Gerhard Erasmus, a tralac Associate and Paul Kruger, a tralac Researcher, discusses the Walmart/Massmart Merger - The Role of International Law in Regulating Competition, Investment and Trade.
BACKGROUND
The recent hearings before the South African Competition Tribunal on the proposed Walmart/Massmart merger were dominated by arguments about the impact of the proposed deal on jobs and local procurement. Some have argued that the Tribunal should decline permission for the merger, and that if it could not do so, it should impose restrictive conditions on Walmart, which wants to buy 51% of Massmart for about R16.5bn. The South African trade unions, the government and some retailers want specific conditions about future labour practices and imports to be imposed as part of the conditional approval for the transaction to go ahead.
A number of important international legal issues have also been raised. Arguments on behalf of Walmart suggest that several international agreements impact on the domestic regulation of trade, competition, investment and related aspects. These matters are often connected. This paper discusses these issues and the reasons why international trade law applies to investment, competition and this particular merger. The relationship between national and international law also needs clarification, as does the role of the government in this matter. One of the additional questions to consider is whether private parties can invoke these agreements; or do they only apply on the inter-state level?
Walmart has subsequently offered certain concessions but during the hearings before the Competition Tribunal its legal representatives have argued that restrictive conditions (depending on how they are formulated) may violate South Africa’s obligations under the WTO agreements. It would be impermissible, they argued, to discriminate against Walmart by obliging it to comply with obligations which do not bind its competitors. What are these international obligations and why would the suggested conditions constitute violations of international rules? Do these international agreements apply domestically?
IS IT ABOUT PROTECTIONISM?
There have been suggestions that the intervention by the South African government before the Competition Tribunal is inspired by protectionist motives. The implication seems to be that it is improper for the authorities to be involved in these hearings. There is nothing improper about the government being concerned about an investment of this kind and to raise questions about its consequences. The other parties and commentators are free to entertain different views. They may challenge assumptions that employment can be protected in the manner proposed by the government and the unions and may offer alternative ideas on how best to secure welfare gains and consumer benefits. They may even pass judgment on the government’s motives and call them ‘protectionist’. The fact that the government raises its concerns now is, however, not wrong or inappropriate. These hearings take place before a public forum and the purpose is to obtain information from the parties concerned and to test the evidence; before making a final ruling on the conditions applicable to the merger. Ultimately the criteria laid down in South Africa’s competition legislation apply, while certain international obligations should also be considered. There is a qualification though; the government’s concerns can, insofar as they relate to binding international legal arrangements, only be accommodated within the ambit of permissible exceptions, in addition to complying with the Competition Act and general administrative law requirements. The accommodation of the international dimension is one of the challenges now facing the Competition Tribunal.
Governments are, as a matter of course, involved in matters of this magnitude; overseeing foreign investment is an accepted governmental function. Many states have legislation dealing with foreign investment and official permission is often required; as happened when foreign investors bought shares in Absa and Standard Bank in South Africa a few years ago.
In the globalised economy national market regulation measures frequently have international ramifications. Compliance with international obligations then enters the equation. There are many examples. Only last week the WTO Appellate Body gave a ruling in the EU/USA dispute about state subsidies paid to the Airbus and Boeing companies and the effect thereof on fair trade. It does not come as a surprise that the same consideration (the effect of the state’s international obligations)
applies to measures about competition and mergers involving foreign companies.
The procedure with respect to the present merger is not at fault. The transparent involvement by the government, together with other parties, acknowledges a basic rule of law requirement. The issues are openly debated. In South Africa (and in certain neighbouring countries) questions concerning the promotion of competition are regulated by law. The Competition Tribunal is an independent forum and will give a decision on the merits and in terms of its legal powers. If a particular party with the necessary standing feels aggrieved about the final ruling, it will be possible to take the matter to the Competition Appeal Court and even to the regular courts. South Africa has a dedicated legal arrangement consisting of detailed legislation and institutions (Competition Commission, Competition Tribunal and Competition Appeal Court) to investigate, decide and review competition related questions and rulings. This includes procedures for protecting the rights of parties and to ensure that the applicable legal norms are fully adhered to. Remedies will be granted where due.
This happened in Namibia with respect to Walmart’s recent merger notification in Windhoek. The facts of that case are mentioned below in order to highlight an important aspect of the present matter, the general rules-based nature of the procedure and the fact that decisions by competition authorities should be justiciable.
THE REGIONAL CONTEXT
The competition hearing in South Africa is the final hurdle for Walmart’s entrance into Africa, as the necessary approval has already been obtained in the other African states with competition regulators. Massmart operates in 14 African countries, but only six of these countries require competition approval for the acquisition. The competition authorities in Tanzania, Malawi, Swaziland and Zambia gave their unconditional approval for the deal. Namibia and South Africa are the two outstanding jurisdictions.
South Africa represents by far the most important market for Walmart in Africa; as 93 percent of Massmart’s revenues are generated in this country. If the merger is refused, or too strict conditions are imposed on its South African operations, it will seriously frustrate Walmart’s entry into Africa.
http://www.tralac.org/cgi-bin/giga.cgi?cmd=cause_dir_news_item&cause_id=1694&news_id=104218&cat_id=1027
US EXPORT COUNCIL PROVIDES ASSISTANCE TO US COMPANIES SEEKING ACCESS TO HIGH GROWTH MARKETS OVERSEAS. http://usexportcouncil.com/
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Sunday, April 10, 2011
No Better Export: Higher Education - By Francisco Sánchez
In his State of the Union address, President Obama, who has emphasized the importance of higher education in our nation, said we must "out-innovate, out-educate, and out-build the rest of the world. ... That's how we'll win the future." From my perspective, a crucial element of winning the future is an increased focus on exports—and among our most valuable exports is education.
This week I have been joined by recruiters from 56 colleges and universities across the country, from Columbia University to the University of Texas at San Antonio, for a weeklong education mission to Jakarta, Indonesia, and to Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi, Vietnam. The purpose of the trip is to explore opportunities for student recruitment and partnerships with higher-education institutions in those two countries. In each city, we are meeting with students and their families, and the participating American colleges will promote their international-study programs in the United States. We have also organized networking sessions and education symposia to promote university-to-university partnerships, such as faculty exchanges, student exchanges, and research projects.
Why do this? Why now?
At the International Trade Administration, in the U.S. Commerce Department, my primary objective is to spur job creation and aid the nation's economic recovery by doubling U.S. exports within five years. You might not think of students as part of our export strategy, but, in fact, higher education ranks among the country's top 10 service exports, right between environmental services and safety and security. We are the largest destination for international students seeking higher education; tuition and living expenses paid by those students and their families brought nearly $20-billion to the U.S. economy during the 2009-10 academic year. According to the Institute of International Education, that dollar figure is expected to continue rising.
More than 20,000 students from Indonesia and Vietnam are already enrolled in colleges and universities in the United States, and most of them pay full tuition. That opens opportunities for more American students to receive financial aid and scholarships. The purchasing power of international students who study in the United States remains strong after they graduate and return home. And as they become part of the growing middle class, regardless of where they live in the world, they will have a better understanding and appreciation of American products and services, and will be more likely to remain our customers.
We are focusing on Jakarta, Ho Chi Minh City, and Hanoi for a number of reasons.
Expanding educational opportunities for students in emerging economies like Indonesia's and Vietnam's is critical to developing a middle class in those markets. The new middle-class consumers emerge with increased resources to participate in both local and global markets, including that of the United States.
In Jakarta, education is the No. 1 priority of the U.S. Embassy, and doubling the number of Indonesian students in the United States by 2014 is one of its top goals. This mission will help meet that goal and ultimately benefit both our educational institutions and our economy. We used our domestic network to recruit colleges and universities that are interested in exploring international partnerships and working toward a global educational approach on their campuses.
In Vietnam, with a population of 86 million, a steadily increasing per capita income, and the high value placed on education, there are significant opportunities for American providers of education services. Vietnam has more than 20,000 students studying abroad, paying about $200-million in tuition and fees every year. It ranks ninth among countries sending students to the United States.
Expanding the educational opportunities for Indonesian and Vietnamese students will provide direct benefits to U.S. companies doing business with those critical markets in the future. Many of them seek out U.S.-educated distributors overseas because of their understanding of American culture, their English-language skills, and the resulting increased ease of doing business with them. This is a part of a long-term strategy to set America on strong footing in emerging global markets.
However, international competition is fierce, and the United States has seen a 30-percent decrease of its market share in the past decade, reinforcing the importance of its efforts to maintain its position as the world's leading higher-education destination. Building ties with international students not only helps American students gain a greater level of international understanding—a vital skill for success in the 21st-century global economy—but also familiarizes future global leaders with the American people and U.S. society. As we look to "win the future," I see no more valuable export than that.
