
I should also mention the plight of the 525,000 Palestinian refugees who were living in Syria prior to the start of the conflict. They, too, have been caught up in the violence in Syria. Fighting has engulfed many Palestinian refugee camps and neighborhoods, including in Yarmouk, causing over half of Syria’s Palestinian population to be displaced. For the most part, the Palestinian population has kept away from taking sides in the conflict. Those refugees who remain in camps are the poorest and most vulnerable. Some Palestinians have fled Syria, but most remain inside the country, having heard that they will be turned away at the borders with neighboring countries. The U.S. is the largest bilateral donor to the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), the UN agency responsible for assisting Palestinian refugees. There are also approximately 63,000 Iraqi refugees inside Syria. In recent months, many other Iraqis who were living as refugees in Syria have chosen to return to Iraq or flee for a second time to other countries.
Contributions of Other Countries
With no end in sight, we are facing a resource crisis. The UN's Regional Response Plan to assist up to 1.1 million Syrian refugees in the region has thus far received only 21 percent of the funds it needs to operate for the first half of 2013 and, as of mid-March, refugee arrivals have already nearly reached June 2013 planning figures. Despite our own budget constraints, the United States continues to make every effort to continue to provide funding to meet the increasing needs. However, it is vital that other donors quickly honor the pledges they have made and provide the cash that agencies need to keep life-saving operations going.
Even if the Asad regime falls soon, displacement and the need for humanitarian aid will continue. This is because of the widespread destruction of Syria's infrastructure and predicted flows of refugees that would continue to cross borders – likely in both directions. If refugees are not able to return for years, host countries will need to continue to help host Syrian children in schools, and help families with medical facilities, and provide other public services.
Using diplomatic channels, we are using every opportunity to ask other donors to follow through on the pledges they made at the Kuwait Donors Conference in January in order to raise the promised $1.5 billion. The Secretary and other Department principals have reached out to other governments to ask them to do more for the Syrian people, including Syrian refugees. Funding is urgently needed if UN agencies and others are able to continue to operate.
Coordination of the international humanitarian response is complex and must occur on multiple levels. The United States participates in meetings in Geneva of the Syria Humanitarian Forum that bring together senior officials from key donor governments, countries affected by the crisis and UN leaders to discuss the humanitarian aspects of the crisis, and to coordinate our collective response. We also actively participate in UN coordination meetings in the field. In addition, we are deepening our coordination with the Syrian Opposition Coalition’s Assistance Coordination Unit. We have also encouraged UN agencies and other partners to do the same, and are pleased with the initial results.
In conclusion Mr. Chairman, I would like to say that my bureau’s primary concerns are providing protection to and aiding those who have fled the violence. The State Department’s overall goal, of course, is a return of peace and stability to Syria and to one day see the refugees return home.
I am grateful for the generosity of Congress and the American people who make our assistance possible, and for the excellent collaboration with the State Department’s Near East and European bureaus, and USAID colleagues. Thank you once again for the opportunity to highlight PRM’s role and some of our concerns regarding the Syrian humanitarian crisis. I would be happy to answer any of your questions.
The Syrian Humanitarian Crisis
Testimony
Anne C. Richard
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration
Committee on Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Near Eastern and South and Central Asian Affairs, United States Senate
Washington, DC
March 19, 2013
Introduction
Good afternoon, Chairman Casey, Ranking Member Risch, and Members of this committee. Thank you for hosting this hearing today on the humanitarian crisis inside Syria. I am pleased to be able to appear before the Committee with my colleague, USAID Assistant Administrator Nancy Lindborg. Our offices work closely together to provide critical humanitarian aid to those affected by the violence in Syria.
The two year anniversary of the Syria uprising coincides with another dark milestone: over one million refugees have now fled across Syria's borders into neighboring countries. More troubling news is that half of that number arrived in the last two months. The United Nations (UN) estimates that over 2.5 million people are displaced inside Syria and many more have been affected by the upheaval and fighting.
I would like to share with you the approach my bureau in the State Department is taking to address the crisis and how our efforts and USAID's work are complementary and mutually reinforcing... I shall first briefly comment on how the refugee crisis is affecting the neighboring countries, discuss the challenges we face in delivering humanitarian assistance to those in need throughout the region, and provide some specifics on the priorities of the Bureau for Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM) and our diplomatic outreach to other countries.
