I post very few of these independence day remarks. I am putting this one up for two reasons:
First and foremost, to keep a record of the consistency of the message. There is no variation. Second, on a weekend, it’s a little bit of a treat to get a surprise video of Hillary!
Israel Independence Day
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
April 18, 2010
Congratulations Israel on 62 years of independence! This is an opportunity to celebrate all that Israel has accomplished and to reaffirm the bonds that unite our two nations – our strategic partnership, our shared values, and our common aspirations.
You know, in 1948, it took President Truman only 11 minutes to recognize your new nation. And ever since, the United States has stood with you in solidarity.
Since my first visit to Israel nearly thirty years ago, I have returned many times and made many friends. And I have shared your pride in seeing the desert bloom, the economy thrive and your country flourish. I have a deep personal commitment to Israel. And so does President Obama. Our nation will not waver in protecting Israel’s security and promoting Israel’s future.
That is why pursuing peace and recognized borders for Israel is one of our top priorities. We believe it is possible – indeed necessary – to achieve a comprehensive peace in the Middle East that provides Israelis, Palestinians, and all the people of the region security, prosperity, and the opportunity to live up to their full God-given potential.
Israel today is confronting some of the greatest challenges in its history, but its promise and potential have never been greater. The United States will continue to stand with you, sharing your risks and helping shoulder your burdens, as we face the future together.
The Clintons want to row their own boat, not bench press. Given the choice, they would prefer to be out navigating the waters rather than closed up in the gym.
I asked former President Bill Clinton why he isn’t on the short list for a Supreme Court appointment, to follow in the footsteps of President William Howard Taft, the last former president to be appointed to the Court. Clinton told me in my EXCLUSIVE “This Week” interview he would enjoy it, but he didn’t think it would be a good idea, because he’s too old and he’d like to see someone younger on the court. “Because I’m already 63-years-old, I hope I live to be 90. I hope I’m just as healthy as Justice Stevens is. But it’s not predictable. I’d like to see him put someone in there, late 40s, early 50s, on the court and someone with a lot of energy for the job. And I don’t think that’d be a good choice,” Clinton said.
I asked Clinton about Senator Orrin Hatch’s suggestion that another Clinton, his wife, might be a good choice. The former President said the Secretary of State “would be great at it” and “at one point in her life she might have been interested in it.” But, he added, “she’s like me, you know, we’re kind of doers. We like being out there and doing things, rowing our own boat and making changes we could see happen.” Hillary Clinton turned 62 in October and Mr. Clinton said, if asked, she would also “advise the president to appoint some 10, 15 years younger.”
Of course left out of the conversation is that fact that, had she BEEN appointed at the age they are both advising, it would have been President Clinton who would have had to appoint her. Can you just hear the caterwauling from the GOP across the years? I mean seriously, what do you think the reaction would have been if he had nominated this woman to the court? The picture was taken in China in 1995 when she famously and courageously spoke out on women’s rights. But I digress. Can you IMAGINE? Can you HEAR it? I can. As for either of them being too old, Ruth Bader Ginsberg was 60 when Bill nominated her.
I think the real key to why they both want to squirm out of any suggestion of them on the court is embedded in this remark:
“But, he added, “she’s like me, you know, we’re kind of doers. We like being out there and doing things, rowing our own boat and making changes we could see happen.”
No, we cannot see either one of them sitting still for that long. Hillary certainly can rock a robe as well as a pantsuit,
but I prefer the powerwalk of last Sunday with the spectator pumps and taupe suit to thinking of her sitting on the bench. I think that is what Bill meant, too.
It was all Bill’s way of saying, “Thanks, but no thanks!” (I believe he is speaking for his spunky little wife as well. Too much energy for the bench.)
There is a line. This crosses it. Not only is the actual global atmosphere laden with toxic dust, the political atmosphere, domestic and international, has the quality of mercury mixed with lead. Under such conditions, this is dangerous stuff.
President Clinton, over the past few days, has been speaking about the responsibility prominent people have to keep their messages argumentative rather than demonizing the opposition. (Reminder: You can hear him on this and other topics tomorrow on “This Week” with Jake Tapper.)
Everyone here knows how much I love pictures of our very photogenic and lovely Secretary of State. This is one picture I not only do not want to see. I do not even want to imagine it!
CANVASSING for support has acquired a more literal meaning in the crucible of Venezuelan politics.
While western politicians debate the pros and cons of billboard advertising against online tweeting president Hugo Chavez has taken his popularity campaign to the streets and licensed some graffiti artists.
Of all the murals and graffiti that adorn this anarchic capital’s rubbish-strewn centre, one creation by the street artist Carlos Zerpa fills the artist with special pride: a stencilled reinterpretation of Caravaggio’s David with the Head of Goliath, in which a warrior grasps the severed head of US secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Zerpa, 26, shrugged at the possibility that American visitors to Caracas — or Clinton herself for that matter — might find the mural offensive. “It’s a metaphor for an empire that is being defeated,” he said nonchalantly in an interview. “My critics can take it or leave it, but I remain loyal to my ideas.”
Uh, YEAH! As an American and a Hillary Clinton loyalist, I do find it offensive even if it is a metaphor since I know that the “delirious” and “unhinged” to which her husband referred do not necessarily understand metaphors.
Ironically(?), this comes on the heels of this very sincere comment by Secretary Clinton.
“And I want to thank Venezuela, who is represented here, for the support that you have given to Haiti in supplying energy to the people of Haiti.”
Seems to me that she extended a hand – personally – if not in the name of the administration. There is a new Broadway play entitled “A Behanding in Spokane.” Well, if Caracas, or Chavez want to “behand” her extended hand that would be one mural. But to behead her? It is beyond overreaction and metaphor. It crosses the line. Nobody here is painting government approved murals of Chavez being harmed. There is a line. It is a line of decency. You permit this public display about a person you have encountered? It is wrong!
And before I get any remarks about how she is a strong leader who knows the risks and puts herself out there voluntarily, is well-protected, and yadda-yadda-yadda, she is also our flesh, blood, and bone Secretary of State serving selflessly. Nothing about this reflects positively on Chavez. Nothing Hillary has said or done merits this.
