Hi, all. Today’s report features:
• Weekly Address: The President speaks from the Intel campus in Oregon about educating our kids for the jobs of tomorrow.
• Out-Educating the Competition: President Obama speaks about encouraging education in science, technology, engineering and math.
• State Update: Afghanistan and Pakistan: Secretary Clinton delivers remarks at the launch of the Asia Society's Series of Richard C. Holbrooke Memorial Addresse.
• Commerce Roundup: American manufacturers share the advantages of building products in the U.S.; Secretary Locke appoints a new deputy director at USPTO; the Secretary’s remarks at National Export Initiative Small Business Conference.
• Ask Admiral Mullen: The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff invites questions for his third virtual town hall.
• USDA News: USDA and Tufts University conduct a joint study to understand, prevent and treat heart disease; the Celebrating Black History Month series spotlights Dr. Alma Hobbs, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Administration.
• WEEKLY ADDRESS •
White House, Feb. 19, 2011:
Weekly Address: Winning the Future at Intel
The President speaks from the Intel campus in Oregon about educating our kids for the jobs of tomorrow so we can make sure America wins the future.
Office of the Press Secretary, Feb. 19, 2011:
Weekly Address: To Win the Future, America Must Win the Global Competition in Education
WASHINGTON – In this week’s address, President Obama said that the United States needs the best trained and best skilled workforce in the world to win the global competition for new jobs and industries. Over the next ten years, nearly half of all new jobs will require education beyond high school. This is why his administration has made education a top priority, enacting reforms like “Race to the Top,” working to make college more affordable, revitalizing community colleges, and launching a nationwide initiative to connect graduates to the businesses that need their skills.
I’m speaking to you from just outside Portland, Oregon where I’m visiting Intel, a company that helped pioneer the digital age. I just came from a tour of an assembly line where highly-skilled technicians are building microprocessors that run everything from desktop computers to smartphones.
But these workers aren’t just manufacturing high-tech computer chips. They’re showing us how America will win the future.
For decades, Intel has led the world in developing new technologies. But even as global competition has intensified, this company has invested, built, and hired in America. Three-quarters of Intel’s products are made by American workers. And as the company expands operations in Oregon and builds a new plant in Arizona, it plans to hire another 4,000 people this year.
Companies like Intel are proving that we can compete – that instead of just being a nation that buys what’s made overseas, we can make things in America and sell them around the globe. Winning this competition depends on the ingenuity and creativity of our private sector – which was on display in my visit today. But it’s also going to depend on what we do as a nation to make America the best place on earth to do business.
Over the next ten years, nearly half of all new jobs will require education beyond high school, many requiring proficiency in math and science. And yet today we’ve fallen behind in math, science, and graduation rates. As a result, companies like Intel struggle to hire American workers with the skills that fit their needs.
If we want to win the global competition for new jobs and industries, we’ve got to win the global competition to educate our people. We’ve got to have the best trained, best skilled workforce in the world. That’s how we’ll ensure that the next Intel, the next Google, or the next Microsoft is created in America, and hires American workers.
This is why, over the past two years, my administration has made education a top priority. We’ve launched a competition called “Race to the Top” – a reform that is lifting academic standards and getting results; not because Washington dictated the answers, but because states and local schools pursued innovative solutions. We’re also making college more affordable for millions of students, and revitalizing our community colleges, so that folks can get the training they need for the careers they want. And as part of this effort, we’ve launched a nationwide initiative to connect graduates that need jobs with businesses that need their skills.
Intel understands how important these partnerships can be – recognizing that their company’s success depends on a pipeline of skilled people ready to fill high-wage, high-tech jobs. Intel often pays for workers to continue their education at nearby Portland State University. As a result, one out of every fifteen of Intel’s Oregon employees has a degree from Portland State.
In fact, Intel’s commitment to education begins at an even younger age. The company is providing training to help 100,000 math and science teachers improve their skills in the classroom. And today, I’m also meeting a few students from Oregon who impressed the judges in the high school science and engineering competitions that Intel sponsors across America.
One young woman, Laurie Rumker, conducted a chemistry experiment to investigate ways to protect our water from pollution. Another student, named Yushi Wang, applied the principles of quantum physics to design a faster computer chip. We’re talking about high school students.
So these have been a tough few years for our country. And in tough times, it’s natural to question what the future holds. But when you meet young people like Laurie and Yushi, it’s hard not to be inspired. And it’s impossible not to be confident about America.
We are poised to lead in this new century – and not just because of the good work that large companies like Intel are doing. All across America, there are innovators and entrepreneurs who are trying to start the next Intel, or just get a small business of their own off the ground. I’ll be meeting with some of these men and women next week in Cleveland, to get ideas about what we can do to help their companies grow and create jobs.
The truth is, we have everything we need to compete: bold entrepreneurs, bright new ideas, and world-class colleges and universities. And, most of all, we have young people just brimming with promise and ready to help us succeed. All we have to do is tap that potential.
That’s the lesson on display at Intel. And that’s how America will win the future.
Thank you.
• OUT-EDUCATING THE COMPETITION •
White House, Feb. 18, 2011:
Out-Educating the Competition
President Obama speaks about winning the future through encouraging education in science, technology, engineering and math during a visit to Intel in Hillsboro, OR.
Office of the Press Secretary, Feb. 18, 2011:
Remarks by the President on Winning the Future in Hillsboro, Oregon
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you, everybody. Thank you. Everybody, please have a seat.
Thank you so much. I am thrilled to be here. I want to, first of all, thank Paul for that introduction, and I want to thank Paul for agreeing to be part of our administration’s new Council on Jobs and Competitiveness. I look forward to our continuing conversations when we meet next week.
I also want to acknowledge a wonderful governor, Governor Kitzhaber, who is here. Thank you so much for all the work that you’re doing. (Applause.) And the mayor of Hillsboro, Jerry Willey, thank you for the great work that you do. (Applause.)
And I want to thank everybody here at Intel for hosting us here today. We just had an amazing tour. One of my staff, he said, it’s like magic. (Laughter.) He did, that’s what he said. (Laughter.)
