National Security Strategy Report
Advancing Our Interests: Actions in Support of the President's National Security Strategy
Jose, thank you very much for your introduction. Thank you, Neil, for – and everyone here at the Foreign Press Center for the opportunity to join you again. I think this is my second or third presentation, so I’m looking forward to it.
Ladies and gentlemen, 16 months ago on the steps of the U.S. Capitol, President Obama took the oath of office in his inaugural address and delivered a message for the world to absorb. And he said, and I quote, “From the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born, know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future with peace and dignity, and that we are ready to lead once more,” unquote.
Since then, in word and deed, the President and this Administration have worked to fulfill this summons to leadership. Today, the President’s National Security Strategy formalizes this vision with a very comprehensive approach that advances our interests, including the security of, obviously, the American people, the growing economy, support for our common values, and an international order that can address 21st
century challenges, which, as we all know now, are diverse, asymmetric in many ways, and unrelenting.
This National Security Strategy is one of national renewal and global leadership, and it advances our interests by building the sources of American strength and influence and shaping a world that is more peaceful and certainly more prosperous. With the strategy, we’re making it clear that America will meet this century’s challenges. So today, I’d like to offer a brief overview of the thinking that shaped this strategy, the vision that the President challenges to fulfill, and our strategic approach to doing so.
First, we must deal with the world as it is, and this strategy is guided by a clear-eyed understanding of our strategic environment, the world as it is today. This is a time of sweeping change. Two decades since the end of the Cold War, the free flow of information, people and trade continues to accelerate at an unprecedented pace. Events far beyond our nation’s shores now impact our safety, our security, and prosperity, and that of our allies and friends alike in ways that we could not have imagined just a few years ago.
This interconnection comes with extraordinary promise and it reinforces many of our innate strengths, our openness, our diversity, our dynamism, our ingenuity, and our dedication to our goals and aspirations. But this interconnection also comes with the perils of global challenges that do not respect borders – global networks of terrorists and criminals, threats in space and cyberspace, the degrading climate and technologies with increasing destructive power.
In addition, the international architecture of the 20th
century, designed for another time, is buckling under the weight of these new threats. As a consequence, it has been difficult to forge the cooperative approach as necessary to prevent states from flouting international norms and agreements. This strategy recognizes the changes required in order to be successful in the new environment of the 21st
century. And that is the world that we seek.
As we have throughout our history, Americans must rise to this moment with a strategy that builds the sources of our strength and our influence and helps shape a world of greater security and prosperity. So our strategic approach, therefore, includes several very important elements. The first is rebuilding our nation, our foundation; recognizing that our national security begins at home, that the center of our efforts is a commitment to renew and revitalize our economy.
As we ensure that our recovery is broad and sustained, we are attempting to lay the foundation for the long-term growth of our economy and the competitiveness of our citizens. American innovation must be the foundation of American power, because at no time in human history has a nation of diminished economic vitality maintained its military and political primacy.
Second, comprehensive engagement; because no one nation can meet global challenges alone, we will pursue comprehensive engagement around the world. We will strengthen old alliances. We will build new partnerships with emerging centers of influence in every region. And we will push for institutions that are more capable of responding to the challenges of our time.
Third, promoting a just and sustainable international order; we must strengthen the rules-based international system where the rights and responsibilities of all nations and their people are upheld, and where nations strive by meeting their responsibilities and face appropriate consequences when they don’t.
Fourth, strengthening and integrating national capabilities; going forward, there should be no doubt the United States of America will continue to underwrite global security. We will do so through our military advantage and we will do so through our wide-ranging commitments to allies, partners, and institutions. However, we must balance and integrate our military might with a whole-of-government approach. Our diplomacy and development capabilities must be modernized and our civilian expeditionary capacity strengthened to support the full breadth of our priorities. And our intelligence and Homeland Security efforts must be integrated with our National Security priorities and those of our allies, our friends, and our partners.
For example, we have ramped up our civilian capacity in both Iraq and Afghanistan and are investing in new development capabilities to help our partners help themselves. We are strengthening coordination among our intelligence, law enforcement, and Homeland Security agencies. And we have integrated planning at the White House by merging our National Security and Homeland Security Councils last year.
