UN AMBASSADOR POWER'S REMARKS ON YOUTH AND COUNTERING VIOLENT EXTREMISM

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
U.S. Mission to the United Nations: Remarks at a UN Security Council Debate on the Maintenance of International Peace and Security: the Role of Youth in Countering Violent Extremism and Promoting Peace
04/23/2015 12:27 PM EDT
Samantha Power
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
New York, NY
April 23, 2015
AS DELIVERED

Thank you, your Royal Highness Crown Prince, for joining the Council to chair this meeting, your presence here is yet another testament to Jordan’s deep commitment to combatting violent extremism among youth and people of all ages.

This Monday, April 20th, six young Somali-American men – ages 19 to 21 – were charged in Minneapolis on terrorism related offenses. They had planned to travel to Syria to join ISIL. Five of the six were U.S. citizens, and one was a permanent resident.

The young men had reportedly been inspired in part by another Somali-American, Abdi Nur, who left the same city in May 2014, shortly after his 20th birthday, and joined ISIL in Syria. And they had in part been encouraged by one another – what is known as peer-to-peer recruiting – through regular meetings to plan their trip and discuss their violent ideology.

Their case is just one of the many recent instances in which young people have attempted to join ISIL or other terrorist groups. In some instances, as in the Minneapolis arrests, we have succeeded in stopping youth before they could reach their destination. In other instances, we have not, as happened in February, when three British girls – ages 15 to 16 – traveled to Turkey, and likely onwards to ISIL-controlled territory, where they presumably remain.

ISIL is showing increased sophistication in recruiting young people, particularly in virtual spaces. The group disseminates around ninety thousand tweets each day, and its members and supporters routinely co-opt trending hashtags to disseminate their messages. ISIL even reportedly developed a Twitter app last year that allows Twitter subscribers to hand over control of their feed to ISIL – allowing ISIL to tweet from the individual subscriber’s account, exponentially amplifying the reach of its messages. In February, ISIL posted a polished, 50-page guide online called, “The Hijrah to the Islamic State,” that instructs potential recruits how to make the journey to its territory – including everything from finding safe houses in Turkey, to what kind of backpack to bring, and how to answer questions from immigration officials without arousing suspicion. And it’s not just ISIL that is aggressively targeting children and youth – but al-Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al-Shabaab, and other groups.

There is a clear consensus that we – and by we of course, I mean not only the United States, but all countries committed to combatting terrorist groups – must make countering violent extremism a central part of our counter terrorism efforts. And this is particularly true among children and teens, whose youth makes them especially vulnerable to recruitment. Yet even with increased attention to this problem, the reality is that we are being outspent, outflanked, and out-innovated by terrorist groups intent on recruiting new young members. We have to catch up – for their welfare, and for our collective security.

That is one of the reasons we are looking forward to the Secretary-General’s Plan of Action to Counter Violent Extremism, which we hope will galvanize the UN to take a leading role in empowering and uniting Member States to tackle this very grave problem. And it is one of the main reasons President Obama convened a White House Summit to Counter Violent Extremism on February 19th. More than 60 governments took part in the summit – including most of the members of this Council – together with civil society representatives from over 50 countries and private sector leaders. And as many of you know, we are looking forward to a leaders summit on the margins of the General Assembly in September, to evaluate the progress that has been made and the challenges that most definitely remain to implement the White House’s CVE Agenda.

One of the participants in the White House’s February summit was a young Moroccan woman named Zineb Benalla. Zineb works for the Arab Center for Scientific Research, an NGO that, with support from the U.S. Agency for International Development, has helped lead an innovative effort to counter violent extremism in northern Mali. As you all know, terrorist groups seized large swaths of the region in 2012, and continue to carry out attacks and recruit young people. Zineb’s project was focused on reaching vulnerable youth studying in the region’s madrasas. Research showed that madrasa instructors were teaching only religious texts and focusing mainly on rote memorization; Zineb’s program aimed to broaden the curriculum to foster more critical thinking and reasoning skills – skills that help young people question, and ultimately reject, the narrow ideologies of terrorist groups.

Zineb did not go directly to the schools, knowing that she would be turned away. Instead, she met repeatedly with imams and elders in Timbuktu and Gao – gradually earning their trust over cups of tea. When eventually she laid out the proposal to start book clubs in the madrasas, they accepted. With the backing of the imams, these imams and these elders, students and teachers were given e-Readers, and allowed to download books that previously would have been considered “haram,” or sinful, such as works of philosophy and novels. She then organized workshops where she trained dozens of educators in how to teach the new material.

Now, this is a narrow program designed for a specific set of circumstances. But Zineb’s story demonstrates several key lessons about how to build efforts to counter violent extremism among young people.

First, education is of course essential to developing the critical thinking skills that empower youth to challenge violent extremist ideologies. We’ve seen similar efforts undertaken on a broader scale by the government of Morocco and others, Morocco is working to replace teachers and imams who promote violent extremist ideologies with ones who hold up the values of respect and dignity, and preach more moderate interpretations of Islam.

Second, the trust and support of local actors is critically important – and that includes not only government officials, but religious and civil society leaders, and even families. As the first and most important line of defense in protecting youth, communities need the tools to do their part. The Safe Spaces Initiative – a guide created by the Muslim Public Affairs Council to help communities implement a multi-tiered strategy of prevention, intervention, and ejection of violent extremist elements – is just one example of a resource that informs communities how to be more active partners.

Third, as others have stressed here today, we need to enlist youth themselves in leading this effort. Research shows that young people are more likely to listen to, and be influenced by, their peers. Yet too often, we approach youth as the passive recipients of campaigns to counter violent extremism, rather than active participants in shaping their strategy and spearheading their implementation. We’ve seen how powerful youth-led initiatives can be, including those that use satire. That was the approach Karim Farok adopted. An amateur Egyptian musician, Karim took an ISIL chant and remixed it into a pop song, posting his version on social media sites. While his action may at first glance look like a way of amplifying ISIL’s message, in reality Karim’s remix was a form of protest, because ISIL’s fundamentalist interpretation of Islam forbids music with instruments. By transgressing the group’s rules, Karim’s song encouraged others to express criticism as well, rather than be silenced by fear. Not only did his remix go viral, garnering hundreds of thousands of views, but it also spawned countless other musical and dancing spoofs of ISIL chants – a potent form of counter-extremist messaging that kids can relate to.

Of course, we must pursue other lines of effort in countering violent extremism among youth as well, such as strengthening laws and international coordination to stop the flow of young foreign terrorist fighters to battlefields, as we committed to do under Resolution 2178; and enlisting the private sector in amplifying our message, as Google Ideas has done through the launch of its Against Violent Extremism Network, which has given a platform to more than 500 rehabilitated former extremists. We need to do more on all of these fronts.

At the beginning, I spoke about the six young men from Minneapolis who were detained earlier this week. One of the main reasons that they were stopped from joining ISIL was because a young man who had originally planned to join with them experienced a change in conscience. He took a step back, he saw the group’s violent intentions for what they were, and he decided to report the group to law enforcement. Without his action, those young men may well have made it to ISIL-controlled territory, where they could have taken part in the group’s horrific atrocities. That young man’s choice shows how a single changed mind – just one person who starts to think differently, and more compassionately – can disrupt and ultimately stop a dangerous action by many people. That is a valuable lesson in countering violent extremism, and ultimately, it is what our efforts are all about.

Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY'S STATEMENT WITH SAUDI FOREIGN MINISTER SAUD al-FAISL

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Joint Press Statement With Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal

Joint Statement

John Kerry

Secretary of State

Royal Terminal

Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

September 11, 2014

FOREIGN MINISTER SAUD: (Via interpreter) In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate, we have held today a regional meeting to combat terrorism with the presidents of all of our states of the Gulf Cooperation Council, in addition to Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, and with the presence of the United States of America. This meeting comes in the light of our cooperation to face the threat of terrorism and with the increased activity of terrorist groups in the region.

This danger that is propagating in the region very fiercely, the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques has always warned against this danger from a long time ago. The last time he warned against this was in last August when he said that it was a shame that these terrorists undertake these activities in the name of religion. They kill innocent peoples and they cut their victims and they take pride in this in the name of religion. They are killing souls that God has forbidden to kill, and they have disfigured the face of humanity.

His Majesty then called upon all the (inaudible), all the scholars of the Muslim Ummah to do their duty in the face of terrorism and hate and extremism, expressing at the same time that his disappointment about this vis-a-vis the silence of the international community with regard to what’s happening in our region. He also urged the leaders of the world and expressed a message towards these leaders when he received ambassadors on August 29th that it’s important to fight against this legion with force, wiseness, and speed. He warned that neglecting it will lead to its wide spread in Europe and America in a few months.

I would like also to refer to the statement of His Excellency the President of the United States Barack Obama and its various contents that reflect the seriousness in the fight against terrorism, including its stress on following terrorists, pursuing terrorists wherever they are.

Our meeting today was a good opportunity to discuss – we have listened today – an outline, explained outline of His Excellency Secretary Kerry about the strategy laid down by the United States to combat terrorism. The meeting today was a good opportunity to discuss this phenomena from all different aspects and perspectives, and to go deep in its roots and causes and reflected keenness to come up with a joint vision to combat it through military means, security means, and intelligence, as well as economic and financial means, and intellectual means also.

The meeting sought to deal with this phenomena from a strategic, comprehensive perspective not only limited to a single country, but extends to deal with this terrorism that strikes Libya, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen – these countries that have become safe haven for these organizations and their networks, in particular with regard to the transfer of weapons and ammunition to them and among them. A case in point: The ISIL terrorist organization, through their – and their infiltration to the borders between Iraq and Syria and their cancellation of these borders, moving freely to Syrian territory with forces and military weapons as safe as they want.

Another important item that we discussed today is the importance of being clear in our plans and policies and to share responsibilities – this, in addition to being serious and continuous in our action to eliminate and wipe out all these terrorist organizations. Inaction and hesitation will not help to uproot this phenomenon. On the opposite, it might encourage its return, and we have learned at great experience in the past years, and this is the best example of this. It’s needless to say that any security action against terrorism to be fruitful and to bear fruit, it has to be accompanied by another action to combat this ideology – erroneous ideology – and also to cut the resources from the terrorists, whether the financial or in terms of weapons, including arms control of the flows from some country that are only interested in destabilizing security and stability of the region and to meddle in its affairs.

In this meeting, we also discussed the volatile political situation in the countries that are plagued with terrorism, which requires the intensification and the strengthening of political efforts in order to support addressing the condition in this countries – in these countries in a way to achieve unity and solidarity between the citizens, whether – and to protect them from racial and sectarian affiliations, and to give them equality of rights and duties.

In conclusion, I would like to point out that within the framework of the efforts required to combat terrorism, we have underlined the importance of maintaining the unity and the sovereignty of the different states, as well as their independence and territorial integrity.

Thank you very much, and I give the floor to His Excellency Secretary Kerry.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, first of all, thanks you very, very much, Your Royal Highness. We are deeply appreciative to you, very grateful for your leadership, for His Majesty King Abdullah and Saudi Arabia’s commitment to this effort, and we thank you for bringing us together today in this very, very important meeting.

This meeting couldn’t happen at a more important time, and frankly, it couldn’t include a more important group of partners. Every single country represented here today, including – especially Iraq, will be a critical part of the effort to destroy ISIL’s ability to terrorize. We’re very grateful to His Royal Highness for helping to facilitate the invitation to Iraq immediately after the formation of the new government as a sign of recognition of the possibilities for a real transformation. And that in and of itself helped to make this meeting more meaningful and more comprehensive.

As all of us know, ISIL is an organization that knows no bounds. It is an organization that rapes and brutalizes women and sells even young girls as brides. They viciously and indiscriminately attack groups of all ethnicities, all sects, any religion, including vulnerable minorities like Christians and Yezidis. And they do so only because those people are not them, because they represent something different. They brutally murder innocent people, including most recently two Americans, whom they beheaded for the world to see in recent weeks. Their barbarity literally knows no limits and they have to be stopped.

Obviously, today is a particularly poignant day for this meeting. Today is September 11th. Thirteen years after the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, the devastating consequences of extremist hate remain fresh in the minds of all Americans and so many of our friends and allies around the world. Those consequences are felt everyday here in the Middle East, where extremist ideology in groups like ISIL continue to tear apart communities, restrain growth, stop progress, pursue violence, and repress people, and ignore and oppose any sort of rule of law.

Last night, in response to ISIL, President Obama outlined a clear, unified global strategy to support the Government of Iraq in taking on and destroying ISIL wherever it is found. That strategy is centered in a global coalition of nations, and as I understand – underscored in the meeting that we had today, Arab nations play a critical role in that coalition – the leading role, really, across all lines of effort: military support; humanitarian aid; our work to stop the flow of illegal funds and foreign fighters, which ISIL requires in order to thrive; and certainly, the effort to repudiate once and for all the dangerous, the offensive, the insulting distortion of Islam that ISIL propaganda attempts to spread throughout the region and the world. ISIL attempts to tell people that what they’re doing is somehow based on their notion of Islam and their view of religion. No religion, certainly not a peaceful, great religion like Islam, ever condones the kinds of activities that ISIL engages in.

I’m very pleased to say that the countries that were here today that joined in the communique that is being issued today have all, each of them, committed to play a role in achieving this mission. In the days ahead I will continue to meet with leaders in the region and beyond as we work to build the broadest coalition possible. Developing this global coalition will also be a primary focus of the UN General Assembly later this month.

As my partners here and I discussed today, the world is obviously in the midst of an enormously challenging time. Nothing is easy right now, but the truth is we are moving in a direction that people in countries all across the world can understand in an effort to try to bring peace and stability and prosperity and opportunity, dignity, and respect to the lives of the people in our countries. This is a moment which is one of those rare opportunities in history where leaders making the right choices can actually bend the arc of history in the right direction in the goals – the direction of the goals that we share: peace and prosperity and security for all.

And if we take advantage of this opportunity, what we are doing now could actually become a model for cooperation. It becomes perhaps even a model for addressing extremism and isolating it, as it should be anywhere where it exists. We believe that we’re all up to this task, and we believe that this is what our citizens are asking of us. We believe we will beat back the evil of ISIL and we will fight for the peaceful and secure world that people of all nations, ethnicities, religions, and sects deserve.

And I’m very grateful for the leadership that Saudi Arabia has exhibited in bringing us here for this meeting, and I look forward to continuing to work with all of the colleagues who are part of today’s meeting. It was important; we made progress; the coalition is growing and it now has a clarity of purpose within this region which is essential to our possibilities of success.

So thank you very much, Your Royal Highness. We appreciate it.

FOREIGN MINISTER SAUD: Thank you.

QUESTION: I have two questions. My first question is for Mr. Secretary. Immediately after American President announcement with regards to the strategy, there was three reaction. First, the Russian who said that any military operation, even against the fundamentalists in Iraq and Syria, it has to get the UN mandate. The Bashar regime said any military operation without coordination with the regime --

MODERATOR: Your question, please. Your question.

