GENERAL DEMPSEY FORTELLS THE FUTURE

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 

Dempsey Gives Hints on Priorities for Future

By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

SEOUL, South Korea, Oct. 1, 2013 - In his first two-year term as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey hasn't blinked when facing challenges that would make some men quit – the Iraq withdrawal, the Afghan surge, the sexual assault epidemic, green-on-blue killings in Afghanistan, sequestration, Benghazi, the Arab Spring, the Syrian War, a colder relationship with the Russians. And it goes on day after day after day.

The chairman began his second two-year term today.

But he, and his wife Deanie, will make it through the second two-year term. He is in South Korea discussing the 31-year-old communist dictator that rules North Korea.

And the challenges elsewhere will pile up – the arguments over the East and South China Sea, trying to cajole allies to see the wisdom of your ways. Some challenges he will expect, but other will crop up and he will have to deal with them along with all the things he has to do.

And now the money that was there when he first took office is gone. In fact, instead of finding just $487 billion in savings in the defense budget, he needs to find an additional $500 billion – forcing a $1 trillion cut to defense.

And add that to the fact that the U.S. government just closed.

When he started his first term as chairman he issued four priorities. The first was to achieve the national objectives that the military forces had — Iraq and Afghanistan, deterrence in the Persian Gulf and so on.

Second was to build Joint Force 2020 which was a look to the future to build the capabilities we will need in the future and not just today.

The other two priorities dealt with the profession of arms. "It occurred to me that after 10 years we needed to take a look at the values to which we claim to live to determine whether the personnel policies, training, deployment, all of that was contributing to our sense of professionalism or whether we had some points of friction," he said during an interview here.

His final priority was keeping faith with the military family. Dempsey is an Armor officer by trade, and an English professor by heart and he is choosy about his words. "I chose family not families, because it's not just spouses and children; it's about veterans and it's about the many, many young men and women who will transition out of the military under my watch," he said.

These priorities will remain the same, he told reporters traveling with him. "But what I've learned over the past two years is where I have to establish some initiatives, some milestones, some programs and processes to achieve progress in those areas over the time remaining to me."

He notes it is a much different budgetary and fiscal environment than when he started. In fact, it's twice as bad. "It was $487 billion when I started, and now it's a trillion-dollar challenge," Dempsey said.

"Expectations about levels of support, the pace of training the pace of deployments are all going to change in the next couple of years, and I have to make sure the force adapts to that," he said.

"We're going to transition 100,000-plus out of the military, and I have to make sure those young men and women are ready for that change," Dempsey said. "I have to slow the growth of pay and health care – I don't have to reduce it – I have to slow the growth [and] make it sustainable."

"And I've got to reshape the force both in size and capability, and we've got [to] renew our sense of professionalism because it is through that, that we'll get through this incredible uncertainty," he said.

Dempsey is most worried about uncertainty in the force and what that is doing to the military family. "Now, we are far more adaptable than we are given credit for," he said. "There's this notion of the cumbersome military bureaucracy. Some is true, but there is also underneath the Pentagon an incredible group of young men and women leaders who change as they need to change to address the challenges as they find them. And they will continue to do that."

DOD SAYS US.-RUSSIAN RELATIONS CAN COOPERATE IN MANY AREAS

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 
U.S., Russia Can Make Bilateral Progress, DOD Official Says
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Sept. 5, 2013 - The United States and Russia disagree on some aspects of their bilateral relations, but there are many areas where the countries can and do cooperate, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia told the Heritage Foundation yesterday.

The relationship has been marked by ups and downs, Evelyn N. Farkas said, and that is normal. The idea, she added, is to work through these disagreements.

"We will continue to work with Russia to find mutually acceptable solutions," Farkas said in her prepared remarks. "We've been managing a significant disagreement with the Russians over Syria."

Still, Farkas said, American officials want to bolster defense cooperation. The United States wants to work on counterproliferation issues with Iran, North Korea, and on counterterrorism and counternarcotics in regions adjacent to Russia.

"Our level of interaction with Russia has increased substantially with the establishment of the Defense Relations Working Group in September 2010," she said. "The working group is intended to create mechanisms for discussion and exchange at the policy level between defense professionals on a range of issues, including defense reform and modernization, missile defense cooperation, defense technology cooperation, and global and regional security issues of mutual interest."

Increased cooperation on Afghanistan tops the U.S. wish list, Farkas said. "Working to bring improved stability to Afghanistan is clearly in U.S. and Russian interests, and Russia continues to be supportive by expanding the Northern Distribution Network and allowing for diversification in the types of cargo that can pass through its territory," she explained. "The U.S. and Russia continue working together to disrupt al-Qaida's and other terrorist groups' operational networks and undermine their access to financial resources."

Continued cooperation to combat piracy off the Horn of Africa also is a U.S. goal, Farkas said.

Even in areas of disagreement there must be conversations, Farkas said. Both Russia and the United States agree that the civil war in Syria should end, she noted, but Russia supports the regime of Bashar Assad. "Both of our countries have been adamant that we remain committed to working with each other to bring the parties together to negotiate a political settlement," she said.

Russia continues to express concern that U.S. and NATO missile defenses could pose a threat to Russia's strategic deterrent, Farkas said, and Russian leaders also question whether Iran really poses a threat.

"We continue to assure Russia that our missile defense efforts are not directed against Russia, nor do they pose a threat to its strategic nuclear deterrent," she said. "And we continue to make the case that the transparency and cooperation we are offering are the best way for Russia to gain the confidence it seeks that our missile defenses do not threaten Russia's strategic deterrent."

Continuing talks on nuclear arms reductions also is important, Farkas said. "We have made clear our willingness to discuss the full range of strategic stability issues of concern to both our countries, and we will continue to seek opportunities to make progress on this agenda," she added.

Farkas echoed a statement President Barack Obama made yesterday in Stockholm on U.S.-Russian relations, citing areas in which U.S. and Russian interests overlap.

The president pointed to progress the two nations have made in the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, in Russia joining the World Trade Organization, and in close cooperation on counterterrorism issues. Russia has also provided logistical support to U.S. and NATO forces based in Afghanistan.

Still, the president acknowledged, relations have cooled recently over Syria and over Russia granting asylum to National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden. "But I have not written off the idea that the United States and Russia are going to continue to have common interests even as we have some very profound differences on some other issues," Obama said. "And where our interests overlap, we should pursue common action. Where we've got differences, we should be candid about them --try to manage those differences, but not sugarcoat them."

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S REMARKS TO STAFF AND FAMILIES OF MOSCOW EMBASSY

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Meeting With Staff and Families of Embassy Moscow
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Spaso House
Moscow, Russia
May 8, 2013

　

AMBASSADOR MCFAUL: Well, ladies and gentlemen, it is a great privilege and honor to have with us today Secretary Kerry. I think we had an extraordinary day of diplomacy yesterday, and two things I just want to say in front of you Secretary Kerry.

Number one, with an incredibly productive, intense at some times, discussion with President Putin, and then later with a marathon day of diplomacy that I think ended at about 2:30 a.m. with Minister Lavrov, we got a new infusion and a new framing and a new strategic vision about how to talk about U.S.-Russian relations. And I want to tell you, Secretary Kerry, your trip could not have come at a better time, and I came away from that meeting thinking we have a very concrete set of issues to work with. We’re not always going to agree, as you said many times yesterday, but I thought the framing at the strategic level was at a very important time in U.S.-Russian relations.

And number two, I just want to say, on Syria in particular, we don’t know how it’s going to end, as you said yesterday many times, but I found it to be extraordinary the amount of time and effort that you are putting to work with our Russians on what I think is one of the biggest issues before our time. So for that infusion of new energy, I thank you greatly. I am enthused to be going back to work tomorrow. I’m glad that you all helped on this trip. And without further ado, ladies and gentlemen, Secretary of State John Kerry. (Applause.)

SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you very much. Thank you Mr. Ambassador, Michael. Thanks for the job that you’re doing, and Donna. Where’d Donna go out there? She’s here? Hey, Donna. Thank you very much. I appreciate your work with disabilities and children and everything. Thank you. And that’s Luke. We got Luke here. And Cole’s at school, is that right?

MRS. MCFAUL: Model UN.

SECRETARY KERRY: Oh, no. He’s at the model UN. He’s Helsinki – what am I talking about? – which is very exciting. But anyway, thank you very, very much for what you do.

And it’s always nice to be in the humble home of an ambassador in a foreign country. (Laughter.) I’m looking around here. I was talking to the President the other day, because he’d been to a couple places and I’d been to a couple places. I said, "Boy, these ambassadors have better homes than any of the rest of us." The President said, "Even better than the White House in some cases." But thank you all for coming out here this morning.

And kids, thank you very much for being part of this. You all look terrific. Did I get you out of school? (Laughter.) Yeah. Pretty exciting. So that’s really worthwhile, right? You’ll remember this forever, the guy who got you out of school. You won’t remember who I am or what I do – (laughter) – but gosh, you got out of school for a day and that was really fun.

Anyway, it’s really special for me to be here. Spaso House is an incredible place, historic obviously, when I think that Ambassador Bullitt was here and George Kennan, Ambassador Kennan, and our own Deputy Secretary of State Bill Burns. I was here once. I remember doing a big reception here with Bob Strauss when he was here. So historically, we have always had savvy, competent political players who also have a sense of history and an ability to do things in our ambassadors here, and Mike McFaul is no exception to that, and nor are any of you who work here, in terms of the tradition of the importance of this posting.

Russia is complicated, we all know, but vital. And the relationship with a Permanent Five member with as important a capacity to play a global role as Russia is is one of the most important diplomatic postings there is. We have had sort of a merry-go-round/rollercoaster ride over the last 20 years when the Soviet Union no longer – ceased to exist, and we’ve been transitioning. And I don’t think anybody can expect that kind of complicated transition to produce this ideal within this short span of time. It rarely does.

Look at the United States of America. I mean, you think of the 1700s and the turmoil between the Articles of Confederation and then later the Constitution, and then a civil war in the 1860s and then a civil rights movement in the 1960s, and we’re still trying to fill out the full promise of our own country’s Constitution. So we need to be thoughtful as we look at other countries as they go through their economic and social transformations.

And what all of you get to do is not just be sort of present at the creation, to think of a great book about diplomacy, but you get to be shaping the creation and involved in helping people to understand their way forward. There really isn’t a more exciting challenge, to be honest with you. And we can’t do it without you. It doesn’t matter what you do within the Embassy, it doesn’t matter whether you’re a Foreign Service Officer or a Civil Service or whether you are temporarily assigned to duty or whether you are here as a representative of a different agency of government among the many agencies that get housed under an embassy. We all have to work as a team.

And we particularly need the help of the locally hired, locally employed people. Those of you who are Russian or third-party, third-country employees are just as important as anybody else, because we can’t do it without your knowledge of the locality, your ability to guide us, the language abilities, knowing the social customs and the culture. All of that contributes to our ability to be able to be better diplomats.

I had the privilege, last Friday, I think it was – it’s a blur – to swear-in the newest class of young Foreign Service Officers. And it was really interesting. There were a group of former military personnel, former Peace Corps volunteers, former teachers, former journalists. Almost every one of them was coming to this mission with some other work experience behind them. Ninety-eight percent of the people that we brought in in this new class have lived abroad, traveled abroad, studied abroad extensively, and every single one of them had broad language skills.

So I think if you want to pick something to do in life in a world that is going through enormous change and enormous confrontation, there is no more exciting challenge than to be on the frontlines of representing the United States of America, our interests and our values, and working to build relationships with people in other countries. Every single one of you, whether you’re doing an interview in a consulate and you get tired doing it because you got too many people to process every day – you’re the face of America. In many cases, you may be the only government official people ever meet. You’ll be the impression and you’ll be the ambassador of our country to say to those people here’s how we behave in America, here’s what we believe in America, here’s how we treat people in America, here are the door of opportunities that we open to you because we are America.

So stand tall, don’t get tired, keep fighting. I know sometimes it’s frustrating. We’re just starting to get at the bureaucracy and all those kinds of issues. I hate bureaucracy. I’m sure you do too. We’re working hard to try to break down some of the walls and barriers, speed things up. I hope over the course of the next year you’ll begin to see some of those changes.

But from me, from President Obama, from the American people, thank you. A profound thank you to you for being here, for packing up your family, going to a new school. I remember what that was like. I was 11 years old when my dad was in the Foreign Service, and I thought it was the biggest adventure in a lifetime. I didn’t have a clue where I was, but it worked. And so somewhere here, maybe you’re a future Secretary of State. Would you like to be Secretary of State? (Laughter.) She’s nodding her head. Okay, guys. (Laughter.) We got – just wait a few years, when I’m finished. (Laughter.)

It really was a great adventure, and it’s something that has stayed with me all my life, because it helped to open my eyes so I could begin to look at other people not just as an American and not just through our view of the world, but begin to see things through their view of the world. And it’s better to balance things that way and have an understanding of how everybody else thinks works and doesn’t work.

So on behalf of America, thank you for being here in Moscow. And if you’re in a consulate somewhere else and happen to be visiting, thank you for that. But we are profoundly grateful to all of you, and I’m privileged to be here for a couple of days.

We, incidentally, did have a great day yesterday. I think we, hopefully, found a cooperative way forward to maybe try – I can’t guarantee you can – but try to bring people together to deal effectively with Syria and hopefully end bloodshed and see if there isn’t a way to find a way forward. It is not easy. Nothing is easy in this process.

I just met with a group of your civil society folks who are struggling to find their voice in their own country, who courageously stand up and fight for what we take for granted in many cases in America. And so you’re part of that journey too. Every single part of this is a mosaic, are the pieces that all come together to create the values and the policies that represent our great nation.

And I’m very proud to be at the State Department, where I promise you I will have your back. Let me count on you to have mine, and together we’re going to fight hard to make real the values that motivated most of you to join up in the first place. Thank you, and God bless. Appreciate it. (Applause.)

U.S. OFFICIAL'S REMARKS AT U.S.-RUSSIA INNOVATION WORKING GROUP EXECUTIVE SESSION

Map of Russia From CIA World Factbook

FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT

Remarks for the U.S. - Russia Innovation Working Group Executive Session
Remarks
Robert D. Hormats
Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment
Washington, DC
April 24, 2013
As Prepared

Thank you, Lorraine, for the kind introduction, and thank you and Oleg for coordinating the working group. I would also like to thank Microsoft – specifically Daniel Lewin and Dorothy Dwoskin – for hosting today’s meeting. I am very grateful to our Russian colleagues for their hard work and participation. And, of course, I would like to thank all of the working group members who attended and presented today.

Both the United States and Russia have a long and proud history of invention. We train some of the world’s best scientists and engineers. And we are home to some of the most innovative businesses. Bloomberg Business Week recently released a list of the 50 Most Innovative Countries. I was impressed—though not surprised—at how quickly Russia has advanced in the rankings. Russia has positioned itself to seize upon fast-growing global innovative sectors, such as aerospace and information and communications technology. We strongly supports Russia’s efforts to create a innovation economy because bringing new technologies to market is good not just for Russia, it is also beneficial to the U.S. economy and society as a whole.

This understanding is embedded in U.S.-Russia Innovation Working Group’s mission. Members of the U.S.-Russia Innovation Working Group have been working on an exciting array of initiatives to support commercialization. I will highlight three key areas of cooperation.

First, the working group has helped advance a series of regional partnerships. I am delighted that Deputy Governor Ivanov has joined today’s meeting to present on the cooperation plan between Nizhny Novgorod Oblast and the State of Maryland. Our goal is to spur future regional partnerships and, in particular, to broaden cooperation to include other regional clusters and other industries. The United States is home to a number of lesser-known, but equally impressive innovation clusters. There is a tremendous aerospace sector in Oklahoma, Florida, and Mississippi; Minnesota and Utah are home to a booming information technology sector; and Arizona is making strides in nanotechnology.