A word on advancing American interests: The progress and positive action in each element of this strategic approach will advance America’s national interest. First, with regard to security, we have an enduring national interest in the security of the United States, its citizens, and the U.S. allies and partners. With regard to prosperity, we have an enduring national interest in a strong, innovative, and growing U.S. economy and an open international economic system that promotes opportunity and prosperity for everyone.
With regard to values, we have an enduring national interest in respecting universal values both at home and around the world. And with regard to international order, we have an enduring national interest in an international order that promotes peace, security, and an opportunity through stronger cooperation to meet global challenges.
So let me now address how our strategy advances each of these interests. First, with regard to advancing our security, there is no greater priority than the safety and security of our people. For nearly a decade, our nation has been at war with a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. This is part of a broad multinational effort that is right and just, and we will be unwavering in our commitment to the security of our people, our allies, and our friends.
Going forward, America’s armed forces and our dedicated men and women in uniform will continue to defend our nation and underwrite global security. To advance our security and that of our allies and partners, this strategy focuses on a number of points.
First, ending the war in Iraq through a responsible transition to an Iraq that is sovereign, stable, and self-reliant, and that is on track. Second, pursuing a focused strategy to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al-Qaida and its violent extremist affiliates in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and elsewhere in the world. Third, stopping the spread of nuclear and biological weapons and securing vulnerable nuclear materials that may be adrift in the world.
Fourth, pursuing a strategy to secure and protect against a full range of threats and hazards to our communities and to enhance our resilience as a nation. And fifth, advancing peace, security, and opportunity in the greater Middle East to include efforts to seek a two-state solution that ensures Israel’s security and achieves Palestinian statehood and an Iran that meets its international obligations. Sixth, by investing and building the capacity of partner states to ensure that they are able to provide security governance and basic services. And lastly, protecting and securing cyberspace while safeguarding privacy and civil liberties.
With regard to advancing our prosperity, even as we ensure that our economic recovery is broad and sustained, we will continue to lay the foundation for the long-term growth of our economy and competitiveness of our citizens in a global economy. To advance economic growth and promote an open international economic system, this National Security Strategy focuses on strengthening education and the skills of our workforce to enable us to compete in a global economy of vastly increased mobility and interdependence.
Transforming our energy economy to power, new industries reduce our dependence on foreign oil and address climate change. And reestablishing American leadership in science, technology, engineering and math, and expanding educational exchanges to forge new knowledge and partnerships. And reducing the federal deficit, spending taxpayer money wisely, and engaging allies and partners to share burdens for our collective security.
And in working with partners, including through the G-20, to end the old cycle of economic boom and bust and promote growth that is balanced and sustained in the United States and elsewhere in the world. And lastly, faster, sustainable, and more inclusive development that accelerates economic progress in emerging economies.
With regard to advancing universal values, America will not impose any system of government on another country, but our long-term security and prosperity depends on our steady support for universal values. Time and again, our values have proven to be our best national security asset. To advance values that are universal, this strategy focuses on promoting these values through the power of our example by living them at home, including through our fidelity to the rule of law and our rejection of practices such as torture.
By supporting those who seek to exercise universal rights abroad, for instance, through our engagement of civil society and efforts to expand and protect the free access of information. And by investing in the capacity of emerging democracies so they can build more durable institutions. And by advancing the dignity that comes through development by pursuing global health, food security, and assistance in humanitarian emergencies such as we did in Haiti.
With regard to advancing a just and sustainable international order, just as we did after World War II, the United States must take the lead in shaping an international architecture that can galvanize collective action to address our global challenges. To develop a just and sustainable international order that can address global challenges, this part of the strategy focuses on ensuring strong alliances which are the foundations of U.S., regional, and global security in Europe, in Asia, the Americas, and in the Middle East and Africa by constantly cultivating and strengthening these indispensible partnerships and deepening coordination and cooperation. By expanding cooperation with 21st
century centers of influence such as Russia, with which we have reset relations, we’ve agreed to a new START arms control treaty and forged cooperation on issues ranging from Afghanistan to Iran.
India, with which our growing relationship will be one of the defining partnerships of the 21st
century. And China, with which we have forged a Strategic and Economic Dialogue to advance mutual interest on areas such as global economic recovery and nonproliferation. And by strengthening institutions for cooperation, including the United Nations, regional organizations such as NATO, international financial institutions, and by reforming the international economic architecture and making the G-20 the premiere forum for international economic cooperation, and by leveraging American leadership to sustain broad international cooperation to address global issues. Cooperation is not an end in itself; it must achieve results.