Well, on a no-Hillary-news day, I know people need their Hillary fix. So here is a new photo gallery. This time the theme is Hillary waving. These photos are exclusively from her tenure as Secretary of State. Here, for your viewing pleasure, is Hillary saying “Hi!” (No, you are not crazy. Yes, this was originally a slideshow but it was too big and was using too many CPUs and stalling the browsers, so I changed it to a photo gallery)
I posted this press release mid-week, but I think these plans are literally up in the air. Right now, it is the air traffic in the U.K. and mainland Europe from France to Romania that is completely disrupted. CNN and Accuweather are predicting a shift in the jetstream around mid-week that will bring the ash cloud farther north over Scandinavia. That will severely affect air travel in the region, so I am guessing that this NATO ministerial will probably have to be postponed.
At the moment, the government of Poland is still planning the state funeral for President Kaczynki and the First Lady tomorrow. The White House is announcing that President Obama is still planning to travel to Warsaw today. The president of Norway, who had been in D.C. for the Nuclear Security Summit had to take a strangely circuitous route home and might still be traveling with four or five other Norwegians by car. Deciding whether any of the planned events and related travel should move forward will be dicey, but given the circumstances, it may be better to postpone. That said , CNN reports that the last time this volcano erupted was 190 years ago and that it spouted ash for two years. Yikes!
I honestly do not know who makes the decisions, but there has been speculation that aboard the ill-fated Polish plane it may have been the President himself who ordered the plane down. Insisting on forging ahead despite risks is not always the wisest choice. Of course I am the born worry-wart, but especially in the case of our beautiful, brilliant Secretary of State I am hoping and praying for prudence in the decision making process.
Secretary Clinton to Travel to Finland and Estonia
Philip J. Crowley
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Public Affairs
Washington, DC
April 14, 2010
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will travel to Finland and Estonia from April 21 to 23, 2010.
In Finland, Secretary Clinton will meet with senior Finnish officials to discuss European security issues, as well as Afghanistan and Iran, as a part of our ongoing bilateral consultations. In the year of the 35th anniversary of the signing of the Helsinki Final Act, she will also give a speech outlining the global human security agenda for the 21st century.
The Secretary will continue to Estonia to attend the NATO Informal Foreign Ministerial. On April 22 and 23, the Secretary will participate in meetings with NATO Allies to discuss a range of issues before the Alliance, including European security and Afghanistan. She will also meet with senior Estonian officials to discuss our bilateral relationship, and will have a media event with Estonian citizens.
Secretaries Clinton and Chu Praise Energy Cooperation Across the Americas in Joint Op-Ed
Office of the Spokesman
Washington, DC
April 16, 2010
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Secretary of Energy Steven Chu praised growing cooperation on energy and climate issues among the nations of the Western Hemisphere in an op-ed published today by the Miami Herald. Their piece also appeared in Spanish in La Opinión and in a number of newspapers across the hemisphere.
“The Americas are blessed with talent, ingenuity and resources, and we can go further, faster by working together than by working alone,” the Secretaries wrote. “Clean, reliable energy will provide a foundation for broad-based economic growth that will widen the circle of prosperity across our hemisphere and also reduce our carbon emissions.”
Yesterday, Secretaries Clinton and Chu addressed energy ministers from across the Western Hemisphere at a meeting of the Energy and Climate Partnership of the Americas (ECPA) in Washington and announced a series of new initiatives to address clean energy and energy security in the Western Hemisphere.
Read Secretary Clinton’s remarks here: http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2010/04/140286.htm.
Read more from the Department of Energy here: http://www.energy.gov/news/8854.htm.
The full text of the Secretaries’ op-ed in the Miami Herald follows:
Joining Hands for Clean Energy
By Hillary Clinton and Steven Chu
President Obama has pledged that the United States will join with our partners across the Americas to chart a low-carbon, clean-energy future. Energy and climate challenges affect us all, and it will take all of us to solve them. The Americas are blessed with talent, ingenuity and resources, and we can go further, faster by working together than by working alone.
That’s why this week in Washington we are hosting energy ministers from across the Western Hemisphere to advance the Energy and Climate Partnership of the Americas (ECPA).
At the 2009 Summit of the Americas in Trinidad and Tobago, President Obama called on governments across the region to work together on a range of initiatives: promoting energy efficiency, developing renewable energy, shifting to cleaner fossil fuels, integrating national power grids, expanding access to electrical services to more people in more places and meeting the urgent global challenge of climate change. Since then, more than a dozen new ECPA initiatives are showcasing our hemisphere’s best ideas and practices.
Here at home, we are changing our energy habits. We’re working to reduce our dependence on imported oil and increase domestic production of renewable energy from wind, solar and biofuels. And we’ve put in place energy efficiency standards that will conserve energy and save consumers money. Our companies, universities and laboratories are expanding research and development of new clean energy technologies. And through ECPA, we have a forum to learn from our neighbors and the innovative approaches they are spearheading.
Costa Rica is pioneering forest conservation through its ecosystem services program. Brazil is a world leader in biofuels technology. Colombia has built cutting-edge urban mass-transit systems and is leading efforts in electricity integration. Mexico and Peru have implemented innovative programs for energy efficiency and conservation. Barbados is unlocking the potential of solar water heaters, and islands such as St. Kitts and Nevis and Dominica are developing their geothermal resources.
By cooperating on energy and climate, the nations of the Americas can all benefit from these advances. And clean, reliable energy will provide a foundation for broad-based economic growth that will widen the circle of prosperity across our hemisphere and also reduce our carbon emissions.
We’re already making progress. As part of ECPA, the United States and the Inter-American Development Bank are working with partners across the region to develop a regional clean energy network that will link energy efficiency centers in Peru and Costa Rica with Chile’s Renewable Energy Center in Santiago, Mexico’s Wind Center in Oaxaca, a biomass center in Brazil and a geothermal center in El Salvador. This new network will bring U.S. and regional experts together to explore technologies and implementation strategies that will benefit us all.