QUESTION: So do you think that this will be a (inaudible) on your operation against the ISIL?

(In Arabic.)

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, first of all, Iraq, the Government of Iraq, has invited the United States of America and asked for help. It has asked for help from the United States and has asked for help from its neighbors, from other countries in the region. And under international law, when a country is invaded and a country invites somebody to come in and help them, we have every right in the world to respond to that request.

And I must say if it weren’t so serious, what is happening in Ukraine, one might almost laugh at the idea of Russia raising the issue of international law or of any question at the UN. And I’m really rather surprised that Russia would dare to assert any notion of international law after what has happened in Crimea and eastern Ukraine.

FOREIGN MINISTER SAUD: (Via interpreter) Regarding Turkey – and indeed there was no difference at all between Turkey and any member of this meeting. As for the training of the free army, it has areas of training where it conducts its training in all neighboring countries.

QUESTION: (Via interpreter) My question is for you from Al Arabiya. What is the role required from the regional countries, especially for Saudi Arabia, especially with regard to this coalition?

My other question for the foreign minister of – no, the Secretary of State. What are the (inaudible) that you (inaudible) to engage (inaudible) any ground force intervention apart from airstrikes? Or what can be done as far as land intervention is concerned?

FOREIGN MINISTER SAUD: (Via interpreter) Yes, there are efforts undoubtedly from Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia has always taken initiatives with regard to a firm position towards terrorists and against them. So there is no limit to what the Kingdom can provide in this regard. So this is the position of the Kingdom. I have not heard from any party to this meeting today, they have not expressed any reservation with regard to the role required from them. So this shows that the Kingdom is determined to face and overcome this scourge.

SECRETARY KERRY: Did you ask about ground troops in Syria or in Iraq? What was your question?

QUESTION: (Via interpreter) Yes, my question is: What are the (inaudible) that the American Government can support, or at least this coalition, as far as ground troops intervention?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, the current plan, as the President said, no country is talking about placing ground troops, nor do we believe there’s a need to. Iraq has a very sizable army. Some of it needs to be reconstituted and retrained. There will be major efforts to do exactly that. But the current plan of the President is not to engage with foreign troops engaging in this fight. This is a fight where the Syrian opposition and the Iraqi forces themselves have significant capacity. Some of it has to be retrained and refocused; but we are confident that together with the efforts of other countries involved, that will happen and it will be sufficient to the task.

Thank you.

QUESTION: One, Foreign Minister, from the American press? Will you take a question, sir?

FOREIGN MINISTER SAUD: If it’s one.

QUESTION: Your government has been quite critical of the United States over the last year or so for not entirely seeing things – the crisis in Syria – the way you did, and I know you were deeply disappointed by President Obama’s decision last summer not to move ahead with airstrikes then. In light of that, do you feel that President Obama and the United States now see the situation as dire – as being as dire as you did then?

FOREIGN MINISTER SAUD: I only see agreement. I don’t see disagreement. (Laughter.) I see the agreement that we have about the present situation.

Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you.

REMARKS ON ELIMINATION OF SYRIAN CHEMICAL WEAPONS BY ASSISTANT SECRETARY PATTERSON

Statement for the Record - Elimination of Syrian Chemical Weapons

Remarks

Anne W. Patterson
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs

Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Washington, DC

March 26, 2014

---

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Corker and Members of the Committee, for inviting me today to discuss the crisis in Syria. I am well aware that many members of this Committee are not satisfied with our progress to date. Neither are we. Let me say that the Administration appreciates your concern and the support this committee has shown for efforts to address this challenge.

The Committee heard from Deputy Secretary Burns three weeks ago on the challenge of sectarian and extremist violence related to the conflict. Today I will supplement Deputy Secretary Burns’ remarks by describing the coordinated strategy that we are developing. I am pleased to be accompanied today by my colleague, Assistant Secretary for International Security and Nonproliferation Tom Countryman, who will address the international community’s progress in the removal and destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons.

The Crisis

The popular demands for economic and political reform sweeping the Middle East began three years ago in Syria as peaceful protests. Syria’s large youthful population sought an end to oppression and new opportunities. The Asad regime’s response to these demands has torn the nation apart, fueling extremism and inflaming regional tensions.

More than 146,000 people have been killed since the unrest and violence began. The number of conflict-affected civilians seeking refuge in neighboring countries has increased to more than 2.5 million people while, inside Syria, an additional 6.5 million people are displaced and at least 9.3 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance. The U.N. Security Council has condemned the denial of humanitarian access to civilians in need and has urged immediate steps to facilitate relief operations throughout the country, yet the regime has continued to obstruct humanitarian access. Again last week, the U.N. Commission of Inquiry on Syria reported on the continuing human rights violations being committed by the regime, as well as human rights abuses by the al-Qaeda linked groups and their offshoots that have taken root in the ungoverned spaces that Asad’s actions and atrocities have created.

Opposition to the Asad regime in Syria is broad and deep. Most Syrians who side with the opposition are moderates. In large areas of the country they have thrown off regime control, yet the situation on the ground is constantly in flux. In some areas, regime forces – with Hizballah and Iranian Revolutionary Guard support – have regained control of territory they had lost earlier in the conflict. Syrian troops are well armed with Iranian and Russian weapons, and also resort to barrel bombs or starvation to terrorize civilians. But peace will not come to Syria from a military victory. The only sustainable solution to the Syria crisis is a negotiated political settlement.

The United States is a leader of the ‘London 11’ contact group that has worked to move forward the Syrian transition, end the violence, and achieve a political solution. Although the U.N.-sponsored Geneva II negotiations have stalled due to regime intransigence aided by the tacit support of Russia, the process served to unify components of the Syrian opposition and to enable it to articulate its vision for a transitional government.

The continuing civil war has proved a magnet for foreign violent extremists – some with substantial combat experience – who are drawn to the ungoverned regions left by the deterioration of the Asad regime. Our colleagues at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence have estimated that there are nearly 23,000 violent extremist fighters in Syria, including more than 7,000 foreign fighters. They represent a minority of the total rebel ranks inside Syria, which are estimated to be between 75,000 – 110,000 fighters. The violent extremist fighters belong to several groups but most notably al-Qaeda’s official affiliate in Syria, Nusra Front, and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), formerly known as al-Qaeda in Iraq, whose new name indicates its growing ambitions. ISIL is responsible for most of the violence that has been taking place in Iraq’s Anbar province aimed at destabilizing Iraq. These groups offer weapons and money to Syrian men who oppose the regime, yet who might not otherwise be drawn to violent extremist causes but for the money and avenue for action against the regime they provide.

Bashar al-Asad bears responsibility for this metastasizing problem. His regime has released terrorists from its jails, allowed violent extremist bases to emerge, and invited other foreign terrorist organizations including Lebanese Hizballah, as well as Iranian-trained militia fighters from Iraq and Pakistan, to join the fight on its side.

Mr. Chairman, we are reviewing our policy and identifying priorities for coordinated action.

Countering Violent Extremist Activity

In Pakistan, we clearly saw the dangers that arise when terrorists are able to set up safe havens – and how difficult and costly in lives and money it becomes to dislodge or destroy them. For that reason, a top priority in the Syria crisis is preventing the establishment of a permanent terrorist safe-haven. In coordination with allies and partners, we are now better organizing ourselves to address the growing challenge of violent extremist fighters in Syria and the flow of these fighters into and out of the country. With our partners, we will apply tools, tactics, and best practices to mitigate potential threats and build upon existing lines of cooperation.