And that is what we’ve pursued over the past 16 months. For instance, we have taken comprehensive action to strengthen the nonproliferation regime, including a UN Security Council resolution last September that embraced the President’s Prague agenda, the Nuclear Security Summit here in Washington in which 47 nations agreed to a work plan to secure vulnerable nuclear materials, and our efforts to hold nations that break the rules accountable. For instance, through the UN Security Council resolution that imposed the toughest nonproliferation sanctions to date on North Korea last year and our current efforts to hold Iran accountable.
Ladies and gentlemen, we have pursued a broader international effort to combat climate change, beginning with the Copenhagen Accord, which, for the first time, secures commitments from all major economies to reduce their emissions. And together with our G-20 partners, we’ve embraced the agenda of balanced and sustainable growth, securing unprecedented international cooperation to work towards global economic recovery.
At this moment of sweeping change, this strategy of national renewal and global leadership will build the source of America’s strength and influence and shape a world that’s more peaceful and more prosperous. Many difficult challenges lie ahead, but the United States will emerge stronger from this time of testing.
I know that you have many questions, but let me anticipate one and that would be: In what ways is this strategy different from all of the others that preceded it? Well, some examples of that would be that within this strategy is a broad interpretation of national security recognizing the extent to which the economy, education, energy, science and technology and such other topics as immigration have increasingly central roles in our national security, as well as the role of the private sector, nongovernmental organizations, and the American people themselves.
The integration of our Homeland Security and National Security Strategies was also a pivotal decision that contributed to the articulation of this strategy. This is the first National Security Strategy since the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security to address security issues in an inclusive way. Emphasis on building and integrating all of our National Security capabilities, we must maintain our military advantage, but we place new emphasis on strengthening our nonmilitary capabilities to address challenges – development, diplomacy, intelligence, and law enforcement.
The plan to concentrate our military resources on the enemies of the United States, defeating al-Qaida and its affiliates rather than a more broadly defined war against a tactic which is terrorism, a clear prioritization of and strategy for halting the spread of nuclear weapons, it is grounded in the international nonproliferation regime. These are well-articulated in the strategy. And a detailed plan to use diplomacy, economic development, and engagement to build constructive relations to the Muslim world is an essential feature of our thinking.
This is the first National Security Strategy to highlight the importance of cyber security. It embraces the 21st
century power dynamics and the first deliberate strategy for building constructive ties with emerging centers of influence, including by elevating the role of the G-20 as the focal point for international economic cooperation. And the core premise that the promotion of human rights and democracy are core national interests. We lead on behalf of those efforts, above all, through the power of our own example, as I mentioned earlier.
And lastly, within the National Security Strategy, a new focus on climate as a core National Security interest, including our global efforts coming out of Copenhagen to advance a framework where all major economies pursue emissions reductions.
So this is just a few of the unique features I think that we’re seeing in a National Security Strategy for the first time, and with that, I thank you for your attention and I’ll be happy to take some of your questions.MODERATOR:
Thank you very much, sir. Why don’t we start right up here in the front row with Andrei.
Before we get started, since we have so many journalists and let’s try to get as many questions as possible, keep the questions to the point and we’re not going to have any follow-ups. So let’s get as many as we can.QUESTION:
Okay. Thank you. Andrei Sitov from TASS from Russia. Thank you, sir, for coming and thanks to our friends at the FPC for doing this.
I appreciate the positive nature, forward-looking nature of the new strategy, but I wanted to ask you, are there any redlines that you laid down in the strategy that you don’t want to be crossed, including in the economic and financial field that you emphasized? And how can Russia as a partner help the U.S. to see that those lines are not crossed? Thank you.GEN JONES:
Well, I mean, the – in the strategy itself, I mean, the redlines are implied by the text. Obviously, nations are going to do what’s necessary to protect the security of their citizens, and all nations reserve the right to act on behalf of the welfare of that citizenry.
But the relationship that I cited with Russia is one of the positive developments of our experience and the President’s experience in office. And we are working – we work – every single day, it seems like I’m talking on the telephone to my counterpart or the Secretary of State with hers, and the President and President Medvedev talk on a regular basis.