Other governments are making critical contributions to ECPA. Brazil is leading an initiative to promote sustainable urban planning and energy efficiency in low-income households to respond to the challenges of urbanization and climate change. Colombia, which sits at the crossroads of Central and South America, is promoting cross-border trade in electricity with Panama, the Andes and Chile. Mexico, with a long commitment to help integrate Central American power markets, is training Central American officials on energy efficiency best practices. Trinidad and Tobago is leading a Caribbean initiative to bring renewable energy to island nations.
It is a testament to the resourcefulness of our people and the commitment of our governments that so many countries in the hemisphere are participating in — and leading — this effort.
These initiatives are only the beginning. At our meeting this week, we are mapping out new areas for collaboration, building on the best ideas of NGOs and the private sector and setting the stage for even greater progress in the future.
As President Obama said in Trinidad, through this partnership we will “create the jobs of the future, lower greenhouse gas emissions, and make this hemisphere a model for cooperation.” This week we are moving closer to making that vision a reality.
Hillary Rodham Clinton is secretary of state, and Steven Chu is secretary of energy.
The Secretary is radiant giving this speech. The parties need to listen carefully to what she is saying and act on her advice.
Remarks at the Dedication of the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
April 15, 2010
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I should just quit while I’m ahead at least. (Laughter.) My goodness, those were wonderful words from my dear friend Danny and from the former congressman but certainly now the president of this extraordinary center, and bringing so much energy and commitment to this cause. There are so many longtime friends and people whom I admire here in this audience that I can’t possibly go down the line. I know that Sara Ehrman acknowledged so many of the members of the Diplomatic Corps and other distinguished participants, and I echo everything that Sara said. Sara has been a friend of mine for a very considerable length of time. (Laughter.) And Sara, you don’t know this, but when you were standing up here, it was one of those Queen Elizabeth moments, because from where I was sitting, we could only see your eyes. (Laughter.) It was a priceless – MS. EHRMAN: No respect. (Laughter.) SECRETARY CLINTON: It’s wonderful being with Sara and Danny because they always put you in your place. (Laughter.)
I am very pleased to have this occasion. Danny has not only written a book called Peace is Possible, he wrote his autobiography which is titled Everything is Possible. I know Danny spent a number of years living in Israel and there wasn’t a more enthusiastic, dedicated citizen of Israel during the time that Danny was there. And he’s often talked to many of us how his passion for Middle East peace is rooted, as Robert said, in his devotion to Israel and in his commitment to Israel’s future and Israel’s security.
And if you read his autobiography, you can’t bet against Danny Abraham. And I am one of those people who does believe that peace is possible, not out of any misplaced idealism or whatever remnants of naiveté may still pulse somewhere in one or two cells left in my body – (laughter) – but because it has to happen. It has to happen. And I think it’s that meeting of the passion and the love and the devotion with the hard-headed reality and clear-eyed view of the future that Danny Abraham so well embodies.
He has worked for decades along with his great friend, the late Congressman Wayne Owens, and I am so pleased that his son and granddaughter are here, because Danny and Wayne started on a journey long before many people even anticipated that such a moment could ever be a reality. And whether you’re in Washington or Jerusalem or Cairo or Riyadh, people call Danny a friend, they call him a confidante, and they do call him a visionary.
Now, this is the second time Danny has asked me to help dedicate a new center. And the last time was at Princeton, which I deeply enjoyed, and I’m pleased that the dean of the Woodrow Wilson School, my friend and great colleague at the State Department, Anne-Marie Slaughter, is here, because that was a memorable event as well. But I love the way Danny does these things. He came to see me at the State Department and he goes, you know, we’re going to have this little thing, you just come, cut a ribbon – (laughter) – and we’ll have a new center with a new president.
Well, this is a testament to the cause of his life and the cause of the lives of so many of you here, Arab and Israeli, Palestinian, American – everyone in this room shares this cause. And the United States and President Obama share it as well. We have long recognized that a strong, secure, and successful Israel is our common goal, but it is also vital to America’s strategic interests. Our countries and our peoples are bound together by our shared values: freedom, equality, democracy, the right to live free from fear, and our common aspirations for a future of peace, security, and prosperity.
This week we are commemorating the 65th anniversary of the liberation of the Nazi death camps. Rob mentioned that in addition to everything else, Danny is a World War II veteran. And with every passing year, fewer survivors and fewer liberators are still with us, but their stories remain as powerful and compelling as ever. Each one is a reminder of why a secure homeland for the Jewish people is not an abstraction, not a wish, but a necessity. And next week will be Israel’s Independence Day, when once again Israelis and those who support Israel will renew our commitment to ensure that Israel will always remain independent, secure, free, and flourishing.
Now, for President Obama, whose grandfather marched in Patton’s Army – and I sometimes look at the President when I’m with him and talking about some issue or another, and think about a grandfather who marched in Patton’s Army and a great-uncle who helped to liberate Buchenwald. And I know how rock solid and unwavering his commitment is to Israel’s security and Israel’s future. And from our first day in office, we have made the pursuit of a comprehensive peace a top priority because we are convinced that Israel’s long-term future as a secure and democratic Jewish state depends upon it.
The lack of peace between Israel and the Palestinians threatens that future, holds back the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people, and destabilizes the region and beyond.
I told some of you this, that one of the striking experiences that I had becoming Secretary of State and now having traveled something on the order of 300,000 miles in the last 15 months and going to dozens and dozens of countries, is that when I compare that to my experience as First Lady, where I was also privileged to travel around the world, back in the ‘90s when I went to Asia or Africa or Europe or Latin America, it was rare that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was raised. Now it is the first, second, or third item on nearly every agenda of every country I visit.
What does that mean? Well, it means that this conflict has assumed a role in the global geostrategic environment that carries great weight. And it also means that there is a yearning on the part of people who have never been to Israel and never met a Palestinian that somehow, some way, we create the circumstances for this to finally be resolved.
As Rob said, last month at AIPAC’s national conference, I spoke about the challenge that Israel faces. And tonight I want to focus on how a struggle despite the difficulty to achieve comprehensive peace is critical, not just to Israel and not just to the Palestinians and not just to the United States, but to the future of this world we share.
