Press Availability in Phnom Penh
Remarks
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of StateVictoria Nuland
Department SpokespersonPeace PalacePhnom Penh, CambodiaJuly 12, 2012
SECRETARY CLINTON:Well, thank you very much for being so patient. There has been a lot of good work and constructive dialogue occurring. And I am very pleased to have had the chance, as I’ve traveled across Asia this week to talk about the breadth of American engagement, especially our work to strengthen economic ties and support democracy and human rights, along with our commitment to common security. This is all part of advancing our vision of an open, just, and sustainable regional order for the Asia Pacific based on institutions, norms, and partnerships that benefit all people and nations. And I think we are seeing what that means in practice.First, as to institutions, I spent several hours today meeting with colleagues at both the East Asia Summit and the ASEAN Regional Forum, and yesterday at the U.S.-ASEAN Post-Ministerial Conference. These institutions are at the heart of America’s expanding, multi-faceted engagement in the region. From boosting trade to expanding educational and cultural exchanges so strengthening security arrangements, these meetings are valuable opportunities for all the key players in the region to sit down together to grapple with some of the most important challenges we are facing.
Today, we reviewed progress in Burma, and I announced that the United States is easing sanctions to allow American businesses to invest there. We discussed North Korea and the importance of maintaining a united front in support of the peaceful, verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. And we focused on the need to improve coordination on important issues like cyber security and disaster relief. It is significant that 45 percent of all the natural disasters in the world occur in this East Asia region.
One of the other issues we discussed in particular underscores the value of these multilateral institutions and also the importance of establishing clear regional norms, and that is the South China Sea. As you know, the United States has no territorial claims in the South China Sea, and we do not take sides in disputes about territorial or maritime boundaries, but we do have a fundamental interest in freedom of navigation, the maintenance of peace and stability, respect for international law, and unimpeded lawful commerce. And we believe the nations of the region should work collaboratively and diplomatically to resolve disputes without coercion, without intimidation, without threats, and certainly without the use of force.
No nation can fail to be concerned by the increase in tensions, the uptick in confrontational rhetoric, and disagreements over resource exploitation. We have seen worrisome instances of economic coercion and the problematic use of military and government vessels in connection with disputes among fisherman. So we look to ASEAN and China to make meaningful progress toward finalizing a code of conduct for the South China Sea that is based on international law and agreements. As I told my colleagues, this will take leadership, and ASEAN is at its best when it meets its own goals and standards and is able to speak with one voice on issues facing the region.
The third building block of an effective regional order is a network of partnerships and alliances, and today I had a productive trilateral meeting with Japan and South Korea and bilateral meeting with High Representative Ashton of the European Union, the foreign ministers of China, Indonesia, and Singapore. America’s alliances with Japan and South Korea are cornerstones of our engagement in the region, and all three of us have stepped up our engagement with ASEAN, including by establishing dedicated missions to ASEAN in Jakarta. So this was a chance to compare notes on a wide range of common concerns and priorities.
Turning to Europe, the United States welcomes the EU’s increased engagement in Asia, and High Representative Ashton and I discussed ways we can work together in the region to advance our shared interests in promoting wider peace and prosperity.
Chinese Foreign Minister Yang and I reviewed a long list of joint U.S.-China efforts on everything from science and technology to energy and the environment, to public health and safety. We recognize that a zero-sum approach in the Asia Pacific will lead only to negative-sum results, so we are committed to working with China within a framework that fosters cooperation where interests align and manages differences where they do not. That is part of what it means to achieve an effective regional order.
So in every way we can, we are sending a clear message: The United States is a resident Pacific power and we are committed to the future. In my meetings throughout Asia, I sometimes hear questions about whether the United States will back up our commitment with increased resources. So here in Phnom Penh, I was proud to announce a significant new effort to reform and reinvigorate our assistance programs to ASEAN and beyond. It is called the Asia Pacific Strategic Engagement Initiative, or APSEI, and I’ll have more to say about that tomorrow at the meetings of the Lower Mekong Initiative.
I’m also looking forward to traveling to Siem Reap to participate in the U.S.-ASEAN Business Forum and to discuss the importance of worker’s rights and women’s rights at a Lower Mekong conference on gender equity and empowerment.
So we’ve covered a lot of ground and let me stop there and take your questions.
MS. NULAND: We’ll take three tonight. We’ll start with Nicole Gaouette from Bloomberg.
QUESTION: (Off mike.)
SECRETARY CLINTON: No, you just have to talk into it —
QUESTION: Okay. Testing?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Yeah.