We are working with members of the opposition, Syria’s neighbors and other regional states to cut off their sources of funding and recruits. Saudi Arabia has criminalized participation in foreign conflicts by its citizens and is prosecuting individuals who have done so. Our allies in the Gulf increasingly, and correctly, see the flood of violent extremists from their countries as a threat to themselves. We have new initiatives to work with our allies to identify violent extremists who have travelled to the region.

We are also working to strengthen the moderate Syrian opposition, both inside and outside of Syria, because they are now facing a two-front war against both the Asad regime and the violent extremists.

Preventing Collapse and Nonlethal Support

In parts of Syria where the regime has been ousted, we want to prevent the wholesale collapse of Syria’s institutions and public services and keep regime hardliners and violent extremists from asserting control. As the fighting has continued, the regime has increasingly targeted civilian populations by denying basic services and cutting them off from food, fuel and medical care. But some provincial and local councils and civil society organizations continue struggling, against great odds, to maintain local government and continue critical services. We need to help them.

Mr. Chairman, members of this committee have been rightly concerned about the pace and effectiveness of support for the civilian opposition. Without a direct U.S. government presence inside the country – as well as control of many border entry points by al-Qaeda-linked groups or their offshoots – it has been difficult to increase our assistance to the Syrian opposition. Our strategy had been to use $260 million in non-lethal assistance to link the Syrian Coalition (SOC) to councils and NGOs inside the country, helping to unify and strengthen the opposition.
However, based on our experience on the ground over the past year, we have been refocusing our activity. Over the past few months the State Department and USAID have stepped up efforts to channel resources directly to local and provincial governments and civil society groups, as well as the SOC.

Our focus is increasingly on ways to help communities maintain basic security, keep the lights on, provide water, food and basic medical care – staving off the advances of extremist groups who seek to exploit peoples’ desperation. It allows these localities to maintain the basic public institutions that will be so critical in rebuilding a post-Asad Syria.

In towns and cities under opposition control, we are beginning to provide cash grants to pay local law enforcement and teachers. We continue to train local councils and civil society organizations in administration and local governance. And we are providing equipment and supplies to help them, including heavy equipment such as generators, cranes, trucks, and ambulances. In one major city, for example, we have helped reopen 17 schools serving 9,300 students. In another major city, we funded the refurbishment of 60 police stations and are providing non-lethal equipment and basic stipends to 1,300 policemen, who are struggling to maintain order. Paying stipends not only helps keep these people on the job, but it also helps deprive the extremist groups of the chance to fill the vacuum themselves.

Make no mistake: this is extremely difficult work and nobody is saying that this assistance will turn the tide against what remains an extremely serious and deteriorating situation. As we learned in Iraq – even with 160,000 American troops, ten years of effort, tens of thousands of schools refurbished, and hundreds of millions of dollars spent – it takes generations to restore stability in societies wrecked by decades of dictatorship and civil wars. We are determined, however, to stand with those struggling to rebuild and stabilize their local communities even in the most horrific circumstances imaginable. These brave individuals will be the future leaders of Syria; they deserve our support, and they will continue to receive it through the types of assistance I just described.

As part of this $260 million in non-lethal overall assistance, moreover, we are providing $80 million in support to the Supreme Military Command (SMC). Providing this support to groups engaged in a highly fluid battle zone has been challenging. In December, an SMC warehouse in Syria containing U.S. supplies was overrun by a faction of extremist fighters. We suspended SMC assistance until they could reestablish secure supply routes and storage facilities. By February, when the SMC regained control of its facility and accounted for its contents, we began sending supplies again – this time directly to trusted commanders.
In providing non-lethal assistance to the SMC, needs are identified by commanders and have included food rations, medical kits, and vehicles – as well as communications and other personal gear. These supplies not only fill gaps identified by opposition troops fighting both the regime and violent extremists, but they are tangible evidence of our support for the moderate opposition.

Although a leadership debate has opened up within the SMC – as the Syrian opposition discusses how to fight the regime more effectively – the dispute has not affected our ability to deliver non-lethal assistance to the moderate armed opposition through trusted commanders.
None of the non-lethal assistance we are providing will be determinative in defeating regime forces, nor will it, on its own, force Asad to change his calculus about trying to hold on to power. However, our assistance does provide needed equipment while sending a signal both to those inside and outside Syria of our strong support for the moderate opposition; help maintain basic administrative institutions; help prevent the formation of vacuums in services and security that extremists aggressively exploit; and create relationships with moderates who can, when this conflict is over, form the basis of a transitional government.

Eliminating the Threat of Chemical Weapons

The Asad regime used chemical weapons against its citizens, and its continued possession of chemical weapons material represents a sustained danger to Syria’s population and all of its neighbors, including Israel. Last year, the international community, led by the United States and Russia, united to defend a long-standing international norm against the use of chemical weapons. Under a Joint Mission organized by the United Nations and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), the international community is supporting the safe elimination of Syria’s chemical weapons program. U.S. assistance includes outfitting a vessel to neutralize Syria’s highest priority chemical precursors and agents.
We are making progress, but there is tough work ahead. To date, the Joint Mission has verified the destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons-production equipment, the machines that mix the components, and the removal of nearly half of Syria’s declared stockpile. All of the sulfur mustard agent and some of the precursors for sarin, the highest priority declared chemicals, have now been removed. It is our goal to complete the removal of declared chemicals as soon as possible in April and the verified destruction of these chemical weapons and materials by June 30.

Protecting our Friends and Allies

We are committed to helping contain the conflict by bolstering the security and stability of Syria’s neighbors. Violence from the ongoing conflict has already spilled into Lebanon and Turkey, our NATO ally. Recently, Israel retaliated against Syrian army targets for an attack on an Israeli patrol on the Golan Heights. On Sunday, the Turkish Air Force shot down a Syrian plane that had encroached along the border. ISIL has used its position in Syria to pour extremist fighters and weapons into Iraq. Lebanon and Jordan are bearing an enormous burden as they work to secure their borders and meet the needs of more than 1.6 million refugees from Syria. We appreciate the support we have received from Congress as we work directly and with our international partners to support Syria’s neighbors:

• We back the Lebanese government’s efforts to contain the Syrian conflict and strongly condemn Hizballah’s intervention on behalf of the Asad regime. The U.S. has provided additional support to the Lebanese Armed Forces and Internal Security Forces to help them secure Lebanon’s borders and address internal security threats. We are helping the Lebanese government care for nearly one million refugees from Syria and strengthen the communities that are hosting them. We have provided more than $340 million in humanitarian assistance to support the needs of these refugees and to reduce the burden on Lebanese communities. In addition, our ongoing bilateral assistance is helping to address deteriorating economic conditions and gaps in the delivery of important services, particularly in communities impacted by the crisis.
• Many of you met with Jordan’s King Abdullah when he was here recently and can appreciate the contributions that Jordan is making to address this crisis. The United States is already working closely with the Jordanian Armed Forces (JAF) to address threats emanating from Syria, including providing enhanced border security and counterterrorism capabilities. DOD funds also help to assist the JAF with providing humanitarian assistance to newly arriving Syrian refugees. Longstanding development programs help relieve the strains on water infrastructure, schools, and health facilities in Jordanian communities that support large numbers of Syrian refugees. We have provided $300 million in additional budget support over the last two years and will support a $1 billion loan guarantee for Jordan as well as the renewal of our bilateral assistance Memorandum of Understanding for an additional five years, as announced by the President last month.
•  In regards to Turkey, we are most importantly working with Ankara on a variety of counter-terrorism issues to address the growing threat that Syria-based terrorists pose to Turkey and the challenge posed by foreign fighters. Additionally, Turkey hosts far more than the 641,000 officially registered refugees from Syria, in addition to significant parts of the Syrian opposition leadership. We are working to mitigate the Syrian conflict’s spillover on Turkey’s security and sovereignty, including through the deployment of two U.S. Patriot batteries in southern Turkey, which join four batteries from other NATO allies. U.S. contributions to the international humanitarian response help provide critical support to refugees hosted in Turkish camps and communities. In support of the U.N., Turkey is playing an important role in facilitating cross-border humanitarian assistance in northern Syria.
• Iraq hosts more than 225,000 refugees from Syria, mostly in the Iraqi Kurdistan region. Since 2012, the United States has provided more than $90 million in humanitarian aid to international organizations and NGOs for Syrian refugees in Iraq. We are also working with the U.N. and the Iraqi government to ensure that the estimated 350,000 Iraqis displaced by the Anbar conflict are getting needed assistance and will be able to vote in Iraq’s upcoming elections, which ISIL seeks to disrupt. At the same time, we are in close contact with Iraq’s political leaders and security commanders to develop and execute a holistic campaign to isolate ISIL from the population, including through intensified information sharing and security assistance.
• In Egypt, which hosts over 135,000 Syrian refugees, political instability and polarization has contributed to a difficult environment and increasing humanitarian needs for refugees. Recognizing the burden that refugee communities can pose on host countries, we are continuing to support humanitarian partners in Egypt and to engage the government to ensure that refugees receive needed support.
• Israel has not been spared the effects of the conflict. Our governments coordinate closely to monitor violent extremist threats in Syria, and we support Israel’s right to defend itself from spillover violence. We applaud Israeli efforts to provide medical care to wounded Syrians seeking help. We are also concerned that Syria’s instability will continue to threaten the Golan.

Urgent Humanitarian Action

We are coordinating closely with the international community to alleviate the suffering caused by this crisis. The Government of Kuwait co-hosted a donor conference with the U.N. Secretary-General in January, which resulted in $2.6 billion in new pledges. The United States is the largest single donor to the Syria humanitarian response, providing more than $1.7 billion in humanitarian assistance. Our assistance supports U.N. and other international organizations as well as numerous NGOs assisting conflict-affected civilians inside the country and throughout the region. We are specifically directing some of our funds to alleviate the growing strain on host communities, infrastructure and public services in neighboring countries. Inside Syria, our assistance provides food, basic healthcare, water and sanitation services and desperately needed relief supplies.

The Asad regime continues to deliberately block humanitarian access in Syria, citing the uncertain security situation. Last week, the first U.N. convoy reached the residents of Qamishli in northern Syria via the Turkish border crossing at Nusaybin. Although some supplies will finally reach these people in desperate need, one day of U.N. aid convoys crossing one border point is not enough. These convoys prove that the Syrian army can allow humanitarian access when it chooses to do so. The Asad regime must approve all U.N. requests for access to areas in need immediately as called for by the U.N. Security Council.

Negotiations Transitioning to a Representative Government

Transitioning to a representative government that is responsive to the needs of the Syrian people is the only way to reduce the violence and alleviate the suffering of the Syrian people. While the international community, including Russia, maintains that the conflict must end via a negotiated political agreement in line with the 2012 Geneva Communiqué, the regime has squandered every opportunity for a peaceful settlement. At the Geneva II talks, the regime’s negotiator insulted the opposition, U.N. Joint Special Representative Lakhdar Brahimi and the international community while contributing nothing of substance to the discussion.

The United States and Russia share a common interest in a successful negotiation that fully implements the Geneva Communiqué and prevents the spread of instability and violent extremism beyond Syria’s borders. To date, this common interest has motivated Russia to continue its support to the OPCW mission. However, Russia has done nothing to move its Syrian allies forward in the Geneva II negotiations. Moreover, we have seen an increase in both the quantity and the quality of weapons Russia has provided to the Syrian regime in recent months. The stability that Russia seeks in Syria will not be achieved by providing planes, tanks, bombs, and guns for use against the Syrian people. We continue to review all options for changing President Putin's calculus away from Russia's support for the Asad regime. Ambassador Brahimi told the Security Council on March 13, that he recommends against a third round of talks unless the regime commits to discuss substantively all elements of the Geneva Communiqué. In the meantime, the United States and its partners will continue to expand our support to the Syrian opposition and ratchet up pressure on the regime.

On another matter, I know that the safety of Syria’s minority communities is a key concern for members of this committee, as it is for us. We are troubled by the plight of all civilians in Syria, including Christians and other religious minorities. Protecting the security and religious rights of these communities, as well as the rights of women, is an important element of our policy and will be essential to any future political settlement. We have sought and received assurances from the Syrian opposition leadership and moderate rebel leaders that they will protect the rights of women and minorities, and engage them in plans for building Syria’s future.
Next Steps
Mr. Chairman, we are actively engaged in trying to bring the Syria crisis to an end.

• We are working with allies and partners to combat the growing threat of violent extremists;
• We are working to prevent a catastrophic collapse of Syrian cities in opposition controlled areas;
• We are providing nonlethal support to the armed opposition;
• We are working with the international community to end the threat of Syria’s chemical weapons;
• We are taking steps to protect and support our regional friends and allies;
• We are contributing generously to the humanitarian response both inside Syria and among its neighbors; and
• We are providing support to the Syrian opposition both directly and through the London 11.

Even as we pursue all the steps I have outlined today, we continue to examine what more we can do to defend U.S. interests in Syria and to achieve a political settlement. We appreciate the support of your Committee – most recently in your 10
March 14 letter – and will continue to work together with the Congress as we move forward.
The Syrian people reject violent extremism. They want to return home and rebuild their country – and we will help them. Thank you.

REMARKS BY SECRETARY KERRY AND PAKISTAN PRIME MINISTER SHARIF

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 
Remarks With Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif After Their Meeting
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
The Hague, Netherlands
March 24, 2014

SECRETARY KERRY: (In progress) – it is to meet with Prime Minister Sharif of Pakistan. We – Pakistan and the United States – have enormous mutual interests. We are both striving to combat extremism, terrorism, deal with the challenge of global energy, as well as to provide for the prosperity of our people and deal with nuclear security. And it’s nuclear security that particularly brings us here to The Hague.

But we are working very, very closely together. I visited with the prime minister in August of last year. We began a strategic dialogue again. We have worked together with our Security, Strategic Stability, and Nonproliferation Working Group. That group is engaged in dealing with issues of nuclear security as well as other challenges. And in addition, we met recently in Washington. Dr. Aziz and I engaged in our strategic dialogue. And we look forward to welcoming Finance Minister Dar, who will be coming to Washington for our finance component of that discussion.

So we are deeply engaged, and I might add that we affirmed recently and we reaffirm that we have great confidence in Pakistan’s nuclear security. They’ve really done an enormous amount of work. I know the prime minister will probably talk about that here at the summit. But we do have important issues of cooperation with respect to the extremism, terror, counterterrorism, and Afghanistan. And we look forward to discussing those issues this morning.

PRIME MINISTER SHARIF: Thank you, John. Thank you very much.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you, sir.

PRIME MINISTER SHARIF: It’s always a pleasure to welcome you, and you’ve been a great friend of Pakistan. Of course, we are very happy to have met here also. And as John has been saying, that there are a lot of challenges – we are meeting these challenges in Pakistan. We have been in office for almost about nine months and we’ve had very constructive discussions with our American friends. I had a very good meeting with President Obama a few months ago in Washington, and we are now following up all that we have discussed and agreed.