And what I worry about is that a failure to act now when there are changed circumstances, including the Arab Peace Initiative, including the very broadly shared fear of Iran’s intentions and actions, will not just set us back, but may irreversibly prevent us from going forward. The failure to pursue a comprehensive peace takes place in an ideological struggle for the future of the Middle East. Because make no mistake about it: Those in the region most hostile to peace, those in the region most opposed to compromise and coexistence, are those who do not have Israel’s best interests at heart and do not have the Palestinians’ best interests at heart.
There are so many actors right now who are willing to make commitments and take actions that would have been unthinkable one, two, three, four years ago. I see my friend the foreign minister of Jordan, Nasser Judeh. He and I talk all the time about the imperative of moving this forward. And yet we know that those who benefit from our failure of leadership traffic in hate and violence, and give strength to Iran’s anti-Semitic president and extremists like Hamas and Hezbollah.
Every step back from the peace table and every flare-up in violence undermines the positive players across the region who seek to turn the page and focus on building a more hopeful and prosperous Middle East. It undercuts the reformers attempting to develop functioning institutions and accountable governments, the entrepreneurs and economists trying to foster broad-based growth, the civil society organizers and activists working for common ground and mutual understanding, and all the mothers and fathers who hope for peace for their children and grandchildren.
So all of us do have a stake in the outcome, but there are only two peoples who can make the decisions. Danny Abraham can’t want this more than the leaders of Israel and of the Palestinians. President Obama can’t work harder than the people of Israel and the Palestinian territories. The goal of a comprehensive peace and all the benefits that we believe that would bring hangs in the balance. Because peace and progress must be driven from both above and below. They require leaders – yes – willing to take risks, populations that demand results, and institutions that can deliver tangible benefits for people’s lives. That is why the United States supports two tracks in the Middle East – negotiations between the parties aimed at reaching a two-state solution and institution building that lays the necessary foundation for a future state for the Palestinians and security guarantees that provide for the security of the state of Israel. But none of these efforts, no matter how sincerely pursued, can be successful if extremists win the argument.
Now, this struggle plays out starkly among the Palestinians themselves. For nearly 20 years, Fatah and Hamas have vied for the right to chart the future for the Palestinian people. And today they articulate opposing arguments for how best to realize Palestinians aspirations. To those disillusioned by a peace process that has delivered too little, Hamas peddles the false hope that a Palestinian state can somehow be achieved through violence and uncompromising resistance. And across the divide, President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad and the Palestinian Authority argue for the two-track approach of pursuing a political settlement and institution building.
Hamas claims any failure of the peace process as vindication of their rejectionist view. The Palestinian Authority has the harder job: to convince a skeptical people that peace is not just possible, but the surest route to bettering their lives and achieving their aspirations.
And the results of these competing approaches can be seen every day in Palestinian streets and neighborhoods, sharpening the choices that confronts the Palestinian people and answering those who suggest there is little difference between the two.
In Gaza, Hamas presides over a crumbling enclave of terror and despair. It stockpiles rockets intended for Israeli cities while the people of Gaza fall deeper into poverty.
Unemployment runs as high as 38 percent – and even higher among young people – yet Hamas impedes international assistance and the work of humanitarian NGOs, and does little to promote sustainable economic growth. Hamas has revealed itself as uninterested in development, institution building, peace, or progress.
Hamas claims to seek peace, prosperity, and a state for its people, but it refuses to take the first necessary steps: renunciation of violence, recognition of Israel, and acceptance of previous agreements. Those are the building blocks for a viable, independent, and contiguous Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with Israel – and we urge Hamas to embrace those steps. And I will repeat what I have said many times before: Gilad Shalit must be released immediately and returned to his family. That is unfinished business that must be accomplished.
But unfortunately, Hamas appears set on continued conflict with Israel with little regard for what that will mean for the Palestinian people. Only by exploiting the frustration and hostility created by the conflict can Hamas hope to distract its people from its failure to govern.
President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad have produced very different results in a relatively short period of time.
The PLO has emerged as a credible partner for peace. It has rejected violence, improved security, made progress on combating incitement, and accepted Israel’s right to exist.
The Palestinian Authority’s two-year plan envisions a state that is based on pluralism, equality, religious tolerance, and the rule of law, created through a negotiated settlement with Israel, and capable of meeting the needs of its citizens and supporting a lasting peace. Under the leadership of President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad, the PA is addressing a history of corruption and building transparent and accountable institutions. The United States has partnered with the PA to improve the effectiveness of its security forces, and General Dayton is here this evening and I want personally and publicly to thank him for his efforts. (Applause.)
Reforms have increased public confidence in the courts – last year they handled 67 percent more cases than in 2008. The PA is building schools and hospitals and training teachers and medical staff, and even developing a national health insurance program. (Laughter.)
Sound fiscal policies, support from the international community – including hundreds of millions of dollars this year alone from the United States, which continues to be the PA’s largest bilateral donor – and improving security and rule of law have led to significant economic growth. More and more Palestinians in the West Bank are finding jobs, starting businesses, and reversing the economic stagnation that followed the outbreak of the Intifada in 2000. The number of new business licenses issued in the West Bank in the fourth quarter of 2009 was 50 percent higher than in the same period in 2008. And three new venture capital funds are set to launch this year with the support of American, Arab, and European investors.
Now, considerable work remains. The PA must redouble its efforts to put an end to incitement and violence, crack down on corruption, and ingrain a culture of peace and tolerance among Palestinians. The leadership should refrain from using international organizations, particularly the United Nations, as platforms for inflammatory rhetoric. And we strongly encourage President Abbas and his government to join negotiations with Israel now. Because Israelis must see as well, that pursuing the path of progress and diplomacy can and will lead to peace and security. But there is no doubt that, so far, the progress we are seeing in the West Bank is encouraging.
Last year I visited a classroom in Ramallah where Palestinian students were learning English through a U.S.-sponsored program that has taught thousands of Palestinian young people. I happened to be there when they were studying Women’s History Month and Sally Ride, the first woman astronaut, was the subject. The students, especially the girls, were captivated by her story. And when I asked for a single word to describe Sally and her accomplishments, one student responded: “hopeful.”
Well, today hope is stirring in the West Bank because of strong leadership and hard work. And people are beginning to see differences in their daily lives which enables them then to imagine a different future for their children.