I had a chance to see everything from an electron microscope to the inside of your microprocessor facility, the clean room. And I have to say, for all the gadgets you’ve got here, what actually most impressed me were the students and the science projects that I just had a chance to see. It gave them a chance to talk about things like quantum ternary algorithms -- (laughter) -- and it gave me a chance to nod my head and pretend that I understood what they were talking about. (Laughter and applause.)
So that was the high school guys. Then we went over to -- (laughter) -- seriously. Then we went over to meet some seventh graders, six girls, and it was wonderful -- all girls -- who had started a science program after school that involved Legos. So I’m thinking, now this is more my speed. (Laughter.) I used to build some pretty mean Lego towers when I was a kid. (Laughter.) I thought I could participate -- only these students used their Legos to build models -- to build robots that were programmable to model brains that could repair broken bones. So I guess that’s different than towers. (Laughter.) It’s not as good. (Laughter.) The towers. (Laughter.)
So I couldn’t be prouder of these students and all the work that they’ve done. And in my State of the Union address, I said that it’s not just the winner of the Super Bowl who deserves to be celebrated, but also the winner of science fairs. And since the Packers beat my Bears -- (laughter) -- I’m reserving all my celebrating for the winners of the service fairs this year -- the science fairs. They deserve applause. (Applause.) They deserve our applause and our praise, and they make me optimistic about America’s future, just as visiting this facility makes me optimistic about America’s future.
I’m so proud of everybody here at Intel, not only because of what you do for these students or this community, because -- but because of what you do for the country. A few weeks ago, I went to the Chamber of Commerce and I talked about the responsibility that American businesses have to create jobs and invest in this country. And there are few major companies that take this responsibility as seriously as Intel.
In 1968, Intel started as one of Silicon Valley’s first start-ups. And as you grew in leaps and bounds in the ‘80s and the ‘90s, you experienced the competitive pressures of globalization -- the changes in technology that made it cheaper for many computer companies to start hiring and manufacturing overseas. And over the years, you’ve done some of this yourself. And yet, by and large, Intel has placed its bets on America.
As Paul just mentioned, three-fourths of your manufacturing still happens right here in the United States. This year you’ll hire another 4,000 American workers. You’ll create good construction jobs upgrading your facilities and building new plants in Arizona and right here in Oregon.
And this kind of commitment has always been part of Intel’s philosophy. The founder of this company, the legendary Andy Grove, has said that he’s always felt two obligations. One obligation is to your shareholders. But the other obligation is to America, because a lot of what Intel has achieved has been made possible, in Andy’s words, “by a climate of democracy, an economic climate, and investment climate provided by our domicile, the United States.”
Intel is possible because of the incredible capacity of America to reinvent itself and to allow people to live out their dreams. And so the question we have to ask ourselves now is, how do we maintain this climate that Andy Grove was talking about? How do we make sure that more companies like Intel invest here, manufacture here, hire here?
In a world that is more competitive than ever before, it’s our job to make sure that America is the best place on Earth to do business. Now, part of that requires knocking down barriers that stand in the way of a company’s growth, which is why I’ve proposed lowering the corporate tax rate and eliminating unnecessary regulations. It also requires getting our fiscal house in order, which is why I’ve proposed a five-year spending freeze that will reduce the deficit by $400 billion. That's a freeze that will bring our annual domestic spending to its lowest share of the economy since Eisenhower was President.
Now, to really get our deficit under control we’re going to have to do more. And I want to work with both parties to find additional savings and get rid of excessive spending wherever it exists, whether it’s defense spending or health care spending or spending in the tax code, in the form of loopholes.
But even as we have to live within our means, we can’t sacrifice investments in our future. If we want the next technological breakthrough that leads to the next Intel to happen here in the United States -- not in China or not in Germany, but here in the United States -- then we have to invest in America’s research and technology; in the work of our scientists and our engineers.
If we want companies like yours to be able to move goods and information quickly and cheaply, we’ve got to invest in communication and transportation networks, like new roads and bridges, high-speed rail, high-speed internet.
If we want to make sure Intel doesn’t have to look overseas for skilled, trained workers, then we’ve got to invest in our people -- in our schools, in our colleges, in our children.
Basically, if we want to win the future, America has to out-build, and out-innovate, and out-educate and out-hustle the rest of the world. That's what we’ve got to do. (Applause.)
So today I want to focus on one component of that, and that is education. That's what I want to talk about today.
Over the next 10 years, nearly half of all new jobs will require education that goes beyond a high school degree. Times have changed. It used to be if you were willing to work hard, you could go to a factory and you might be able to get a job that lasts 20 years, provide good benefits, provide decent salary. These days those jobs are far and few between. Many of the jobs that are going to exist in the future, that exist now -- like the ones here at Intel -- require proficiency in math and science.
And yet today as many as a quarter of our students aren’t even finishing high school. The quality of our math and science education lags behind many other nations. As we just heard Paul say, companies like Intel struggle to hire American workers who have the skills that fit their needs.
So we can’t win the future if we lose the race to educate our children. Can’t do it. In today’s economy, the quality of a nation’s education is one of the biggest predictors of a nation’s success. It is what will determine whether the American Dream survives. And so it’s the responsibility of all of us to get this right: parents, teachers, students, workers, business and government. We’re all going to have to focus on this like a laser.
And over the past two years, my administration’s guiding philosophy has been that when it comes to reforming our schools, Washington shouldn’t try to dictate all the answers. What we should be doing is rewarding and replicating the success of schools that have figured out a way to raise their standards and improve student performance.
And so here’s what we did. Instead of pouring federal money into a system that wasn’t working, we launched a competition. We called it Race to the Top. To all 50 states we said if you show us reforms that will lead to real results, we’ll show you the money.
Race to the Top has turned out to be the most meaningful reform of our public schools in a generation. For less than 1 percent of what we spend on education each year, it has led over 40 states -- 40 -- to raise their standards for teaching and for learning. And these standards weren't developed in Washington -- they were developed by Republican and Democratic governors throughout the country.
Because we know that, other than parents, perhaps the biggest impact on a child’s success comes from the man or woman who’s sitting or who is standing in front of the classroom, we've also focused a lot on teaching, on teachers. We want to make teaching an honored profession in our society. We want to reward good teachers. We want to stop making excuses for bad teachers. And over the next 10 years, with so many baby boomers retiring from our classrooms, we want to prepare 100,000 new teachers in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and math -- fields that will give the students the skills they need for the jobs that exist in places like Intel.