MS. NULAND: Yes.
QUESTION: Could you outline us – for us the stakes if ASEAN and China fail to reach an agreement on a code of conduct for the South China Sea? And we also understand that ASEAN has had a great deal of difficulty reaching an agreement on a final communiqué. And I’m interested in your thoughts on what this says about the group’s ability to deal with thorny regional challenges.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes. Well, let me begin by saying that the discussions are continuing and they are intense, so we will see what the outcome is. But frankly, I think it is a sign of ASEAN’s maturity that they are wrestling with some very hard issues here. They’re not ducking them; they are walking right into them. And I have worked in many multilateral settings, and it is not at all unusual for much more mature organizations to be working on and discussing and even arguing about certain matters past the deadlines in order to try to see if there’s a way forward.
So I think we’ll wait. And it’s not up the United States. It’s up to ASEAN. It’s not up to China, it’s up to ASEAN. It’s not up to any outside nation or organization. It’s up to the ASEAN members themselves. And ASEAN stresses unity, and the slogan of the meeting here is “One Community, One Destiny.” And as organizations like ASEAN mature and develop, it becomes necessary to address hard issues, and we wish them well.
MS. NULAND: Next one. (Inaudible.) Sorry?
QUESTION: (Off mike.)
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, let’s wait and see what happens.
MS. NULAND: Next one, Khan Sophirom from the Ramsei Kampuchea Daily.
QUESTION: (Inaudible.) Is there any specific policy to Cambodia during your two-day visit in Phnom Penh? And what about the about the over 400 million Cambodians that have (inaudible)? Is there any development on that?
SECRETARY CLINTON: I couldn’t understand the second part of the question. I heard about is there anything in this – during my visit on assistance to Cambodia. But I couldn’t understand the second point.
QUESTION: What about the Cambodian debt – our 400 million U.S. —
MS. NULAND: Cambodian debt.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Oh, the debt. The debt. Okay. I’m sorry. Thank you. First, the United States remains strongly committed to working with and supporting the Cambodian people. Our development assistance has more than doubled in the last decade. It is now more than $75 million. We also, through our efforts on global health and HIV/AIDS, have worked with the Cambodian Government and NGOs in combating HIV/AIDS. We’re also encouraged from work we’ve been doing over a number of years to see recent reductions in maternal and child mortality. We’re working with Cambodia through our Feed the Future Initiative to help meet the needs of nearly 25 percent of the Cambodian population that is food deprived. So we’re working to translate development assistance into meaningful improvements in the lives of Cambodian people.
Now sometimes it is a little frustrating, I will admit, for the United States, because we channel our aid in so far as possible to the people themselves. We want more people fed. We want more people healthier. We want more men, women, and especially children to have a better life. So we cannot point to a big building we have built, but we can point to more children being alive, more people surviving HIV/AIDS, more women surviving childbirth, and we will continue to do everything we can to help the Cambodian people realize their own futures.
With respect to bilateral debt, under international law, governments are responsible for the obligations of their predecessors even though that may seem unfair in many instances. So what we want to do is work with the Cambodian Government to try to resolve these longstanding issues in a way that is fair, to help the Cambodian Government enhance its credit worthiness, increase its access to international capital markets. We think it will be in Cambodia’s interest to be able to enter into international financial markets, not be dependent on any one source of funding, but be able to bargain and work toward real credit worthiness. So we’re working with the Cambodian Government, and I’m hoping we will make progress in trying to resolve this issue. It’s something I personally am committed to doing.
MS. NULAND: Last one tonight, Margaret Brennan, CBS, please.
QUESTION: Madam Secretary, do you see any signs that Russia is going to support sanctions on Syria in the UN Security Council? There have been a number of developments this week, reports of Russian ships headed toward Syria, the defection of the Syrian ambassador to Iraq and now talk about public debate in Iran about supporting the Assad regime. What are your thoughts?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Margaret, I had the chance to discuss these issues at length with UN Special Envoy Kofi Annan last night following his consultations in Damascus, Tehran, and Baghdad, but before he briefed the UN Security Council. And I was encouraged that he is now asking for more support in the form of a UN Security Council resolution that not only endorses the political transition plan that the action group agreed on in Geneva but that has real consequences for noncompliance. The United States is determined to support him because our experience of the last year makes it absolutely clear that the Assad regime will not do anything without additional further pressure. I had a good discussion of these issues with Chinese Foreign Minister Yang today, and we agreed to do all we can in New York to see the Geneva plan, which was signed onto by all five permanent members of the UN Security Council – including Russia and China – be implemented.