US EXPORT COUNCIL PROVIDES ASSISTANCE TO US COMPANIES SEEKING ACCESS TO HIGH GROWTH MARKETS OVERSEAS. http://usexportcouncil.com/
Friday, March 11, 2011
The Square Kilometre Array (SKA) will be a mega radio telescope, about 100 times more sensitive than the biggest existing radio telescope.
Africa is bidding to host the world's most powerful radio telescope, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA). When constructed, in 2025, it will have 50 times greater sensitivity than any other radio telescope on Earth.
The SKA will probe the edges of our universe, even before the first stars and galaxies that formed after the Big Bang. This telescope will contribute to answering fundamental questions in astronomy, physics and cosmology, including the nature of dark energy and dark matter.
South Africa is leading the African bid and has already legislated to create 12.5 million hectares of protected area - or radio astronomy reserve. This area is also referred to as the Karoo Central Astronomy Advantage Area, offering low levels of radio frequency interference, very little light pollution, basic infrastructure of roads, electricity and communication.
The Square Kilometre Array (SKA) will be a mega radio telescope, about 100 times more sensitive than the biggest existing radio telescope.
SKA is a €1.5 billion project, with operating costs of about €100 million a year.
It will be the first to provide mankind with detailed pictures of the “dark ages” 13.7 billion years back in time.
This mega telescope will be powerful and sensitive enough to observe radio signals from the immediate aftermath of the Big Bang.
If there is life somewhere else in the Universe, the SKA will help us find it.
At least 24 organisations from 12 countries, including Australia, Canada, India, China, France, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Spain, South Africa, Sweden, the Netherlands, the UK and the USA, are involved.
The SKA will consist of approximately 4 000 dish-shaped antennae and other hybrid receiving technologies.
Both South Africa and Australia have suitably remote, radio quiet areas for hosting the SKA and have competing bids to host the SKA.
If Africa wins the SKA bid, the core of this giant telescope will be constructed in the Karoo region of the Northern Cape Province near to the towns of Carnarvon and Williston, linked to a computing facility in Cape Town.
Other countries where stations will be placed include Namibia, Botswana, Mozambique, Mauritius, Madagascar, Kenya and Zambia.
South Africa is already building the Karoo Array Telescope (MeerKAT) which is a precursor instrument for the SKA, but will in its own right be amongst the largest and most powerful telescopes in the world.
For More Infromation
Mr. Rod Marcel
E Mail rod@skaafrica.com
www.skaafrica.com
US EXPORT COUNCIL PROVIDES ASSISTANCE TO US COMPANIES SEEKING ACCESS TO HIGH GROWTH MARKETS OVERSEAS. http://usexportcouncil.com/
The SKA will probe the edges of our universe, even before the first stars and galaxies that formed after the Big Bang. This telescope will contribute to answering fundamental questions in astronomy, physics and cosmology, including the nature of dark energy and dark matter.
South Africa is leading the African bid and has already legislated to create 12.5 million hectares of protected area - or radio astronomy reserve. This area is also referred to as the Karoo Central Astronomy Advantage Area, offering low levels of radio frequency interference, very little light pollution, basic infrastructure of roads, electricity and communication.
The Square Kilometre Array (SKA) will be a mega radio telescope, about 100 times more sensitive than the biggest existing radio telescope.
SKA is a €1.5 billion project, with operating costs of about €100 million a year.
It will be the first to provide mankind with detailed pictures of the “dark ages” 13.7 billion years back in time.
This mega telescope will be powerful and sensitive enough to observe radio signals from the immediate aftermath of the Big Bang.
If there is life somewhere else in the Universe, the SKA will help us find it.
At least 24 organisations from 12 countries, including Australia, Canada, India, China, France, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Spain, South Africa, Sweden, the Netherlands, the UK and the USA, are involved.
The SKA will consist of approximately 4 000 dish-shaped antennae and other hybrid receiving technologies.
Both South Africa and Australia have suitably remote, radio quiet areas for hosting the SKA and have competing bids to host the SKA.
If Africa wins the SKA bid, the core of this giant telescope will be constructed in the Karoo region of the Northern Cape Province near to the towns of Carnarvon and Williston, linked to a computing facility in Cape Town.
Other countries where stations will be placed include Namibia, Botswana, Mozambique, Mauritius, Madagascar, Kenya and Zambia.
South Africa is already building the Karoo Array Telescope (MeerKAT) which is a precursor instrument for the SKA, but will in its own right be amongst the largest and most powerful telescopes in the world.
For More Infromation
Mr. Rod Marcel
E Mail rod@skaafrica.com
www.skaafrica.com
US EXPORT COUNCIL PROVIDES ASSISTANCE TO US COMPANIES SEEKING ACCESS TO HIGH GROWTH MARKETS OVERSEAS. http://usexportcouncil.com/
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
A hands-on leader pushes Commerce
Commerce Secretary Gary Locke's spacious, wood-paneled office features a working fireplace, elegant artwork and other luxurious touches befitting one of the federal government's top economic officials.
More unusual is the nearly 60-foot-long Chinese dragon kite that hovers over his desk. The piece is not just a nod to the heritage of the first Chinese American to hold the top Commerce Department job but also evidence of Locke's hands-on style - aides said he came in one weekend and hung it himself.
It is an approach Locke has taken to running the sprawling department, which plays a crucial role in the Obama administration's plans for fixing the badly broken economy.
Since Locke took office in March 2009, he has earned a reputation as the type of manager eager to know details and wring out new efficiencies. He has pushed the Patent and Trademark Office to shorten the time it takes to get a patent, from 34 months to 20 months. He cajoled the Economic Development Administration, which makes business-development grants to distressed communities, to streamline its approval process. And he brought the 2010 Census in 25 percent under budget, saving taxpayers $1.9 billion.
But those management feats pale next to the challenge he faces as one of the key figures in implementing President Obama's pledge to double U.S. exports within five years.
The expansion of exports would mean 2 million new jobs, officials calculate, and with the nation desperate for new sources of employment growth, the mission is urgent.
Even before the housing crash and deep recession, the nation's economic growth was built on a flawed foundation of asset bubbles and excessive consumer debt, Locke said. Coupled with growth driven by innovation in areas such as renewable energy and high-quality manufacturing, he said, exports could form the basis for a new prosperity.
"Clearly we need to export more as a country as part of our economic recovery," Locke said.
The export goal is ambitious. Countries such as China and India, once thought of mostly as sources of cheap labor, are developing increasingly sophisticated manufacturing capabilities.
Still, Locke said, the potential for expanding U.S exports is plain.
Only 1 percent of U.S. companies export products at all, and of those, 58 percent export to just one country, most frequently Canada or Mexico, he said.
"If we can just help those firms export to one or two more countries, we would be able to increase exports exponentially," he said. In 2010, he noted, U.S. exports increased by 17 percent. The growth was broad-based, led by increases in exports of industrial supplies and materials, machinery and food.
For Locke, all of this plays into his prior experience. During the two terms he served as governor of Washington - home to global giants such as Microsoft and Boeing - trade with China more than doubled.
After leaving the governorship, Locke was a partner in the Seattle office of the law firm Davis Wright Tremaine. There, his work focused on helping U.S. companies break into international markets.
"I'm trying to bring some of those lessons learned" to the Commerce Department, Locke said.
He noted that "Made in the USA" is a phrase that still has clout around the world. "There is a huge hunger and demand for U.S. products," he said.
In its first two years, the Obama administration has earned a reputation in some quarters for being hostile to business.
Some business leaders have complained that the administration has demonized them in its rhetoric while hamstringing them with new environmental, health-care and financial industry regulations.
Locke, however, says the tension has not been obvious in his job, which requires constant interaction with business leaders.
In 2010, Commerce coordinated 31 trade missions in 31 countries with 368 companies. Participating companies anticipate $2 billion in increased exports from the missions, the department says. In 2011, Locke is scheduled to lead four trade missions.
Locke was not the president's first choice to head Commerce. He got the job only after New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson (D) and New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg (R), withdrew; Richardson cited an investigation of state contracting, and Gregg voiced his political differences with the president.
Still, Locke was eager to take on the challenge.
"I wanted to help the president turn around the economy," he said.
"It has taken the country many years to get to this sorry state of affairs, and we will not be able to turn it around overnight."
Even so, the process has proven more arduous than many people expected. While the overall economy is expanding, job growth has been anemic and the national unemployment rate has hovered close to 10 percent for a year.
Locke, however, says the administration is on the right track with its heavy investments in green energy, education and health care.
"It is almost like building the foundation of a house or an office tower," he said. "All the foundation work takes a long, long time. You don't really see it. It is all happening below the street level. . . . After that, then things really begin to take off."