To ensure that higher education is within the reach of every American, we extended -- we put an end to unwarranted taxpayer subsidies that used to go to banks, and we put the savings towards making college more affordable for millions of students. And this year, we want to make permanent our tuition tax credit, which is worth $10,000 for four years of college.
And finally, to make sure anyone can get trained and prepared for whatever career they pursue, we want to revitalize America’s community colleges. Not everybody needs to go to a four-year college. And so we’ve launched a nationwide initiative to connect graduates that need a job with businesses that need their skills.
And we've drawn lessons from Intel’s experience. For years, Intel has recognized the value of these kinds of partnerships between schools and businesses. This company understands that your success depends on a pipeline of skilled workers who are ready to fill high-tech jobs.
And so over the last decade, you’ve invested $50 million to support education in the state of Oregon. You’ve started programs -- (Applause.) That's worth applause.
You’ve started programs that get kids interested in engineering and technology as early as elementary school, like those six girls that I met. You’ve sponsored mentoring and engineering competitions for poor and underserved high school students. Your employees volunteer -- some of you probably here have volunteered -- as tutors in nearby schools and universities. You’ve helped train 7,000 Oregon teachers over the last 10 years.
Your science fairs, your talent searches are some of the largest and most prestigious in the world, producing multiple Nobel Prize winners -- and I expect some of the students I met will qualify soon. (Laughter and applause.)
And we were so grateful that Intel was one of the four companies that initially joined our administration’s nationwide campaign to boost math and science education here in America, as part of a new organization called “Change the Equation.”
So you guys have been pretty busy here at Intel. (Laughter.) You’ve given countless students the chance to succeed, and for that you should be very proud. But you’re not just a good corporate role model. You’re a corporation who understands that investing in education is also a good business model. It’s good for the bottom line.
A lot of your employees were engineering undergraduates at Oregon State or Portland State, right? (Applause.) How many Beavers here, by the way? (Applause.) You know my brother-in-law is coach there. (Laughter and applause.) Just wanted to -- just wanted to point that out. They’re a young team, but they're on the move. (Laughter.)
But here’s what we know. If you can spark a student’s interest in math or science who would have otherwise dropped out, you might not just change a child’s life; you may nurture the talent that one day discovers the breakthrough that changes this industry forever.
In fact, before I came here, I read a story about a young University of Oregon graduate. His name is Nabil Mistkawi, and he joined Intel as an engineer in 1993. After working with so many other employees who had doctorate degrees, Nabil decided to go back to school and get his PhD in chemistry at Portland State University. And thanks to Intel, he was able to pay for his degree and keep his full-time job.
During that time, Intel was trying to find a faster, more efficient way to process their microchips, but nobody could figure it out. And they asked at least eight other companies and research labs for help. Some said it couldn’t be done. Others worked on it for nearly a year with no success. And so they asked Nabil if he wanted to give it a shot.
Within three days -- three days -- he came up with a solution that is now saving this company millions of dollars a year. And I will not embarrass myself by trying to explain what his answer was -- (laughter) -- and most of you probably know how it works anyway. (Laughter.) The point is, an investment in education paid off in a big way -- for Nabil, for Intel, for the millions of workers and consumers who benefited from that discovery.
So for all the daunting statistics about our educational failings as a nation, for all the naysayers predicting America’s decline -- you’ve been hearing them lately -- stories like this give me hope. Stories like these give me confidence that America will win the future. We know what works. We know how to succeed. We know how to do big things. And all across this nation -- in places just like one -- we have students and teachers, local leaders and companies, who are working together to make it happen.
When it comes to competing with other nations for the jobs and industries of the future, we are all on the same team -- the American team. And if we start rowing in the same direction, I promise you, there is nothing that we cannot achieve. That’s what you’re proving here at Intel. That’s what you’re proving in the schools and colleges of this state. That’s what America will prove in the months and years ahead.
Thank you, guys. God bless you. (Applause.)
• STATE UPDATE: AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN •
Department of State, Feb. 18, 2011:
Secretary Clinton Delivers Remarks on Afghanistan and Pakistan
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton delivers remarks at the launch of the Asia Society's Series of Richard C. Holbrooke Memorial Addresses in New York, February 18, 2011.
Department of State, Feb. 18, 2011:
Secretary Clinton’s Remarks at the Launch of the Asia Society's Series of Richard C. Holbrooke Memorial Addresses
SECRETARY CLINTON: …. (Richard Holbrooke called Afghanistan and Pakistan) his toughest assignment. And certainly, the challenges were almost beyond description. And Richard was always the first to enumerate them. But he understood the importance of this mission to our national security and to the future of such a critical region of the world.
We’ve made progress, but the tribal areas along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan remain the epicenter of violent extremism that threatens Americans and peace-loving people everywhere.
Here in New York, Richard’s hometown, we need no reminder of the stakes. Nearly 10 years ago, al-Qaida launched a terrorist attack planned and prepared in the safe haven of Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. And it took, tragically, the lives of thousands not only of our fellow citizens, but individuals from across the world.
Since then, al-Qaida and its followers have killed innocent people and encouraged the killing, whether it was in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Madrid, London, Bali, or Istanbul. These attacks have served only to steel our resolve. As President Obama said at West Point, we did not ask for this fight, but we will surely finish it.
Since that terrible day in 2001, two successive administrations from different points on the political spectrum have made an enormous commitment of American lives and treasure to pursue the terrorists who attacked us and those who harbor them. And after all that, many Americans understandably want to know how we plan to achieve the goals we have set forth.
For their part, people in the region – not just in Kabul or Islamabad, but in Beijing and Moscow, Delhi and Tehran – wonder about America’s long-term intentions and objectives. They want to know if we will walk away again, as we did in 1989 after the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan.
Today, I want to answer some of those questions and talk in more detail about a new phase of our diplomatic efforts on Afghanistan. I will be clear right at the start about a few key elements: our adversary, our goal, and our strategy.