SECRETARY KERRY: Good.

PRIME MINISTER SHARIF: Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you, Nawaz. Thank you.

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY MAKES REMARKS WITH PAKISTANI FOREIGN AFFAIRS ADVISOR SARTAJ AZIZ

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 
Remarks With Pakistani Foreign Affairs Advisor Sartaj Aziz
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Prime Minister's Residence
Islamabad, Pakistan
August 1, 2013

MODERATOR: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. (Inaudible.)

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, thank you very much. As-Salaam Alaikum. It’s a pleasure to be here and I was privileged to be able to meet with the Prime Minister as well as the Prime Minister’s Foreign Affairs Advisor, His Excellency Sartaj Aziz. We’ve just come from a very productive meeting with Prime Minister Sharif, and I’m very grateful to him for delaying his trip. He is leaving for a pilgrimage to Mecca during this most Holy Month of Ramadan, and I want to honor his willingness to delay his trip a little bit in order to be able to meet today. I’m very grateful to him for that.

Let me say what a pleasure it is for me to be back in Pakistan. I have been here many times, as the people of Pakistan know, and I was very privileged to work in the United States Senate in order to pass what became known as the Kerry-Lugar-Berman bill, which provided significant economic assistance to the people of Pakistan. And we did that because we specifically wanted to make clear that America does not want to have a transactional relationship, we do not want to have a relationship based on the moment or based on an issue such as counterterrorism or Afghanistan, but we want a relationship with the people of Pakistan for the long term. One of the largest diasporas of Pakistanis lives in the United States of America. We have a huge Pakistani-American population. We’re proud of their many contributions to America, to our society, and they are proud always of their heritage and of their continuing links to their homeland, to Pakistan.

I also want to applaud the people of Pakistan for this remarkable, historic transition that has taken place here with this election. I was privileged to be here a few years ago at the last election with then Senator Joe Biden and Senator Chuck Hagel. Now the three of us are privileged to work for President Obama in his Administration – obviously, one as the Vice President of the United States, Secretary Hagel is the Secretary of Defense. So we’re privileged – all three of us – to continue to work on the relationship with Pakistan, and it’s with our friendship and our understanding as we come here today at an historic time in Pakistan’s democratic journey. I was privileged to be here the day of the election for the first transfer of power from one president to another at the ballot box. And now we have seen the first transfer of that elected president civilian to another civilian president. So the march towards democracy in Pakistan is something to be celebrated. And that is another reason why I’m privileged to be here at this moment. The people of Pakistan deserve enormous credit for their role in the peaceful transition of power from one democratically-elected government to another.

I’m here with a simple message: The United States is committed to a long-term partnership with the people of Pakistan, and we remain fully engaged in building a relationship that is based on mutual interests and mutual respect. And we are working closely with the new government in order to advance a shared vision of the future that is marked by peace, by stability, and by prosperity.

It is also no secret that along this journey in the last few years we’ve experienced a few differences. I think we came here today, both the Prime Minister and myself, with a commitment that we cannot allow events that might divide us in a small way to distract from the common values and the common interests that unite us in big ways. As we discussed this morning, the common interests far exceed and far outweigh any differences. So we’re here to speak honestly with each other, openly about any gaps that may exist that we want to try to bridge. And our people deserve that we talk directly and with candor and represent their interests.

I’m pleased to announce that today very quickly we were able to agree to a resumption of the Strategic Dialogue in order to foster a deeper, broader, and more comprehensive partnership between our countries. And this revitalized dialogue will address in a realistic fashion all of the many key issues between us, from border management to counterterrorism to promoting U.S. private investment and to Pakistan’s own journey to economic revitalization.

I want to emphasize the relationship is not defined simply by the threats that we face. It is not only a relationship about combatting terrorism. It is about supporting the people of Pakistan and particularly helping at this critical moment for Pakistan’s economic revival. That has been a centerpiece of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s campaign, it is a centerpiece of his governing efforts, and it will be a centerpiece of our relationship.

The Prime Minister has outlined an ambitious agenda of reforms that will unlock growth and opportunity. And I know that some of these reforms are going to be difficult. They always are. But they are essential to creating sustainable development, more reliable energy supplies, and better services for the people of Pakistan.

Our partnership is also about energy, education, trade, and investment. We have the largest Fulbright program in the world right here in Pakistan. And through the Kerry-Lugar-Berman Act, we’ve helped to bring 1,000 megawatts of power to the national grid, which is providing power and uplifting the lives of 16 million Pakistanis. We’ve launched a new investment fund that will help grow small and medium sized enterprises. And I’m pleased to report that we are funding the rehabilitation of all four major trade routes between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Pakistan’s regional position brings enormous economic opportunities, and we want to recognize those. That’s why we welcome and encourage the steps that Pakistan and India have taken to expand their economic relationship. As I said when I visited New Delhi just a few weeks ago, if Pakistan and India can confidently invest in each other, then the rest of the world is more confidently going to invest in both of them, and the returns on that investment to this region will be simply enormous.

Now, of course, Pakistan cannot achieve its full economic potential until it overcomes extremism, extremist threats within its borders. I want to say that Pakistan troops have fought very bravely against this threat and its people have suffered enormously, including perhaps more than 40,000 Pakistanis who have been killed by terrorists over the past decade. The truth is we face a common enemy in terrorism, and the choice for Pakistanis is clear: Will the forces of violent extremism be allowed to grow more dominant, eventually overpowering the moderate majority? And I ask anybody in Pakistan to ask themselves: How many bridges have those terrorists offered to build? How many schools have they opened? How many economic programs have they laid out for the people? How many energy plants have they tried to build? I think the choice is clear. I believe Pakistanis are going to recommit to the values that are espoused by the founder of the country, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, who helped people come together to build a stable, moderate democracy and an economically vibrant and tolerant nation that is at peace with itself and its neighbors.

The reality is that the fates of Afghanistan and Pakistan are intertwined. And addressing the threat that is posed by cross-border militancy is a key aspect of our Strategic Dialogue. This is a challenge that cannot be met by any one country. It will take a united effort to resolve the issues of safe havens and political reconciliation.

So I want to thank His Excellency in particular for his visit to Kabul, which was a very important visit last month. Both of our countries share an interest in a unified, stable, and peaceful Afghanistan, and so we greatly appreciate Pakistan’s assistance in the Afghan reconciliation process. And that is a process that obviously will take time and perseverance.

In the end, the relationship between the United States and Pakistan has traveled a long way. And yes, we still do have ground to cover. But after my discussions today, I can tell you unequivocally that we do share a long-term vision for the relationship. And I believe that in Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif we have someone who is committed to try to grow that relationship.

To ensure that we continue our important bilateral conversation at the highest levels, I have extended on behalf of the President of the United States an invitation to Prime Minister Sharif to meet with the President and have a bilateral meeting with him in the United States this fall.

So I thank you again, Your Excellency, for the gracious hospitality which I always have received when I come here to Pakistan. But thank you for the hospitality and welcome you’ve shown me and my team here today, and I will look forward after your comments to taking a couple of questions.

MR. AZIZ: Thank you. It’s my pleasure to welcome Secretary of State John Kerry on his first bilateral visit to Pakistan and also thank him for the very positive and constructive statement that he just made. Senator Kerry is a very familiar and well-respected figure who has always been welcomed in Pakistan as a good friend. We appreciate the leadership that he has exhibited in the past as the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and now in his new capacity as Secretary of State to promote and strengthen the partnership between our two countries.