By Michael A. Fletcher
Washington Post Staff Writer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/02/AR2011010203214.html
US EXPORT COUNCIL PROVIDES ASSISTANCE TO US COMPANIES SEEKING ACCESS TO HIGH GROWTH MARKETS OVERSEAS. http://usexportcouncil.com/
More unusual is the nearly 60-foot-long Chinese dragon kite that hovers over his desk. The piece is not just a nod to the heritage of the first Chinese American to hold the top Commerce Department job but also evidence of Locke's hands-on style - aides said he came in one weekend and hung it himself.
It is an approach Locke has taken to running the sprawling department, which plays a crucial role in the Obama administration's plans for fixing the badly broken economy.
Since Locke took office in March 2009, he has earned a reputation as the type of manager eager to know details and wring out new efficiencies. He has pushed the Patent and Trademark Office to shorten the time it takes to get a patent, from 34 months to 20 months. He cajoled the Economic Development Administration, which makes business-development grants to distressed communities, to streamline its approval process. And he brought the 2010 Census in 25 percent under budget, saving taxpayers $1.9 billion.
But those management feats pale next to the challenge he faces as one of the key figures in implementing President Obama's pledge to double U.S. exports within five years.
The expansion of exports would mean 2 million new jobs, officials calculate, and with the nation desperate for new sources of employment growth, the mission is urgent.
Even before the housing crash and deep recession, the nation's economic growth was built on a flawed foundation of asset bubbles and excessive consumer debt, Locke said. Coupled with growth driven by innovation in areas such as renewable energy and high-quality manufacturing, he said, exports could form the basis for a new prosperity.
"Clearly we need to export more as a country as part of our economic recovery," Locke said.
The export goal is ambitious. Countries such as China and India, once thought of mostly as sources of cheap labor, are developing increasingly sophisticated manufacturing capabilities.
Still, Locke said, the potential for expanding U.S exports is plain.
Only 1 percent of U.S. companies export products at all, and of those, 58 percent export to just one country, most frequently Canada or Mexico, he said.
"If we can just help those firms export to one or two more countries, we would be able to increase exports exponentially," he said. In 2010, he noted, U.S. exports increased by 17 percent. The growth was broad-based, led by increases in exports of industrial supplies and materials, machinery and food.
For Locke, all of this plays into his prior experience. During the two terms he served as governor of Washington - home to global giants such as Microsoft and Boeing - trade with China more than doubled.
After leaving the governorship, Locke was a partner in the Seattle office of the law firm Davis Wright Tremaine. There, his work focused on helping U.S. companies break into international markets.
"I'm trying to bring some of those lessons learned" to the Commerce Department, Locke said.
He noted that "Made in the USA" is a phrase that still has clout around the world. "There is a huge hunger and demand for U.S. products," he said.
In its first two years, the Obama administration has earned a reputation in some quarters for being hostile to business.
Some business leaders have complained that the administration has demonized them in its rhetoric while hamstringing them with new environmental, health-care and financial industry regulations.
Locke, however, says the tension has not been obvious in his job, which requires constant interaction with business leaders.
In 2010, Commerce coordinated 31 trade missions in 31 countries with 368 companies. Participating companies anticipate $2 billion in increased exports from the missions, the department says. In 2011, Locke is scheduled to lead four trade missions.
Locke was not the president's first choice to head Commerce. He got the job only after New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson (D) and New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg (R), withdrew; Richardson cited an investigation of state contracting, and Gregg voiced his political differences with the president.
Still, Locke was eager to take on the challenge.
"I wanted to help the president turn around the economy," he said.
"It has taken the country many years to get to this sorry state of affairs, and we will not be able to turn it around overnight."
Even so, the process has proven more arduous than many people expected. While the overall economy is expanding, job growth has been anemic and the national unemployment rate has hovered close to 10 percent for a year.
Locke, however, says the administration is on the right track with its heavy investments in green energy, education and health care.
"It is almost like building the foundation of a house or an office tower," he said. "All the foundation work takes a long, long time. You don't really see it. It is all happening below the street level. . . . After that, then things really begin to take off."
By Michael A. Fletcher
Washington Post Staff Writer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/02/AR2011010203214.html
US EXPORT COUNCIL PROVIDES ASSISTANCE TO US COMPANIES SEEKING ACCESS TO HIGH GROWTH MARKETS OVERSEAS. http://usexportcouncil.com/
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Development Bank of South Africa to help finance projects in Angola
The Development Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA) is opening up a R1.75 billion credit line to fund reconstruction and development projects in Angola.
The fund will be operated through Angolan bank Banco Africano de Investimento in partnership with the African Development Bank, and comes on the back of last week’s state visit to South Africa by Angolan President Jose Eduardo dos Santos.
Under the terms of a “declaration of intent on the utilisation of financial facilities” signed during Dos Santos’ visit, the Industrial Development Corporation and the Export Credit Insurance Corporation are also expected to expand on their financing programmes with Angola.
The credit, which could run into billions of dollars, will help South African companies secure lucrative contracts in Angola, a market previously dominated by China, Brazil and Portugal.
Aguinaldo Jaime, the head of Angola’s private investment agency ANIP, said: “The procedure and mechanism are still being worked out between the financial institutions, but the declaration is a clear signal that the political will is in place for these financial mechanisms to facilitate the co-operation between the two countries.”
He added: “I think the two countries have recognised that you can boost investment only if you have financial mechanisms in place.
“This is what we have learned relating to our experiences with Portugal, China and Brazil.”
One organisation hoping to benefit from the credit lines is the South Africa-Angola Housing Initiative (SAAHI), an umbrella management group that has been planning big infrastructure and construction projects in three provinces in Angola.
SAAHI chief executive Sello Rathete said it already had a commitment for about $500 million (R3.4bn) from the DBSA.
Other co-operation deals inked between Angola and South Africa during Dos Santos’s historic state visit, the first by an Angolan head of state since 1994, covered information and communications technology, public works and infrastructure development and a protocol on technical co-operation on veterinary services.
Although no details were given, an energy implementation plan signed by ministers is believed to relate to electricity supply, rather than oil and gas as has been suggested.
The deal between South Africa’s PetroSA and Angolanm state oil firm Sonangol, which could lead to a joint refining project, is still under discussion, according to President Jacob Zuma.
Responding to complaints about the difficulties in obtaining entry visas into Angola, Dos Santos said his government was working on possibly creating a multiple-entry visa for South African business executives.. - Louise Redvers
http://www.tios.co.za/dbsa-to-help-finance-projects-in-angola-1.1003240
US EXPORT COUNCIL PROVIDES ASSISTANCE TO US COMPANIES SEEKING ACCESS TO HIGH GROWTH MARKETS OVERSEAS. http://usexportcouncil.com/
The fund will be operated through Angolan bank Banco Africano de Investimento in partnership with the African Development Bank, and comes on the back of last week’s state visit to South Africa by Angolan President Jose Eduardo dos Santos.
Under the terms of a “declaration of intent on the utilisation of financial facilities” signed during Dos Santos’ visit, the Industrial Development Corporation and the Export Credit Insurance Corporation are also expected to expand on their financing programmes with Angola.
The credit, which could run into billions of dollars, will help South African companies secure lucrative contracts in Angola, a market previously dominated by China, Brazil and Portugal.
Aguinaldo Jaime, the head of Angola’s private investment agency ANIP, said: “The procedure and mechanism are still being worked out between the financial institutions, but the declaration is a clear signal that the political will is in place for these financial mechanisms to facilitate the co-operation between the two countries.”
He added: “I think the two countries have recognised that you can boost investment only if you have financial mechanisms in place.
“This is what we have learned relating to our experiences with Portugal, China and Brazil.”
One organisation hoping to benefit from the credit lines is the South Africa-Angola Housing Initiative (SAAHI), an umbrella management group that has been planning big infrastructure and construction projects in three provinces in Angola.
SAAHI chief executive Sello Rathete said it already had a commitment for about $500 million (R3.4bn) from the DBSA.
Other co-operation deals inked between Angola and South Africa during Dos Santos’s historic state visit, the first by an Angolan head of state since 1994, covered information and communications technology, public works and infrastructure development and a protocol on technical co-operation on veterinary services.
Although no details were given, an energy implementation plan signed by ministers is believed to relate to electricity supply, rather than oil and gas as has been suggested.
The deal between South Africa’s PetroSA and Angolanm state oil firm Sonangol, which could lead to a joint refining project, is still under discussion, according to President Jacob Zuma.
Responding to complaints about the difficulties in obtaining entry visas into Angola, Dos Santos said his government was working on possibly creating a multiple-entry visa for South African business executives.. - Louise Redvers
http://www.tios.co.za/dbsa-to-help-finance-projects-in-angola-1.1003240
US EXPORT COUNCIL PROVIDES ASSISTANCE TO US COMPANIES SEEKING ACCESS TO HIGH GROWTH MARKETS OVERSEAS. http://usexportcouncil.com/
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
South Africa seeks trade and investor gains from joining Bric club.
South Africa EXPECTED to gain substantial trade and investment benefits when it joined Brazil, Russia, India, China in the Bric grouping of emerging economies, a top government official said yesterday.
SA appears set to join the bloc after an invitation extended last week by China, which holds the rotating chairmanship.
The invitation was made in a telephone call to International Relations and Co-operation Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane by her Chinese counterpart, Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi.
Although SA’s government has long aspired to be in the Bric league, most commentators feel its economy is dwarfed by those of the Bric countries, whose growth rates have been the envy of the developed world especially during the recession.
In a recent commentary, Prof Mills Soko of the University of Cape Town Graduate School of Business said SA should not be "obsessed" with joining.
Prof Soko argued that markets in the rest of Africa, the Middle East and other Latin American countries should not be neglected, and emphasised that the Bric grouping was not in fact an organisation, but the construct of an economist, and did not have a strategy, or clear objectives.
"We cannot engage in an ill- defined, ad hoc manner," Prof Soko said, emphasising SA should understand the trade policies of the Bric countries and how these would affect it, and what competitive pressures these would apply. While Bric countries represented markets for South African goods, they were also competitors in sectors such as steel, clothing and textiles and the automotive industry.
However, in an indication of SA’s foreign policy priorities, President Jacob Zuma has made state visits to each of the Bric countries since coming to office.
Goldman Sachs Asset Management chairman Jim O’Neill coined the term "Bric" in 2001 to describe the four countries whose joint output would, he said, equal that of the US by the year 2020.
China’s "invitation" to SA comes barely a week after Russian President Dmitry Medvedev’s envoy to Africa, Alexei Vasiliev, said his country expected SA to join as early as next year .
SA has argued that its accession would give it some economic and developmental advantage in Africa, while promoting the development of Bric and enhancing co-operation among these emerging market economies.
SA stands to benefit from the potential preferential trade pacts and economic co-operation agreements that could be concluded with Bric countries, whose combined population of 2,5-billion people shares between them an estimated annual gross domestic product of more than 9-trillion.
Sipho Nene, acting director- general of the Department of International Relations and Co- operation, said the department’s motivation to Mr Zuma about joining Bric was that it was for SA’s economic and political benefit. "Since Bric has no secretariat, the body does not yet have financial obligations for our country, but we anticipate huge trade and investment spin-offs from it."
On the economic front, he said SA stood a chance to negotiate positions that would enhance its trade and leverage the potential for direct foreign investment from Bric member states.
"By joining Bric we are not starting from scratch … we are merely building on already established trade agreements, standing binational commissions or bilateral relations and other diplomatic and economic links with Bric countries who are already SA’s strategic partners.
"This membership is aimed at keeping SA as an important player in various organisations outside the United Nations, which is supposed to remain the pillar of cooperation and collaboration for the world," Mr Nene said.
Mr Yang indicated that Chinese President Hu Jintao had also invited Mr Zuma to attend the third Bric leaders’ summit, to be held in China next year.
Ms Nkoana-Mashabane said SA was ready to step up communication and co-ordination with China and other Bric members.
"Our approach to intensifying our relations with emerging powers and other countries of the South is through bilateral engagement," she said.
"We also see the Nonaligned Movement and the Group of 77 as important for South-South interaction, especially in the framework of the United Nations.
"Our trilateral partnership with India and Brazil (Ibsa) will get a better balance, and become even stronger, with SA a member of the Brics. SA’s diversified foreign policy objectives and interests allow both groupings (Ibsa and Brics) to co-exist. The mandates of Brics and Ibsa are complementary," she said.
HOPEWELL RADEBE radebeh@bdfm.co.za http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/Content.aspx?id=130374
US EXPORT COUNCIL PROVIDES ASSISTANCE TO US COMPANIES SEEKING ACCESS TO HIGH GROWTH MARKETS OVERSEAS. http://usexportcouncil.com/
SA appears set to join the bloc after an invitation extended last week by China, which holds the rotating chairmanship.
The invitation was made in a telephone call to International Relations and Co-operation Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane by her Chinese counterpart, Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi.
Although SA’s government has long aspired to be in the Bric league, most commentators feel its economy is dwarfed by those of the Bric countries, whose growth rates have been the envy of the developed world especially during the recession.
In a recent commentary, Prof Mills Soko of the University of Cape Town Graduate School of Business said SA should not be "obsessed" with joining.
Prof Soko argued that markets in the rest of Africa, the Middle East and other Latin American countries should not be neglected, and emphasised that the Bric grouping was not in fact an organisation, but the construct of an economist, and did not have a strategy, or clear objectives.
"We cannot engage in an ill- defined, ad hoc manner," Prof Soko said, emphasising SA should understand the trade policies of the Bric countries and how these would affect it, and what competitive pressures these would apply. While Bric countries represented markets for South African goods, they were also competitors in sectors such as steel, clothing and textiles and the automotive industry.
However, in an indication of SA’s foreign policy priorities, President Jacob Zuma has made state visits to each of the Bric countries since coming to office.
Goldman Sachs Asset Management chairman Jim O’Neill coined the term "Bric" in 2001 to describe the four countries whose joint output would, he said, equal that of the US by the year 2020.
China’s "invitation" to SA comes barely a week after Russian President Dmitry Medvedev’s envoy to Africa, Alexei Vasiliev, said his country expected SA to join as early as next year .
SA has argued that its accession would give it some economic and developmental advantage in Africa, while promoting the development of Bric and enhancing co-operation among these emerging market economies.
SA stands to benefit from the potential preferential trade pacts and economic co-operation agreements that could be concluded with Bric countries, whose combined population of 2,5-billion people shares between them an estimated annual gross domestic product of more than 9-trillion.
Sipho Nene, acting director- general of the Department of International Relations and Co- operation, said the department’s motivation to Mr Zuma about joining Bric was that it was for SA’s economic and political benefit. "Since Bric has no secretariat, the body does not yet have financial obligations for our country, but we anticipate huge trade and investment spin-offs from it."
On the economic front, he said SA stood a chance to negotiate positions that would enhance its trade and leverage the potential for direct foreign investment from Bric member states.
"By joining Bric we are not starting from scratch … we are merely building on already established trade agreements, standing binational commissions or bilateral relations and other diplomatic and economic links with Bric countries who are already SA’s strategic partners.
"This membership is aimed at keeping SA as an important player in various organisations outside the United Nations, which is supposed to remain the pillar of cooperation and collaboration for the world," Mr Nene said.
Mr Yang indicated that Chinese President Hu Jintao had also invited Mr Zuma to attend the third Bric leaders’ summit, to be held in China next year.
Ms Nkoana-Mashabane said SA was ready to step up communication and co-ordination with China and other Bric members.
"Our approach to intensifying our relations with emerging powers and other countries of the South is through bilateral engagement," she said.
"We also see the Nonaligned Movement and the Group of 77 as important for South-South interaction, especially in the framework of the United Nations.
"Our trilateral partnership with India and Brazil (Ibsa) will get a better balance, and become even stronger, with SA a member of the Brics. SA’s diversified foreign policy objectives and interests allow both groupings (Ibsa and Brics) to co-exist. The mandates of Brics and Ibsa are complementary," she said.
HOPEWELL RADEBE radebeh@bdfm.co.za http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/Content.aspx?id=130374
US EXPORT COUNCIL PROVIDES ASSISTANCE TO US COMPANIES SEEKING ACCESS TO HIGH GROWTH MARKETS OVERSEAS. http://usexportcouncil.com/
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Hilary Clinton - Remarks Saban Center for Middle East Policy Seventh Annual Forum
Remarks at the Brookings Institution's Saban Center for Middle East Policy Seventh Annual Forum
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
December 10, 2010
Thank you. Thank you very much. I appreciate the introduction, but nothing is imminent – (laughter) – so far as I know. But it is a great pleasure for me to be back here and part of this very important forum.
And I appreciate your introduction. I appreciate the friendship that you and Cheryl have given to me and to my family. You’ve been friends for many years. And certainly, as anyone who knows Haim understands, as an entrepreneur, a philanthropist, he is unparalleled, but also as a champion for peace. He represents in many ways in the best qualities of both Israel and America. He’s generous, he’s irrepressible, and absolutely unstoppable. And he has dedicated his energy and support to so many important causes and helped so many people. But he has probably no deeper passion than the one we are here discussing tonight – strengthening U.S.-Israeli relations and securing a just and lasting peace in the Middle East.
So I thank him and I thank Strobe Talbott, I thank Martin Indyk, and I thank all of you. And in particular, I appreciate your bringing us together to discuss the crucial issues surrounding the Middle East. I also want to acknowledge all of the colleagues from Israel who are here. Certainly, you’ll hear in a minute from Defense Minister Barak.
There are other members of the Israeli Government here – opposition leader Livni, and I’m delighted that Prime Minister Fayyad is also with us. Prime Minister Fayyad has accomplished a great deal in a short amount of time under very difficult circumstances. Along with President Abbas, he has brought strong leadership to the Palestinian Authority and he has helped advance the cause of a two-state solution by making a real difference in the lives of the Palestinian people. So Mr. Prime Minister, welcome again to Washington and thank you for your very good work. (Applause.)
Now, you don’t have to read secret diplomatic cables to know that we are meeting during a difficult period in the pursuit of peace in the Middle East. I understand and indeed I share the deep frustrations of many of you in this room and across the region and the world. But rather than dwell on what has come before, I want to focus tonight on the way forward, on America’s continuing engagement in helping the parties achieve a two-state solution that ends the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians once and for all, and on what it will take, finally, to realize that elusive, but essential goal.
Before I go further, I want to offer the deepest condolences of the American people for the lives lost in the recent fires in Northern Israel. Israelis are always among the first to lend a hand when an emergency strikes anywhere in the world. So when the fires began to burn, people and nations stepped up and offered help. It was remarkable to watch. Turkey sent planes; Egypt and Jordan donated chemicals and equipment; the Palestinian Authority dispatched firefighters and their trucks; and the United States was also part of the effort deploying expert firefighters, C-130 cargo planes, and thousands of gallons of chemicals and suppressants. It was testament once again to the deep and enduring bonds that unite our two countries, to the partnership between our governments, and the friendship between our people.
The United States will always be there when Israel is threatened. We say it often, but it bears repeating: America’s commitment to Israel’s security and its future is rock solid and unwavering, and that will not change. From our first days in office, the Obama Administration has reaffirmed this commitment. For me and for President Obama, this is not simply a policy position. It is also a deeply held personal conviction.
Over the last two years under President Obama’s leadership, the United States has expanded our cooperation with Israel and focused in particular on helping Israel meet the most consequential threats to its future as a secure and democratic Jewish state. Our security relationship has grown broader, deeper, and more intense than ever before. And we have not just worked to maintain Israel’s qualitative military edge. We have increased it through new advances like the Iron Dome, a short-range rocket defense system that will help protect Israeli homes and cities. And our military continues to work closely with the IDF through exchanges, training, and joint exercises.
For Israel and for the region, there may be no greater strategic threat than the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran. We just heard my husband speaking to that. And let me restate clearly: The United States is determined to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. And along with our international partners, we have implemented tough new sanctions whose bite is being felt in Tehran. Iran’s leaders face a clear choice, one of those tough choices that Strobe mentioned as the theme of this forum: Meet your international responsibilities or face continued isolation and consequences.
We have also stepped up efforts to block the transfer of dangerous weapons and financing to terrorist groups like Hezbollah and Hamas. But Iran and its proxies are not the only threat to regional stability or to Israel’s long-term security. The conflict between Israel and the Palestinians and between Israel and Arab neighbors is a source of tension and an obstacle to prosperity and opportunity for all the people of the region. It denies the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people and it poses a threat to Israel’s future security. It is at odds also with the interests of the United States.
I know that improvements in security and growing prosperity have convinced some that this conflict can be waited out or largely ignored. This view is wrong and it is dangerous. The long-term population trends that result from the occupation are endangering the Zionist vision of a Jewish and democratic state in the historic homeland of the Jewish people. Israelis should not have to choose between preserving both elements of their dream. But that day is approaching.
At the same time, the ever-evolving technology of war, especially the expanding reach of the rockets amassed on Israel’s borders means that it will be increasingly difficult to guarantee the security of Israeli families throughout the country without implementing peace agreements that answer these threats.
Continuing conflict also strengthens the hands of extremists and rejectionists across the region while sapping the support of those open to coexistence and cooperation. Radicalization of the region’s young people and growing support for violent ideologies undermine the stability and prosperity of the Middle East. The United States looks at these trends. We reflect on our deep and unwavering support of the state of Israel and we conclude without a shadow of a doubt that ending this conflict once and for all and achieving a comprehensive regional peace is imperative for safeguarding Israelis’ future.
We also look at our friends the Palestinians, and we remember the painful history of a people who have never had a state of their own, and we are renewed in our determination to help them finally realize their legitimate aspirations. The lack of peace and the occupation that began in 1967 continue to deprive the Palestinian people of dignity and self-determination. This is unacceptable, and, ultimately, it too is unsustainable.
So for both Israelis and Palestinians and, indeed, for all the people of the region, it is in their interest to end this conflict and bring a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace to the Middle East based on two states for two peoples.
For two years, you have heard me and others emphasize again and again that negotiations between the parties is the only path that will succeed in securing their respective aspirations; for the Israelis, security and recognition; for the Palestinians, an independent, viable sovereign state of their own. This remains true today. There is no alternative other than reaching mutual agreement. The stakes are too high, the pain too deep, and the issues to complex for any other approach.
Now, it is no secret that the parties have a long way to go and that they have not yet made the difficult decisions that peace requires. And like many of you, I regret that we have not gotten farther faster in our recent efforts. That is why yesterday and today I met with Israeli and Palestinian negotiators and underscored our seriousness about moving forward with refocused goals and expectations.
It is time to grapple with the core issues of the conflict on borders and security; settlements, water and refugees; and on Jerusalem itself. And starting with my meetings this week, that is exactly what we are doing. We will also deepen our strong commitment to supporting the state-building work of the Palestinian Authority and continue to urge the states of the region to develop the content of the Arab Peace Initiative and to work toward implementing its vision.
Over recent months, Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas have met face to face multiple times. I have been privileged to be present during their meetings in Sharm el-Sheikh, in Jerusalem, and in Washington. I have also had the chance to talk with each leader privately. These were meaningful talks that yielded new clarity about the gaps that must be bridged.
Significantly, both sides decided together to pursue a framework agreement that would establish the fundamental compromises on all permanent status issues and pave the way for a final peace treaty.
Reaching this goal will not be easy by any means. The differences between the two sides are real and they are persistent. But the way to get there is by engaging, in good faith, with the full complexities of the core issues and by working to narrow the gaps between the two sides.
By doing this, the parties can begin to rebuild confidence, demonstrate their seriousness, and hopefully find enough common ground on which to eventually re-launch direct negotiations and achieve that framework.
The parties have indicated that they want the United States to continue its efforts. And in the days ahead, our discussions with both sides will be substantive two-way conversations with an eye toward making real progress in the next few months on the key questions of an eventual framework agreement. The United States will not be a passive participant. We will push the parties to lay out their positions on the core issues without delay and with real specificity. We will work to narrow the gaps asking the tough questions and expecting substantive answers. And in the context of our private conversations with the parties, we will offer our own ideas and bridging proposals when appropriate.
We enter this phase with clear expectations of both parties. Their seriousness about achieving an agreement will be measured by their engagement on these core issues. And let me say a few words about some of the important aspects of these issues we will be discussing.
First, on borders and security. The land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean is finite, and both sides must know exactly which parts belong to each. They must agree to a single line drawn on a map that divides Israel from Palestine and to an outcome that implements the two-state solution with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt. The Palestinian leaders must be able to show their people that the occupation will be over. Israeli leaders must be able to offer their people internationally recognized borders that protect Israel’s security. And they must be able to demonstrate to their people that the compromises needed to make peace will not leave Israel vulnerable. Security arrangements must prevent any resurgence of terrorism and deal effectively with new and emerging threats. Families on both sides must feel confident in their security and be able to live free from fear.
Second, on refugees. This is a difficult and emotional issue, but there must be a just and permanent solution that meets the needs of both sides.
Third, on settlements. The fate of existing settlements is an issue that must be dealt with by the parties along with the other final status issues. But let me be clear: The position of the United States on settlements has not changed and will not change. Like every American administration for decades, we do not accept the legitimacy of continued settlement activity. We believe their continued expansion is corrosive not only to peace efforts and two-state solution, but to Israel’s future itself.
And finally, on Jerusalem which is profoundly important for Jews, Muslims, and Christians everywhere. There will surely be no peace without an agreement on this, the most sensitive of all the issues. The religious interests of people of all faiths around the world must be respected and protected. We believe that through good faith negotiations, the parties should mutually agree on an outcome that realizes the aspirations for both parties, for Jerusalem, and safeguard its status for people around the world.
These core issues are woven together. Considering the larger strategic picture makes it easier to weigh the compromises that must be made on both sides and see the benefits to be gained. We are not moving forward in a vacuum. From day one, the Obama Administration has recognized the importance of making progress on two simultaneous and mutually reinforcing tracks – negotiations between the parties and institution-building that helps the Palestinians as they prepare to govern their own state. Improvements on the ground give confidence to negotiators and help create a climate for progress at the peace table.
So even as we engage both sides on the core issues with an eye toward eventually restarting direct negotiations, we will deepen our support of the Palestinians’ state-building efforts. Because we recognize that a Palestinian state achieved through negotiations is inevitable.
I want, once again, to commend President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad for their leadership in this effort. Under the Palestinian Authority’s Two-Year State-Building plan, security has improved dramatically, services are being delivered, and the economy is growing.
It is of course true that much work remains to reverse a long history of corruption and mismanagement. But Palestinians are rightfully proud of the progress they have achieved, and the World Bank recently concluded that if the Palestinian Authority maintains its momentum in building institutions and delivering public services, it is – and I quote – “Well positioned for the establishment of a state at any point in the near future.”
The United States is continuing our efforts to support this important work along with many other international partners, NGOs and governments, including the government of Israel to bring together key players to focus on solving specific challenges in the region, including in the Palestinian territories, we have launched an initiative called Partners for a New Beginning chaired by Madeleine Albright, Walter Isaacson, and Muhtar Kent. And we are working directly with the Palestinian Authority on a range of issues. Last month I was pleased to announce the transfer of an additional $150 million in direct assistance to the Palestinian Authority.
This fall, to cite one example, American experts in partnership with the Palestinian Water Authority, began drilling new and much needed wells in Hebron. And with recent Israeli approvals, we soon will begin several water infrastructure projects in Gaza that the Palestinian Authority has identified as priorities. These and other efforts to expand wastewater treatment and provide sanitation services have already helped 12,000 Palestinian families gain access to clean water.
The United States is working with the Palestinian Authority, with Israel, and with international partners to ease the situation in Gaza and increase the flow of needed commercial goods and construction supplies while taking appropriate measures to ensure they don’t fall into the wrong hands. We are pleased with Israel’s recent decision to allow more exports from Gaza which will foster legitimate economic growth there. This is an important and overdue step, and we look forward to seeing it implemented.
Now, we also look forward to working with Israel and the Palestinian Authority on further improvements while maintaining pressure on Hamas to end the weapons smuggling and accept the fundamental principles of peacemaking – recognizing Israel, renouncing violence, and abiding by past agreements. This is the only path to achieve Palestinians’ dreams of independence.
Security is one area where the Palestinian Authority has made some of its most dramatic progress. I have seen it myself on recent trips to the West Bank, where well-trained and well-equipped Palestinian security forces stood watchful guard. Families in Nablus and Jenin shop, work, and play with a newfound sense of security, which also contributes to the improved economic conditions. As the Palestinian security forces continue to become more professional and capable, we look to Israel to facilitate their efforts. And we hope to see a significant curtailment of incursions by Israeli troops into Palestinian areas.
But for all the progress on the ground and all that the Palestinian Authority has accomplished, a stubborn truth remains: While economic and institutional progress is important, indeed necessary, it is not a substitute for a political resolution. The legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people will never be satisfied, and Israel will never enjoy secure and recognized borders until there is a two-state solution that ensures dignity, justice, and security for all.
This outcome is also in the interests of Israel’s neighbors. The Arab states have a pivotal role to play in ending the conflict. Egypt and Jordan in particular have been valuable partners for peace. In the days ahead, as we engage with the parties on the core issues and support the Palestinian people’s efforts to build their own institutions, we will also continue our diplomacy across the region and with our partners in the Quartet. Senator Mitchell will leave this weekend for Jerusalem and Ramallah and will then visit a number of Arab and European capitals.
Our message remains the same: The Arab states have an interest in a stable and secure region. They should take steps that show Israelis, Palestinians, and their own people that peace is possible and that there will be tangible benefits if it is achieved. Their support makes it easier for the Palestinians to pursue negotiations and a final agreement. And their cooperation is necessary for any future peace between Israel and Lebanon and Israel and Syria.
We continue to support the vision of the Arab Peace Initiative, a vision of a better future for all the people of the Middle East. This landmark proposal rests on the basic bargain that peace between Israel and her neighbors will bring recognition and normalization from all the Arab states. It is time to advance this vision with actions, as well as words. And Israel should seize the opportunity presented by this initiative while it is still available.
In the end, no matter how much the United States and other nations around the region and the world work to see a resolution to this conflict, only the parties themselves will be able to achieve it. The United States and the international community cannot impose a solution. Sometimes I think both parties seem to think we can. We cannot. And even if we could, we would not, because it is only a negotiated agreement between the parties that will be sustainable. The parties themselves have to want it. The people of the region must decide to move beyond a past that cannot change and embrace a future they can shape together.
As a political figure, a Senator, and now as Secretary of State, I have seen what it takes for old adversaries to make sacrifices and come together on common ground. Unfortunately, as we have learned, the parties in this conflict have often not been ready to take the necessary steps. Going forward, they must take responsibility and make the difficult decisions that peace requires.
And this begins with a sincere effort to see the world through the other side’s eyes, to try to understand their perspective and positions. Palestinians must appreciate Israel’s legitimate security concerns. And Israelis must accept the legitimate territorial aspirations of the Palestinian people. Ignoring the other side’s needs is, in the end, self-defeating.
To have a credible negotiating partner, each side must give the other the room, the political space to build a constituency for progress. Part of this is recognizing that Israeli and Palestinian leaders each have their own domestic considerations that neither side can afford to ignore. It takes two sides to agree on a deal and two sides to implement a deal. Both need credibility and standing with their own people to pull it off.
So this is also about how the leaders prepare their own people for compromise. Demonizing the other side will only make it harder to bring each public around to an eventual agreement.
By the same token, to build trust and momentum, both sides need to give the other credit when they take a hard step. As we begin to grapple with the core issues, each side will have to make difficult decisions, and they deserve credit when they do so. And it should not just be the United States that acknowledges moves that are made; the parties themselves must do so as well.
To demonstrate their commitment to peace, Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas and their respective teams should take these steps. They should help build confidence, work to minimize distractions, and focus on the core questions, even in a period when they are not talking directly.
To demonstrate their commitment to peace, Israeli and Palestinian leaders should stop trying to assign blame for the next failure, and focus instead on what they need to do to make these efforts succeed.
And to demonstrate their commitment to peace, they should avoid actions that prejudge the outcome of negotiations or undermine good faith efforts to resolve final status issues. Unilateral efforts at the United Nations are not helpful and undermine trust. Provocative announcements on East Jerusalem are counterproductive. And the United States will not shy away from saying so.
America is serious about peace. We know the road forward will not be easy. But we are convinced that peace is both necessary and possible. So we will be persistent and press forward. We will push the parties to grapple with the core issues. We will work with them on the ground to continue laying the foundations for a future Palestinian state. And we will redouble our regional diplomacy. When one way is blocked, we will seek another. We will not lose hope and neither should the people of the region.
Peace is worth the struggle. It is worth the setbacks and the heartaches. A just and lasting peace will transform the region. Israelis will finally be able to live in security, at peace with their neighbors, and confident in their future. Palestinians will at last have the dignity and justice they deserve with a state of their own and the freedom to chart their own destiny. Across the Middle East, moderates and advocates of peace and coexistence will be strengthened, while old arguments will be drained of their venom and the rejectionists and extremists will be exposed and marginalized.
We must keep our eyes trained on this future and work together to realize it. That is what this is all about. That is what makes the compromises and difficult decisions worth it, for both sides.
We are now in the holiday season, a time of reflection and fellowship. The National Christmas Tree is lighting up the sky. Jewish families have just completed the eight days of Hanukkah, the Festival of Lights, which reminds us that even when the future looks darkest, there is light and hope to be found through perseverance and faith. Muslims around the world also recently celebrated Eid al-Adha, the Festival of Sacrifice, which teaches the story of a man whose faith was tested when he was ordered by God to give up his beloved son. Whether we call him Abraham, Avraham, or Ibrahim, this man is the father of all the faiths of the Holy Land. He is a reminder that despite our differences, our histories are deeply entwined. And so too are our futures.
Today we should remember these stories. Sometimes we will be asked to walk difficult roads together, and sometimes these roads will be lined with naysayers, second-guessers, and rejectionists. But with faith in our common mission, we can and will come through the darkness together. That is the way – the only way toward peace, and that is what I hope we will keep in mind as we make this journey – this difficult journey toward a destination that awaits.
Thank you and may God bless you in this effort.
US EXPORT COUNCIL PROVIDES ASSISTANCE TO US COMPANIES SEEKING ACCESS TO HIGH GROWTH MARKETS OVERSEAS. http://usexportcouncil.com/
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
December 10, 2010
Thank you. Thank you very much. I appreciate the introduction, but nothing is imminent – (laughter) – so far as I know. But it is a great pleasure for me to be back here and part of this very important forum.
And I appreciate your introduction. I appreciate the friendship that you and Cheryl have given to me and to my family. You’ve been friends for many years. And certainly, as anyone who knows Haim understands, as an entrepreneur, a philanthropist, he is unparalleled, but also as a champion for peace. He represents in many ways in the best qualities of both Israel and America. He’s generous, he’s irrepressible, and absolutely unstoppable. And he has dedicated his energy and support to so many important causes and helped so many people. But he has probably no deeper passion than the one we are here discussing tonight – strengthening U.S.-Israeli relations and securing a just and lasting peace in the Middle East.
So I thank him and I thank Strobe Talbott, I thank Martin Indyk, and I thank all of you. And in particular, I appreciate your bringing us together to discuss the crucial issues surrounding the Middle East. I also want to acknowledge all of the colleagues from Israel who are here. Certainly, you’ll hear in a minute from Defense Minister Barak.
There are other members of the Israeli Government here – opposition leader Livni, and I’m delighted that Prime Minister Fayyad is also with us. Prime Minister Fayyad has accomplished a great deal in a short amount of time under very difficult circumstances. Along with President Abbas, he has brought strong leadership to the Palestinian Authority and he has helped advance the cause of a two-state solution by making a real difference in the lives of the Palestinian people. So Mr. Prime Minister, welcome again to Washington and thank you for your very good work. (Applause.)
Now, you don’t have to read secret diplomatic cables to know that we are meeting during a difficult period in the pursuit of peace in the Middle East. I understand and indeed I share the deep frustrations of many of you in this room and across the region and the world. But rather than dwell on what has come before, I want to focus tonight on the way forward, on America’s continuing engagement in helping the parties achieve a two-state solution that ends the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians once and for all, and on what it will take, finally, to realize that elusive, but essential goal.
Before I go further, I want to offer the deepest condolences of the American people for the lives lost in the recent fires in Northern Israel. Israelis are always among the first to lend a hand when an emergency strikes anywhere in the world. So when the fires began to burn, people and nations stepped up and offered help. It was remarkable to watch. Turkey sent planes; Egypt and Jordan donated chemicals and equipment; the Palestinian Authority dispatched firefighters and their trucks; and the United States was also part of the effort deploying expert firefighters, C-130 cargo planes, and thousands of gallons of chemicals and suppressants. It was testament once again to the deep and enduring bonds that unite our two countries, to the partnership between our governments, and the friendship between our people.
The United States will always be there when Israel is threatened. We say it often, but it bears repeating: America’s commitment to Israel’s security and its future is rock solid and unwavering, and that will not change. From our first days in office, the Obama Administration has reaffirmed this commitment. For me and for President Obama, this is not simply a policy position. It is also a deeply held personal conviction.
Over the last two years under President Obama’s leadership, the United States has expanded our cooperation with Israel and focused in particular on helping Israel meet the most consequential threats to its future as a secure and democratic Jewish state. Our security relationship has grown broader, deeper, and more intense than ever before. And we have not just worked to maintain Israel’s qualitative military edge. We have increased it through new advances like the Iron Dome, a short-range rocket defense system that will help protect Israeli homes and cities. And our military continues to work closely with the IDF through exchanges, training, and joint exercises.
For Israel and for the region, there may be no greater strategic threat than the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran. We just heard my husband speaking to that. And let me restate clearly: The United States is determined to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. And along with our international partners, we have implemented tough new sanctions whose bite is being felt in Tehran. Iran’s leaders face a clear choice, one of those tough choices that Strobe mentioned as the theme of this forum: Meet your international responsibilities or face continued isolation and consequences.
We have also stepped up efforts to block the transfer of dangerous weapons and financing to terrorist groups like Hezbollah and Hamas. But Iran and its proxies are not the only threat to regional stability or to Israel’s long-term security. The conflict between Israel and the Palestinians and between Israel and Arab neighbors is a source of tension and an obstacle to prosperity and opportunity for all the people of the region. It denies the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people and it poses a threat to Israel’s future security. It is at odds also with the interests of the United States.
I know that improvements in security and growing prosperity have convinced some that this conflict can be waited out or largely ignored. This view is wrong and it is dangerous. The long-term population trends that result from the occupation are endangering the Zionist vision of a Jewish and democratic state in the historic homeland of the Jewish people. Israelis should not have to choose between preserving both elements of their dream. But that day is approaching.
At the same time, the ever-evolving technology of war, especially the expanding reach of the rockets amassed on Israel’s borders means that it will be increasingly difficult to guarantee the security of Israeli families throughout the country without implementing peace agreements that answer these threats.
Continuing conflict also strengthens the hands of extremists and rejectionists across the region while sapping the support of those open to coexistence and cooperation. Radicalization of the region’s young people and growing support for violent ideologies undermine the stability and prosperity of the Middle East. The United States looks at these trends. We reflect on our deep and unwavering support of the state of Israel and we conclude without a shadow of a doubt that ending this conflict once and for all and achieving a comprehensive regional peace is imperative for safeguarding Israelis’ future.
We also look at our friends the Palestinians, and we remember the painful history of a people who have never had a state of their own, and we are renewed in our determination to help them finally realize their legitimate aspirations. The lack of peace and the occupation that began in 1967 continue to deprive the Palestinian people of dignity and self-determination. This is unacceptable, and, ultimately, it too is unsustainable.
So for both Israelis and Palestinians and, indeed, for all the people of the region, it is in their interest to end this conflict and bring a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace to the Middle East based on two states for two peoples.
For two years, you have heard me and others emphasize again and again that negotiations between the parties is the only path that will succeed in securing their respective aspirations; for the Israelis, security and recognition; for the Palestinians, an independent, viable sovereign state of their own. This remains true today. There is no alternative other than reaching mutual agreement. The stakes are too high, the pain too deep, and the issues to complex for any other approach.
Now, it is no secret that the parties have a long way to go and that they have not yet made the difficult decisions that peace requires. And like many of you, I regret that we have not gotten farther faster in our recent efforts. That is why yesterday and today I met with Israeli and Palestinian negotiators and underscored our seriousness about moving forward with refocused goals and expectations.
It is time to grapple with the core issues of the conflict on borders and security; settlements, water and refugees; and on Jerusalem itself. And starting with my meetings this week, that is exactly what we are doing. We will also deepen our strong commitment to supporting the state-building work of the Palestinian Authority and continue to urge the states of the region to develop the content of the Arab Peace Initiative and to work toward implementing its vision.
Over recent months, Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas have met face to face multiple times. I have been privileged to be present during their meetings in Sharm el-Sheikh, in Jerusalem, and in Washington. I have also had the chance to talk with each leader privately. These were meaningful talks that yielded new clarity about the gaps that must be bridged.
Significantly, both sides decided together to pursue a framework agreement that would establish the fundamental compromises on all permanent status issues and pave the way for a final peace treaty.
Reaching this goal will not be easy by any means. The differences between the two sides are real and they are persistent. But the way to get there is by engaging, in good faith, with the full complexities of the core issues and by working to narrow the gaps between the two sides.
By doing this, the parties can begin to rebuild confidence, demonstrate their seriousness, and hopefully find enough common ground on which to eventually re-launch direct negotiations and achieve that framework.
The parties have indicated that they want the United States to continue its efforts. And in the days ahead, our discussions with both sides will be substantive two-way conversations with an eye toward making real progress in the next few months on the key questions of an eventual framework agreement. The United States will not be a passive participant. We will push the parties to lay out their positions on the core issues without delay and with real specificity. We will work to narrow the gaps asking the tough questions and expecting substantive answers. And in the context of our private conversations with the parties, we will offer our own ideas and bridging proposals when appropriate.
We enter this phase with clear expectations of both parties. Their seriousness about achieving an agreement will be measured by their engagement on these core issues. And let me say a few words about some of the important aspects of these issues we will be discussing.
First, on borders and security. The land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean is finite, and both sides must know exactly which parts belong to each. They must agree to a single line drawn on a map that divides Israel from Palestine and to an outcome that implements the two-state solution with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt. The Palestinian leaders must be able to show their people that the occupation will be over. Israeli leaders must be able to offer their people internationally recognized borders that protect Israel’s security. And they must be able to demonstrate to their people that the compromises needed to make peace will not leave Israel vulnerable. Security arrangements must prevent any resurgence of terrorism and deal effectively with new and emerging threats. Families on both sides must feel confident in their security and be able to live free from fear.
Second, on refugees. This is a difficult and emotional issue, but there must be a just and permanent solution that meets the needs of both sides.
Third, on settlements. The fate of existing settlements is an issue that must be dealt with by the parties along with the other final status issues. But let me be clear: The position of the United States on settlements has not changed and will not change. Like every American administration for decades, we do not accept the legitimacy of continued settlement activity. We believe their continued expansion is corrosive not only to peace efforts and two-state solution, but to Israel’s future itself.
And finally, on Jerusalem which is profoundly important for Jews, Muslims, and Christians everywhere. There will surely be no peace without an agreement on this, the most sensitive of all the issues. The religious interests of people of all faiths around the world must be respected and protected. We believe that through good faith negotiations, the parties should mutually agree on an outcome that realizes the aspirations for both parties, for Jerusalem, and safeguard its status for people around the world.
These core issues are woven together. Considering the larger strategic picture makes it easier to weigh the compromises that must be made on both sides and see the benefits to be gained. We are not moving forward in a vacuum. From day one, the Obama Administration has recognized the importance of making progress on two simultaneous and mutually reinforcing tracks – negotiations between the parties and institution-building that helps the Palestinians as they prepare to govern their own state. Improvements on the ground give confidence to negotiators and help create a climate for progress at the peace table.
So even as we engage both sides on the core issues with an eye toward eventually restarting direct negotiations, we will deepen our support of the Palestinians’ state-building efforts. Because we recognize that a Palestinian state achieved through negotiations is inevitable.
I want, once again, to commend President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad for their leadership in this effort. Under the Palestinian Authority’s Two-Year State-Building plan, security has improved dramatically, services are being delivered, and the economy is growing.
It is of course true that much work remains to reverse a long history of corruption and mismanagement. But Palestinians are rightfully proud of the progress they have achieved, and the World Bank recently concluded that if the Palestinian Authority maintains its momentum in building institutions and delivering public services, it is – and I quote – “Well positioned for the establishment of a state at any point in the near future.”
The United States is continuing our efforts to support this important work along with many other international partners, NGOs and governments, including the government of Israel to bring together key players to focus on solving specific challenges in the region, including in the Palestinian territories, we have launched an initiative called Partners for a New Beginning chaired by Madeleine Albright, Walter Isaacson, and Muhtar Kent. And we are working directly with the Palestinian Authority on a range of issues. Last month I was pleased to announce the transfer of an additional $150 million in direct assistance to the Palestinian Authority.
This fall, to cite one example, American experts in partnership with the Palestinian Water Authority, began drilling new and much needed wells in Hebron. And with recent Israeli approvals, we soon will begin several water infrastructure projects in Gaza that the Palestinian Authority has identified as priorities. These and other efforts to expand wastewater treatment and provide sanitation services have already helped 12,000 Palestinian families gain access to clean water.
The United States is working with the Palestinian Authority, with Israel, and with international partners to ease the situation in Gaza and increase the flow of needed commercial goods and construction supplies while taking appropriate measures to ensure they don’t fall into the wrong hands. We are pleased with Israel’s recent decision to allow more exports from Gaza which will foster legitimate economic growth there. This is an important and overdue step, and we look forward to seeing it implemented.
Now, we also look forward to working with Israel and the Palestinian Authority on further improvements while maintaining pressure on Hamas to end the weapons smuggling and accept the fundamental principles of peacemaking – recognizing Israel, renouncing violence, and abiding by past agreements. This is the only path to achieve Palestinians’ dreams of independence.
Security is one area where the Palestinian Authority has made some of its most dramatic progress. I have seen it myself on recent trips to the West Bank, where well-trained and well-equipped Palestinian security forces stood watchful guard. Families in Nablus and Jenin shop, work, and play with a newfound sense of security, which also contributes to the improved economic conditions. As the Palestinian security forces continue to become more professional and capable, we look to Israel to facilitate their efforts. And we hope to see a significant curtailment of incursions by Israeli troops into Palestinian areas.
But for all the progress on the ground and all that the Palestinian Authority has accomplished, a stubborn truth remains: While economic and institutional progress is important, indeed necessary, it is not a substitute for a political resolution. The legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people will never be satisfied, and Israel will never enjoy secure and recognized borders until there is a two-state solution that ensures dignity, justice, and security for all.
This outcome is also in the interests of Israel’s neighbors. The Arab states have a pivotal role to play in ending the conflict. Egypt and Jordan in particular have been valuable partners for peace. In the days ahead, as we engage with the parties on the core issues and support the Palestinian people’s efforts to build their own institutions, we will also continue our diplomacy across the region and with our partners in the Quartet. Senator Mitchell will leave this weekend for Jerusalem and Ramallah and will then visit a number of Arab and European capitals.
Our message remains the same: The Arab states have an interest in a stable and secure region. They should take steps that show Israelis, Palestinians, and their own people that peace is possible and that there will be tangible benefits if it is achieved. Their support makes it easier for the Palestinians to pursue negotiations and a final agreement. And their cooperation is necessary for any future peace between Israel and Lebanon and Israel and Syria.
We continue to support the vision of the Arab Peace Initiative, a vision of a better future for all the people of the Middle East. This landmark proposal rests on the basic bargain that peace between Israel and her neighbors will bring recognition and normalization from all the Arab states. It is time to advance this vision with actions, as well as words. And Israel should seize the opportunity presented by this initiative while it is still available.
In the end, no matter how much the United States and other nations around the region and the world work to see a resolution to this conflict, only the parties themselves will be able to achieve it. The United States and the international community cannot impose a solution. Sometimes I think both parties seem to think we can. We cannot. And even if we could, we would not, because it is only a negotiated agreement between the parties that will be sustainable. The parties themselves have to want it. The people of the region must decide to move beyond a past that cannot change and embrace a future they can shape together.
As a political figure, a Senator, and now as Secretary of State, I have seen what it takes for old adversaries to make sacrifices and come together on common ground. Unfortunately, as we have learned, the parties in this conflict have often not been ready to take the necessary steps. Going forward, they must take responsibility and make the difficult decisions that peace requires.
And this begins with a sincere effort to see the world through the other side’s eyes, to try to understand their perspective and positions. Palestinians must appreciate Israel’s legitimate security concerns. And Israelis must accept the legitimate territorial aspirations of the Palestinian people. Ignoring the other side’s needs is, in the end, self-defeating.
To have a credible negotiating partner, each side must give the other the room, the political space to build a constituency for progress. Part of this is recognizing that Israeli and Palestinian leaders each have their own domestic considerations that neither side can afford to ignore. It takes two sides to agree on a deal and two sides to implement a deal. Both need credibility and standing with their own people to pull it off.
So this is also about how the leaders prepare their own people for compromise. Demonizing the other side will only make it harder to bring each public around to an eventual agreement.
By the same token, to build trust and momentum, both sides need to give the other credit when they take a hard step. As we begin to grapple with the core issues, each side will have to make difficult decisions, and they deserve credit when they do so. And it should not just be the United States that acknowledges moves that are made; the parties themselves must do so as well.
To demonstrate their commitment to peace, Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas and their respective teams should take these steps. They should help build confidence, work to minimize distractions, and focus on the core questions, even in a period when they are not talking directly.
To demonstrate their commitment to peace, Israeli and Palestinian leaders should stop trying to assign blame for the next failure, and focus instead on what they need to do to make these efforts succeed.
And to demonstrate their commitment to peace, they should avoid actions that prejudge the outcome of negotiations or undermine good faith efforts to resolve final status issues. Unilateral efforts at the United Nations are not helpful and undermine trust. Provocative announcements on East Jerusalem are counterproductive. And the United States will not shy away from saying so.
America is serious about peace. We know the road forward will not be easy. But we are convinced that peace is both necessary and possible. So we will be persistent and press forward. We will push the parties to grapple with the core issues. We will work with them on the ground to continue laying the foundations for a future Palestinian state. And we will redouble our regional diplomacy. When one way is blocked, we will seek another. We will not lose hope and neither should the people of the region.
Peace is worth the struggle. It is worth the setbacks and the heartaches. A just and lasting peace will transform the region. Israelis will finally be able to live in security, at peace with their neighbors, and confident in their future. Palestinians will at last have the dignity and justice they deserve with a state of their own and the freedom to chart their own destiny. Across the Middle East, moderates and advocates of peace and coexistence will be strengthened, while old arguments will be drained of their venom and the rejectionists and extremists will be exposed and marginalized.
We must keep our eyes trained on this future and work together to realize it. That is what this is all about. That is what makes the compromises and difficult decisions worth it, for both sides.
We are now in the holiday season, a time of reflection and fellowship. The National Christmas Tree is lighting up the sky. Jewish families have just completed the eight days of Hanukkah, the Festival of Lights, which reminds us that even when the future looks darkest, there is light and hope to be found through perseverance and faith. Muslims around the world also recently celebrated Eid al-Adha, the Festival of Sacrifice, which teaches the story of a man whose faith was tested when he was ordered by God to give up his beloved son. Whether we call him Abraham, Avraham, or Ibrahim, this man is the father of all the faiths of the Holy Land. He is a reminder that despite our differences, our histories are deeply entwined. And so too are our futures.
Today we should remember these stories. Sometimes we will be asked to walk difficult roads together, and sometimes these roads will be lined with naysayers, second-guessers, and rejectionists. But with faith in our common mission, we can and will come through the darkness together. That is the way – the only way toward peace, and that is what I hope we will keep in mind as we make this journey – this difficult journey toward a destination that awaits.
Thank you and may God bless you in this effort.
US EXPORT COUNCIL PROVIDES ASSISTANCE TO US COMPANIES SEEKING ACCESS TO HIGH GROWTH MARKETS OVERSEAS. http://usexportcouncil.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