But this progress is tenuous. Without increased support from the international community, including from the Arab states, without larger, steadier, and more predictable financial support, the Palestinian Authority’s efforts to build institutions and spur growth could run out of steam. Because if the PA cannot overcome corruption and smuggling, development will fall short. And if it fails to control violence, progress will slow to a halt.
Extending and sustaining this positive development also requires Israel to be a partner. The Netanyahu government has lifted roadblocks and eased movements throughout the West Bank. These also are encouraging moves that will improve the quality of life, but Israel can and should do more to support the Palestinian Authority’s efforts to build credible institutions and deliver results. Both sides would benefit from a real partnership that fosters long-term growth and opportunity.
Because ultimately the fate of these efforts hinges on the peace process. In contrast to Hamas, the Palestinian Authority has staked its credibility on a path of peaceful coexistence. Even more than economic opportunities, that path for the Palestinians must lead to a state of their own, for the dignity that all people deserve, and the right to chart their own destiny. If President Abbas cannot deliver on those aspirations, there’s no doubt his support will fade and Palestinians will turn to alternatives – including Hamas. And that way leads only to more conflict.
Now, I’ve had friends of mine – Israelis – say, but you know we can’t determine what happens and we just have to hold firm to the positions we hold. As I said in my AIPAC speech, there are three problems with that position: demography, ideology, and technology.
So for Israel, accepting concrete steps toward peace – both through the peace process and in the bottoms-up institutions building I have described – are the best weapons against Hamas and other extremists. Prime Minister Netanyahu has embraced the vision of the two-state solution. But easing up on access and movement in the West Bank, in response to credible Palestinian security performance, is not sufficient to prove to the Palestinians that this embrace is sincere. So we encourage Israel to continue building momentum toward a comprehensive peace by demonstrating respect for the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinians, stopping settlement activity, and addressing the humanitarian needs in Gaza, and to refrain from unilateral statements and actions that could undermine trust or risk prejudicing the outcome of talks.
Now, Israel has worked hard to improve security. And along with the increased capacity and commitment of Palestinian security forces and the construction of the wall, which I have defended as a senator and I defend as the Secretary of State, the number of suicide bombings – thankfully – has dropped significantly. And as a result, some in Israel have come to believe that they are protected by walls, buoyed by a dynamic economy, and can avoid having to do anything right now. Because these are hard choices that they are confronting.
But that would mean continuing an impasse that not only carries tragic human costs and denies Palestinians their legitimate aspirations, but which threatens Israel’s long-term future as a secure and democratic Jewish state. Israelis and Palestinians alike must confront the reality that the status quo has not produced long-term security or served their interests, and accept their share of responsibility for reaching a comprehensive peace that will benefit both sides.
So too must the Arab states, many of whom are represented here tonight, who worry about the destabilizing impact of extremists like Hamas but don’t do enough to bolster the efforts of the Palestinian Authority. It is also in the interest of Arab states to advance the Arab Peace Initiative with actions, not just rhetoric, make it easier for the Palestinians to pursue negotiations and achieve an agreement. If the Arab Peace Initiative is indeed, as Rob said, the genuine offer it appears to be, we should not face threats by certain Arab states that it will be “taken off the table” each time there is a setback. We look forward to a deeper conversation about implementing the Initiative and the concrete results it would bring to the people of the region. And we are very encouraged by the work of a number of NGOs and civil society groups, including some who are represented here, to articulate a more complete vision of those benefits of peace.
Now, for our part, the United States understands the need to support the reforms of the Palestinian Authority and continue efforts to restart substantive negotiations. We not only know we cannot force a solution, we have no interest in forcing a solution. The parties themselves are the only ones who can resolve their differences. (Applause.) But as a good friend, we believe that through good-faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree to an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state based on the ‘67 lines, with agreed swaps, and Israel’s goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israel’s security requirements.
This will require all parties to make difficult but necessary choices. And it will take leadership. Now, we’ve seen this before. We’ve seen it over the last years from the time when Sadat and Begin extended a hand of peace because they knew it would make their people stronger.
Reflecting on one of his many conversations with Egyptian President Mubarak, Danny once observed that, “There is no question that… many of the leading figures in the Arab world know what benefits a full peace with Israel will bring to their countries, but they also know that in the prevailing political climate it is dangerous to state such a truth.”
Changing that climate is up to each and every one of us. And it requires the mobilizing of a broad constituency for peace that provides a political counterweight to the forces of division and destruction. There is an ever-more pressing imperative to make the case for peace clearly and publicly. And the most compelling arguments are the benefits that Israelis and Palestinians will see.
I often think about a friend to many of us, Yitzhak Rabin. He wondered how deeply the support for peace ran among his people, because he understood that agreements between leaders are the beginning, not the end of anything. Whether peace takes hold depends upon it becoming a habit of the heart. In order for it to be real, people have to learn to live and work and go to school together. Peace must grow in homes and communities, not just in national capitals. It needs to be nurtured and then passed on to the next generation.
So, Danny, you’re right; peace is possible in the Middle East. But whether it comes to pass depends on us. This center is so well-named today for you, because despite the setbacks, the twists and the turns, you have never given up on your belief and conviction in peace. The worst thing can happen and the phone will ring, Rob. We are all familiar with that. (Laughter.) I don’t know how many times Danny called my husband in the 1990s or how many times he called and said he had to come see me in the Senate or come see me in the State Department. But the message is always the same: You must persist; peace requires you to persist.
And so, Danny, we are here to say we do believe with you that peace is possible. And like you, we will do everything we can to see it happen. And we want you to know that when it finally does come kicking and screaming across the finish line, it’s going to be because you never gave up. And for that, we love you. (Applause.)
This was a pleasant little love fest! One participant remarked that as far as he knew, she was the first SOS to meet with this group! They welcomed her warmly, and , from the outset through the end, she was completely unscripted. Leadership at its zenith!
Remarks to the Department of State’s Advisory Committee on International Economic Policy
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
April 15, 2010
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, first, let me say this is my first opportunity to welcome all the ACIEP members. And Ted, thank you for your continuing leadership and involvement. Thea, thank you for your work. And you’ve gotten to know Jose, who has been in the job a few months now. And we’re very committed to the work of the E bureaus and to try to maximize the expertise and experience that all of you represent.