The Working Group should consider these clusters for future collaboration.

The second major area of discussion today was on the commercialization of innovative technologies. Working group members provided an update on their ongoing programs, including the American Councils’ Enhancing University Research and Entrepreneurial Capacity – or EURECA – program. This partnership between U.S. and Russian research universities is aimed at building the innovation ecosystem and expanding entrepreneurial and technology transfer capacities. In addition to the EURECA program update, CRDF Global and the National Business Incubators Association spoke about their efforts and ideas on promoting innovation in the United States and Russia.

Last, the working group has helped better delineate the government’s role in innovation. My good friend Alan Wolff—who is one of our foremost experts on comparative innovation policy—shared his thoughts on the U.S. experience and the role of our government. As I mentioned earlier, the United States is an innovation nation but, of course, we have learned hard lessons along the way.

So, there is a tremendous opportunity for others to benefit from our path. Tomorrow, many of you will visit the National Institutes of Health, where you will see firsthand an example of the government’s role in biotech innovation. You will also meet with officials from the Small Business Administration and learn about their "Small Business Innovation Research" program. This program helps small businesses by providing funds for the critical startup and development stages of technology commercialization. One of the most important things a government can do to promote innovation is to establish a legal and regulatory framework that is conducive to entrepreneurial thinking and bringing new ideas to market. You heard today recommendations by an expert group of U.S. and Russian lawyers for both of our governments. I have seen the policy recommendations and look forward to a read-out of the discussion during this session. I would like to thank all those who contributed to this report.

Now it is our turn.

The United States is—and will remain—and innovation economy. That’s why our government takes these recommendations seriously. The Russian government has also heeded the call to action. Russia has placed a very high priority on implementing policies that foster and facilitate innovation. The Bloomberg statistic I quoted earlier is testament to this fact. My colleague and co-chair of the U.S.-Russia Innovation Working Group, Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation and Government Chief of Staff Vladislav Surkov will speak to the Russian perspective. Mr. Surkov has been a prominent voice for the promotion of innovation in Russia and a strong supporter of our bilateral innovation cooperation agenda. Vladislav Yuryevich it is a pleasure to have you here, and I now turn the microphone over to you.

Thank you.

U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY AND RUSSIAN DEFENSE MINISTER SHOYGU DISCUSS SECURITY ISSUES

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Hagel, Russian Counterpart Discuss Mutual Security Issues
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 26, 2013 - Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoygu made a congratulatory call to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, and the two leaders discussed a range of issues, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said yesterday.

Hagel and Shoygu discussed the ongoing security transition in Afghanistan, Little said in a statement.

"Secretary Hagel assured his counterpart that the handover of security responsibilities is progressing as the capabilities of the Afghan national security forces continue to improve," he added.

Hagel said the United States would keep Russia and all concerned apprised throughout the process, and he encouraged close bilateral cooperation on other issues, including Syria, North Korea and Iran.

"Minister Shoygu expressed his desire to reconvene missile defense discussions with the U.S. at the deputy minister level," Little said. "Secretary Hagel agreed and reiterated that this is an important part of U.S.-Russian relations."

Hagel assured the minister that these discussions would continue and be carried forward by Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Jim Miller, the press secretary noted.

"Secretary Hagel expressed his appreciation for the call, as well as his desire to continue close coordination on a range of global issues," Little said.

U.S. PRESS STATEMENT ON ENDING INTER-COUNTRY ADOPTIONS BETWEEN U.S. AND RUSSIA

The Peter and Paul Fortress in Saint Petersburg - built between 1706 and 1740 - surrounds the Saints Peter and Paul Cathedral (completed 1733), which houses the remains of almost all of the members of the Russian imperial family

　

FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT, RUSSIAN LAW

Statement on Russia's Yakovlev Act
Press Statement
Patrick Ventrell
Acting Deputy Spokesperson, Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC

December 28, 2012

We deeply regret Russia’s passage of a law ending inter-country adoptions between the United States and Russia and restricting Russian civil society organizations that work with American partners. American families have adopted over 60,000 Russian children over the past 20 years, and the vast majority of these children are now thriving thanks to their parents’ loving support. The Russian government’s politically motivated decision will reduce adoption possibilities for children who are now under institutional care. We regret that the Russian government has taken this step rather than seek to implement the bilateral adoption agreement that entered into force in November. We are further concerned about statements that adoptions already underway may be stopped and hope that the Russian government would allow those children who have already met and bonded with their future parents to finish the necessary legal procedures so that they can join their families.

The limitations imposed by the Act on Russian civil society’s ability to work with American partners will also make it more difficult for Russian and American non-governmental organizations to cooperate in areas as diverse as human rights advocacy, open government, and electoral transparency. The United States remains committed to supporting the development of civil society and the democratic process around the world, including in Russia.

U.S.-RUSSIA RELATIONS

 

Photo: Saint Basil's Cathedral, Moscow in winter. From: CIA World Factbook

 
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
U.S. Relations With Russia
Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs
Fact Sheet
December 14, 2012
The United States seeks a relationship with Russia based on cooperation in the pursuit of mutual interests and a frank and open discussion of disagreements based on mutual respect as the two countries seek to address the shared challenges of the 21st century.

Russia matters for the defense and promotion of U.S. national interests in a way matched by few other countries in the world. Russia is the world’s largest country by landmass and is a key geopolitical player in the East Asia-Pacific region, Central Asia, the Caucasus, and Europe. Russia and the U.S. collectively control over 90 percent of the world’s nuclear weapons, and Russia is the world’s largest producer of hydrocarbons. It is a permanent member of the UN Security Council, a member of the G8 and G20, and a key player in the Quartet on Middle East peace, the P5+1 talks on Iran, and the Six-Party talks on North Korea.

On such critical issues as preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, combating terrorism, countering narcotics, addressing the effects of climate change, increasing trade and investment to enhance economic prosperity, and managing global financial markets, the United States is better positioned to advance our national interests if we can work with Russia in the spirit of cooperation. Russia’s long-term prosperity, modernity, integration into the global economy, and political liberalization are all in the interest of the United States.

The New START Treaty was signed on April 8, 2010, and entered into force on February 5, 2011, and demonstrates U.S. and Russian leadership in reducing the number of nuclear weapons in the world. New START reduces the limits on the number of U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear arms by a third and restores important verification and inspection measures. On April 13, 2010, the two countries also signed a Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement, which will enable the disposal of 34 tons of weapons-grade plutonium on each side, or enough for about 17,000 nuclear weapons. On January 11, 2011, the U.S. and Russia concluded an agreement on civilian nuclear cooperation, establishing a legal basis for cooperation and expanding opportunities for U.S. companies in Russia.

In terms of stabilizing Afghanistan, Russia has been a critical partner. Thanks to Russia’s agreement to allow the transit of U.S. personnel and equipment across Russian territory in support of the ISAF mission, as of June 2012, more than 2,374 flights and over 404,000 military personnel have transited this corridor, while Russia’s ground transit arrangement with NATO has resulted in the shipment of over 50,000 containers of supplies to Afghanistan.

We are working together to prevent Iran and North Korea from pursuing nuclear weapons programs. Together with Russia, we crafted United Nations Security Council Resolution 1929, which introduced the most comprehensive set of multilateral sanctions to date on Iran. In 2010 Russia canceled the planned sale of an advanced air-defense system (the S-300) to Iran, further advancing our non-proliferation aims. The U.S. also worked closely with Russia to pass United Nations Security Council Resolution 1874, which strengthens financial and arms embargoes on North Korea.