First, our adversary. Despite heavy losses, the al-Qaida terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 retain dangerous capabilities. They continue to plot large-scale, catastrophic international attacks and to support and inspire regional affiliates. The United States and our allies remain their principal targets. Before 2001, al-Qaida was protected in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. Al-Qaida and the Taliban, along with various associated groups, still maintain an alliance, based largely in the border region between Afghanistan and Pakistan. And the Taliban continue to wage a brutal insurgency against the government in Kabul in an effort to regain control of the country. The Taliban and al-Qaida are distinct groups with distinct aims, but they are both our adversaries and part of a syndicate of terror that must be broken.
After he took office, President Obama launched a thorough review of our policy and set out a clear goal: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al-Qaida, and prevent it from threatening America and our allies in the future. Al-Qaida cannot be allowed to maintain its safe haven, protected by the Taliban, and to continue plotting attacks while destabilizing nations that have known far too much war. From the Tigris to the Indus, the region will never live up to its full potential until it is free of al-Qaida and its creed of violence and hatred. That is an aspiration that should unite every nation.
In pursuit of this goal, we are following a strategy with three mutually reinforcing tracks – three surges, if you will: a military offensive against al-Qaida terrorists and Taliban insurgents; a civilian campaign to bolster the governments, economies, and civil societies of Afghanistan and Pakistan to undercut the pull of the insurgency; and an intensified diplomatic push to bring the Afghan conflict to an end and chart a new and more secure future for the region.
The first two surges set the table for the success of the third, which aims to support an Afghan-led political process to split the weakened Taliban off from al-Qaida and reconcile those who will renounce violence and accept the Afghan constitution with an increasingly stable Afghan Government. That would leave al-Qaida alone and on the run.
In 2001, after 9/11, I would remind us all, the Taliban chose to defy the international community and protect al-Qaida. That was the wrong choice, and they have paid a heavy price. Today, the escalating pressure of our military campaign is sharpening a similar decision for the Taliban: Break ties with al-Qaida, renounce violence, and abide by the Afghan constitution, and you can rejoin Afghan society; refuse and you will continue to face the consequences of being tied to al-Qaida as an enemy of the international community.
They cannot wait us out. They cannot defeat us. And they cannot escape this choice.
All three surges are part of the vision for transition in Afghanistan that President Obama reaffirmed in his December policy review and that NATO endorsed in Lisbon at the most recent summit. Ultimately, Afghans must take responsibility for their own future – for providing security, for strengthening governance, and for reaching a political solution to the conflict.
That transition will be formally launched next month, with troop reductions starting in July and continuing based on conditions on the ground. It will be completed by the end of 2014. As transition proceeds and Afghan leadership strengthens across the country, a process of political reconciliation will become increasingly viable.
In turn, successful reconciliation will reduce the threat to the Afghan Government, making transition more sustainable. Crucially, the enduring commitment of the United States, our allies, and our partners will continue to support the stability of the Afghan Government and the durability of a responsible political settlement. That is the vision of transition – one that is shared by the Afghan Government – that we are pursuing.
So we have a big challenge with many moving parts. Let me go through each surge – military, civilian, and diplomatic – and explain how they fit together to advance our larger goals.
First the military surge, which sent thousands of additional American and allied troops to Afghanistan to deny safe haven for al-Qaida and to break the Taliban’s momentum. More and better-trained Afghan security forces are also in the field, working side-by-side with our troops. And we honor the service and sacrifice of all the women and men, from every nation, as well as their civilian colleagues, who have put their lives at risk and, all too tragically, for too many, paid with those lives. They are engaged in a very tough fight. But we are in it together. Thanks to their efforts, the rapidly deteriorating security situation the Obama Administration inherited in January 2009 has begun to stabilize. Expanded local security measures at the village level have helped protect vulnerable populations. Security has improved in Kabul and in key provinces like Helmand and Kandahar. The momentum of the Taliban insurgents has been blunted, and in some places even reversed.
Now, from the beginning, we have recognized the fundamental connection between our war effort in Afghanistan and the extremists’ safe havens and enablers in Pakistan. It is no secret that we have not always seen eye-to-eye with Pakistan on how to deal with these threats or on the future of Afghanistan. But as a result of growing cooperation between our governments, militaries, and law enforcement agencies, and determined action by the Pakistani army, we have been able to dramatically expand our counterterrorism and intelligence efforts.
Pressure is increasing on both sides of the border. As a result, the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 are under threat like never before. Al-Qaida’s leadership is weakened, its safe havens in the border regions are smaller and less secure, and its ability to prepare and conduct terrorist operations has been significantly degraded. But make no mistake, al-Qaida remains a serious threat, but it is finding it tougher to raise money, train recruits and plan attacks outside the region. Just as importantly, we have given its Taliban allies and sympathizers reason to question the wisdom of their loyalty.
Now let me turn to the second track. I know there are some on Capitol Hill and elsewhere who question whether we need anything more than guns, bombs, and troops to achieve our goals in Afghanistan. As our commanders on the ground would be the first to say, however, that is a short-sighted and ultimately self-defeating view. We will never kill enough insurgents to end this war outright. The military campaign must proceed hand-in-hand with a robust civilian effort that helps the Afghan Government build credibility with its own people, offer alternatives to the insurgency, and provide incentives for all Afghans to renounce violence and work together toward a better future. That is how insurgencies end.
And that is why we have matched our military surge with a civilian surge that tripled the number of diplomats, development experts, and other specialists on the ground. These efforts are mutually reinforcing and both support the transition process. We now have more than 1,100 civilian experts from nine federal agencies working in Afghanistan on everything from improving agriculture, to expanding infrastructure, to stemming the drug trade, and training Afghan civil servants.
We have also expanded our civilian efforts in Pakistan, including through the Kerry-Lugar-Berman assistance program, which is funding projects to address Pakistan’s urgent energy and economic needs.
After the devastating floods, we stepped up with aid and relief, and our Strategic Dialogue is building habits of cooperation between our governments at every level. Now, of course, there are still significant challenges to overcome in our relationship. Distrust lingers on both sides. And we need to work together carefully to prevent misunderstandings and disagreements from derailing the progress we have made in the past two years.
So in both nations, the decision to deploy additional civilian resources is paying dividends, even as we remain determined to work smarter and better at how we deploy these resources.
The budget that President Obama announced on Monday provides the resources our diplomats and development experts need to be effective partners to the military to get the job done. Retreating from the civilian side of the mission – as some funding proposals currently before Congress would do – would be a grave mistake.