Refugees in Neighboring Countries
Countries bordering Syria are approaching a dangerous saturation point with refugees. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, in January of this year, 2,000 people fled Syria every day. In February, the number climbed to 5,000 a day; and in March, we've seen 8,000 people a day crossing from Syria into Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq and Turkey. In addition to serving as evidence that life inside Syria has become extremely dangerous for many, the number and the rate are overwhelming the capacity of humanitarian aid organizations to meet the needs of these victims and are sorely testing the limits of host countries' abilities to provide safe shelter. If international borders are closed to Syrians seeking refuge, the awful tally of human destruction will only increase.
Jordan: There are approximately 350,000 refugees in Jordan according to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Approximately 70 percent of refugees in Jordan live outside of the refugee camps in cities and towns. Many have been taken in or helped by relatives, friends or even strangers. Only 30 percent live in the Za’atri refugee camp in northern Jordan. The Government of Jordan set up Za’atri in response to the large numbers of refugees crossing the border, and it has moved to set up another camp, as yet uninhabited, and initiated plans for another. Za’atri camp has been plagued by security problems and we have been in active conversations with the UNHCR and the Government of Jordan to improve the safety of refugees there as well as humanitarian workers.
Jordan is allowing refugees to cross its borders but is finding that its resources are stretched to help massive flows of refugees while providing services to its own citizens at the same time. We should note that we are concerned by reports that some Palestinian and Iraqi refugees have been turned around at the border and we have asked the Government of Jordan to let them cross. We’ve thanked the Government of Jordan for its ongoing assistance to the refugee population, and asked them to keep their borders open to all refugees. Knowing the significant economic cost associated with hosting hundreds of thousands of refugees, the U.S. government is providing Jordan with budget support.
Lebanon: Lebanon is hosting over 354,000 Syrian refugees. Lebanon has also taken in 32,000 Palestinian refugees who have fled the violence in Syria. Syrian refugees in Lebanon live in host communities and are not in camps, which allows for greater freedom of movement, greater possibilities for self-sufficiency and a semblance of a normal life. At the same time, the presence of so many refugees in a country of 4 million people taxes Lebanon’s infrastructure and resources and has increased tensions within the refugee-hosting communities. Hizballah's presence in southern Lebanon creates a challenge for UN agencies and non-governmental organizations (NGO) in providing aid, while its involvement in the Government of Lebanon complicates U.S. efforts to provide help during this crisis. Despite these strains, the Government of Lebanon continues to keep its borders open, though its leaders have warned that Lebanon has reached its saturation point and requires significant international assistance in order to support the refugees.
Iraq: Over 110,000 Syrian refugees have fled to Iraq, and most are now in Kurdistan. Domiz camp in Kurdistan accommodates approximately 54,000 persons, and two camps in Anbar province at Al-Qaim accommodate over 7,500 persons. In addition to those living in camps, there are many who live in villages and communities. In Kurdistan, Syrians are permitted to live and work in the community once they have registered.
Since October 21, 2012, the Government of Iraq has kept the Al-Qaim border crossing with Syria closed, except for medical emergencies and some family reunification cases. Local authorities and the Iraqi Ministry of Migration and Displacement state that the border is closed for security reasons. Syrian refugees in Anbar prior to the closure of the border are restricted to the camps, although some have family members nearby. The main reasons for return to Syria continue to be lack of freedom of movement out of the camp and lack of a way to earn a living. UNHCR continues to provide support to those expressing interest in returning to Syria but is not encouraging repatriation because conditions are not conducive to a safe return.
Turkey: Since the beginning of the crisis, the Government of Turkey has supported most of the humanitarian needs of the refugees from Syria who have crossed its border. In addition to 186,200 refugees registered in 17 camps set up by the government and 71,000 registered (or soon to be registered) outside of camps, the Government of Turkey estimates that an additional 100,000 unregistered refugees live in urban areas. While the government has previously focused its support for Syrian refugees on the camp-based populations, it is now beginning to address the needs of the out-of-camp Syrians by setting up centers where urban refugees can register for IDs and free health services. Turkey has a strong economy but is experiencing a decline in its once vibrant cross-border trade with Syria.