So we work through these issues respecting each other’s priorities depending on the issue, respecting each other’s redlines, to use your example, and we find – we’ve found ways of accommodation that gets us to a common point, as we did in START and as we’re doing today as we speak on some of the other issues that we’re handling – on Iran in particular. So this is an aspect of the type of engagement that we hope to implement not only in one or two countries, but with all countries that we deal with.MODERATOR:
Let’s take somebody towards the back. How about Michael? Wait for the microphone, please.QUESTION:
Mike Evans from the London Times. How important a priority is it going to be to deal with the – what you might call “homegrown” terrorism in this country? GEN JONES:
Well, I think this is an example, a clear example of the wisdom of combining homeland security and national security and making a seamless National Security Council that embraces both of those priorities. Obviously, this is going to be a high priority and the appropriate agencies are at work. We are devoting an awful lot of attention to this, obviously as some incidences have shown that we need to focus on this issue. There is great international cooperation ongoing, most recently with Pakistan, but with other countries, the sharing of information and intelligence through law enforcement agencies is multiplying. The security that we bring – the security focus that we bring to our means of mass transportation are obviously being watched carefully, not only here but elsewhere in the world. So this is an issue that we are watching carefully, just as we’re watching carefully terrorist activities outside of our borders.MODERATOR:
Let’s switch to this side of the room. How about our Romanian colleague?QUESTION:
Nicolae Melinescu from Romanian Television. Sir, Romania is going to part of the nuclear defense. How could you see its role within the enlarged deterrence which the U.S. is preparing to implement? Thank you very much.GEN JONES:
Thank you. We’re very much looking to the visit of the foreign minister next week. And our engagement with Romania bilaterally and also through the North Atlantic Treaty Organization is one of the bright spots of our multilateral engagements and our bilateral engagements. We expect that, and know that, Romania has always been extremely helpful to us in many different ways, not only to NATO but also to the United States specifically and ISAF in Afghanistan. And so we look forward to this visit very much and we appreciate Romanian cooperation on all of the important issues that we discuss with them. Thank you.MODERATOR:
How about our colleague from Kyodo News right here in the middle.QUESTION:
Oh, thank you. Yushin Sugita from Kyodo News. Thank you for this opportunity. The strategy says that the need to modernize the alliance between U.S. and Japan and U.S. and Korea – can you elaborate that what is done and what has to be done, including the recent shakings between – about the Okinawa basing issues between U.S. and Japan?GEN JONES:
Well, the regional aspects of our multilateral engagements and alliance have been strong for many, many years. And every now and then, there are events that happen that remind us that this is still a very dangerous part of the world. North Korea, of course, has reminded us of this fact. And that causes us to reengage with our friends and allies as to our preparedness. Are we surprised by anything? Was there – is there a better cooperation that needs to be had in the way of information sharing, intelligence gathering? Is our disposition of forces appropriate to the threats that we might face? And of course, as we discuss now, what is the proper response to the obvious – in response to the tragedy of the sinking of the South Korean ship and the loss of so many lives?
So our two presidents have been talking to one another. We have admired the way President Lee has handled the situation and his strong leadership and patience and forbearance in a very, very difficult time. And these types of situations tend to reinforce our greater regional discussions on mutual security issues. So we constantly adjust. We react to the events of our times, and we do what we have to do to protect our countries.MODERATOR:
Let’s go back to our Korean colleague there in the back. Yes, to ask a follow-up question. Thank you.QUESTION:
Thank you. Yonhap News Agency, South Korea. Can you elaborate on the multiple measures you mentioned against North Korea? You mentioned international security strategy report. And also, based on the talks between Secretary Clinton and Chinese officials, do you expect China will support the effort by South Korea and the United States to sanction – condemn North Korea at the UN Security Council? Thank you very much.GEN JONES:
Well, Secretary Clinton has just returned to the United States from her trip, as you know. And in fact, after I leave here, we will be having a meeting at the White House where Secretary Clinton will present her observations from her trip. So it’s too early to answer that question except to say, of course, that in our bilateral discussions with China on a number of issues, we hope that the Chinese Government will certainly do the right thing in the face of the evidence that’s presented.MODERATOR:
I think we need a little balance here. How about Joyce? We need a woman’s voice here. (Laughter.)GEN JONES:
Oh, that of balance. (Laughter.)MODERATOR:
Yeah, that kind. (Laughter.)QUESTION:
Hi, General. Joyce Karam with Al Hayat newspaper. I want to ask you on something you mentioned here on the strategy about strengthening the partnership with countries like Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, mainly to enable our militaries and defense system to work together more effectively. Can you elaborate a little bit on this? And specifically, how would you like this defense cooperation to play in regards to the Iranian – countering the Iranian ambitions in the region?GEN JONES:
Sure. Well, unless and until Iran chooses to demonstrate to the world that it has nothing but peaceful intentions with regard to their use of nuclear energy, it will be important for the United States and the friends and allies that you just mentioned to make sure that our people are secure.