So we do see the pressure building. Senior military figures from the Syrian army are defecting every week. We just had the first major diplomatic defection, the Syrian ambassador to Iraq turned on the regime yesterday. The economy is in shambles. The regime is struggling to hold onto large parts of the country.
So we do look to the Security Council and all of its members, including Russia, to join us in a serious resolution that gives Special Envoy Kofi Annan what he needs, what he’s asking for, and imposes real consequences on the regime for continuing to defy its obligations first and foremost to its own people and then to the international community. And we call on the Syrian military and business community to choose a democratic future rather than to cling to this crumbling regime. So we are working hard in New York, in other capitals, trying to make sure that we build on Kofi Annan’s latest reporting and request, and we hope to see steady progress. Thank you very much.
MS. NULAND: Thank you, all.
Hillary Clinton’s Press Conference in Phnom Penh
July 12, 2012 by still4hill
I love it! I am all about giving power back…
LikeLike
Whenever I read any of HRC’s Sec. of State speeches, I am reminded of how formidable and intelligent she is. She’s been a phenomenal Sec. of State, and now it’s time for her to run again for President. (If not in ’12 because of logistical issues, then in 2016. Though we do need her _right now_.)
LikeLike
We need her right now. I don’t know what’s going to happen between now and 2016 with either one of these candidates in office. Well, maybe I do. Whichever it is, the GOP will dominate, as it has throughout this administration. Four more years of Bush III is unacceptable.
Take note: Cory Booker has been named to head the platform committee and fashion Dem policy for the next four years. This is a step toward a national profile. I like Cory. I think the Dems are grooming him.
LikeLike
I like Cory Booker. I think he’s a smart pol.
I’ve also noticed that several HRC Dems have prominent places at the Democratic National Convention.
And Lanny Davis had that article the other day about polls and how they don’t really mean that much, which also made me sit up and say, “Hmm.” (Of course, he’s right.)
Still, what upsets me most is that it didn’t have to be this way. The professionals (so-called) at the DNC didn’t listen to us in ’08, I’m not sure they’re listening now either, and while _they_ deserve whatever _they_ get (those who put us in this bad condition), we the people of this country do _not_ deserve such nonsense as the House voting over and over again to “repeal” things when the Senate will never go along with it, the House knows it, so it’s just political grandstanding to no purpose. The current POTUS won’t even point out that the House doesn’t care about real people with this nonsense; I cannot believe HRC would be this clueless, ever.
At any rate, 5/31/08 was a low point with regards to political party. That event, just as we all said at that time, was a watershed moment, and for the worse. How we can regain any footing whatsoever with two very weak candidates, knowing full well the strongest one we have must sit the sidelines, I just don’t know.
LikeLike
Make that “those who put us in this bad _position_,” as while this _is_ a terrible condition to be in, the reason, positionally, it’s so terrible is because of the woeful actions of the DNC at the 5/31/08 RBC meeting.
LikeLike
I hear ya, Barb! Thing is can remember bad times, but we had strong leaders, and good times and we had “meh” leaders. It’s very discouraging that we have bad times with weak leaders – actually NO leadership. their behavior on the trail says it all, and yes the turning point was 5/31/08 – when they decided not to count every vote and to give some away etc. Disgusting.
I don’t trust Lanny. Why did he work against Hillary’s purposes in Honduras in 2009?
LikeLike
I’m not sure what Lanny Davis was doing in ’09; I do think he’s like us in that if he could have HRC as his President, he’d help her in a heartbeat.
And yes, to have these difficult times without good leadership (or even passable leadership) is extremely frustrating. I believe the current President means well and I think he’s grown in the job. But we all know that HRC was ready to be President, and BHO was not . . . the DNC screwed up, which screwed the country royally in the process, and unless BHO pulls a LBJ and bows out, I don’t see much hope for the country in the next four years even if he is re-elected. (Very sorry to say that, too.)
LikeLike
In ’09 Lanny was working (contracted) with the coup leaders in Honduras while HRC was trying to get the democratically-elected Zelaya back in the country and restored to power. That never happened – the White House reined her in and eventually the coup government was recognized by the U.S. which was one of a few times in 09 that they pulled her back when she was ready to rock.
He may have grown (a little) in his job, but he lacks – and this is biological – the stomach for the fight. He just doesn’t have that, will not go to the mat for anybody – witness the case in 09 I just mentioned. HRC was ready to go to the mat for Zelaya and the people who elected him. Obama and supporting democracy in Honduras? Eh! Not so much! That angers me about him and his circle of friends – Jarrett etc.