Challenges in Crisis Response
The challenges before us are many. USAID Nancy Lindborg’s testimony discusses access, security and funding issues. Therefore, I will focus on: (1) the need to work with host governments to ensure that they keep their borders open to refugees and have what they need to help the refugees; (2) specific contributions made by the PRM bureau; and (3) ensuring that other countries are contributing to humanitarian aspects of the crisis so that the UN and other humanitarian agencies have more of the support they need to respond.
Working with Host Governments
We recognize the huge strain that the influx of refugees is currently placing on countries that neighbor Syria. In both Jordan and Lebanon, government leaders are concerned about their capacity to absorb so many refugees. Iraq has expressed concerns that al-Qaeda and its Syria affiliate, al-Nusrah Front, are sending fighters and weapons across the border. Turkey, for the most part, has maintained an open border policy for all refugees, although each day it limits the number of refugees allowed to cross at border crossings with high traffic. It is essential that neighboring countries continue to keep their borders open for those refugees fleeing violence in Syria. In every meeting with officials from these countries, we thank them for allowing refugees to cross and discuss ways to help them uphold humanitarian principles while safeguarding their own security so that they are protected from a spillover of violence.
It is important that short-term relief programs link to longer-term development aid as part of overall U.S. government aid to the region. This is particularly the case in Jordan and Lebanon. We must leverage other aid and investments and incorporate refugees into the fabric of these countries, in order to minimize the costs that hosting refugees places on communities. This is an important area in which the State Department and USAID are working together.
Department of State Response
The Department and USAID lead the U.S. government’s humanitarian response and we work closely together in response to the crisis. Nancy Lindborg and I have traveled together to the region twice and were also recently joined by Ambassador Ford in Turkey, prior to our participation at the Kuwait Donors Conference in January. Our communications teams are taking advantage of maximizing every opportunity to get the message out to domestic and international audiences about the dimensions of the crisis and to highlight our government’s leadership role in responding.
That said, allow me to outline the role the State Department has in helping to get as much humanitarian aid into Syria as possible through partners. Over several decades, PRM has developed a privileged relationship with the humanitarian agencies of the United Nations, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and non-governmental organizations. These agencies are a key part of the international humanitarian system that is governed by humanitarian principles. They bring technical expertise and operational capacity to respond to this large-scale crisis. Of the nearly $385 million in humanitarian assistance that USAID and the State Department are providing in response to the Syria crisis, the State Department’s contributions total nearly $185 million. Our contributions provide life-saving emergency assistance to meet basic humanitarian needs, such as shelter, water, sanitation, and health both inside Syria and in host countries.
The delivery of assistance is often undertaken at great personal risk to those distributing the aid. For example, in the past couple of months, two UNHCR convoys and one UN interagency convoy have delivered aid into north-west Syria, where thousands of internally displaced people are in acute need of humanitarian help. The operations were carried out in collaboration with the Syrian Arab Red Crescent and the local community. Once the convoys moved across battle-lines into areas controlled by the opposition, the missions were facilitated by the Syrian Opposition Coalition. Such operations are dangerous and difficult, which underscores the need for unhindered and safe access for those providing humanitarian assistance inside Syria. We will continue to encourage the UN to do more such cross-line assistance deliveries, counting on the Syrian Opposition Coalition to help coordinate and negotiate safe access. While these convoys are good, much more is needed to ensure supplies consistently and safely reach people in need.
Of course, people in need are not concentrated in one area and instead can be found on both sides of shifting battle-lines. Humanitarian organizations provide aid in a neutral and impartial manner. The United Nations is seeking to get access to all communities in need on a regular basis. It is unacceptable and a violation of humanitarian principles for the Syrian regime to deny this access.
I should also mention the plight of the 525,000 Palestinian refugees who were living in Syria prior to the start of the conflict. They, too, have been caught up in the violence in Syria. Fighting has engulfed many Palestinian refugee camps and neighborhoods, including in Yarmouk, causing over half of Syria’s Palestinian population to be displaced. For the most part, the Palestinian population has kept away from taking sides in the conflict. Those refugees who remain in camps are the poorest and most vulnerable. Some Palestinians have fled Syria, but most remain inside the country, having heard that they will be turned away at the borders with neighboring countries. The U.S. is the largest bilateral donor to the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), the UN agency responsible for assisting Palestinian refugees. There are also approximately 63,000 Iraqi refugees inside Syria. In recent months, many other Iraqis who were living as refugees in Syria have chosen to return to Iraq or flee for a second time to other countries.
Contributions of Other Countries
With no end in sight, we are facing a resource crisis. The UN's Regional Response Plan to assist up to 1.1 million Syrian refugees in the region has thus far received only 21 percent of the funds it needs to operate for the first half of 2013 and, as of mid-March, refugee arrivals have already nearly reached June 2013 planning figures. Despite our own budget constraints, the United States continues to make every effort to continue to provide funding to meet the increasing needs. However, it is vital that other donors quickly honor the pledges they have made and provide the cash that agencies need to keep life-saving operations going.
Even if the Asad regime falls soon, displacement and the need for humanitarian aid will continue. This is because of the widespread destruction of Syria's infrastructure and predicted flows of refugees that would continue to cross borders – likely in both directions. If refugees are not able to return for years, host countries will need to continue to help host Syrian children in schools, and help families with medical facilities, and provide other public services.
Using diplomatic channels, we are using every opportunity to ask other donors to follow through on the pledges they made at the Kuwait Donors Conference in January in order to raise the promised $1.5 billion. The Secretary and other Department principals have reached out to other governments to ask them to do more for the Syrian people, including Syrian refugees. Funding is urgently needed if UN agencies and others are able to continue to operate.
Coordination of the international humanitarian response is complex and must occur on multiple levels. The United States participates in meetings in Geneva of the Syria Humanitarian Forum that bring together senior officials from key donor governments, countries affected by the crisis and UN leaders to discuss the humanitarian aspects of the crisis, and to coordinate our collective response. We also actively participate in UN coordination meetings in the field. In addition, we are deepening our coordination with the Syrian Opposition Coalition’s Assistance Coordination Unit. We have also encouraged UN agencies and other partners to do the same, and are pleased with the initial results.
In conclusion Mr. Chairman, I would like to say that my bureau’s primary concerns are providing protection to and aiding those who have fled the violence. The State Department’s overall goal, of course, is a return of peace and stability to Syria and to one day see the refugees return home.
I am grateful for the generosity of Congress and the American people who make our assistance possible, and for the excellent collaboration with the State Department’s Near East and European bureaus, and USAID colleagues. Thank you once again for the opportunity to highlight PRM’s role and some of our concerns regarding the Syrian humanitarian crisis. I would be happy to answer any of your questions.
Tuesday, June 5, 2012
U.S. AND NIGERIAN FUTURE RELATIONSHIPS
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks at U.S.-Nigeria Binational Commission "A Rising Partnership"
Remarks William J. Burns
Deputy Secretary Washington, DC
June 4, 2012
Thank you, George, for that kind introduction. We appreciate USIP co-hosting this event with us in your beautiful building. I want to extend a warm welcome to Foreign Minister Ashiru, to the Nigerian state governors, Cabinet officials, and National Assembly members who have made the long journey to join us today.
As Ambassador Moose has already mentioned, we meet today against a sad and tragic backdrop. Let me extend once again our deepest and sincerest sympathies to the families and friends of those who lost their lives in the terrible plane crash in Lagos yesterday.
Today’s gathering is both unique and historic, and I am honored to be a part of it. Never before have we brought such a diverse and senior group of Nigerian and U.S. officials together under the auspices of the Binational Commission. It is also a sign of our wide-ranging ambitions that we welcome such a diverse and distinguished group from the U.S. government, including representatives from the Department of Defense, USAID, Department of Energy and elsewhere.
The United States approaches this partnership from the fundamental premise that Nigeria is one of the most strategically important nations in sub-Saharan Africa. One out of every four Africans is Nigerian. Nigeria is Africa’s largest oil producer, home to its largest Muslim population, and its largest contributor of peacekeepers. Nigeria is also our largest trading partner in sub-Saharan Africa, with $35 billion in annual trade between our countries. A leader in the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), Nigeria has led peacemaking efforts from Liberia to Cote d’Ivoire to Guinea-Bissau. On the UN Security Council, Nigeria has lent its voice to causes of conscience in Libya, Syria, and around the world.
We are invested in your success because we recognize Nigeria as a strategic center of gravity in its own right. But we also recognize a broader truth: across the continent, communities are struggling to find productive paths for growing youth populations; to defeat corruption; to turn a corner in improving governance, infrastructure and public health; to hold together different faiths and regions and to take on the drivers of extremism. In other words, Nigeria’s challenges are Africa’s challenges. And if we can help Nigeria chart a secure, prosperous and democratic course, then Nigeria’s successes can be Africa’s as well -- successes we can measure in improved lives, livelihoods, and leadership in the region.
That is what Secretary Clinton envisioned when she and then-Secretary to the Government of the Federation Mahmud Yayale Ahmed signed the framework for the Bi-National Commission in 2010. Two years later, we can proudly say that the BNC has grown into a forum for frank conversations to keep our bilateral relations on track; into a convening point for the many committed actors in both our governments; and into an expansive dialogue to turn common cause into creative thinking and coordinated action. And, as the four working groups that will meet over these two days reflect, our partnership is increasingly rooted in shared values, delivering results, and ready to take on the challenges ahead.
First, our working group on Good Governance, Transparency and Integrity (GTI) can already point to important successes. Last April’s elections were Nigeria’s most successful and credible since its return to democracy in 1999. This is due in no small part to our sustained engagement through the GTI working group and our shared commitment to a transparent and consultative preparation for the elections. The United States is proud to have supported the efforts of the Nigerian government and the Independent National Electoral Commission through a $31.3 million election assistance program in collaboration with the UK.
Today, we broaden our focus from elections to what comes after: in particular, transparent, effective governance. An old American newspaperman one said that “there is not a crime, there is not a dodge, there is not a trick, there is not a swindle, there is not a vice which does not live by secrecy.” Today we will discuss how freedom of information, accountability, and transparency can empower citizens to take on the difficult and deep-rooted challenge of corruption.We look forward to hearing your views on a challenge that is not unique to Nigeria and is a huge impediment to development and prosperity across the world.
Energy and investment -- the subject of our second working group -- is also critical to Nigeria’s economic present and future. Our economic ties are strong: the United States accounts for some $5.4 billion in foreign direct investment in Nigeria annually, and Nigeria is the fifth largest foreign supplier of oil to the United States. Nigeria has taken significant steps on its “roadmap” to rehabilitate its energy infrastructure. Now we must work together to sustain progress and match it with increased international investment in Nigeria’s energy sector. In February, we sent a high-level U.S. energy trade mission, and several of the American participants have already made follow-up business trips to Nigeria -- laying the groundwork for future partnerships and growth. Today, we will discuss how we can advance these reform efforts that will increase private investment in power sector infrastructure, promote the use of clean energy sources and help Nigeria translate its tremendous natural riches into lasting and widespread prosperity for all of its people.
While oil currently provides more revenues, nearly seventy percent of Nigeria’s population is engaged in agriculture, which why the third working group, focused on Food Security and Agriculture, is so important. The United States is working to strengthen Nigeria’s agricultural sector through encouraging policy reforms, technology transfer, and strong private sector involvement. We are committed to help Nigeria meet its ambitious plans to invest in and improve its ability to feed its people and become a major agricultural exporter. We have done this through the integration of technical assistance programs like USAID’s “MARKETS” program which aims to add over $100 million in support through a twelve-year value chain-focused program to increase farmer yields through improved technology. We are also encouraging private investment, to help seal the promise of growth and opportunity for all Nigerians. For example, a recent agreement between Taraba State and Dominion Rice Integrated Farms will reduce Nigeria’s rice imports by 15% and create daily work for 15,000 Nigerians.
As we all know, economic prosperity alone does not create successful societies. Security is a prerequisite for successful development, for a successful Nigeria. We are all disturbed by the repeated scenes of violence in various parts of Nigeria that threaten to undercut the gains Nigeria has made. This is why discussions in the fourth working group -- on Regional Security Cooperation – are so critically important. Violent, extremist militants like those associated with Boko Haram offer no practical program to improve the lives of Nigerians. They depend on resentment and neglect. It is incumbent on the government of Nigeria – both at the Federal and state level – to provide not only basic services but a compelling narrative of constructive civic engagement that points Nigeria toward a better future.
To that end, we are ready to explore a potential partnership with the Nigerian army to build its civil affairs capacity which, in turn, will help Nigeria build trust between citizens and the security services charged with protecting them. In addition, building on our fruitful discussions last June, we are committed to helping Nigeria develop a comprehensive counterterrorism strategy -- one that includes citizen engagement and dialogue -- alongside more traditional security measures. The United States is determined to help Nigeria translate its comprehensive strategy into concrete action. We are also committed to help Nigeria coordinate its security responses through an intelligence fusion center.
As we address the complex issues that the BNC covers, we should expect no “silver bullet”, and no quick fixes. Meaningful reform is a difficult task for any government at any level. But you are not starting from scratch. A strong team of reformers and highly qualified ministers, many of whom are with us today, have already undertaken substantial reforms and mutually reinforcing initiatives.
To highlight just a few of your many success stories: Finance Minister Ngozi has pushed a strong reformist agenda, with support from Central Bank Governor Sanusi, Trade and Investment Minister Aganga, and Minister of Power Nnaji – all of whom have taken steps to promote sustained economic development, job creation, increased agricultural productivity and more foreign investment. Governors from states such as Kano, Rivers, Borno, and Taraba, who are with us today, have demonstrated that accountable and responsible leadership can achieve meaningful results.
When government commits itself to progress and meaningful reforms, the Nigerian people have shown time and time again that they are willing to rise to the occasion. When they see that the work of government at the national, state, and local levels is positively impacting their lives, I believe they will stand with those who have stood with them. And Nigeria will move forward.
In every region of the world, from Southeast Asia to South America, nations are solving the challenges of economic development and clean, accountable governance. They are spreading prosperity to once neglected regions and groups. They are bridging old divides between religions, ethnicities and tribes within their borders. These new nations are stepping forward, propelled by a rising middle class, to claim their place as economic powers and regional leaders in the century ahead.
Nigeria can and should be among them. When Secretary Clinton visited Nigeria in 2009, she said: “The capacity for good governance exists in Africa and it exists in Nigeria. We have seen it in many places, and we have seen it in Nigeria.”
The challenges before us are great, but so too is the promise of the Nigerian people. So let us make the most of this moment and build on the strong foundations of our partnership to secure a better future -- for Nigeria, for America, for Africa and for the world.
Thank you.
Saturday, June 2, 2012
USAID MEETING AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks to the USAID Meeting on "From Policy to Action: Making Progress toward Disability Inclusion"
Maria Otero
Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights
Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights
Washington, DC
May 30, 2012
As Prepared for Delivery
Thank you. It’s wonderful to be here today with all of you representing civil society, as well as colleagues from across the U.S. government. I am, as you’ve heard, Maria Otero, and I have the pleasure of representing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton today.
For Secretary Clinton, and indeed for the Obama Administration, the word “inclusion” has taken on a new focus in our foreign policy. From women’s rights, to LGBT rights, to the rights of individuals with disabilities, we recognize one vital truth: we cannot fully honor our commitment to human rights so long as any one group is left in the shadows of society. As Secretary Clinton has said, “All people everywhere have the right to live productive lives, free from discrimination and with equal access to opportunities.”
Over the past three and a half years, we have sought to advance that vision in every part of the world, including here in the United States, which is why President Obama has asked the Senate to join 111 other countries and the EU by ratifying the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
In the United States we have worked hard to achieve equality of opportunity and the full participation of our citizens; and, though we are far from perfect, we do have important lessons and best practices to share with partner governments around the world.
In my three years as Under Secretary, I have learned that the State Department’s greatest value is our network of embassies and diplomats around the world. We have one of the world’s largest networks of professionals, all of whom are in their positions to promote American values.
Whether we are engaging in a bilateral conversation with a partner government or contributing new language for a resolution in the Human Rights Council, our diplomats are poised to build political will for the promotion of human rights for all individuals, including those with disabilities. I want to take a moment to recognize the work of Special Advisor Judy Heumann in helping direct those efforts around the world.
Let me give you a couple of examples that show how we are making disability inclusion part and parcel of our understanding of the full realization of human rights.
Through our embassies, we are talking to government officials about their laws and regulations and how they can better protect against discrimination towards persons with disabilities. We are engaging with the multinational companies and local enterprises to increase inclusive employment opportunities for youth and adults with disabilities. And we are working with civil society advocates like those of you in this room, to ensure that we are up to date and informed on where the needs are greatest.
We have also set visitor programs so that professionals and students can learn from the United States, and vice versa—so we can learn from them.
I know you addressed in an earlier panel the power of using Sports to promote the rights and abilities of persons with disabilities, and I think it is wonderful that the 2012 Hours Against Hate campaign, started by our Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism and Special Representative to Muslim Communities, is officially affiliated with the Olympic and Paralympic Games.
Also here in Washington, we are making sure our grant guidelines and procedures are inclusive of persons with disabilities as well as members of other vulnerable and minority groups. For example, the Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor will now assign weighted criteria to evaluate how proposals support and empower persons with disabilities, as well as women, members of racial, ethnic and religious minorities, and LGBT people.
No matter what tactic we are taking—whether educating our diplomats about disability inclusion or bringing leaders like yourselves together—it all depends on a robust partnership with civil society. We all know that inclusion is not just a goal, but a process as well. And it’s thanks to all of you that we are making great strides in both.
So, thank you for being here and for all that you do. We look forward to the progress that lies ahead.
Thank you. It’s wonderful to be here today with all of you representing civil society, as well as colleagues from across the U.S. government. I am, as you’ve heard, Maria Otero, and I have the pleasure of representing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton today.
For Secretary Clinton, and indeed for the Obama Administration, the word “inclusion” has taken on a new focus in our foreign policy. From women’s rights, to LGBT rights, to the rights of individuals with disabilities, we recognize one vital truth: we cannot fully honor our commitment to human rights so long as any one group is left in the shadows of society. As Secretary Clinton has said, “All people everywhere have the right to live productive lives, free from discrimination and with equal access to opportunities.”
Over the past three and a half years, we have sought to advance that vision in every part of the world, including here in the United States, which is why President Obama has asked the Senate to join 111 other countries and the EU by ratifying the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
In the United States we have worked hard to achieve equality of opportunity and the full participation of our citizens; and, though we are far from perfect, we do have important lessons and best practices to share with partner governments around the world.
In my three years as Under Secretary, I have learned that the State Department’s greatest value is our network of embassies and diplomats around the world. We have one of the world’s largest networks of professionals, all of whom are in their positions to promote American values.
Whether we are engaging in a bilateral conversation with a partner government or contributing new language for a resolution in the Human Rights Council, our diplomats are poised to build political will for the promotion of human rights for all individuals, including those with disabilities. I want to take a moment to recognize the work of Special Advisor Judy Heumann in helping direct those efforts around the world.
Let me give you a couple of examples that show how we are making disability inclusion part and parcel of our understanding of the full realization of human rights.
Through our embassies, we are talking to government officials about their laws and regulations and how they can better protect against discrimination towards persons with disabilities. We are engaging with the multinational companies and local enterprises to increase inclusive employment opportunities for youth and adults with disabilities. And we are working with civil society advocates like those of you in this room, to ensure that we are up to date and informed on where the needs are greatest.
We have also set visitor programs so that professionals and students can learn from the United States, and vice versa—so we can learn from them.
I know you addressed in an earlier panel the power of using Sports to promote the rights and abilities of persons with disabilities, and I think it is wonderful that the 2012 Hours Against Hate campaign, started by our Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism and Special Representative to Muslim Communities, is officially affiliated with the Olympic and Paralympic Games.
Also here in Washington, we are making sure our grant guidelines and procedures are inclusive of persons with disabilities as well as members of other vulnerable and minority groups. For example, the Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor will now assign weighted criteria to evaluate how proposals support and empower persons with disabilities, as well as women, members of racial, ethnic and religious minorities, and LGBT people.
No matter what tactic we are taking—whether educating our diplomats about disability inclusion or bringing leaders like yourselves together—it all depends on a robust partnership with civil society. We all know that inclusion is not just a goal, but a process as well. And it’s thanks to all of you that we are making great strides in both.
So, thank you for being here and for all that you do. We look forward to the progress that lies ahead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)