Economic issues, particularly here in the State Department with the international breadth that we try to reach in terms of both diplomacy and development are absolutely critical to everything we do. And I would like not to make a speech, but to have a conversation, because I see some very, very familiar faces whom I’m delighted to see here, and some new faces to me who I know are very committed to the work that we’re trying to do on behalf of our country.
So if it’s okay, Ted, I’ll just throw it open and let anybody ask anything that they want to, make any suggestions. It doesn’t have to be about economics. As I look around the table, I know some of you have great and broad interests across many different areas and I’d be happy to talk about anything that might be on your minds. QUESTION: Madam Secretary, thank you so much. We were just engaged and hearing from a number of members. I think there are some who have their hands raised and others who have already spoken. It would be, I think, welcome. SECRETARY CLINTON: Great. QUESTION: I will turn to you to lead the discussion. (Laughter.) SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, okay. Well, I was going to ask that – I know many of you, but not all of you, so maybe if – when I call on you, if you just would say what brings you here, that would be great. So, Louis, why don’t we start with you? QUESTION: My name is Lewis Cohen. I am a former Foreign Service officer, a former trade negotiator at USTR, currently trade consultant, and have watched this committee evolve. And I have to say it is wonderful to have you here. I think you’re the first Secretary of State who has addressed us. I could be wrong, but I think not. We’ve been having a discussion about the various priorities that E and EB are going to be addressing. And the export initiative was top of the list.
As somebody who has served as an economic counselor and a commercial counselor in an embassy, I saw it from the ground up. As somebody who represented a large multinational with investments around the world, especially in Japan, I saw the potential for large companies to act as mentors for small companies – for opening markets for small companies. The one I have in mind is Toys R Us. And in the process of building stores, it was amazing how much cheaper American counters, air conditioners, shelving systems, you name it were than their Japanese counterparts, and how it was difficult for the small American companies who actually produce these things – how difficult it was for them to find markets, because it’s expensive. SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes, it is. QUESTION: They don’t have the personnel and so on. SECRETARY CLINTON: Right. QUESTION: Toys R Us worked with their suppliers. Obviously, they have those suppliers from here. But they opened doors in places like Japan, all over Europe, in the Middle East. And suddenly, their stores became showcases for these systems. And suddenly, other companies in those countries looking to build stores saw these systems and came to Toys R Us and said, “Can you introduce us to these partners?” And it worked. Toys R Us brought in a large quantity of product from these companies and they opened markets for them.
And I think sitting around the room, we have UPS, we have Caterpillar, we have a number of other large companies who operate around the world and who I think can open the doors and mentor smaller suppliers. That’s one way to build business, because if you look at the numbers – and we were talking about numbers earlier – I suspect something like 80 percent of our exports can be attributed to something like 2- or 300 companies. And that’s not surprising. SECRETARY CLINTON: Right. Right. QUESTION: They have the wherewithal to do it. So I think this committee can take a look at this from that angle – maybe we could have a subcommittee addressing these issues – and try to attract the larger American companies – the supply chain operators, the people at the top of the supply chains who can reach down. SECRETARY CLINTON: Right. Right. I think that’s an excellent idea, and it’s the kind of feedback we need as we really flesh out the export initiative. One of our goals behind the export initiative is clearly to create more jobs and more business for American companies. But it is also, as you say, to showcase. I think that all too often, we overlook many of our most competitive advantages because we don’t have an organized methodology for hooking up big companies and small companies.
When I was representing New York, I did a lot of work on procurement for small companies because the procurement rules for the federal government were so complicated. And large companies had full-time people just trying to follow the rules so that they could make it clear that there was an opportunity and they would pursue it. And we brought in – and it’s amazing, the opportunities that were all of a sudden born because people connected. So let’s follow up on that. I think that’s an excellent thought. QUESTION: I think your friend Joe was ready to speak. SECRETARY CLINTON: Hi Joe. (Laughter.) QUESTION: Hi, Madam Secretary. It’s just an honor to be here and I thank you for allowing me to participate. I saw on the listing of people that the president of the American Farm Bureau is part of this group, so I’ll be careful with my comments. SECRETARY CLINTON: (Laughter.) Well, some of us think of Long Island as America. (Laughter.) QUESTION: Awesome. Two areas which you are very familiar with, and they came up in earlier comments by the presenters that have already spoken – two things of concern to us in American agriculture that are highest priority. One is the immigration debate. SECRETARY CLINTON: Yeah. QUESTION: We know that the State Department that’s – you know, the Congress has got to take some action. We’re working with Senator Schumer, obviously, on trying to come up with a white paper. Right now, there isn’t anything. So the first step that the Congress got to do is come up with a white paper. But you already know how important that is to American agriculture. We employ 1.5 million farm workers across the country. And the biggest thing that we want is a legal program to employ the people that we need in our industry.
Second point that I wanted to make was about free trade. And you’ve heard me speak on this many, many times over the years. Free trade does not constitute fair trade. And we’re talking about job, you know, creation, but also we need to worry about job retention. I’ll use New York because we – I know it best. The dairy industry lost a thousand dairy farmers last year – not all related to trade.
Absolutely, our trade balance in the United States – one of the most positive parts of it is American agriculture. And that’s great. But the flip side is what is the impacts of the trade agreements on our small farmers, whether it be on Long Island, New York or California or anywhere. And that’s the unanticipated consequences of the trade agreement, is that we’re seeing the impacts. Fruit and vegetable sector – 37 percent of our fruit and vegetables are now imported.
So the consequences of that are we’re hurting small businesses and small farmers, which – then, that impacts when you lose a farm – the truck drivers, the equipment dealers, the bankers, all the other mechanisms that keep agriculture alive in communities. So that’s one of the thoughts that I have, is that as we discuss trade and job creation as though we don’t lose sight of retaining our job, our people in our own country. So thank you. SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Joe, you know how sympathetic I am to that. For people who may not realize it, Suffolk County, which is the far eastern end of Long Island, is the most productive farming county in New York and one of the most productive in the country, because it’s a lot of high-value fruits, vegetables, ducks, horticulture — QUESTION: Wine. SECRETARY CLINTON: — wine – very good wine. And what Joe says is very much the case. Agriculture is one of our bright spots in our balance of trade challenges. And so many other countries provide subsidized inputs and even some support for export and market access. And it just gets increasingly difficult for even medium size – not just small, but even medium size American agriculture to compete.