Now, I certainly appreciate the tight budget environment we find ourselves in. But the fact is that these civilian operations are crucial to our national security.
Consider the long-term price we have paid as a result of disengaging from Afghanistan after 1989. As Secretary of Defense Bob Gates told the Senate Armed Services Committee just yesterday, we cannot afford to make that mistake again. Or consider Iraq, where the transition to a civilian-led mission is helping the Pentagon save $45 billion, and the State Department and USAID require an increase of only $4 billion to make sure that we are robustly engaged with the government and people of Iraq. That is a good deal by any standard. So we are working with Congress to ensure that the civilian surge in Afghanistan and Pakistan receives the support it requires now and in years to come.
Now, I will not sugarcoat the fact that the Afghan Government has, from time to time, disagreed with our policies. And there is no denying the challenges our civilian efforts face in Afghanistan. Corruption remains a major problem. Fighting fraud and waste is one of our highest priorities. A major focus of the civilian surge has been expanding our presence in the field, getting more experts out to provide hands-on leadership of our development projects. We have partnered with the military to put in place stronger controls on contractors. And we are working with Afghan institutions that we fund directly to help them improve auditing and accountability.
So as the military surge weakens the insurgents and pressures them to consider alternatives to armed resistance, the civilian surge creates economic and social incentives for participating in a peaceful society. Together, the two efforts prepare the ground for a political process, which history and experience tell us is the most effective way to end an insurgency.
And that brings us to the third track. President Obama’s December policy review emphasized, and I quote, that “our civilian and military efforts must support a durable and favorable political resolution of the conflict. In 2011, we will intensify our regional diplomacy to enable a political process to promote peace and stability in Afghanistan.”
As promised, we are launching a diplomatic surge to move this conflict toward a political outcome that shatters the alliance between the Taliban and al-Qaida, ends the insurgency, and helps to produce not only a more stable Afghanistan but a more stable region.
Now, of course, we had always envisioned Richard Holbrooke leading this effort. He was an architect of our integrated military-civilian-diplomatic strategy, and we feel his loss so keenly.
But Richard left us a solid foundation. Over the past two years, he built an exceptional team and a strong working relationships with our allies and regional partners.
And today, I am pleased to announce that the President and I have called back to service Ambassador Marc Grossman, a veteran diplomat and one of Richard’s most esteemed colleagues, as our new Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan. Ambassador Grossman’s first tour in the Foreign Service was in Pakistan. He knows our allies and understands how to mobilize common action to meet shared challenges. He played a crucial role in the Dayton talks, and Richard described him in a memorable book that Richard wrote as “one of the most outstanding career diplomats.” Ambassador Grossman has followed in Richard’s shoes before when he served as Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs in the ‘90s, and I am absolutely confident in his ability to hit the ground running.
Now, Ambassador Grossman and the rest of his interagency team will marshal the full range of our policy resources to support responsible, Afghan-led reconciliation that brings the conflict to a peaceful conclusion, and to actively engage with states in the region and the international community to advance that process.
As I said, important groundwork has already been laid, both by Richard and his team, and by the Afghans themselves.
Many low-level fighters entered the insurgency not because of deep ideological commitment, but because they were following the promise of a paycheck. So in London last year, the international community pledged financial support for the Afghan Government’s comprehensive program to draw them off the battlefield and back into society.
As military pressure escalates, more insurgents may begin looking for alternatives to violence. And not just low-level fighters. Both we and the Afghans believe that the security and governance gains produced by the military and civilian surges have created an opportunity to get serious about a responsible reconciliation process, led by Afghans and supported by intense regional diplomacy and strong U.S.-backing.
Such a process would have to be accepted by all of Afghanistan’s major ethnic and political blocs. For this to work, everyone has to feel they have a stake in the outcome and a responsibility for achieving it.
President Karzai made a good start by convening a broad-based Peace Jirga in June that set out a framework for national reconciliation. He then formed a High Peace Council that includes representatives from across Afghanistan. Council leaders are holding meetings in key provinces throughout the country with tribal leaders, civil society, women, and villagers to hear their hopes and concerns for a reconciliation process. They are working to form local councils to begin engaging the insurgents and the broader community.
The United States supports this Afghan effort. Over the past two years, we have laid out our unambiguous red lines for reconciliation with the insurgents: They must renounce violence; they must abandon their alliance with al-Qaida; and they must abide by the constitution of Afghanistan. Those are necessary outcomes of any negotiation. This is the price for reaching a political resolution and bringing an end to the military actions that are targeting their leadership and decimating their ranks.
If former militants are willing to meet these red lines, they would then be able to participate in the political life of the country under their constitution.
Now, I know that reconciling with an adversary that can be as brutal as the Taliban sounds distasteful, even unimaginable. And diplomacy would be easy if we only had to talk to our friends. But that is not how one makes peace. President Reagan understood that when he sat down with the Soviets. And Richard Holbrooke made this his life’s work. He negotiated face-to-face with Milosevic and ended a war.
It won’t be easy. Old adversaries will need to see that their own self-interest lies in setting aside their grievances. Taliban militants will have to decide that they are better off working within the Afghan political system rather than fighting a losing struggle alongside al-Qaida in bombed-out caves. The Afghan Government must be prepared to be more inclusive and more accountable. All parties will have to commit to a pluralistic political system that respects the human rights of every Afghan.
The United States is committed to helping Afghans defend those rights. We will not abandon our values or support a political process that undoes the social progress that has been made in the past decade.
The Afghan Government needs to safeguard the rights of all Afghans, especially women and minorities. I know firsthand from what happened in the Balkans, Northern Ireland, and other places recovering from conflict that the participation of women and civil society groups will be essential to building a just and lasting peace.
The United States supports the participation of women at all levels of the reconciliation process, because we believe the potential for sustainable peace will be subverted if women are silenced or marginalized. Afghan women made significant contributions to the Peace Jirga, they must continue to be a part of the High Peace Council, and they have an important role to play at the provincial and local levels if genuine reconciliation is going to take root.
Reconciliation – achieving it and maintaining it – will depend on the participation and support of Afghanistan’s neighbors, including and most importantly Pakistan. Let me be blunt: We all need to be on the same page for this to work. Whether we live in Kabul or Islamabad or Washington, we need to share a common vision for the future. A vision of a stable, independent Afghanistan rid of insurgency and proxy conflicts fought by neighboring states. A vision of a region free from al-Qaida.