The United States and Russia are increasing people-to-people connections through education, culture, sports, media, and other professional interactions. The objective of these efforts is to promote the mutual understanding required to build lasting ties between our two peoples. In the field of cultural and public diplomacy, the "American Seasons" program in Russia has brought a wide spectrum of cultural offerings to the Russian public. In 2012, the Chicago Symphony Orchestra completed its first tour to Russia in more than two decades. Also in 2012, U.S. audiences applauded the return of the Bolshoi Ballet to the Kennedy Center and enjoyed the Mariinsky Ballet’s performances of "Cinderella". The "Russian Seasons" cultural program in America included the bicentennial celebration of the founding of the Russian settlement at Fort Ross, California. Bilateral agreements have also been concluded on cooperation in intercountry adoptions as well as liberalization of practices governing entry visas. The bilateral Agreement Regarding Cooperation in Adoption of Children which was signed in 2011 by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov provides better safeguards for adoptive children taking into account the interests and obligations of the adoptive parents. In September 2012, a historic U.S.-Russia visa agreement entered into effect, making Russian and American travelers for business or tourism eligible to receive visas valid for multiple entries during a period of 36 months.

The United States and Russia do not see eye to eye on all issues, but our relationship accommodates frank discussion of disagreements in a spirit of mutual respect with the aim of managing our differences. Where we have differences – on Georgia, Syria, human rights, etc., – we will address them openly and honestly, and will stand by our principles. Pursuing cooperation where it is in our mutual interest enables a more substantial, less polemical dialogue on the hard issues. Our full bilateral agenda for 2013 features deepening economic ties with Russia, the newest member of the WTO; making progress where we can on missile defense; and expanding the work of the Bilateral Presidential Commission.

Bilateral Presidential Commission

In April 2009, Presidents Obama and Medvedev agreed to the formation of the Bilateral Presidential Commission (BPC). The Bilateral Presidential Commission is the premier forum for cooperation between the United States and Russia, and provides a framework for dialogue and the identification of new opportunities based on our shared interests.

The Bilateral Presidential Commission’s 21 working groups continue to produce concrete, substantive results that impact not only our governments but also regular people living in both our countries. Its ongoing expansion – including recently-added working groups on innovation, rule of law and military technical cooperation – and new initiatives demonstrate that our vast bureaucracies are learning the habits and recognizing the benefits of continuing cooperation in between presidential and other high-level meetings.

The BPC continues to function as the vehicle that provides regular attention to our biggest mutual policy objectives via a transparent and structured mechanism. It brings together over 40 U.S. and Russian agencies, as well as numerous NGOs and businesses.

The BPC’s principal objectives include the strengthening of strategic stability, international security, economic well-being, and the development of ties between Russians and Americans. Its core principles include a focus on common interests, a two-way partnership and exchange, a frank dialogue respectful of differences, and the completion of tangible results.

The BPC aims to institutionalize the government-to-government and people-to-people aspects of the bilateral relationship. Increased participation by the non-government sphere – involving private enterprise, NGOs, and other elements of civil society in both countries – is and will remain an important goal of the Commission.


Bilateral Economic Relations

The United States is working vigorously to expand bilateral trade and investment cooperation to benefit both Russia and the United States. Over the past three years, the positive atmosphere resulting from the "reset" of bilateral relations has led to an unprecedented advance in economic cooperation between our countries. From 2009 to 2011, U.S. exports to Russia rose 57 percent and total U.S.-Russia trade increased over 80 percent. U.S. companies reported numerous major business deals in Russia in 2012, including the ExxonMobil-Rosneft deal in May for exploration in the Arctic shelf, Boeing’s $15 billion in aircraft sales in Russia over the past five years, and Ex-Im Bank’s June MOU signing with Sberbank, Russia’s largest bank, to support up to $1 billion in exports to Russia.

In December 2011, culminating 18 years of hard work and dedication, Russia was invited to join the World Trade Organization (WTO), a major accomplishment that will bring the world’s largest economy outside the WTO into the organization and bind it to a set of rules governing trade, as well as a dispute-resolution mechanism to enforce those rules. To ensure that U.S. companies and workers can take full advantage of Russia’s WTO membership, Congress enacted legislation to extend permanent normal trade relations to Russia.

Our governments are also engaged in a wide range of joint efforts under the Bilateral Presidential Commission in the areas of trade, investment, multilateral economic cooperation, commercial engagement, and innovation that will benefit the people of both countries

Russian Membership in International Organizations

Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Russia took steps to become a full partner in the world's principal political groupings. In December 1991, Russia assumed the permanent UN Security Council seat formerly held by the Soviet Union. Over the years, Russia has increased its international profile and played a growing role in regional issues. Russia and the United States both belong to a number of other international organizations and groupings, including the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), Middle East Quartet, P5+1 on Iran, Six-Party Talks on North Korea, G-8, and G-20.

In 1994 Russia joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Partnership for Peace initiative. In 1997 the NATO-Russia Founding Act established formal relations between the NATO and Russia, and in 2002 the NATO-Russia Council was created.

U.S.-RUSSIA SIGN MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR COOPERATION IN ANTARTICA

Map:  Antartica.  Credit:  CIA World Factbook.
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, ANTARTICA

U.S.-Russia Cooperation on Antarctica, Interregional Areas, and Beringia

Fact Sheet
Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, DC
September 8, 2012

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov met during the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Summit in Vladivostok, Russia on September 8, 2012 to sign a Memorandum of Understanding for Cooperation in Antarctica and to issue Joint Statements on Pursuing a Transboundary Area of Shared Beringian Heritage and on Enhancing Interregional Cooperation. The United States and Russia conduct some of the most extensive and diverse scientific activities in Antarctica, and are among the original architects and signatories of the 1959 Antarctic Treaty.

Antarctic Cooperation
The Memorandum of Understanding for Cooperation in Antarctica will:
Strengthen cooperation and significantly improve coordination of bilateral policies, science, logistics, search and rescue, training, and public outreach in Antarctica.
Reinforce cooperative activities already taking place. For the first time, the United States and Russia are jointly conducting inspections of foreign facilities in Antarctica, which will take place in two phases in 2012.
Interregional Cooperation
The Joint Statement on Interregional Cooperation will:
Encourage closer state and municipal ties, such as sister-city initiatives, with the goal of stimulating increased U.S.-Russia trade and investment links at the local level.
Facilitate exchanges on state and municipal governance, paying close attention to e-government issues as well as the development of projects, including infrastructure development, along with plans to exchange delegations from local governments.
Foster business ties between our two countries at the sub-national level, particularly between the Pacific Northwest and the Russian Far East, where investments like ExxonMobil’s on Sakhalin Island, as well as our increased U.S. agricultural exports, are already making headway in our economic relationship.
Beringia
The Joint Statement on Pursuing a Transboundary Area of Shared Beringian Heritage represents the first time the United States and Russia have stated their intention to formally link National Parks in Alaska - the Bering Land Bridge Natural Preserve and the Cape Krusenstern National Monument - with the soon-to-be-designated Beringia National Park in Chukhotka, Russia.

The linkage will:
Facilitate conservation of flora, fauna, and the natural ecosystem.
Preserve kinship ties, traditional lifestyle, and languages of the indigenous peoples of the region.
Enhance collaboration on conservation, management, scientific research, and effective monitoring of the environment.
Formalize the symbolic linkage of our two continents, governments, and people.

EXTENDING PERMANENT NORMAL TRADE RELATIONS TO RUSSIA

Photo:  Cargo Ship.  Credit:  Wikimedia.

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

The Economic and Strategic Case for Extending PNTR to Russia

Remarks
William J. Burns
Deputy Secretary
U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Washington, DC
September 6, 2012
Thank you. It’s an honor to be here with Under Secretary Sanchez at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. It’s an honor to be introduced by Susan Schwab, for whose service as U.S. Trade Representative I have great admiration, and who did so much during her tenure to advance American economic interests in Russia. And it’s an honor to speak to you briefly today about an issue that matters to all of us -- the economic and strategic argument for extending Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) to Russia.

I have spent a good deal of my checkered diplomatic career helping Administrations of both parties navigate the complexities of the U.S.-Russia relationship. I’ve seen moments of great promise in that relationship, as well as periods of sharp and sometimes abiding differences. Through it all, I’ve tried my best to keep focused on what’s at stake for America’s own interests, as well as for Russia’s long-term evolution. That sense of focus is not always easy to sustain amidst the push and pull of events in both our countries, and in the world around us, but it’s essential to understanding the importance of extending PNTR to Russia today.

This afternoon’s meeting is well-timed. Tomorrow night, Secretary Clinton will touch down in Vladivostok for the 2012 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Summit where liberalizing trade is expected to be high on the agenda. This is the first time Russia has hosted APEC. But more importantly, Russia is convening this gathering as the newest member of another group: the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Russia’s membership in the WTO is a major milestone, reflecting the strong, persistent support of the last three U.S. Administrations. However, until Congress acts to extend PNTR to Russia, our businesses will be deprived of an unprecedented opportunity to boost trade with one of the largest and fastest growing markets in the world.

A vote to extend PNTR is not a favor to Russia. It is a vote to create and sustain jobs in the United States. PNTR legislation has attracted bipartisan support in both chambers of Congress and from leaders of states across the country. They have lined up to make clear that PNTR is a vital opportunity to keep our companies competitive and help create new, high-quality American jobs. Continuing to deny PNTR for Russia at this stage only hurts American companies and workers, who are facing fierce economic competition—in more sectors and from more places than ever before.

At a time when our leadership in the world depends on shoring up our economy at home, the potential upside to opening the Russian market to U.S. goods and services is considerable. Russia today is the 7th largest economy in the world, but only our 20th largest trading partner. Yet, for many U.S. states, exports to Russia are growing faster than exports to the rest of the world; in April alone, U.S. goods exports to Russia reached $1 billion, a new record level. The U.S. Department of Commerce estimates that at least 5,000 American jobs are supported for every $1 billion of U.S. exports.

But until the WTO Agreement applies between the United States and Russia, America’s competitors will enjoy more liberal treatment for exports of goods and services and stronger commitments on protection of intellectual property rights--American companies will not. Until the WTO Agreement applies between us, Russia will be under no obligation to apply science based food safety standards to U.S. agricultural exports, leaving poultry and beef producers in Delaware, Arkansas, and Montana vulnerable. And until the WTO Agreement applies between us, we will not have the same recourse as our competitors to the WTO’s binding dispute resolution mechanism to ensure that Russia complies with its WTO commitments.

Failing to lift Jackson-Vanik and extend PNTR will not penalize Russia, nor will it provide an effective lever to change the Russian Government’s behavior. However, extending PNTR is a smart strategic investment that over the long term can help create a better, more predictable partner for the United States and contribute to Russian efforts to build a more transparent and accountable political and economic system.

Russia today is very much at a crossroads. As demonstrations across Russia over the last nine months have reminded us, a growing number of Russians both in and out of government want to see their country develop into a modern state with a diverse and competitive economy. But those determined Russians, many from the emerging middle class, are not only driven by a thirst for economic prosperity, but for a voice in how decisions are made in their society—for the predictability and accountability that come with rule of law.

While we do not expect change to occur overnight, this is a trend-line that is increasing in pace--and one we should support. Extending PNTR and thereby increasing U.S. trade with Russia can strengthen the hand of Russians who want an outward-looking society and an economy that depends more on the innovativeness and resourcefulness of its people, rather than on resources pulled out of the ground. It can also provide positive reinforcement to those working to create a level playing field, with transparent, predictable rules to serve as a hedge against corruption and further Russia’s political modernization. These are not just my own views. They are the arguments of some of the Kremlin’s harshest critics who have called on the United States to terminate Jackson-Vanik. That does not diminish their deep concerns about human rights and the Magnitskiy case–concerns which we strongly share.

Neither WTO membership nor extending PNTR to Russia can instantly create the kind of change the Russian people are seeking. PNTR should be one part of a stronger and fuller rule of law framework that we pursue with Russia, combined with the investment protections that would come with a new Bilateral Investment Treaty and implementation of the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention, which Russia joined earlier this year. These steps will not transform Russia’s economy overnight. But they will help integrate Russia into the global economy and send strong signals to investors about Russia’s commitment to strengthening rule of law.

As I said earlier, I’ve learned in many years of helping to navigate U.S.-Russian relations that we have to be realistic about the challenges which lie ahead.

We have serious and enduring differences with Russia that PNTR will not change. We continue to disagree fundamentally about Georgia, whose sovereignty, territorial integrity, and independence we firmly support. We also disagree fundamentally about Syria, where no stable outcome is possible as long as Bashar al-Asad remains in power, shedding the blood of his own people and risking a spillover of sectarian violence in a region that already has more than its share of troubles. Russia must make a choice here in determining where its interests lie. In the meantime—with Russia’s help or without it—we will continue to work with others in the international community to seek an end to the violence and to develop concrete steps to support a real political transition that advances the processes of reform, reconciliation, and reconstruction.

We also have profound differences with Russia over human rights. We want to see Russia emerge as both a global power and a vibrant democracy with strong rule of law. And we are seeing a new generation of Russians asking important questions of their own leaders. Without an active and independent media, how will Russia succeed in rooting out corruption and its debilitating effects on the economy? How will Russia build a modern political system responsive to modern challenges unless its citizens and activists can freely express dissenting views, without fear of political prosecution? How can Russia strengthen accountability in governance when whistleblowers like Sergey Magnitsky are arrested or killed for pointing out fraud and abuse? What will Russia do to develop a strong, capable civil society when NGOs receiving foreign funds are stigmatized with misleading labels?

While we cannot and should not impose American solutions, we can and do support those Russians who are seeking answers to these tough questions about their nation’s future. We are already taking concrete steps, using existing restrictions on human rights abusers, to ensure that no one implicated in the death of Sergey Magnitsky can travel to the U.S. We will also continue to support programs that bolster Russia’s civil society and strengthen the hand of those seeking a freer and more open and democratic future for Russia.

By now it should be clear, this is not a simple or easy relationship. Given the complexities and hard work involved, it may be tempting to downplay Russia’s importance. We do not have that luxury. Russia is a permanent member of the UN Security Council and one of the world’s largest nuclear powers, and it will remain profoundly in America’s interest to work with Russia where our interests overlap. Already over the last three years we have shown that we can achieve significant results, including on reductions of strategic nuclear weapons and on Afghanistan, where Russia has proven itself a valued partner in ensuring the safe transit of our personnel and equipment to the region. With PNTR, we hope to add expanded trade to this list.

We are encouraged that committees in the Senate and the House have passed PNTR legislation with broad bipartisan support. We also understand that it is likely that a PNTR bill will be considered by both chambers of Congress along with legislation addressing the tragic case of Sergey Magnitskiy. We continue to believe that the case for extending PNTR to Russia stands on its own merits. And, in close consultation with Congress, we will continue to seek out the most effective avenues to address the Magnitskiy case and human rights more broadly.

The economic and strategic stakes are clear. And so is the choice before Congress. Either give Americans the chance to compete on a level playing field in an important market—or we can ensure that the opportunities we worked so hard to create are seized not by Americans, but by workers and businesses beyond our shores. We urge Congress to take action as soon as possible.

Thank you again for the opportunity to meet with you today. Thank you for all your efforts on this important issue. And thank you for everything that the U.S. Chamber does to help ensure that Americans understand the growing connection between economic renewal at home and opening up new markets and new possibilities overseas. I look forward very much to continuing to work with you in that enormously important mission. Thank you.

VIGIALANT EAGLE 12: INTERNATIONAL EXERCISE TO HANDLE TERRORIST HIJACKINGS

Air Force Brig. Gen. Richard W, Scobee, deputy director of operations for North American Aerospace Defense Command, answers questions about Vigilant Eagle 12, Aug. 29, 2012. U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. Thomas J. Doscher
　
FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
NORAD, Russia Train to Confront Terrorist HijackingsBy Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Aug. 30, 2012 - It was a scene unthinkable even 30 years ago as U.S., Canadian and Russian militaries worked together this week at the North American Aerospace Command headquarters to confront a common enemy: terrorist hijackers.
 That's exactly what happened during Vigilant Eagle 12, the third exercise of its kind designed to promote collaboration in detecting hijacked aircraft and scrambling military jets to intercept and escort them to safety.
 This year's three-day exercise was computer-based, with participants at the NORAD headquarters at Peterson Air Force Base, Colo.; Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska; and at two bases in Russia.
 The scenario involved commercial airliners on international flights that had been seized by terrorists, Air Force Brig. Gen. Richard W. Scobee, NORAD's deputy operations director, told reporters as the exercise wrapped up yesterday. One simulated hijacking took off from Alaska and was headed for Russian airspace; the other originated in Russia and was bound for the United States.
 The scenarios required NORAD – the U.S.-Canada command that safeguards U.S. skies under Operation Noble Eagle -- and the Russian air force to go through the procedures they would use to dispatch fighter jets to investigate and track the aircraft heading toward each other's airspace. At that point, they handed off the missions to the other to complete.
 Applying lessons learned during last year's exercise, which involved actual aircraft, the participants worked through escort and handoff procedures using their different communications, command-and-control and air traffic control systems, Scobee explained.
 To complicate the scenarios, and to reflect what assets might be available during a real-life hijacking, they had to work without input from the U.S. Air Force's Airborne Warning and Control System or Russia's A-50 Beriev system.
 NORAD and Russia share surprisingly similar tactics, techniques and procedures, Scobee said yesterday during a post exercise news conference. "It is remarkable that they are so similar," he said. "Even though we developed them separately, we see the problem similarly."
 Subtle differences became transparent during the exercise, Scobee said, because of the "clean handoff" as one command handed the mission and authority over to the other. "It was like a handshake," he said.
The unifying factor, Scobee said, was an understanding that actions taken could mean the difference between life and death for passengers. "That is the No. 1 thing – and the Russian Federation is just like NORAD [and] the United States and Canada," Scobee said. "We want to protect our citizens, and that is our primary goal."
 Scobee and Maj. Gen. Sergey Dronov of the Russian air force, who led Russia's delegation in Colorado, praised the professionalism of both the NORAD and Russian militaries and their shared appreciation of the importance of the mission.
 "Right now, we have a common enemy, and that is terrorism," Dronov said through an interpreter.
 "Our countries are uniquely plagued by terrorism," agreed Scobee. "And this exercise gives us an opportunity to work together, to learn from each other about how we are dealing with those kinds of events."

The goal, he said, is to increase the complexity of the exercises, refining concepts and procedures in simulation, then applying them in the sky the following year.
 "Next year, we will go back and use lessons learned from this exercise and apply them to another live-fly exercise," he said. "It will be one of those things where we learn from each other and keep building on the exercises we have."
 Future exercises will continue to integrate new curve balls that keep participants on their toes while reflecting how adaptable adversaries operate, Scobee said.
 "It is a constant chess game, because just like we don't keep our tactics stagnant, terrorists do the same thing," he said. "They are always thinking of another way to try to get past our systems of control. So we always have to think about adjusting our tactics, our training and our procedures."
 Dronov said he was impressed during this year's exercise by how quickly the participants dealt with challenging scenarios thrown their way. "They are also walking away with some priceless experience of interaction with each other," he said. "I am confident that in the future, this cooperation will continue."
 The Vigilant Eagle series stems from a 2003 agreement between the U.S. and Russian presidents to promote closer cooperation as they move beyond the Cold War era, Scobee explained. The threat of international hijackers served as a foundation to help advance that effort, resulting in a relevant exercise program that helps address a recognized threat.
 "The populations of the United States and Canada and the Russian Federation should hear this loud and clear: We are here to ensure their safety," Scobee said. "Not only do we practice here at NORAD multiple times a day for this to happen, but now we are also practicing with our international partners to ensure that the air systems of all our countries are safe. And then, if something does go wrong, that we are there to take action."

This helps to provide a unified front against terrorist hijackers like those who attacked the United States on 9/11, giving birth to the Noble Eagle mission, he said.

"We will never be helpless again," Scobee added. "[The public] should hear that loud and clear."

U.S. SEC. OF STATE CLINTON ON RUSSIA JOINING THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
By Making Moscow a Normal Trading Partner, Congress Would Create American Jobs and Advance Human Rights
Media Note Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC
June 20, 2012
The following op-ed written by Secretary Clinton is appearing in print in the Wall Street Journal and online at Wall Street Journal:
Later this summer, Russia will join the World Trade Organization (WTO) in the culmination of a process that began nearly two decades ago. This is good news for American companies and workers, because it will improve our access to one of the world's fastest-growing markets and support new jobs here at home.

U.S.-Russian bilateral trade isn't reaching anything close to its full potential today. While that trade has increased over the past few years, America's exports to Russia still represent less than 1% of our global exports. Given the potential for expanding these links, Russia's WTO membership will be a net benefit for our economy.

But there is one obstacle standing in the way. American businesses won't be able to take advantage of this new market opening unless Congress terminates the application of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment and extends "permanent normal trading relations" (PNTR) to Russia.

Jackson-Vanik, which restricts U.S. trade with countries that limit their people's emigration rights, was adopted by Congress in the early 1970s to help thousands of Jews leave the Soviet Union. It long ago achieved this historic purpose.
Now it's time to set it aside. Four decades after the adoption of this amendment, a vote to extend permanent normal trading relations to Russia will be a vote to create jobs in America. Until then, Russia's markets will open and our competitors will benefit, but U.S. companies will be disadvantaged.

Extending permanent normal trading relations isn't a gift to Russia. It is a smart, strategic investment in one of the fastest growing markets for U.S. goods and services. It's also an investment in the more open and prosperous Russia that we want to see develop.

As the demonstrations across Russia over the past six months make clear, the country's middle class is demanding a more transparent and accountable government, a more modern political system, and a diversified economy. We should support these Russian efforts.

When Russia joins the WTO, it will be required—for the first time ever—to establish predictable tariff rates, ensure transparency in the publication and enactment of laws, and adhere to an enforceable mechanism for resolving disputes. If we extend permanent normal trading relations to Russia, we'll be able to use the WTO's tools to hold it accountable for meeting these obligations.

The Obama administration is under no illusions about the challenges that lie ahead. WTO membership alone will not suddenly create the kind of change being sought by the Russian people. But it is in our long-term strategic interest to collaborate with Russia in areas where our interests overlap.

Already our work together over the past three years has produced real results, including the New Start Treaty to reduce strategic nuclear weapons, an agreement on civilian nuclear cooperation, military transit arrangements to support our efforts in Afghanistan, and cooperation on Iran sanctions. With permanent normal trading relations, we would add expanded trade to the list.

To be sure, we have real differences with Russia. We disagree fundamentally about the situation in Georgia. On Syria, we are urging Russia to push Bashar al-Assad to implement former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan's six-point plan, end the violence, and work with the international community in promoting a transition.

In addition, President Obama and I have clearly expressed our serious concerns about human rights in Russia. And we have taken steps to address these challenges, including support for programs that promote human rights, rule of law, and civil society there. We have strengthened ties between nongovernmental organizations in both countries, from political activists to groups working for women's rights. Following the tragic death of Sergei Magnitsky, a lawyer who blew the whistle on official corruption, we imposed restrictions to ensure that no one implicated in this crime can travel to the United States. We are continuing to work with Congress on addressing these issues.

Some argue that continuing to apply Jackson-Vanik to Russia would give us some leverage in these areas of disagreement. We disagree—and so do leaders of Russia's political opposition. They have called on the U.S. to terminate Jackson-Vanik, despite their concerns about human rights and the Magnitsky case. In fact, retaining Jackson-Vanik only fuels more anti-American sentiment in Russia.

Russia's membership in the WTO will soon be a fact of life. Failing to extend permanent normal trading relations will not penalize Russia, nor will it provide a lever with which to change Moscow's behavior. It will only hurt American workers and American companies. By extending those trading relations, we can create new markets for our people and support the political and economic changes that Russia's people are demanding. These reforms will ultimately make Russia a more just and open society as well as a better partner over the long term for the U.S.

STATE DEPARTMENT CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY ON NORMALIZATION OF U.S.-RUSSIA TRADE RELATIONS

Photo Credit:  Wikimedia.
FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Russia's Accession to the World Trade Organization and Granting Russia Permanent Normal Trade Relations
Testimony William J. Burns
Deputy Secretary Statement before the Ways and Means Committee of the United States House of Representatives
Washington, DC
June 20, 2012
Chairman Camp, Ranking Member Levin, Distinguished Members of the Committee: thank you for inviting me to appear before you today.
This hearing comes at an opportune moment. This summer, Russia will become a member of the World Trade Organization. Before this happens, Congress has a choice: it can extend Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) to Russia, giving American exporters and workers a level the playing field in one of the fastest growing markets in the world; or it can keep Jackson-Vanik in place, preventing American companies from reaping the benefits of an unprecedented opportunity to boost trade in a large and growing market.
Terminating the Jackson-Vanik Amendment’s application is not a favor to Russia. It is a step to help create American jobs. And, as Russia’s aspiring democrats have made clear, it is a smart, strategic investment in the kind of country Russia’s emerging middle class is striving for -- a Russia that promotes a strong rule of law. This step is in the Russian people’s own self-interest and to the practical benefit of American companies and workers.

I. The Economic Stakes
At a time when the economic needs of the American people are great, U.S. foreign policy must help American workers and businesses connect to markets abroad to drive our economic recovery at home.
The upside of opening Russian markets to American exporters is clear. From 2009 to 2011, U.S. exports to Russia rose 57 percent, and total U.S.-Russia trade rose over 80 percent. However, U.S. trade with Russia still totals less than one percent of our global trade. Russia may be the world’s seventh-largest economy, but it is our 20th largest trading partner.

Lifting Jackson-Vanik and extending PNTR does not require the United States to change any of its tariffs, services, market access, or other World Trade Organization (WTO) commitments. It simply makes permanent the treatment we have already extended to imports from Russia every year since 1992 and ensures that the WTO Agreement will apply between us. If the WTO Agreement does not apply between us American companies will be at a disadvantage. While America’s competitors will enjoy more liberal treatment for exports of goods and services and stronger commitments on protection of intellectual property rights, American companies will not. Russia will not have an obligation to apply science-based food safety standards to U.S. exports of meat and poultry or WTO rules on antidumping, leaving American companies vulnerable. Worse still, when our economic competitors from Brazil, Europe and China have grievances in Russia, their governments will be able to turn to a binding WTO dispute mechanism. The United States will not.

II. The Strategic Backdrop
Beyond the benefits to immediate U.S. economic interests, extending PNTR to Russia is a strategic investment in our long-term relationship. Our strategic interests around the world demand that we cooperate with Russia in a number of areas. Russia is a permanent member of the Security Council and a member of the P5+1. Together Russia and the United States hold 90 percent of the world’s nuclear weapons. Russia is the single largest source of the world’s hydrocarbons. Russia sits astride Europe, Asia, and the broader Middle East, three regions whose geostrategic importance will continue to shape American interests for years to come.

By working together with Russia over the last three and a half years, we have shown that we can achieve tangible results that matter to our own self-interest and national security. We are implementing the New START Treaty. Together, we are disposing of enough weapons-grade plutonium for 17,000 nuclear warheads. Russia joined with other members of the United Nations (UN) Security Council in supporting Security Council Resolution 1929 and voluntarily cancelled the sale of a sophisticated air defense system to Iran, a contract worth over a billion dollars. This week, Moscow hosted international talks to press Iran to comply with its international obligations regarding its nuclear program. Russia also provides critical logistical support to international forces in Afghanistan: many of the supplies that transit the Northern Distribution Network go through Russia and a majority of our troops traveling to Afghanistan transit through Russian airspace -- over 370,000 military personnel in all.

The United States and Russia have achieved gains that extend beyond security and global politics to touch the daily lives of Americans and Russians. Last July, Secretary Clinton and Foreign Minister Lavrov signed an agreement to build trust and transparency on the sensitive issue of inter-country adoption. They also approved a reciprocal visa agreement to makes it easier for business people and tourists to travel between our countries. And through the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission and its 20 working groups, we have built new partnerships and engaged our citizens, businesses and non-governmental organizations in areas such as health care and energy efficiency.

Even as we seek progress on areas of mutual interest, there are also areas of real difference between our countries on issues ranging from missile defense and Georgia to Syria and human rights. We continue to believe that cooperation with Russia on missile defense can enhance the security of the United States, our allies in Europe, and Russia. In pursuing cooperation on missile defense, the United States will not agree to constrain or limit our missile defenses. U.S. support for Georgia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders will not change. On Syria, our message to our Russian colleagues has been clear and consistent. Assad’s campaign of terror against his own people is unconscionable. It is past time for action to meet our obligations as UN Security Council members to protect peace and security and allow the Syrian people to pull their country back from the brink and embark on a political transition.

We have serious concerns about democracy and human rights in Russia -- including the unsolved murders of journalists like Paul Klebnikov and the tragic death of Sergey Magnitskiy. In these instances and many others, we have not hesitated to voice our concerns publicly and directly with Russia’s leadership. We have also taken action. Thanks to existing authorities and the President’s Proclamation on Human Rights last August, we have taken steps to deny visas to those who have committed serious human rights abuses, including those involved in the Magnitskiy case. Through U.S. assistance programs, we are also supporting the Russian people in their efforts to promote transparency, accountable government, and the fair application of the rule of law.

Today, a deeper economic partnership represents one of our greatest opportunities to work to build trust and pursue common interests with Russia. The removal of Jackson-Vanik would give ballast to our overall relationship with Russia and strengthen the case of those who argue that greater cooperation with America is good for the Russian people.

Jackson-Vanik has served a noble and historic purpose. It put American law firmly behind the liberation of hundreds of thousands of Soviet Jews trapped on the wrong side of the Iron Curtain and achieved its goal. Years ago, the National Conference on Soviet Jewry began advocating for an end to Jackson-Vanik. The American Jewish Committee, echoing statements of other Jewish groups, joined Russian democrats in reaffirming its "support for Russia's graduation from the Jackson-Vanik amendment, a Cold War relic which remains one of the thorns in the side of ties between the U.S. and Russia."

Keeping Jackson-Vanik in place for Russia also provides political ammunition for those in Russia who argue that the United States is stuck in a Cold War mentality. It puts our companies at a competitive disadvantage and diminishes our ability to hold Russia to its commitments to transparency and increased market access.

III. Russia’s Changing Landscape
Two decades ago, many were overly optimistic about how quickly change would come to Russia. The reality is that real political and economic transition in Russia is likely to take decades to complete. However, change is already happening, and the pace is increasing. After a decade of growth, an emerging generation of Russians aspires not just to see their country as a wealthy great power -- but a modern nation in which they have the opportunity to compete and innovate in the global marketplace; a nation in which they have a say in how they are governed and how their taxes are spent.

Young Russians’ connections to the world are growing and irreversible: half of Russians over age eighteen are on the Internet today. Three million Russians are blogging. Russians made over thirty-six million trips abroad last year. More Russians received visas to travel to the United States than ever before -- twice as many as came just seven years ago. Russians have become accustomed to and expect basic personal freedoms: the freedom to travel, to shift jobs and residence, to own and convey property, and to express themselves in cyberspace.

The fact that, beginning last December, tens of thousands of Russians have taken to the streets repeatedly to carry out peaceful demonstrations is a vivid reminder that Russians want a political voice and want to help shape their own future. They are a reminder that an empowered middle class, with a demand for accountability and transparency, can also drive political and economic change.

Our goal is to be supportive of efforts made by Russians themselves to modernize their economic and political systems. Russian civil society activists argue that increased trade with the United States would help strengthen this new middle class. They argue that greater transparency and accountability in rules will help attract the investment needed to move Russia’s economy away from its dependence on hydrocarbons and generate new sources of economic growth. They argue that a level playing field, including better legal protections and transparent, predictable rules applied uniformly across Russia’s territory, will help provide a hedge against corruption and monopolistic control. Refusing to lift Jackson-Vanik and extend PNTR gives America no leverage over Russia in the areas where we differ. This is why leaders of Russia’s political opposition have called on the U.S. to terminate Jackson-Vanik, notwithstanding their concerns about human rights and the Magnitskiy case -- concerns which we share. Similarly, Georgia recognized the benefits of increased trade and, notwithstanding its disagreements with Russia, joined a consensus agreement to support Russia’s WTO accession.

Over time, extending PNTR can help Russians achieve their goal of building a modern, successful and prosperous nation. Upon accession to the WTO, Russia will join the United States and others in taking on obligations to increase transparency and predictability in laws and regulations. WTO membership and PNTR alone will not cut the Russian economy free from what Russia’s own leadership recognizes are the crippling effects of corruption and weak rule of law. Other complementary measures such as beginning negotiations on a new Bilateral Investment Treaty and Russia’s progress toward OECD accession are also important to continue to support Russia’s modernization and openness to free trade. While challenges will remain for a long time to come, this long-term strategy of greater economic engagement, grounded in a rules-based system, can help to open up Russia’s economy and society and to reinforce rule of law.

Ultimately, the Russian people themselves will have to choose their country’s direction. In the meantime, we will support Russians’ own efforts to create the kind of country they strive for: an open society that protects fundamental freedoms, property rights, transparency, competition and free trade; and a modern Russia that partners with the United States to promote global security and prosperity.

Navigating relations with Russia in the months and years ahead will not be easy. It will involve a complicated mix of managing cooperation and differences. However, as Russia prepares to join the World Trade Organization, the economic needs of the American people and the Russian people’s vision for their own future both point us in the same direction: toward an end to the application of the decades-old Jackson-Vanik Amendment and the beginning of a new chapter in our economic and trade relationship with Russia.

U.S.-RUSSIA AND ENERGY COOPERATION

Photo Credit:  U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT

U.S.-Russia Energy and Energy Efficiency Cooperation

Fact Sheet

Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs

June 18, 2012

The United States and Russia have an extensive dialogue on issues of energy and energy efficiency aimed at spurring innovation and stimulating the scientific development needed to address the global energy challenges of the 21st century. The U.S.-Russia Energy Working Group, one of several initiatives under the Bilateral Presidential Commission, supports this dialogue and the deployment of clean energy technologies and services. This cooperation is also implemented through a range of activities including public-private partnerships, city-to-city pairings, trade missions, and university links. These efforts endeavor to promote growth in the Russian and U.S. economies and assist in reducing national levels of carbon emissions by implementing advanced technologies, mobilizing financial resources, and facilitating creative energy management solutions.


Smart Grid
Under the Smart Grid pilot project, the cities of San Diego and Belgorod are sharing best practices and technical information to improve efficiency in electric power systems and reduce emissions. In May 2011, San Diego, Belgorod, and their respective utilities signed a protocol of intent outlining priority areas of cooperation including power distribution automation, and exchanging best practices in business processes and critical infrastructure security. The U.S. Agency for International Development is working with the Russian Energy Agency to fund a joint U.S.-Russian Study on Legal/Regulatory, Market, Consumer and Technical Impediments to Smart Grid Technology Deployment.

• The United States and Russia have held technical workshops to lay the groundwork for a second Smart Grid pairing between Kaliningrad and a U.S. city.

Smart Cities
Building on the Smart Grid partnerships, the United States and Russia plan to establish a “Smart Cities” partnership to integrate principles of energy efficiency and environmental sustainability into urban planning. Under this partnership, benchmarks will be defined to achieve sustainable urban growth. Innovative municipalities would share best practices on meeting these benchmarks for energy efficiency and “smart” planning to lower energy costs, enhance public services, and reduce harmful greenhouse gas emissions, thus stimulating local job growth and economic development.


Energy Efficiency in Public Buildings
Russia’s new energy efficiency law calls for a 15 percent reduction of energy consumption in public buildings by 2014. The United States and Russia are working together to share lessons learned in utilizing energy performance contracts to improve efficiency in municipal public buildings, including a pilot project with Honeywell and the City of St. Petersburg. Under the project, Honeywell is scheduled to begin the first phase of an energy efficiency audit of Hospital No. 2 in St. Petersburg. The Overseas Private Investment Corporation has indicated an interest in financing the project.


Methane Mitigation
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Russia’s Gazprom are collaborating to implement cost-effective methane mitigation technologies to reduce pipelines leakages, energy waste and harmful carbon emissions.


Energy Efficiency Trade Missions
The U.S. Commercial Service and the Department of Energy organized an Energy Efficiency Trade Mission of 12 U.S. companies to Moscow and St. Petersburg led by Under Secretary for International Trade Sanchez from June 4-7, 2012. The mission included individualized business appointments and meetings with Russian national and regional government officials for United States companies specializing in implementing energy efficiency solutions.


Promoting Clean Energy in Russia’s Far East
 In April 2012, USAID and the Russian Energy Agency signed a Memorandum of Understanding to promote clean energy development in Russia’s Far East. This collabortion aims to identify, evaluate, and implement a demonstration project for environmentally sensitive and efficient use of heat and electricity. The collaboration aims to enable investments related to energy production, delivery, and consumption using advanced clean energy technologies and services. The United States and Russia are also jointly conducting scientific research on black carbon to identify, inventory, and find solutions to harmful black carbon emissions.

RUSSIA REPORTEDLY RESUPPLYING BASE IN SYRIA

Map Credit:  U.S. State Department Website:

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE

Russia Resupplying Base in Syria, DOD Spokesman Says

By Karen Parrish
WASHINGTON, June 19, 2012 - A Russian cargo ship reportedly carrying attack helicopters to Syria turned back today when its British insurer canceled coverage, but a Defense Department spokesman said three other Russian vessels will carry supplies and possibly troops to the Russian naval base at Tartus.


Russian military officials have said the supplies are intended for their own resupply and force protection, Pentagon spokesman Navy Capt. John Kirby told reporters today.


Kirby said defense officials support Russia's decision to stop the cargo ship's voyage. "We ... don't want to see the Assad regime get arms and ammunition or any lethal support that they could use," he said.

In January 2011, Syrians began protesting against the government of Bashar Assad. The protests spread into a more general uprising, which United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said in May had claimed some 10,000 lives. Russia, a Syrian ally, has threatened to veto any U.N. Security Council sanctions against Syria.


President Barack Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin issued a joint statement yesterday calling for "moving forward on [a] political transition to a democratic, pluralistic political system" in Syria.


Kirby said political transition is "the right way forward."


"I think we can all agree that that's the right answer for Syria and for the Syrian people," he added.


International diplomatic and economic pressure "needs to continue to be applied to the Assad regime so that they will step down and do what's right for their own people," the spokesman added.


Kirby noted U.S. defense officials have repeatedly said providing lethal military aid to Assad's forces is "intolerable and unacceptable."


"We've been very clear with the entire international community, not just the Russians, about what our concerns are with respect to lethal aid and assistance going to the Assad regime," he added.


Pentagon Press Secretary George Little, who also spoke during today's briefing, said any disagreement over Syria between Russia and the United States hasn't affected the northern distribution network. The network, which Russia supports, has been the only means of ground transport for NATO supplies headed into Afghanistan since Pakistan closed ground cargo routes to NATO forces in November.


"It's an extremely complicated but essential network for our supplies in and out of Afghanistan," Little said. "I have heard no indication that the Russians are going to change their participation in that network and would reiterate our thanks to the government of Russia for supporting it."

"At the same time," Kirby said, "we've been very clear with them about our concerns about lethal support to the Syrian regime. It's not like we haven't been honest about what concerns us with these arms sales to Assad. We have been."


Kirby noted U.S. officials are working with the international community "as much and as aggressively as we can to make sure that Assad doesn't have at his disposal the means to kill his own people, or at least limit that ability as much as we can."