LikeLike
You’re right. Neither Obama or Romney is a fighter. Biden’s speeches are better than Obama’s at this point because the nation is looking for a fighter.
Speaking of Romney, I’m wondering why his campaign hasn’t made more organized overtures to Hillary supporters. Maybe he’s afraid of not seeming conservative enough, but beyond that I can’t figure it out. Then again, his campaign is pretty bad. At this point even I could run it better and I want him to lose.
LikeLike
Biden is the only pit bull Obama has in this fight. And the Romney campaign – amazing, isn’t it? Seems they are doing this blindfolded and wearing earplugs! No strategy at all!
LikeLike
We haven’t seen a campaign like this in a while – two candidates running against various elements of the electorate more than against each other ( Democrats are going up against the “imperious rich” and Republicans want to scourge the “undeserving poor” for the country’s problems), the country is in pain and neither candidate will so much as raise their voice a little about it, and Bill Clinton is nowhere to be found in an election year. What political rabbit hole have we fallen into?
LikeLike
You were joking about being surprised by WJC’s absence, right?
LikeLike
Not really. I thought Romney talking about him on the campaign trail wouldn’t elicited some response. Also, I didn’t think was possible for him to sit by while a campaign was underway, even if he wasn’t that enthusiastic about the party’s candidate because the alternative seems so much less appealing. I just don’t know what to make of a quiet Bill Clinton. It’s not normal. I want to know what he’s up to. Is he working on some grand plan, or just as bored with this election as the rest of us are?
LikeLike
Intense dislike for the way he has been treated by Obama & Co, is insufficient reason?
LikeLike
It wasn’t in 2010. The former president was all over the place campaigning for friends and supporters, but also for the Democrats’ message – what they had accomplished and what they hoped to achieve, etc… It’s that campaigning for ‘the brand’, if you will, that I’m surprised he isn’t doing. He’s always so good at it, too.
I would posit that he was Romney’s most influential PUMA-to-Republican voter convert, but if that were the case you know the Romney campaign would be run worlds better than it is right now.
LikeLike
That, as well as his campaigning in 2012, was, as promised, for supporters of HRC. This year he campaigned for Kathleen Kane and Bill Pascrell to name a few – diehard 2008 supporters of HRC who never left her side. This is exactly what he said he would do back in 2008 when they stuck with her. He campaigned AGAINST Obama supporters – Steve Rothman for example – who got trounced by Pascrell.
LikeLike
Yes, but he was also out there on other, mainly economic, issues not preaching Obama’s message, but the general platform of the Democratic party. That’s what I’m missing. He can make economic theories understandable to non-economists in a way that few others can and, given the stark difference in vision between the two parties, I think that that “economics unvarnished” would be very helpful.
LikeLike
The rabbits dug this hole on May 31, 2008, and we fell into it on August 26, 2008. In fact I posted several times on exactly that theme back then using original sketches from Carroll’s work and well as video from the Disney animation. I removed all posts in that vein in December 2008 when HRC accepted SOS. This did not happen suddenly. You can’t take people’s votes away and manipulate primary or electoral outcomes without turning the democracy upside down. Down is up and up is down as I said it back then.
LikeLike
I doubt Romney’s lack of “fight” is a result of Secretary Clinton not taking the ’08 nomination. Not sure if Obama has mellowed or I’ve gotten more feisty, but he doesn’t seem to have it this time around either. Maybe he would if he were challenging an incumbent President Rodham Clinton but I still think that there’s plenty out there to get motivated about. The thing that surprises me most is the absence of former President Clinton in the proceedings, especially since Romney was talking about him on the stump a few days ago. You think he’d pop up somewhere when a Republican is taking his name in vain.
LikeLike
That’s not what I was saying. We would not necessarily have two pale horses in this race if the Dems had not manipulated that 2008 nomination. If that had been a true fair fight on the convention floor, a true fighter would have emerged – one of them. Obama never HAD to fight. They carried him in on rose petals. And he hasn’t fought yet. He just asks people to fight for him. The Repubs put up whomever they put up. Romney is there because they think he’s the one to beat Obama. If 2008 had gone differently – legitimately – according to THE RULES this would be a different race even if Obama HAD come out the victor – he would have had to fight for it instead of being presented the nomination. Romney be damned – I wasn’t talking about him.
LikeLike
Maybe he figures that’s the job of the guy who HAS the office and wants to keep it.
LikeLike