As we have underscored from the beginning, Pakistan plays a pivotal role. It is a nuclear-armed nation of nearly 170 million people with deep ties and strong interests in Afghanistan. It was with Pakistan that the United States and other countries supported the Afghan people in their fight against the Soviet occupation in the 1980s. And Pakistan continues to host thousands of refugees from the current conflict. Unfortunately, the historic distrust between Pakistan and Afghanistan remains a major cause of regional instability and does not serve the long-term interests of the people of either country.
Pakistan has legitimate concerns that should be understood and addressed by the Afghan Government under any reconciliation process, with steps that provide transparency and reassurance. But Pakistan also has responsibilities of its own, including taking decisive steps to ensure that the Afghan Taliban cannot continue to conduct the insurgency from Pakistani territory. Pressure from the Pakistani side will help push the Taliban toward the negotiating table and away from al-Qaida.
For reconciliation to succeed, Pakistan will have to be part of the process. It will have to respect Afghan sovereignty and work with Afghanistan to improve regional stability. We know cooperation is possible. Just last month, Afghanistan and Pakistan took a huge step forward with formal ratification of a long-awaited Transit Trade Agreement, which will boost economic opportunity on both sides of the border by opening new markets and trade routes for Afghan and Pakistani goods. This was one of Richard’s proudest accomplishments, because it had been in negotiation since the early 1960s.
Expanding this cooperation to security issues, including reconciliation, is in the interests of both nations and will be a focus of our diplomatic efforts going forward.
Beyond Pakistan, all of Afghanistan’s neighbors and near-neighbors – India and Iran, Russia and China, the Central Asian states – stand to benefit from a responsible political settlement in Afghanistan and also an end to al-Qaida’s safe havens in the border areas and the exporting of extremism into their countries. That would reduce the terrorist and narcotics threat to their own citizens, create new opportunities for commerce, and ease the free flow of energy and resources throughout the region. It could also help move other regional conflicts toward peaceful resolution.
Indeed, we are encouraged by news that India and Pakistan are re-launching a dialogue aimed at building trust, and we encourage them to work in that same spirit to support a political process in Afghanistan. We look to them – and all of Afghanistan’s neighbors – to respect Afghanistan’s sovereignty, which means agreeing not to play out their rivalries within its borders, and to support reconciliation and efforts to ensure that al-Qaida and the syndicate of terrorism is denied safe haven everywhere. Afghanistan, in turn, must not allow its territory to be used against others.
The United States will intensify our efforts to build broad international support for Afghan reconciliation.
In early March, we will meet in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia with our partners in the International Contact Group, hosted by the Organization of the Islamic Conference. The Contact Group, which Richard worked so hard to build, brings together more than 40 countries and international organizations, including a growing number of Muslim-majority nations. The Afghan leaders of the High Peace Council will join us and review efforts toward reconciliation.
NATO ministers will convene in Paris a few days later to review transition planning. We are also preparing for a conference in Germany later this year for the 10th anniversary of the Bonn Conference, which we hope will be an important milestone in the political process.
As this work proceeds, the United States will relentlessly pursue al-Qaida and those Taliban who refuse to renounce violence, while working to improve security, development, and governance on the ground. Again, the Afghan Taliban have a clear choice: Be part of Afghanistan’s future or face unrelenting assault.
For reconciliation to take hold – for it to be irreversible – Afghanistan’s government will need to provide security to all its people. So the United States and our allies will continue training, advising, and assisting Afghan forces.
We are working with President Karzai to implement a responsible transition to Afghan security leadership, which will begin in the coming weeks. And in July, we will begin to reduce the number of our troops based on conditions on the ground. Transition to Afghan leadership will be complete by the end of 2014. We think this provides the Afghan Government the time and space it needs to further build up the security forces, ministries, and institutions that will make reconciliation durable and sustainable.
Just as importantly, a political process that takes insurgents off the battlefield will make it easier for our troops to hand over responsibility to Afghan security forces and for transition to proceed.
We have been clear that this transition does not mark the end of our commitment to the people of the region. NATO has pledged an enduring military and financial commitment to Afghanistan that will extend beyond the completion of transition in 2014.
And at the request of the Afghan Government, the United States will launch negotiations on a new Strategic Partnership Declaration. It will provide a long-term framework for our bilateral cooperation in the areas of security, economic and social development, and institution building.
This new partnership will complement our ongoing Strategic Dialogue with Pakistan. The development of these relationships, along with our deepening engagement with key neighbors, is crucial to providing stability and confidence in the region.
The United States will always maintain the capability to protect our people and our interests. But in no way should our enduring commitment be misunderstood as a desire by America or our allies to occupy Afghanistan against the will of its people. We respect Afghans’ proud history of resistance to foreign occupation, and we do not seek any permanent American military bases in their country or a presence that would be a threat to any of Afghanistan’s neighbors.
The United States is not walking away from the region. We will not repeat the mistakes of the past. Our commitment is real and it is enduring.
But for all that America is ready to do, and for all the work of the international community, the people and leaders of the region are ultimately responsible for their own futures.
Pakistanis are tired of terror and turmoil. Afghans have suffered through three decades of war. But the leaders of both nations, in and out of government, have not done enough to chart a different course.
Despite steps by the government over the past two years, Pakistan’s public finances remain in disarray. Energy shortages are hampering economic growth, and causing political and social instability.
Routine suicide bombings – including last week’s tragic murders of 31 innocents by a so-called “school boy” suicide bomber – underscore the continued threat of violent extremism. And shocking, unjustified anti-Americanism will not resolve these problems.
America stands ready to assist Pakistan’s leaders in addressing these challenges. They have already enacted some reforms aimed at stabilizing the economy. The test will be in how they are implemented, supported and expanded. Pakistan’s leaders still have a lot to do to reduce corruption, to rebuild from last summer’s floods, and to keep making progress in eliminating extremists and their sanctuaries.
The Afghan people also expect their government to present a positive vision for the future. President Karzai’s stated commitment to enhance transparency, improve basic services, and reduce corruption is a start. But his people will look for deeds to match the words. They will look for strong and independent democratic institutions, like the courts and electoral bodies, to ensure their rights. And most of all, they will look for results that make a difference in their lives.
Leaders in both nations will have to decide what kind of future they want for their children and grandchildren to inherit.
What that future looks like will depend, to no small degree, on the success of the political and diplomatic process I have described today. So long as leaders in Kabul and Islamabad eye each other with distrust, so long as the Taliban have safe havens from which to wage war, so long as al-Qaida operates anywhere in the region, the prospects for progress are slim.
Last month in Doha – actually, now two months ago, in December – just before the protests began in Tunisia and Egypt, I warned that the region’s foundations were sinking into the sand. In Afghanistan and Pakistan, conflict is blasting the foundations apart, brick by brick. Reconciliation and reform offer another way.
South Asia is home to nearly 1.5 billion people. They are talented and hard-working, rich in culture, and blessed with entrepreneurial spirit. If the countries of the region can move beyond their historic conflicts and cooperate to seize the opportunities of the 21st century, there are no limits as to what they can achieve.
Our friend Richard Holbrooke believed a better future is possible for Afghanistan, for Pakistan, and the wider region. He once observed, and I quote, “In every war of this sort, there is always a window for people who want to come in from the cold... If they are willing to accept the red lines and come in… there has to be a place for them.”
Those were his words. And that is the policy of the United States. It may not produce peace tomorrow or the next day, but it does offer our best chance. And it offers especially the best chance for the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan, who so richly deserve a different future. The United States will be there as a partner to help them achieve that, if that is the path they choose.
Thank you all very much. (Applause.)
• COMMERCE ROUNDUP •
Department of Commerce, Feb. 18, 2011:
Build It Here
American manufacturers share the advantages of building their products within the United States. These manufacturers are from various sectors including health care, plastics and irrigation control.
Department of Commerce, Feb. 18, 2011:
Build It Here: American Manufacturing
During the course of our economic recovery since the end of the Great Recession in 2009, domestic manufacturing has been a star. In the past, manufacturing output and job growth have typically lagged behind the economy’s overall recovery in the United States. But this time, manufacturing has led the way.
Manufacturing activity expanded in January at its fastest pace in seven years, recording its 18th month of growth, according to the Institute for Supply Management’s January manufacturing index. As Commerce Department Chief Economist Mark Doms noted recently in his new blog, manufacturing jobs are associated with relatively high wages, hence the commonly used phrase “good jobs” in reference to those created in the industry.
In the video below, U.S. companies from a wide range of industries from health care to plastics talk about why they manufacture their goods in America. The United States offers a highly educated workforce, strong intellectual property protections, and a business climate that supports and encourages innovation. For ET Water, Labcon, Supracor and others, manufacturing in America just makes smart business sense.
Department of Commerce, Feb. 18, 2011:
Secretary Locke Appoints New Deputy Director at the USPTO
Teresa Stanek Rea was appointed by Secretary Locke as the new Deputy Director of the Commerce Department's U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) this week.
Serving alongside USPTO Director David Kappos, Rea will take charge of a Commerce office that is integral in encouraging innovation and technological advancement in the U.S., and helps businesses protect their investments, promote their goods, and safeguard against deception in the marketplace.
Rea is a leading attorney in the field of intellectual property with more than 25 years of legal experience and a past president of the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA). She is currently a partner in Crowell & Moring LLP’s Washington, D.C. office, where she has focused on intellectual property and dispute resolution related to pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other life science issues.
“Teresa has an impressive track record of success across several disciplines and will be a tremendous asset to the USPTO,” Locke said. “Her leadership will be instrumental in the USPTO's efforts to foster economic growth and job creation by reducing the backlog of patent applications, enhancing patent and trademark quality, and becoming more efficient.”
Rea is a member of several technical and legal associations and has been a frequent lecturer and publisher on patent topics including biotechnology, nanotechnology, licensing, technology transfer, patent practice, export control and interferences. She received a Juris Doctor degree from Wayne State University and a Bachelor of Science degree in pharmacy from the University of Michigan.
Arriving at a critical time for the agency, Rea joins the USPTO just as Congress prepares to move forward with vital patent reform legislation that would enable the USPTO to better serve America’s innovators in bringing their products to market faster and, in so doing, help spur economic growth and job creation.
Department of Commerce, Feb. 17, 2011:
Secretary Locke’s Remarks at National Export Initiative Small Business Conference, Minneapolis, Minnesota
…. Although my colleagues from Congress couldn't be here, it’s great to be in Minneapolis to kick off the “New Markets, New Jobs Tour.”
The purpose of this multi-city tour – which will take us to a different city each month through the end of the year – is simple:
To help small and medium-sized American businesses sell more goods and services around the world, so they can create more jobs here at home.
In the next few minutes, I’ll explain how we’re going to do it.
But first, I think it's important to identify the stakes of what we’re talking about here today.
In his State of the Union address a few weeks ago, the president said how important it was for America to win the future.
He said the most important contest our nation faces is not between Democrats and Republicans, but between America and countries around the world that are competing like never before for the jobs and industries of the future.
Here in Minneapolis, you’re on the front lines of that competition.
Your competitors are no longer just in Madison or Chicago or Indianapolis. They’re in places like Shanghai and Mumbai and Sao Paulo.
These companies want to eat your lunch. They are playing for keeps in this global competition for talent, for capital and for the jobs of the future.
And America should welcome this challenge.
This country doesn’t back down from competition.
Minneapolis businesses don't back down from competition.
And the primary goal of the Obama administration is to give you the tools you need to win in the global economy, because winning more business abroad is how we get the American economy firing on all cylinders again.
The simple fact is that the more American companies export, the more they produce. The more they produce, the more workers they need. And that means jobs. Good paying jobs here at home.
Consider that exports directly support nearly 10 million U.S. jobs.
Or that one in three manufacturing jobs and almost one in five agricultural jobs are tied directly to exports.
And these are good-paying jobs that pay 15 percent more than the typical wage in America, exactly the type of jobs we need a lot more of.
That’s why early last year President Obama announced his National Export Initiative, which mobilizes departments throughout the federal government to help double U.S. exports by 2015 and support millions of jobs.
We’re already off to a good start. Exports have been a key driver of America's economic recovery.
After dropping 14.6 percent in 2009, exports grew nearly 17 percent in 2010, reaching the second-highest annual total on record and the largest year-to-year percent change in over 20 years.
In 2010, exports contributed to nearly half of all U.S. economic growth.
But if we want to continue that success, we’ll need more participation from small to medium-sized businesses, which often aren’t exporting nearly as much as they could.
Only one percent of U.S. companies export – and of those that do, 58 percent export to only one country, typically to Mexico or Canada.
Now, of course it's important to sell more within the United States. But in a global economy where 95 percent of the world's consumers live outside U.S. borders, you've got to go where the customers are.
Moreover, the more markets you are selling in, the more diversified your customer base is. That’s why U.S. companies that exported a lot generally held up better than companies that didn't during the previous recession.
Now, there are plenty of reasons why many U.S. companies don’t export.
They may have trouble getting the working capital they need to produce their goods, or be worried about getting timely payment from unfamiliar foreign customers.
They may have difficulty navigating foreign customs and regulations.
They may not have the networks to get the meetings they need with potential distributors, suppliers or foreign government decision-makers.
The National Export Initiative or NEI, is designed to help more companies – like those gathered here today – overcome these hurdles.
And the “New Markets, New Jobs” Tour brings all the government services available under the NEI right to the doorstep of small and medium-sized businesses across America.
We understand that when you're running a small business, you’ve got:
• Payroll to meet;
• Orders to fill; and
• Customers to serve
You might not have time to go searching for government services that can help your business.
So we’re coming to you.
Today, we've got teams from the:
• Export-Import Bank;
• Small Business Administration;
• Agriculture Department; and
• The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative’s office.
You heard from some of their leaders this morning, and you'll be hearing from others throughout the day.
From the Commerce Department, we’ve got representatives from our International Trade Administration, which advocates for U.S. businesses in 77 countries around the world, and has outreach teams in over 100 cities across America.
One of those export teams is right here in Minneapolis, and they’ve got a proven record of connecting Minnesota businesses to those foreign markets:
Just look at the work our team did with Paragon Store Fixtures, a small manufacturer based in Big Lakes. We connected Paragon with the Finnish Maritime Association to assist with manufacturing specifications and compliance. Soon after, Paragon was able to build and export over $100,000 worth of display fixtures to a Finnish boat manufacturer.
Our goal here today is to help everyone enjoy that kind of success. The entire staff from your local U.S. Export Assistance Center is here. These are people who can answer your most difficult questions. USEAC folks, please raise your hands so people know where you are.
We’ve also got Commerce Department experts on three great informational panels coming up; that will include specific guidance on how to break into promising markets like Canada, Mexico and China.
I encourage you to take advantage of all the expertise our people have to offer.
I know for many of you, you're just starting to see the benefits of an economy that’s growing again. I'm confident that positive momentum will continue in the year ahead.
But one thing is clear:
For the American economy to produce the millions of new jobs we need in the years ahead, we need our small and medium-size businesses to lead the way.
When you succeed, the entire American economy succeeds.
The Obama administration will do everything it can to give you the help you need….
• ASK ADMIRAL MULLEN •
Department of Defense, Feb. 16, 2011:
Ask the Chairman: Virtual Town Hall III
The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, ADM Mike Mullen, is reaching out to you for his third virtual town hall. From now until the end of the month, ADM Mullen will be taking your questions right here on You Tube, questions on everything from Afghanistan and Iraq, Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal, wounded warrior care...ANYTHING you want to know about the military, military families, or military policy. Just click in the comments box below this video (at YouTube.com), and click on "create a video response." ADM Mullen will answer the questions received in his next podcast. Check out the Chairman's own blog along with his page on Facebook. He's waiting to hear from you!
• USDA NEWS •
Department of Agriculture, Feb. 17, 2011:
USDA, Tufts Partners in Heart Disease Study
Heart disease causes one quarter of the deaths in the United States. The USDA's Bob Ellison has more on a joint study between USDA and Tufts University to understand, prevent and treat heart disease.
White House Blog, Feb. 18, 2011:
Dr. Alma Hobbs' Story: Promoting Prosperity on America's Farms
Posted by Dr. Alma Hobbs, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Administration at the U.S. Department of Agriculture
Ed. Note: This post is part of the Celebrating Black History Month series, which highlights African Americans from across the Administration whose work contributes to the President's goals for winning the future.
From North Carolina to Washington, D. C., my career spans over thirty years with the Department of Agriculture. I grew up in Farmville, a small southern town in North Carolina, and attended a segregated elementary and high school. My parents instilled in me a strong work ethic and commitment to service. The foundation laid by my parents empowered me to succeed in earning three degrees. I earned a Doctorate and Masters of Science from North Carolina State University in Raleigh, North Carolina, and the Bachelor’s of Science from North Carolina Central University in Durham, North Carolina. I have worked at the local, state and national levels. For me, it has been a long journey from the segregated south to the nation’s capital, but I am proud to serve in this historic Administration.
My personal and professional goals have always been to positively impact the lives of people through education to ensure they are empowered to reach their full potential. Over my career, I often served as the first African-American or female in the positions I held. After the passage of the landmark Civil Rights Act, I worked to integrate USDA county offices and took the first group of black 4-H youth to compete in a state completion. This was an exciting opportunity. Previously, 4-H competitions were segregated and did not recognize black 4-H groups. I later became the first African American to hold a senior executive position in USDA’s Extension Service. Agriculture is typically a male-dominated career, so it was significant when I was selected as the first woman to serve as an Extension Administrator at Tennessee State University. In that position, I provided support for research, education, and extension programs to increase the prosperity, security, and sustainability of America’s families, farms and ranches, business firms, and communities. The experience allowed me to become the first female Dean in Agriculture at Virginia State University. There, I was responsible for providing leadership for agriculture, human ecology, research, and cooperative extension.
In my current position as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Administration, I am leading efforts to transform the culture of USDA and carry out Secretary Vilsack’s vision to transform USDA into a model organization, positioned to meet the present and future needs of its employees and customers. During the State of the Union Address, the President laid out a plan to win the future by out-innovating, out-educating and out-building the rest of the world. Through education and outreach programs, we are reforming and transforming our government so that it’s leaner and smarter for the 21st century. It is an honor to be a key player as we improve management and transparency and ensure equal access to departmental programs at USDA.