As Secretary Kerry mentioned, we have had very intensive and frank discussion in a very collegial atmosphere to strengthen the foundations of our friendship and to further build our partnership to achieve our shared goals in the future. As he mentioned, in these foundations there are many mutually reinforcing elements. The U.S. is our largest trading partner and a major source of foreign direct investment and economic assistance. We have – Pakistan has a large diaspora in the United States, and a significant number of highly-educated Pakistanis both in the public and private sectors owe their skills to universities in the U.S. However, most importantly --

SECRETARY KERRY: I think they have a microphone problem.

MR. AZIZ: However, most importantly, it is our shared faith in democracy and respect for the rule of law and human freedoms and commitment to the promotion of peace and security in the region that binds our countries in a new and stronger partnership. As we look into the future, we want trade, more trade, larger investment and cooperation in development, including education as the building blocks of a new and renewed partnership.

In this regard, we highlighted the importance of securing greater market access for Pakistani products in the U.S. and larger foreign direct investment as the new government attaches highest priorities to economic revival. I also conveyed our gratitude to the U.S. for their support for the Diamer-Bhasha dam as a part of its vital effort to deal with the energy crisis.

Of course, these efforts to revive the economy and produce – will not produce full results without peace and stability in our region. In fact, both of us agreed that Pakistan wishes to have good relation with all its neighbors and we hope to expand our connectivity for the mutual benefit.

There are, of course, other challenges too, and today we have discussed the path forward as the U.S. draws down its forces in Afghanistan in areas such as Afghan reconciliation, ground lines of communication, IEDs, counterterrorism. We have to improve – we have improved our bilateral coordination significantly, and we have continued to work to improve them further.

I have reiterated Pakistan’s clear commitment to facilitating U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan and supporting any Afghan-led and Afghan-owned solution and reconciliation for peace and stability in Afghanistan.

I also briefed Secretary Kerry about the (inaudible) of a comprehensive counterterrorism strategy our government is in the process of formulating in consultation with all the stakeholders.

We also shared our concerns on the drone strikes which Pakistan not only considers a violation of our sovereignty but it’s also counterproductive as they undermine the overall counterterrorism cooperation efforts.

And as Secretary Kerry mentioned, in order to give impetus to these understandings, we have agreed on the resumption of the Strategic Dialogue process and holding the next ministerial-level dialogue within the next six months. As some of you would recall, this dialogue started in 2010 and three sessions were held within 2010, in March, July and October. But then several events derailed this process and no meeting has been held since October 2010, and therefore the objective of transforming U.S.-Pakistan relations from a transactional to a sustainable strategic partnership has remained unfulfilled. And we think after the historic democratic transition in Pakistan the time to realize this objective has arrived, and that is what we have agreed on.

And we are also grateful for the invitation to the Prime Minister visit President Obama later this year which will further help to (inaudible) and strengthen. And in particular on the economic front, which is the key building block of our relationship, we hope that we can double our bilateral trade through enhanced market access to something like $11 billion in the next five years.

So I thank Secretary Kerry for this visit. Let me state it clearly that we are committed to work together in all these areas in a very pragmatic and positive manner on the basis of respect for each other’s interests as well as concerns. So I thank you again and look forward to seeing you (inaudible).

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you, Sartaj. Thank you very much.

MODERATOR: We’ll take four questions, two each side. Michael Gordon of New York Times. Sir, you’ll have to speak up because (inaudible).

QUESTION: Hello. Okay. Mr. Secretary, the effort to get talks going with the Afghan Taliban in Doha is frozen and it now appears that NATO’s military mission may well end and that most if not all of the NATO troops may be gone before any negotiations even get underway. And that means that the United States’ leverage and the Afghan Government’s leverage in these talks will be reduced if they’re ever resumed. What have you asked the Pakistanis to do to get these talks going, and what steps are you taking to bring the United States military strategy and the diplomatic strategy into alignment?

And a question, please, for Mr. Aziz: What specific efforts is Pakistan undertaking now to get these talks underway? And sir, as you know, the United States has repeatedly pressed Pakistan to crack down on safe havens that Haqqani and other networks have used to carry out attacks in Afghanistan. Was this issue raised again today by Mr. Kerry? And what is Pakistan actually prepared to do, and would Pakistan be prepared to do more about the safe havens if the United States would commit to reducing its drone strikes? Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, Michael, let me just say that I – of course, we talked about this issue today. Pakistan has been very helpful with respect to this process and we’re very grateful to the Pakistanis for their initiative, and they will continue to be helpful.

I disagree that I think the NATO mission will end before – I mean, look, if the talks are going to take place, they’re going to take place. If they don’t, that’s their choice, but it will not change the fundamental strategy of what the United States and Afghanistan and the ISAF forces are doing. The President has made it clear that he will, at the appropriate time, be announcing an ongoing American presence. And the negotiations on a bilateral security agreement are underway and I am confident will be completed at an appropriate moment in time. And our plans continue for an election in Afghanistan in 2014 that will be the centerpiece of this transition. The Afghan forces this year, without regard to what happens with the Taliban, have taken over lead responsibility in Afghanistan for security. We are working with them. And so that will continue, obviously, into next year, and the training and equipping will continue beyond that.

So the reason we hope the talks can take place is because everybody understands that a political resolution is better than continued fighting. And our hopes are that it would be possible to be able to combine that with the rest of the transition that is taking place in Afghanistan. We will continue those efforts, but it doesn’t – I don’t agree that there is a lack of synchronization between the military strategy and the diplomatic strategy. The diplomatic strategy is to try to get to talks but to continue the process of preparing the Afghan people for their election and for a transition that will take place regardless.

MR. AZIZ: Well, what can Pakistan do? I think as Secretary Kerry said, it is a process between the Afghan stakeholders and we are doing our best to facilitate that process. We can’t do more than facilitate. And obviously, there are many stakeholders, and Taliban have not so far been persuaded to talk to Karzai directly, but they may be persuaded to talk to the High Peace Council under certain conditions. So that is the next effort that is being made. And if they do, then at least they can talk about talks and how to organize them. But I think in these efforts what President Karzai will be coming here later this month, so we’ll explore with him also how much flexibility he will show in dealing with this issue, and hopefully after that some new attempt can be made.

On the safe havens, of course, we had a very detailed discussion with our plans, on our overall comprehensive strategy, the All Parties Conference that we are planning to hold, and how the follow-up will take place. And as it unfolds, all of you will come to know how we propose to deal with it. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Mr. Asif Bhatti of Geo Television.

QUESTION: Thank you very much. I have a question to His Excellency, Senator John Kerry. As advisor mentioned that we have reservations on drone attacks, so you might know about the public reservations and sentiments on the drone attacks. And the Pakistani Government especially criticizing these attacks and they think that it should be stopped now. What is your strategy? Are you seriously thinking to change your drone attack policy?

And the second part of my question is that are you considering the swapped deal of prisoners with Pakistan and especially handing over Dr. Aafia Siddiqui to Pakistan? Thank you.

SECRETARY KERRY: Say the last part again? I’m sorry.

QUESTION: Secretary, there’s a – are you considering seriously that there will be exchange of prisoners deal between Pakistan and United States, and will you hand over Dr. Aafia Siddiqui to Pakistan?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I don’t have any comment or anything to add with respect to any potential prisoner exchange or non-exchange. It’s just we didn’t even talk about that at this point this morning.

With respect to the drone policy, we’ve had an ongoing dialogue with our friends in Pakistan regarding all aspects of our relationship, our shared interests, including, obviously, the counterterrorism cooperation. And I think the President of the United States made it very, very clear recently in a major speech that he delivered at our National Defense University in which he laid out the legal and the policy standards that guide any actions that we have against any individuals with respect to terror and under what circumstances we might take direct action.

That stands on its own. That is a very clear articulation of our policy and of what it – where it will go. But we obviously don’t discuss publicly every aspect of our counterterrorism activities. I will say this, I’ll quote the President: “We must define our effort not as a boundless global war on terror, but rather as a series of persistent, targeted efforts to dismantle specific networks of violent extremists that threaten America.”

I know there are issues of sovereignty that are raised often. I would simply remind all of our friends that somebody like an al-Qaida leader like al-Zawahiri is violating the sovereignty of this country. And when they attack people in mosques and blow up people in villages and in marketplaces, they are violating the sovereignty of the country.

So I think the President has made a policy as limited and as clear as is humanly possible, and he has laid out a very transparent, accountable, thorough legal justification for any counterterror policies the United States may or may not engage in.

QUESTION: Do you have any --

MODERATOR: Deb Riechmann of Associated Press.

QUESTION: Thank you. Mr. Aziz, on the drone attacks, is Pakistan – the number of drone attacks has recently declined. Is Pakistan still asking for a further curtailment of these strikes that are so unpopular in your country?

And Secretary Kerry, back on the bilateral security agreement issue, there’s an unnamed State Department official that’s been quoted as saying that the U.S. has resolved most of the issues on the BSA and that is nearing completion on the agreement with Afghanistan. And right now, you’re running up against the one-year deadline on those negotiations and the troop level decision is hinged on this. Where do we stand on this? Are you guys about ready to wrap this up or are we, as Karzai said, still not talking about this, or – there’s even reports that you’ve read a completed text on this.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I’m not going to comment on an agreement that hasn’t been finalized. It’s always dangerous to predict completion prior to completion. So we’re making progress. We’re working on it. I am personally confident that we will have an agreement and the agreement will be timely, and I am confident that the President has ample space here within which to make any decisions he wants to make regarding the future troop levels. So I think we’re on a good track. I feel very comfortable with where we are. And as I say to you, I expect this agreement to be completed at an appropriate time.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) you expect it?

SECRETARY KERRY: I expect it to be completed at an appropriate time.

QUESTION: Secretary Kerry, (inaudible) both questions --

MODERATOR: Mr. Baqir Sajjad of Dawn newspaper, a question.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) on both questions (inaudible) --

QUESTION: (Inaudible) regards to (inaudible).

QUESTION: Sir, do you have any (inaudible)?

QUESTION: (Inaudible) answer to the question that we --

MR. AZIZ: Yes, the question about drones. As I mentioned, we have registered our concern and will continue to do so that drone attacks are counterproductive in terms of our relationship (inaudible). So in the light of today’s discussion we’ll continue this dialogue on how to stop this policy of drone attacks as far as the U.S. is concerned.

QUESTION: Have you asked for curtailment?

MR. AZIZ: We are – no, we are (inaudible) stopping, not just containment. (Laughter.)

MODERATOR: Mr. Baqir Sajjad of Dawn newspaper.

QUESTION: Sir, you mentioned that you took up the issue of cross-border insurgency. Are you confident that Pakistan, which has not moved on safe havens on its side of the border, will do it this time?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I’m confident that we’re working in good faith to find ways to go forward and find the best policy that we can put in place. We talked for a number of hours this morning and we covered an enormous amount of topics, and a couple of them it was important for me to cover very closely and very specifically. So we began to scratch the surface of some of this. I’ll be meeting again later this evening. I’m going to have further meetings, and this afternoon, and we agreed precisely because of the complexity of working out the details that we’re going to begin the Strategic Dialogue immediately. And over the six months, we will have a ministerial, but we have five committees that will begin to meet very quickly on this. So I expect a lot of definition and a lot of progress to come to the forefront.

What was important today was that there was a determination by the United States and by Pakistan to move this relationship to the full partnership that it ought to be and to find the ways to deal with these individual issues that have been irritants over the course of the past years. And I believe that the Prime Minister is serious about doing that. I know that President Obama is also, which is why the President looks forward to meeting with the Prime Minister in about a month or so in the United States. So this conversation will continue, and I’m confident we’re going to find effective ways to manage the challenges that we both face.

MODERATOR: Ms. Saima Mohsin of CNN.

QUESTION: Thank you. He’s introduced me already. My first question is for Sartaj Aziz. There’s a lot of talk about safe havens in Pakistan, and the United States in the past few years has put a lot of pressure on Pakistan to deal with it, but that hasn’t happened. With the new government – and it seems that the military is keen to do so as it did with Swat, but not without the backing of the government – is the government looking at this, and are you planning on doing something about it and sending in a military operation in Waziristan?

And for Secretary of State Kerry and looking ahead to troop withdrawal in Afghanistan and this relationship with Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the United States, there seems to be a huge upsurge in violence and a lot of concern about what’s going to happen come 2014. And we’re already seeing violence, as I said. So you mentioned monitoring the border, but what do you think you can achieve that you haven’t managed to in the past decade?

MR. AZIZ: Well, on the first question, as you know, this operation started in 2009, and out of seven agencies in the tribal areas, six we have already launched military operation and tried to gain effective control and establish the right of the state. The only agency left is now Waziristan. And obviously, with 150,000 troops deployed in the tribal areas, we are overstretched right now. And therefore, right now, we are planning to have an All Parties Conference in which we consult all the stakeholders. Obviously, dialogue has to go along with military action, so we will explore that option first. And if that doesn’t work, then we’ll see under what conditions and by what timeframe we’ll do the alternative actions.

So I think basically, partly it’s a question of capacity, partly it’s a question of timing, and the other options without which the basic objectives cannot be achieved. So in the coming weeks, you’ll know how the strategy works.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, let me be very clear. The United States is drawing down, not withdrawing. There’s a distinction. The President will announce the number of forces that he will commit for the United States, and other countries have already committed certain numbers of forces who will remain in Afghanistan for two purposes: one, counterterrorism; and two, to train, equip, and advise the armed forces.

Together, all of these countries, over 50 nations – about 52, 53 nations – have combined to help train and equip a military of 350,000 people in Afghanistan. That’s a very sizable army. And I believe, properly trained and equipped as they will continue to be over the course of the next year and beyond, they will have an ability to be able to cooperate, hopefully, with the Pakistanis and others in order to provide the kind of security and protection that the people of Afghanistan and the people of Pakistan deserve.

So I am very hopeful that as we go forward here, people will remember that this is a transition, not an ending. It is a transition to Afghans themselves who will stand up and fight for the freedoms that they want and for the lifestyle they want and for the country that they want. And I believe that as in other places in the world, when people are given the ability and the capacity to be able to fight for their own future, they do.

So I think we’re going to see an important transition take place, and if we work out modalities between us that begin to deal with some of these issues with respect to the borders and safe havens and other things, which I think we can work out, that will only strengthen the effort going forward. So I think this is a very important year, and not – and I think most importantly, a year with the opportunity for the people of Afghanistan to choose their future leadership in the spring of next year.

I think we’ve got to wrap up in a moment, don’t we?

MODERATOR: One question, please.

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, I’m afraid if it’s one, it’s ten, and then I’m going to be late. (Laughter.) So bear with me. I’m sorry, folks. Thank you.

MR. AZIZ: Thank you very much.

SECRETARY KERRY: Thanks so much.