There are three things that should be avoided if we can. And Iran has the capacity to solve this problem any day that it wishes to do so. Now, the first is that the nations that you just mentioned, including ourselves, reject the idea that Iran should be capable of developing nuclear weapons. That’s point one. Point two is that this development of nuclear weapons would undoubtedly trigger a nuclear arms race in that very part of the world that you just talked about in the Middle East. And point three is if Iran developed the technology to produce nuclear weapons, there is great fear that this particular country would export that technology to non-state actors. And then the world as we know it would be infinitely in greater danger.
And so the obvious things that we have to do with regard to friends and allies is to make sure that while we try to discourage Iran and why we leave the door open to Iran to walk back through it and do the right thing with regard to not only the Tehran research reactor proposal but also demonstrating conclusively its desire to use nuclear power only for peaceful use, then we have to take other considerations into action. And that’s precisely what is meant by our National Security Strategy statement with regard to the region.MODERATOR:
How about our German colleague right here on the end.QUESTION:
Thank you. Markus Ziener, German newspaper Handelsblatt. Looking into this new strategy, you’re putting a lot of emphasis on the economic issues and the role the economy is playing for maintaining the leadership of the United States. So I’m now wondering, given the huge deficit of the U.S. and given the money that has been pumped into the economy, how much at threat is the security and position of the U.S. because of that? GENERAL JONES:
Mm-hmm. Well, it’s a – this is a 21st
century problem and it’s one that we’re going to have to deal with. And the President is very clear-eyed about the importance of managing the deficit and recovering from this dangerous situation that has potential long-term consequences. We’re going to have to, as the President says, show national discipline in how we spend our money and how we use our resources, to use them wisely. We’re going to have to, because of the globalized nature of our economies and the linkages, make sure that we work with other countries so that it’s not – this is not just a U.S. problem. It’s, as you know, a multinational problem. But we are clear-eyed on the idea that a strong economy and a strong domestic situation is absolutely essential in order to be effective elsewhere in the world. MODERATOR:
Let’s take somebody in the back, as far back as we – oh, this gentleman on the right. Right over here. Yeah. QUESTION:
Hi. Thank you. Devin Symons, Nippon TV. Can you speak specifically to the need to maintain a sustainable working relationship with Japan, as mentioned in the NSS? You spoke a little bit about Korea but – GENERAL JONES:
-- specifically on Japan. And does that mean that there’s a necessity to maintain the bases on Okinawa or – specifically to that? GENERAL JONES:
Yeah. Well, obviously, the long history between the United States and Japan continues to be one of the cornerstones of any national security strategy or international security strategy, certainly in that part of the world. And we are in discussions right now with Japan as to the basing options of the situation that we have with Okinawa and the Marines on Okinawa. Some of you may know that I have spent some time on Okinawa in my younger days. But this is a very strategic issue. It’s one that affects our collective security. And it’s one that I’m confident that the United States and Japan are in the process of working out to the satisfaction of everyone, not just to the two countries but also the region.