And it’s just – it needs to be kept in mind because it is a big employer. And we tried for years just to get an exception for a legal program for farm workers and it got all caught up in the immigration debate and we never got that done, so — QUESTION: Great. You have time for — SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, yeah, I do. Absolutely. QUESTION: Please. Deborah. QUESTION: Madam Secretary, I’m Deborah Wince-Smith and I’m the president of the Council on Competitiveness here in Washington, and our members are CEOs and university presidents and labor leaders. And we’re, of course, focused on our productivity, our job creation, and we’re very much now involved in the revitalization of manufacturing.
But also, I wanted to share with you – because the Department’s played such a role in this – we’ve really pioneered a new economic development model to bilateral innovation labs that we’re doing at a very senior level with our main trading partners, from Brazil and Saudi Arabia to Korea, as well as the Nordic countries. And this is a very interesting model because we’re able to address issues such as intellectual property and rule of law and transparency and capital issues through the lens of competitiveness and innovation.
So the other exciting thing that I wanted to share is our leader, chairman, who is the CEO of John Deere, we’ve just established the new global federation of competitiveness councils. And the councils all around the world have come to us – I think it’s a good example of U.S. leadership – to put this first-ever network together to stimulate growth in our countries, but also for the world at large. So we very much appreciate that Jose and Bob Hormats and many – and Nancy Smith-Nissley have been great partners in creating all that. So — SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you. Well, thanks for those very kind and well-deserved words. Let me go over there. QUESTION: First of all, it’s always fun to come to State Department because we agree with you across the board at Caterpillar. The – you don’t always prevail — SECRETARY CLINTON: We don’t hear that very often. (Laughter.) QUESTION: You know, I have to tell you, you don’t always prevail in the interagency process, but you’re always right. (Laughter.) So — SECRETARY CLINTON: You’ve got that on tape, everybody, right? QUESTION: As you know, when we look at this issue of doubling U.S. exports – and Caterpillar is one of the country’s largest exporters, we’re one of the most successful manufacturers – just two things to keep in mind. One is when you look at the U.S. trade deficit, we have a big trade surplus in services. We have a big trade surplus in agriculture. We have a huge trade deficit in manufactured goods and a huge trade deficit in energy.
But when you look at the trade deficit in manufactured goods with the 17 countries with which we have FTAs, as a group, we have a very sizable trade surplus. And no one focuses on that. SECRETARY CLINTON: That’s (inaudible). QUESTION: So where you really have open markets, American manufacturers not only hold their own; we really succeed. So the goal there is we need more open markets. I know where you are on the free trade agreements. Please prevail within the interagency process. We need that market access as soon as possible.
And then secondly, the last two years were the first two years in Caterpillar’s history where our exports to non-OECD countries was larger than to OECD countries. The developing world is our future. And to the degree – you know, we still have some of the highest trade barriers against the poorest countries. If we really want to get serious about seeing economic growth worldwide and more U.S. exports, we need to eliminate those trade barriers. We need duty-free, quota-free access for the poorest countries, the LDC countries, and the acid test on whether we’re really serious about that will be on Haiti.
So if we can get the rest of the countries participating in the global economy, doubling U.S. exports will be a walk in the park and – because the demand will be for infrastructure products and medical products and what-have-you. So please make that a priority, and that includes sugar, that includes textiles, that includes ethanol. But we’ve got to give Haiti a chance and we can’t have high trade barriers against the poorest country in the hemisphere that needs help desperately. And your husband has been terrific on this for as long as we’ve known him, and we really want this to work. SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, thank you on both counts. We do have a duty-free, tariff-free arrangement with Haiti and we’re using it as one of our principal tools for redevelopment and to try to entice other countries to come to Haiti to make their same commitment so that they can then export back into their own countries duty-free. So we see that as a real tool.
Yes. QUESTION: Madam Secretary, thank you for being here. My name is John Duke Anthony. I’m the president of the National Council on U.S.-Arab relations. Nine months ago when this committee met, that very day you were in India smoothing over some of the last remaining rough edges of that special relationship with India. At that time, oil was $42 a barrel. It had dipped down that far. We had some questions then for which there were no answers, and that was what would be that situation if the price went up to 70. It’s now past 80. The atmosphere was receptive when you were there and we were here. The moment was propitious to be optimistic.
But we also asked another question of India’s Reliance refining giant, which is a major source of inputs for refined products into Iran. Now, all this links back to the economic situation and the sanctions issue and your visit to India and which you’re focusing on with regard to Iran. Could you address where we are now in comparison to where we were then? SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think the short answer would be that we have made a lot of progress in persuading a significant number of countries to see the threat from Iran as we see it. Certainly, when I became Secretary of State, that was not the case. Even our European allies were not as convinced as they are today. And I think that President Obama’s commitment to demonstrate engagement with Iran that he was willing to put out a hand to try to get the Iranians to reciprocate, and their failure to do so, their election which they reacted to so violently, has opened a lot of eyes. I’m not going to sit here and tell you that we have an easy path ahead of us, because it’s challenging to get everyone to agree on the wording of what this kind of tough sanctions regime out of the Security Council looks like.
But through very intensive, persistent work at many levels with our counterparts across the world, we have a very solid, strong base in the European Union. Russia has moved further than anyone thought it would. China is now actually engaged in New York – something that nobody thought they would be. The proof is in the pudding and trying to get the exact terms is challenging, but I feel like we’ve made progress.
Now, the question that is fair to ask is: So, if we get what would be credible sanctions, Iran’s been sanctioned ten times and they’re resilient. They withstood the rigors of the Iran-Iraq War for all those years. They took enormous losses. And they have a regime that has a very different world view and sense of their own place in it. But I am firmly of the belief that pursuing the sanctions track that we are now in New York is absolutely necessary, and we hope to be able to make a lot of progress this month.
Yes, Barry. QUESTION: Madam Secretary, thank you. I’m a new member of the committee and I look forward to participating on it. And just pursuing this on Iranian sanctions, as you mentioned, I’m all for what you’re doing. I think it’s great and for nonproliferation reasons particularly. But there’s one way to do it, I think, that can make it more palatable to American business and less attractive to the Iranians. And you probably have this in mind already, but the – as you move forward, if the rules against participating with countries who – or companies that do business in Iran, if the rules are clear and legal, then when companies have to break contracts – because the new sanctions are going to require people to break contracts. If the rules are clear, the companies that break the contracts, American companies and all, can claim force majeure in arbitrations or foreign courts – there’s my law professor hat – and they won’t have to pay damages; while, if they don’t claim that, or if they can’t claim that because it’s suggestions – if all it is is encouraging them to do it, then the countries will be on the hook for broken contracts with companies that want to still deal with Iran or people that deal with Iranian entities. And then they’ll pay damages and they’ll go to Iran or to people that are doing business with Iran. Why enrich Iran with the kind of sanctions that don’t have real bite? Rather, by having force majeure, you’re protecting U.S. companies around the world in foreign courts, arbitrations, and all. So I just — SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Professor Carter, I appreciate that very much. (Laughter.) QUESTION: Well, I’m sure Harold Cohen, your lawyers – you’ve really got an outstanding legal advisor. SECRETARY CLINTON: We’ve got a good lawyer, but I haven’t talked about force majeure since I taught law school, so I’ve got to get my head back in that. (Laughter.) QUESTION: Okay. SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes. QUESTION: Thank you so much, Madam Secretary, and it’s such a pleasure to see you and I’d like to thank you for your leadership here at the State Department. And I just wanted to say a few words about the unique role of the State Department and how we appreciate that role. I’m going to agree with Bill Lane on that one piece, just to take him off balance a little bit – (laughter) – that in the context of the interagency process, only the State Department really brings together all those different pieces. U.S. Trade Representative has the trade piece, and Commerce, and Labor, and so on, have the different pieces, but the State Department really can bring together the interests of U.S. business, U.S. job creation, development, democracy, human rights, worker rights. And that really is that nexus that I think is so important that I know you understand, that the important role of worker rights is not simply an extraneous issue when we talk about our international economic relationships, but it is crucial to our long-term goal of building durable democracies and building a trade relationship that will not just increase the flow of trade but will also make sure that working people all over the world are able to benefit from and appreciate and support the increased globalization.
And so we look forward to working with you on the national export initiative and all the many, many issues that the State Department’s involved in. We thank you so much for your leadership. SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, thank you all for letting me come by and thank you for serving. And we’re going to make you work, so I’m glad I see a lot of rolled-up sleeves here. (Laughter.) Thank you very much.
This private blog is about Hillary Clinton's work. It is intended to support, promote, and appreciate Hillary Clinton's efforts and initiatives, all of them – past, current, and future. Onward together! “Resist, insist, persist, enlist.” - Hillary Rodham Clinton
Search this blog
The Office of Hillary Rodham Clinton
Welcome to the Office of
Hillary Rodham Clinton
*Read about Hillary's life
*See Hillary's current projects
*Learn about Hillary's vision for America
*Send Hillary a note
Onward Together
“Resist, insist, persist, enlist.” Hillary Rodham Clinton
Hillary Clinton on Facebook
Hillary Clinton on Facebook
@HillaryClinton on Twitter
Follow Hillary on Twitter!
What Happened
Hillary Clinton's 2016 election memoir
Too Small to Fail
“One of the best investments we can make is to give our kids the ingredients they need to develop in the first five years of life.” — Hillary Rodham Clinton
The Clinton Foundation on Facebook
Like the Clinton Foundation on Facebook!
Flint Child Health & Development Fund
"If you can, please chip in to support the Flint Child Health & Development Fund, which is working to provide health care and educational support to families in Flint affected by this crisis." - Hillary Clinton
Thank you for everything, Mme. Secretary!!!!
Thank you for all of your dedicated service and brilliant leadership!
Hillary Clinton’s Cover Letter to Congress on the ARB Report
Hillary because…
She would NEVER have allowed social safety nets to be "on the table."
Read the unclassified ARB Report on Benghazi here.
@U.S. Senate: Time to ratify LOST!
"... ratify the Law of the Sea Convention, which has provided the international framework for exploring these new opportunities in the Arctic. We abide by the international law that undergirds the convention, but we think the United States should be a member, because the convention sets down the rules of the road that protect freedom of navigation, provide maritime security, serve the interests of every nation that relies on sea lanes for commerce and trade, and also sets the framework for exploration for the natural resources that may be present in the Arctic." -HRC, 06-03-12, Tromso Norway
"I deeply resent those who attack our country, the generosity of our people and the leadership of our president in trying to respond to historically disastrous conditions after the earthquake." - HRC 01-26-10
Good Advice!
“You can’t keep snakes in your backyard and expect them only to bite your neighbors. Eventually those snakes are going to turn on whoever has them in the backyard.” HRC
Hillary! Leadership we need!
Politics & Foreign Policy
"What I have always found is that when it comes to foreign policy, it is important to remember that politics stops at the water's edge." -HRC 11-04-10
What a difference one woman can make!
"...whether it’s here, in the absolute best embassy in the world, or whether it’s in Washington, or whether it’s elsewhere, what a difference one woman can make. And that woman is right here, the woman who needs no introduction, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton." 07.05.10 - Unidentified speaker, Embassy Yerevan
Most Respected
"So, ladies and gentlemen, I give you your Secretary of State, and perhaps the most respected person on the world stage today, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton." - Jon Huntsman 05-23-2010
Hillary Clinton Express Facebook Group
Your one stop spot for Hillary Clinton News!
Supporters of “The People’s President,” Hillary Rodham Clinton
Together 4 us! Facebook Page
Uppity Woman
The place to go if you feel like you're the only woman who wants to punch her own TV set.
Jenny’s Jumbo Jargon
Elephant Watch
Favorite Quote
“When people attack you, you always have to remember that a lot of what others say about you has a lot more to do about them than you.” – Hillary Rodham Clinton