It is an important strategic base. It does need to be modified in some ways. We have to respect the realities of the population growth on Okinawa. We have to respect the fact that air bases in the middle of densely populated areas should find other alternatives and we’re perfectly willing to do that. And we have been in very, very good discussion with the Japanese Government. And I expect that in the not too distant future, the Japanese Government will have some announcements to make, which we will support. MODERATOR:
We have time for one more question, and our Pakistani colleague, Ali, looks quite anxious. If we get him a microphone – GENERAL JONES:
I can take a couple more, if you’d like. PARTICIPANT:
I don’t think you can, sir. GENERAL JONES:
Pardon me? PARTICIPANT:
I don’t think so. (Laughter.) GENERAL JONES:
I do. (Laughter.) MODERATOR:
Don’t put me in the middle. (Laughter.)GENERAL JONES:
Let me put it another way. I will take a couple more. (Laughter.) MODERATOR:
This is what we do, sir. Ali. QUESTION:
All right. Thank you, General Jones. I’m Ali Imran from Associated Press of Pakistan. And you just talked about cooperation from Pakistan and emphasized engagement with your allies in the fight against al-Qaida and other affiliates, but there have been stories in the American media about your trip to Pakistan last week. And according to these stories, perhaps you were pressing Pakistan and as reported that Pakistan was also threatened, you know, into moving against militants more aggressively and broadening the fight. So what is the nature of U.S.-Pakistan relationship and cooperation in the fight against terrorism? GENERAL JONES:
Well, as you know, we’ve also had some very, very good bilateral discussions on the strategic partnership with Pakistan, here in Washington, and a constant dialogue with Pakistani authorities on this – the nature of this relationship.
Fundamentally, the United States has committed itself to a long-term strategy with regard to that part of the world, including Pakistan, India, Afghanistan, to try to bring a better life to the people of the region, to try to end terrorism and – in all shapes and formed directed against all different peoples. And we have plotted the Pakistani efforts to date with regard to their renewed efforts that began last year: their success in the Swat Valley, their success in South Waziristan. We have rejoiced in the trust and confidence that’s been built between our two militaries: the increased sharing of information and intelligence, the cooperation that we’ve received on law enforcement issues, the very prompt response we got as a result of the Times Square incident.
My trip was simply to underscore, at the request of the President, that we take this particular relationship extremely seriously, that we are very serious when we say we have long-term – we will make long-term commitments to Pakistan to help the economy, to help revitalization of the infrastructure, to bring investment from not only our business community but international investment, to help the instruments of governance wherever possible. But we wanted to also impress upon our friends that it is essential that terrorism be defeated and that wherever there are the presence of terrorists or the perception of presence of terrorists, that it’s in the interest of Pakistan to not only repudiate the existence of those kinds of organizations but also at the appropriate time to rid Pakistan of those – of that presence. And we offer friendship and assistance, cooperation in every way possible in order to do that and in order to bring – help bring a better future to Pakistan.
So I want to state very clearly that this was a meeting among friends, one that we have regularly. We are now to the point where we can exchange very direct information and very direct messages, which have the – I think the – hopefully the benefit of adding vitality to the relationship. So we are pleased with the progress and we hope that Pakistan is pleased with the progress and we hope that we will continue down a successful road so that we can get on with the idea and the concept and the commitment that we’ve made to help Pakistan economically and in many other ways. MODERATOR:
Okay, we’re on bonus time now, so (inaudible). (Laughter.)GENERAL JONES:
I said I’d take two more. So I got one more. MODERATOR:
Okay, we’ll go right here. Go ahead, Sonia. QUESTION:
Okay, thank you. Thank you, General. You didn’t talk about Latin America, and my question is specifically on Venezuela. There are some concerns here in the U.S. because of the close ties between Venezuela and Iran. And I would like to know, there are – what does that represent for you in terms of your national strategy, security strategy? I would like to know what does that mean for the U.S.? What is the U.S. position? What are their concerns? Thank you. GENERAL JONES:
Thank you. Well, the U.S. does intend to pay a great deal of attention to our own hemisphere. And the many, many discussions we’ve had with President Lula in Brazil, President Uribe in Colombia, and Panama, and Mexico, we have an engagement strategy that I think is deep and robust and certainly focuses on the real problems that face us.
We think that Iran has, in fact, conducted activities in that part of the world that are not helpful. We have shared those activities with our friends. We hope that the neighboring – that the countries in the region will use their influence on people like President Chavez to see exactly the dangerous path that playing Iran’s game – the game that Iran is playing right now has potential consequences that affect not just the region but affect the world order with regard to nuclear proliferation, as I highlighted earlier. So we hope that like-minded nations of influence will exert that influence on countries like Venezuela so that we can have a more concentrated and focused approach to these very serious problems.
Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. MODERATOR: