On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States, I am delighted to send best wishes to the people of Cameroon as you celebrate your 40th anniversary of the Republic this May 20.

Our two countries are partnering together to address issues of democracy, good governance, and economic development. U.S. companies are investing and expanding their activities in Cameroon. I am pleased that the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is assigning two Americans to work on a range of development projects, including a new $16 million Food for Education program in Cameroon’s Far North Region.

We hope to continue to work with Cameroon to consolidate democratic gains and economic growth; particularly as you embark upon municipal and legislative elections planned for 2013. We support your efforts to strengthen electoral institutions, enhance transparency and allow for contestation of results. As you celebrate your National Day, know that the United States stands with you as a partner and friend. We are committed to this relationship for a brighter future for all Cameroonians.

Oh, thank you all. Thank you. Thank you. Well, that was really a wonderful introduction from someone who I’ve had the great pleasure of working with on a number of important issues and am delighted to be working so closely with Senator Lindsey Graham again, as he is the ranking member on the Foreign Operations Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee. And I’m so appreciative of his strong support of America’s development and diplomatic efforts around the world. We promised him that we would seize and erase all tapes of what he has just said. (Laughter.) So don’t take it personally, any of you in the press, but this is to protect him going forward. (Laughter.)

Well, this has been an amazing day, and I’m all that stands between you and getting out into this absolutely beautiful afternoon and enjoying some of the sights that Washington has to offer. But I wanted to come to close out the formal part of the program to express great appreciation, first and foremost, to the Chicago Council – in particular, Catherine Bertini and Dan Glickman for bringing us all together today to our very special guests, the heads of state and government from Tanzania, Benin, Ethiopia and Ghana, and to tell you how exciting it is that we have this partnership at the highest levels with the countries that you represent here at this conference and for the months and years ahead. I also want to thank Raj Shah and his great colleagues at USAID. Raj has led a tireless effort on behalf of advancing food security worldwide along with the wonderful help of people not only here in Washington but in our posts and missions across the globe.

Thanks to our G-8 partners. I see representatives from the G-8 countries here. Thank you for your commitment to food security, for the great work that started in L’Aquila and has continued forward to here in Washington. And thanks to all of you in the private sector, in the not-for-profit sector, in the academic world, in the faith community, in the agricultural productivity and research world. Thank you all.

And this has been a real diverse conference. Not only heads of state and government and foreign ministers and aid workers and health experts and businessmen and women, but we had at least one rock star. I have it on very good authority. (Laughter.) And although we hail from different regions and hold different points of view, as Senator Graham said about his and my perspectives, on this we all agree – the need to drastically decrease hunger and poverty worldwide. And strengthening global agriculture is a powerful way to do that.

Now it wasn’t long ago that a symposium on food security would have drawn a very different crowd, because for years, passionate and persistent advocates made the case that this issue needed to be on the development agenda of every nation. Well, the United States listened, the G-8 countries listened, and now it’s a signature issue. Billions of dollars have been pledged by the world’s largest economies, and those pledges are being met. The G-20 has embraced this mission. So has the World Bank and the African Union. And 30 African nations are creating national agricultural investment plans and revising their budgets to make agriculture a leading priority.

Now in the United States, we’ve created our own global food security initiative, and as you were able to hear directly from President Obama earlier today, Feed the Future is at the forefront of our global development agenda. Now we took on food security right out of the box in this Administration because the facts were so compelling. Yes, it’s a complex, far-reaching issue, but it comes down to a couple of very key facts – nearly a billion people worldwide suffering from chronic hunger; by the year 2050, the global population will climb to 9 billion, and the world will need to produce 70 percent more food than we do today just to feed everyone; 75 percent of the world’s poor live in rural settings and depend on agriculture for their livelihoods.

Now there are many other facts, but I think these three are sufficient not only to make the case, but to add up to a tremendous opportunity, because if we can help the rural poor produce more food and sell it in thriving local and regional markets as well as on the global market, we can decrease chronic hunger today, we can build an ample food supply for tomorrow, we can drive economic growth in places where poverty is persistent, and we can have better futures for men, women, and children.

Now I think what we are seeking to do through our investments in global agriculture is not just to solve the problem of hunger, we also want to solve the problem of extreme poverty. And agriculture, in our opinion, may be the best intervention point to do that. Development dollars spent on agriculture have the greatest impact on poverty reduction, more than money spent in any other sector. So if we want to make big gains in the fight against poverty, agriculture is the best way to do that.

And there is no place that that is more true than in Africa, where there is such great potential for gains in agricultural productivity. So together, African governments, donors, international organizations, the private sector, and civil society can close the productivity gap and feed many more people.

Now having said that agriculture development can deliver strong results, I have to admit the goals we have set for ourselves are very ambitious. They need to be. The countries that we are supporting are trying to transform how people farm, what people eat, how crops are stored and sold, and that is not easy. Some of the changes they seek will take years, perhaps even generations, to lock into place. So we need to have the foresight and to stay committed to this mission.

Many worthy ideas have been shared here today about what should come next in the global fight for food security. And I want to emphasize three issues that I believe deserve our particular attention. All three are areas in which progress is both urgently needed and well within our reach. And all are priorities of the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition that President Obama announced this morning.

The first is a centerpiece of this symposium: partnering with the private sector. As President Obama said earlier, the New Alliance includes a major push to mobilize more private sector investment and involvement. Now part of the reason for that is simple math. Consider the 30 African countries that have created or are now creating comprehensive national agriculture investment plans. When we look at their own spending, even in those countries that have met the goal of allocating 10 percent of their national budget to agriculture, and then when we add to that the pledged support from development partners like the members of the G-8, a significant gap still remains because governments alone cannot supply all the investment needed to transform agriculture. We need the private sector.

Now that’s not only true only of agriculture. Private investment has become invaluable to development across the board. In the 1960s, official development assistance from governments and multilateral organizations accounted for 70 percent of capital flows going into developing countries. But today that number has fallen to just 13 percent. And that’s not because public assistance has gone down; it’s because private investment has skyrocketed. Now we need to drive more of that investment toward agricultural growth.

And beyond investment, the private sector has a great deal to offer in terms of skills and expertise. Whether it’s improving the supply chain so fewer crops are spoiled on their way to market, as Premium Foods is doing in Ghana; or training growers in certified seed production, like Tanseed is doing in Tanzania; or expanding the production and processing of highly nutritional foods like chickpeas and soybeans, as Guts Agro Industry is in Ethiopia, businesses often know how to do important things better and more cost effectively than anyone else.

African countries are taking the lead on cultivating private sector involvement. They are reforming their policies to make their economies and agricultural sectors more attractive for both domestic and international investment and private sector activity. Their partners can support this by launching our own innovative collaborations with businesses, both local and international.

Now, I do realize that not everyone welcomes wholeheartedly the notion of more private sector involvement. And let me be clear that while global corporations play an irreplaceable role, we want them to prosper alongside local business, not at their expense. Private sector activity must start with the smallholder farmers whose future prosperity is the focal point of all our efforts, and then expand outward from there.

Furthermore, I know that some worry that by asking the private sector to step up, governments are hoping that gives us the excuse to scale back. Well, I want to say as clearly as I can that the United States is in this for the long run. And we ask others to hold us accountable as we will do the same in turn. And we believe accountability must apply to our private sector partners as well. But private sector activity is the only lasting basis for self-sustaining economic growth. And ultimately, after all, isn’t that our goal?

The second topic I want to emphasize is nutrition. In recent years, we have learned that improving access to food does not automatically lead to improved nutrition. Neither does raising incomes nor creating new markets. What leads to improved nutrition is focusing on nutrition itself and integrating it into all our food security initiatives.

Nutrition is just too important to be treated as an afterthought. Children’s entire lives are shaped by whether they receive enough of the right nutrients during those crucial 1,000 days from pregnancy to second birthdays. And this, in turn, heavily influences whether a country will have a healthy and educated workforce. So when we overlook nutrition, we set ourselves up for a less healthy, less productive, less prosperous future.

Two years ago, during the annual meeting of the UN General Assembly, I joined international leaders, including Secretary General Ban Ki Moon, the foreign minister of Ireland and others, in announcing the “1,000 Days” partnership in support of the Scaling Up Nutrition movement known as SUN. That was the first time foreign ministers had gathered to focus squarely on nutrition as a critical development priority. And since then, a growing number of countries have committed to improving nutrition. Twenty-seven countries have committed to taking action through the SUN movement, and I urge more countries to join because we have proven solutions to the problem of under- and mal-nutrition

And let me also say that under-nutrition is not just a problem facing only developing countries. We’re struggling with it in the United States, and we have plenty of food. But many people, including far too many children, are not eating nutritious foods. They’re eating, but they’re not eating in a way that improves and sustains their health, and they are increasingly facing serious health problems.

In Chicago on Monday, while the NATO summit is underway, there will be a “1,000 Days Summit” to focus on the problem of child under-nutrition, not only abroad but here at home in cities like Chicago. Mayor Rahm Emanuel is taking on the so-called “food deserts” as a public health priority, because this problem of under-nutrition cuts across all borders and all incomes.

The United States has a set an ambitious nutrition target within Feed the Future. We aim to reach 7 million children within five years to prevent stunting and to increase child survival. I think we have the capacity to reach even more, and if we all work together we can set a global target.

The third issue I want to emphasize is gender equality. I’m sure it’s no surprise to anyone that I am convinced women are critical to our success in every field of endeavor. And this is not a matter of sentiment or personal interest on my part. This is also actually a fact-based, evidence-based statement. It has been said that – (applause) – the modern face of hunger is often a woman’s face, because in many parts of the world, women still eat last and eat least.

The face of a farmer is often a woman’s face as well. According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, women comprise nearly half of the agricultural workforce across Africa. So if we want to support farmers, we also have to support women farmers. And that is not something that happens automatically. It has to be part of a deliberate, determined strategy that takes gender equality into account across everything we are doing.

And the results speak for themselves. The FAO estimates that if women farmers had the same access to productive resources as men – seeds, credit, insurance, land title, and so on – they could increase yields on their farms by 20 to 30 percent. And that, in turn, could raise total agricultural output so much it could reduce the number of hungry people worldwide by up to 150 million.

Now the obstacles that stand in the way of women’s equal access to resources in agriculture or anything else are, unfortunately, formidable. They include laws, deeply held traditions, lack of information, plain old inertia, and we have to overcome each and every one of them. We can’t just hope that women get the support they need as a side effect of our work. We have to push for it. And it’s not optional. It’s not marginal. It’s not a luxury. It’s not expendable. It happens to be essential, or we will never reach our goals.

The United States has integrated gender equality throughout Feed the Future, and we will do the same with the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition. We’ve created new tools like the Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index to measure our impact. And we look to our partners to help us in this broader effort. When we liberate the economic potential of women, we elevate the economic performance of communities, nations, and the world.

So the work we’re talking about today will require all of us to change how we do business. Now that’s not always easy. I’ve seen that firsthand at the State Department and USAID. To give you just one example, I instructed our ambassadors in many parts of the world to take on agricultural issues, not something that our typical ambassadors know a great deal about, but they’ve educated themselves about land reform and export bans and fertilizer subsidies. And they’ve gone out and worked closely with our partners to help them achieve their goals.

No institution is easy to change. Some of you know that all too well. But the State Department and USAID have changed for this issue because we are so convinced of its overall importance. And we will all have to change and change again to keep moving forward. But if we continue to align our investments and resources, find opportunities for partnership, share news of our progress, and share the lessons from our mistakes, and hold each other accountable, I absolutely believe we will succeed in significantly decreasing hunger and poverty worldwide.

In the past three and a half years that I have been privileged to serve as Secretary of State, I’ve traveled to nearly a hundred countries. And in many, I’ve met with farmers and agricultural scientists, policymakers, nutrition experts, and of all I have seen and all the people I have met, my hope and commitment has only been deepened. There is a sense of anticipation that we can move ahead. Not since the Green Revolution has there been this level of focus by the world on this problem. And we also are heartened by the real progress that we see already underway.

When I was in Tanzania last year, I visited a women’s farm cooperative with the prime minister. And the farm receives funding from USAID. The women there are raising vegetables – peppers and leafy greens mostly. But they didn’t have a market nearby where they could sell their excess crops. So they started one. And then they built cooling huts. And even though their vegetables are high-value, the women don’t sell all of them; they save them for themselves and their children because they have been made aware of how rich they are nutrients, especially for growing children. They were so eager to show me their crops, their drip irrigation system, their greenhouse. They know they are contributing to something of great importance – not only better lives for their own children, but a better future for their country.

So to anyone who wonders whether progress is possible, go visit women like the ones I met in Tanzania. Go visit the scientists in India who are carrying on the tradition of the Green Revolution by developing drought-tolerant and disease-resistant seeds. Go visit their counterparts in Kenya, who are working in their labs and greenhouses to create a green revolution in Africa. Look at the school lunch program in Brazil, which provides nutritious food every day to every Brazilian child, all grown by smallholder farmers. Look at the policy makers in Indonesia who had the foresight to make a substantial investment in nutrition as a strategy for economic growth. Look at the farmers, the entrepreneurs, the activists, the political leaders, the teachers, the parents who are devoting themselves to making their communities healthier, more just, and more prosperous.

These are the people who are on the frontlines of progress. Our place is standing right behind them, giving them the support they need to succeed. And I am very proud to be part of this movement, because indeed that’s what it is, and to work with each and every one of you and countless others like you who sign on to this movement’s mission. I am absolutely convinced we can not only keep the progress going, we can show results that will just surprise people everywhere and give hope to those who will never know our names, will never understand what we were doing here in Washington, but whose lives will be so much better because we made this commitment together.

Thank you all very much. (Applause.)

Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Roberta Jacobson and Central American Integration System (SICA) Secretary General Juan Daniel Alemán Gurdián signed a Memorandum of Understanding granting the United States observer status with SICA on May 18, 2012. This agreement underscores the United States’ commitment to partnership with Central America to work for greater prosperity and security for the citizens of the region.

Established in1991, SICA is the institutional framework for regional integration in Central America. Member states include Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama. The Dominican Republic participates as an Associated State. Countries holding observer status are Chile, Germany, Italy, Japan, Mexico, and Spain.

At the June 22, 2011, SICA International Conference of Support in Guatemala City, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton announced the United States would seek observer status with SICA. On December 16, 2011, the SICA Heads of State or Government instructed the SICA General Secretariat to proceed with the necessary steps to formalize the admission of the United States as a Regional Observer to SICA as soon as possible. The Memorandum of Understanding is nonbinding and lays out the privileges of a SICA observer state.

The U.S. Department of State has renewed the Charter of the Cultural Property Advisory Committee for a two-year period, effective May 1, 2012. The Committee advises the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs on the protection of cultural heritage.

The membership of the Committee consists of private sector experts in archaeology, anthropology, ethnology or related fields; experts in the international sale of cultural property; and representatives of museums and of the general public.

Established by the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act (Public Law 97-446), the Committee reviews requests from other countries seeking U.S. import restrictions on archaeological or ethnological material, the pillage of which places a country’s cultural heritage in jeopardy. The Committee submits its findings and recommendations to the Department which carries out the President’s delegated decision-making responsibilities as set forth under the Act.

For more information on cultural heritage and preservation at the Department of State, please visit: http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage/

On May 20, the United States and Timor-Leste commemorate the tenth anniversary of diplomatic relations. The United States and Timor-Leste have enjoyed an enduring partnership based on shared values that dates to Timor-Leste’s independence ten years ago. Together we advance human rights and democracy in Timor-Leste and around the world. We build strong foundations for Timor-Leste's future as a stable, peaceful, and prosperous democracy. The United States is committed to deepening this partnership into the next decade and beyond.

Over a dozen U.S. agencies have provided more than $350 million in assistance to Timor-Leste since 2000. The United States also supports Timor-Leste through contributions for the United Nations peacekeeping mission and to international financial institutions, including the Asian Development Bank and the World Bank.

Our rich set of activities contribute to stability via professionalism of the police and military; to a vibrant population through better maternal and child health; to liberty and fairness through support for an impartial system of justice, strong governing institutions, and clean governance; and to prosperity through programs to advance economic and agricultural development, reduce poverty, expand educational opportunity, and create jobs.

Promoting Stability and Security

• The "Supporting Police, Sustaining Peace" program is strengthening Timor-Leste’s national police, promoting conflict prevention among youth, and increasing civil society engagement with the security forces. Multiple U.S. agencies support law enforcement in Timor-Leste, including the Department of State, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Drug Enforcement Agency, U.S. Coast Guard, and Naval Criminal Investigative Service.
   
• U.S. military engagement with Timor-Leste is robust and focused on the professionalization of the armed forces and humanitarian assistance. Our engagement includes ship visits, joint exercises, humanitarian missions, the deployment of a detachment of Navy Seabees, English language training, and annual bilateral defense consultations. The U.S. Navy’s Pacific Partnership humanitarian missions alone have touched the lives of tens of thousands of Timorese in the country’s most remote regions.

Strengthening Good Governance

• The United States is supporting Timor-Leste’s 2012 presidential and parliamentary elections by sponsoring international observation missions, training domestic observers, and providing voter and civic education.
   
• USAID provides legal aid assistance to thousands of underserved citizens, trains village councilors about their rights and responsibilities under local law, and supports journalists to raise professional standards.
   
• The Millennium Challenge Corporation’s (MCC) Threshold Program is significantly strengthening Timor-Leste’s efforts to combat corruption by providing key support to the fledgling Anti-Corruption Commission.
   
• The Department of State’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs funds a Department of Justice Resident Legal Advisor to support the Office of the Prosecutor General, the Central Bank, the National Parliament, and other major institutions, focusing on legislative reform and addressing complex criminal cases.
   
• The United States is strengthening the capacity of Timor-Leste’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs by improving diplomatic training programs and information science resources.

Boosting Economic Growth

• U.S. programs are reducing poverty in Timor-Leste by increasing private sector opportunities. The USAID-supported Café Cooperativa Timor provides income for over 20,000 families. USAID’s Greenhouse Program raises the incomes of rural households by diversifying crops and building links to markets.
   
• USAID’s Land Law Program is implementing the first-ever survey, registration, and titling of land in Timor-Leste, strengthening land regulations and administrative systems, and developing dispute resolution mechanisms.
   
• We are developing the aquaculture sector and building market links for some of the poorest coastal communities through the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food for Progress program.
   
• The U.S. Trade and Development Agency assisted in the creation of Timor-Leste’s successful petroleum investment regime and helped build the institutions needed to develop the country’s hydrocarbon resources.

Promoting Improved Health and Protecting the Environment

• USAID’s Water Sanitation and Hygiene Program has provided access to improved water sources for 23,000 people and access to basic sanitation for 10,000 people.
   
• U.S. assistance is strengthening services at rural health centers to improve nutrition, family planning, newborn and maternal care, and treatment for malaria and diarrhea. We are boosting immunization rates by bolstering community health systems and improving immunization management through MCC’s Threshold Program.
   
• The five-year U.S. Coral Triangle Support Program is bolstering Timor-Leste’s capacity to manage its sensitive coastal and coral reef resources to enhance food security, human health, and adaption to climate change. In conjunction with this support, the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, USAID, and the Timor-Leste National Fisheries Directorate are creating a five-year work plan to better conserve and manage Timor-Leste’s marine resources and help collect and analyze scientific data.

Investing in People and Expanding People-to-People Ties

• Since independence in 2002, over 50 Timorese students have received scholarships for full-time degree study at American universities through the Fulbright Program and the U.S.-Timor-Leste Scholarship program. The United States, the ConocoPhillips-led Bayu-Undan Joint Venture, and the Timor-Leste government's Secretariat of State for Natural Resources are partnering to provide additional Fulbright scholarships for masters and doctoral degrees. USAID is preparing to launch a new program to expand the number of undergraduate-level scholarships.
   
• The United States sponsors multiple English-language programs including English Language Fellows and after-school courses for low-income children. We also fund in-depth research into why Timorese children drop out of school at early ages. The research will be used to develop strategies to raise attendance rates.
   
• U.S. small grants support Timorese NGOs and institutions on diverse projects, such as cultural preservation, preventing gender-based violence, and promotion of human rights.

The U.S. Department of State is pleased to announce that Ales Byalyatski of Belarus and Uganda’s Civil Society Coalition on Human Rights and Constitutional Law are the joint winners of the 2011 Human Rights Defenders Award. This award recognizes individuals or non-governmental organizations that show exceptional valor and leadership in advocating the protection of human rights and democracy in the face of government repression.

Ales Byalyatski has bravely advocated on behalf of victims of political oppression and their families despite harassment by the Government of Belarus. As the founder of “Vyasna,” one of Belarus’ leading human rights organizations, Byalyatski provided legal and practical support to victims of an on-going crackdown and acted as a key source of information about human rights violations. He is currently a political prisoner, serving a four and a half year sentence for defending human rights.

Uganda’s Civil Society Coalition on Human Rights and Constitutional Law is honored for effectively defending the human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals, often at great personal risk. The Coalition, which is comprised of 40 Ugandan NGOs, has successfully defended the rights of LGBT individuals in Ugandan courts, sparked public dialogue on LGBT rights in Uganda, and challenged widespread misperceptions and prejudices. The Coalition’s structure, effectiveness, and engagement with Ugandan civil society, government officials, and the Ugandan public provides a model for other human rights activists around the world.

This year’s nominees came from every corner of the world. Common World and the Little Bird Mutual Assistance Hotline in China, as well as the Mutual Support Group and the Center for Legal Action in Human Rights, from Guatemala were nominated organizations, as were an impressive group of individual nominees: Jorge Molano of Colombia, Adilur Rahman Khan from Bangladesh, George Freeman from Sierra Leone, Govinda Prasad Sharma Koirala of Nepal, Swaziland’s Justice Thomas Masuku, Igor Kalyapin from Russia, Zarganar from Burma, and Zaw Min Htut, a Rohingya rights activist living in Japan.

The United States stands with these and all human rights defenders and civil society activists who work hard every day, in every part of the world, to make real the promise of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

SECRETARY CLINTON: I am delighted to welcome Minister Peiris, the external affairs minister from Sri Lanka. The United States strongly supports the process of reconciliation and reconstruction in Sri Lanka. We have very strong, important ties between our two countries. We were encouraged to see the end of a very long, bloody, terrible conflict, and look forward to working with Sri Lanka as they pursue their commitment to a better future for all the people. And the United States wants to be a supportive partner in those efforts. I’m looking forward to a productive conversation with the minister.

FOREIGN MINISTER PEIRIS: Well, it was exactly two years ago that I was here at the invitation of the Secretary of State, and I am delighted to be here on this occasion to have a wide-ranging discussion with the Secretary of State. During the intervening period of two years, a great deal has happened in my country, and by any standard, those developments represent a substantial accomplishment.

We have been able to complete 90 percent of the work connected with the resettlement of the people who were displaced by the conflict, and there is also a very moving story in human terms with regard to the ex-combatants who have all been rehabilitated. This includes 595 child soldiers who – they have all been reintegrated into society after the benefit of exposure to programs of vocational training which equip them to earn their living.

The most striking developments have really been in the northern province of Sri Lanka where the economy is growing by as much as 22 percent in comparison with the average for the rest of the island, which is about 8 percent. Now this is the result of an emphasis on the development of infrastructure to a degree that is really without (inaudible) at any other time in the island’s history.

This is, itself, the product of a deep conviction of ours that there is an intimate connection between reconciliation and economic development. We believe that any realistic process of reconciliation must focus upon economic factors, there must be a certain threshold of economic contentment and well-being, and emphasis on access to livelihoods and incomes. These are essential aspects of a reconciliation process. They have overriding importance, although of course we are, at the same time, addressing other aspects of reconciliation including land, language, which is a key to the understanding of other cultures, and it is also, as I’m sure you would agree, a very powerful instrument for preventing the stratification of (inaudible) society. We are also addressing, in earnest, constitutional reforms which are appropriate at this stage of the country’s political and social development.

I think I should refer very briefly to another deep conviction of ours, namely that a reconciliation process, if it is to be successful, it must reflect sensitivity to the aspirations of our people. It must have a homegrown polity. It is only then that the people of the country at large will be able to identify this process, which will then come alive in their hearts and minds.

Now, we have at this moment, a very rich and multifaceted relationship between Sri Lanka and the United States. We have as many as 5,000 students studying in the universities of the United States. And there is excellent cooperation between our two governments in the realm of defense. And only yesterday, I had a very productive meeting in the office of the United States Trade Representative, and the object of that meeting was to explore ways and means of building upon the trade and investment framework agreement which is in existence between our two countries.

And I’m convinced that today, more than ever before, with the return of stability and tranquility to our country, there is abundant scope for building further upon the relationship that is already very strong and vibrant. And that is why I’m particularly happy to be here in Washington today to meet with the Secretary of State to have a candid discussion about the future of the bilateral relationship between Sri Lanka and the United States. Thank you.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you so much, minister. Thank you all.

The U.S. Embassy in Vientiane held a groundbreaking ceremony for the new U.S. Embassy Compound in Laos. Ambassador Karen B. Stewart presided at the occasion, accompanied by Mr. Phomma Khammanichanh, Director General of the Europe-America Department of the Foreign Affairs Ministry, in a confirmation of the strong ties between the two nations. Following local custom, the site of the future U.S. Embassy was blessed by monks from the neighboring Buddhist temple. A Cassia tree was planted to mark the celebration. Local village, district, city and central government officials attended the ceremony along with the U.S. Embassy community.

Situated on a seven-acre site, the multi-building complex will include a chancery, compound access points, and utility buildings. When completed, the new complex will provide embassy employees with a state-of-the-art workspace.

The new facility will incorporate numerous sustainable features, including lights that automatically dim to take advantage of daylight, low consumption water fixtures, rain gardens, and indigenous and adapted plant species for reduced irrigation demand. The facility’s design targets Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) Silver Certification by the Green Building Certification Institute.

The $109 million project will be constructed by B.L. Harbert International of Birmingham, Alabama and Page Southerland Page of Arlington, Virginia is the architect of record. The New Embassy Compound (NEC) is scheduled to be completed in summer 2014.

Since 1999, as part of the Department’s Capital Security Construction Program, the Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations (OBO) has completed 89 new diplomatic facilities and has moved more than 27,000 people into safe, secure, and functional facilities. OBO has an additional 43 projects in design or construction, including the NEC in Vientiane.

OBO’s mission is to provide safe, secure and functional facilities that represent the U.S. Government to the host nation and support our staff in the achievement of U.S. foreign policy objectives. These facilities should represent American values and the best in American architecture, engineering, technology, sustainability, art, culture, and construction execution. For further information, please contact Christine T. Foushee at FousheeCT@State.gov or (703) 875-4131, or visit www.state.gov/obo.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, this is a very exciting time for all of us, which includes everyone in this room who has been working together in order to realize the dream of an effective, functioning partnership around food and nutrition security. And to those of you who have traveled from afar to be here in Washington, we welcome you. And in particular, we are honored to have the heads of state and government who have been introduced. These gentlemen are here because they understand the opportunity that is being presented to have a true partnership, a global partnership around the ending of food insecurity, hunger, and malnutrition. And we are very impressed that you have taken this leadership position and the time to be with us.

Also in this room are representatives of the G-8 nations. This G-8 effort began in Italy, and I see friends of mine from the Government of Italy who began this process in L’Aquila. And at Camp David this weekend, in partnership with our African partners, we take it to the next level.

We are also pleased that so many of you who understand the importance of public-private partnerships representing the private sector are here as well. Because very honestly, we cannot reach the ambitious goals we have set without involving the private sector. And you’ll hear tomorrow about the exciting investments and pledges that the private sector is making. We need your investment, your expertise, your global reach, your commitment to results.

So we are teed up and ready to go. We are so pleased that we have this opportunity to present all the work that has gone into the presentation. We’ll dive into the details tomorrow when USAID hosts the symposium, but I want, in addition to thanking all of you who have contributed, to thank my colleagues, the two former speakers. Dr. Raj Shah was working at the Gates Foundation when first he left to come to work in the Obama Administration at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. He began working on this effort which we know as Feed the Future, and he became such a valuable partner. And we were so pleased to see him become the director of USAID. He lives and breathes food security, and we are happy to be on the same trajectory with him to fulfill the goals we have set.

And I also wish to thank my chief of staff and counselor, Cheryl Mills, for the extraordinary work that she has done over the last three and a half years, basically just pushing, pulling, dragging us all across the finish line. Because if there were ever a cause worthy of our best efforts and our enduring cooperation, it is this one. We know the statistics: nearly a billion people worldwide suffer from chronic hunger; 75 percent of poor people live in rural settings and depend on agriculture for their livelihoods. So by improving agriculture, we can together strike a powerful blow against both hunger and poverty.

And that’s why food security is a priority of the Obama Administration. It is both the smart thing to do and the right thing to do. It is a moral imperative to help people escape hunger and poverty. It is an economic imperative to spread prosperity, create rising incomes, give people the chance to give their own children a better future. It is indeed a strategic imperative. We want to support and build up countries who have leaders like those here before you to take their rightful place of leadership regionally and globally.

In the last three and a half years, I’ve had the privilege of visiting farmers, agricultural scientists, health and nutrition experts in a number of countries. And there truly is a palpable sense of excitement that we are on our way; we are poised for the kind of breakthroughs that we haven’t seen since the Green Revolution. In fact, in several countries, we are already seeing meaningful progress. Feed the Future is working with 19 target countries, and during the past three years, those countries have increased their total food production by about 6 percent, which is 70 percent higher than the increase in food production among least developed countries. More food is available to more people, more farmers are earning higher incomes, and the ripple effects of health and prosperity are spreading despite the global economic slowdown.

And we know that this is a very long dream for our country. As Cheryl said, Ben Franklin, who’s up there watching over us, knew a lot about farming. And he was someone who understood the connection between providing for people and having stable political systems. And of course, Thomas Jefferson was an actual farmer, and in the next room you can see the desk at which Thomas Jefferson wrote portions of our Declaration of Independence. He always believed that one of America’s great strengths were our farmers and, in fact, in 1785 wrote in a letter to James Madison, “The small landholders are the most precious part of a state.” Well, we know from our own history smallholder farmers helped to build America, and now we’re seeing it across the world.

So we welcome all of you here as we begin this exciting two days in Washington. We’ve provided you with a lot of food, so please don’t be shy about enjoying it. But we do so out of that sense of gratitude that you are on this journey with us. Our G-8 partners and friends, our African partners and friends, our private sector, our health experts, our academics, our agricultural experts, everyone – we are on a journey together. We’re proud of what the United States did during the Green Revolution, but we can’t keep looking toward the past and say that was great, look at what we did 30, 40 years ago. We now have to take what we know and apply it in the 21st century. We have to learn the lessons that we have learned, sometimes hard lessons over the last years, and we have to focus on the people, the people who will benefit, the people who will have their lives changed, the people of nations that will change because of this work.

So thank you all for your commitment to improving food and nutrition security for women and men who will never know about this, who will never know our names, but because of our work they will have their own lives changed and their futures uplifted. And that is the greatest reward of all. Thank you very, very much. (Applause.)

MODERATOR: Good afternoon and thanks, everyone, for joining us. As you know, some new measures were announced today in support of Burma’s ongoing democratic reform efforts. And here to talk to us a little bit about what these new actions mean, we have two senior Administration officials. For your own information, they are [names withheld]. Just so you know the ground rules is that they will be referred to as senior Administration officials, and that this call is on background.

So with that out of the way, I’d like to introduce [Senior Administration Official One] to say a few words, and then we’ll open it up to your questions. Go ahead, [Senior Administration Official One].

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Okay. Thank you, [Moderator]. And good afternoon everybody, and thank you for joining.

As you heard from the Secretary this afternoon, we came to a major decision on the future of our policy approach to Burma. I think it’s important, though, as you look at this that you understand the context and the details of what we are doing. It is what I would call a substantial refinement and recalibration of our approach to Burma policy, and it is done in response to a pattern of reform that we have seen, that we continue to be encouraged by. But at the same time, we have no illusions about the continuing challenges inside the country and the continuing issues of core concern to us, as the Secretary also outlined today in her statement.

The decision we came to and the announcement we made, we have put much careful thought into, about how to prudently respond and accommodate our policy to the evolving environment on the ground while at the same time staying true to our longstanding principled approach to promoting reform in Burma.

And I would say there are a few elements here that we need to spotlight. First, the approach here, in essence, is to take the bluntness out of the sanctions that have been there to date. What we are doing is easing on society at large and carefully looking to target what we call the spoilers, the bad actors within the system. In a very carefully considered process in coming weeks, we are going to sharpen, refine the tools we have at our disposal to update the specially designated entities list, the SDN list, to ensure that we are working in and consistent with reform and in partnership with a country in reform, and we are not contributing to a system that we have had concerns – deep concerns – about to date. And that’s going to be a very, very carefully considered process, and we will be working on that in coming weeks and such.

Now secondly, as the Secretary outlined, we are – we believe our companies are really the best models for best practices around the world. And in fact, that gives us an opportunity to lead in a way that is consistent with this partnership and reform mantra that we have. We expect and we are very confident that they can model the behavior we are seeking inside the country, that the people of the country are seeking for themselves, which is transparency, accountability, equity, benefit to the citizens and not simply to the elites and the other, as we would call them, bad actors in the country. And this model behavior, I think, is going to be very, very important going forward, and we will be also, I think, talking a bit more about that in coming weeks and working with companies to act accordingly.

And third, I think it’s very important that folks understand that we will continue to listen to voices, particularly inside the country, but also in our NGO community, in Congress, with whom we’ve had a very deep and productive partnership on this. There are diverse voices with diverse opinions about the way forward, and we were pleased by some of the statements – many statements we’ve seen, bipartisan statements coming out from Capitol Hill today in support of what we’re looking to do, the calibrated approach. And we will continue to consult closely with them and all others who have a deep concern about the future of Burma going forward.

MODERATOR: Great. Well, thank you very much. And now, with that, we’ll turn it over to your questions. Operator?

OPERATOR: Thank you. If you would like to ask a question, please press *1 on your touchtone phone. Please un-mute your phone and record your name and affiliation clearly when prompted. To withdraw your question, press *2. Once again, to ask a question, please press *1 on your touchtone phone and record your name and affiliation.

Our first question comes from Josh Rogin with Foreign Policy. Your line is open.

QUESTION: Thanks very much for taking the time to do the call, and thank you for your service. Can you talk in more detail about what changes you’re making to the sanctions? How did you choose which changes to make? Which changes will affect the oil sector in particular? And what accountability measures will you have in place to measure whether or not these new provisions or changes are being instituted in the way that you want? Thank you.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Right. Thank you for the question. I want to make sure it’s clear we are not looking at this in terms of sectors. This is countrywide, again, with the notion of targeting, as well carefully targeting bad actors, so it is not based on any particular sector – oil, gas, or otherwise. So we are easing – and some people call it suspending – the restrictions on financial services and investment, new investment, broadly across all the different sectors.

The – we will hold folks accountable and in terms of – and we’re going to look at various mechanisms going forward for ensuring that there is oversight, that there is transparency, and through transparency, accountability for the activities or our companies and those who engage in Burma going forward.

MODERATOR: Great. Thank you. Next question, please.

OPERATOR: Our next question comes from Paul Eckert with Reuters News Agency. Your line is open.

QUESTION: Hi. [Senior Administration Official One’s position withheld.] And thanks for doing this call. I’ve noted that the NGO groups are not entirely positive about this development. I know you talk to them, but one of their concerns is that even though you are pointedly maintaining sanctions on the military elements when it comes to investment, that there’s not anything to stop them from still being the enforcers and conducting warfare on the ethnic areas where a lot of these resource – investment projects might be set up; in other words, that a lot of the pressure that’s happening on – the pressure on the ethnic groups is driven by trade, right now China trade but could also – that future foreign investors could step in in that role. Is there ways you can put a check on that? In other words, the cronies of the militaries are eligible for investment projects and for financial transactions and they rely on the military behind the scenes?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: We are taking a very close look at that. We understand the challenges, and the Secretary laid those out, about the activities on the ground that can create complications for the reform effort. And in fact, we’ll look to ensure that if there are those types of activities, we have an SDN list that will be regularly updated – it’s not simply a one-time thing – that we will continue to refine. We will need, obviously, very good evidence of this type of activity. And if there are people being pushed off their land, if there’s all kinds of activities that clearly run afoul of our values in human rights, that we will ensure that our companies are not enabled to benefit from that.

And in fact, we’re now going to look to local communities, engagement with them, with local NGOs, with international NGOs to get us good information, the best information they can. I think there’s more information we can get as the country starts to open up and as more people go into the country to get greater fidelity and insight into these types of activities. And we will do everything possible, and I think we can be successful in ensuring that there are no benefits to these people through this new policy.

QUESTION: Thanks.

MODERATOR: Thank you. Ready for the next question.

OPERATOR: Our next question comes from William Wan with The Washington Post. Your line is open.

QUESTION: Hey, thanks for doing this. My key question is just why there aren’t any kind of codified regulations on companies. From what the Secretary was saying, it sounded like it was just – that they were encouraging good corporate governance, that kind of thing, but there wasn’t anything written down that would regulate that.

The other one is, just last month we were doing one of these backgrounders, and it seemed at that point, you guys were looking at very specific targeting sectors as a way to do this, and you guys named jade, oil, some of these things that are very tied closely with the military, as sectors you would avoid. I was wondering what changed in terms of the thinking, and why you guys ended up going down this road.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Thank you for the question. On the good corporate governance standards – to outline – she outlined some of them, actually, in her statement – we are going to be very specific about the types of things we’re looking for. And as I said, we will have a mechanism set up to ensure there is some transparency and oversight, to ensure that this is not just exhorting folks and then leaving it, but that we are, again, working with the people of Burma who are asking for this.

Aung San Suu Kyi has been quite consistent in asking for more transparency by corporations and the contracting and the use of funds from those contracting, who folks are talking to and how it’s benefitting local communities. And we are going to be quite – we’re going to outline these things as we see them and have very close consultation, discussion with companies as they go in, those who are interested, and again, try to ensure that they model the behavior and are acting consistent with American values as I think they do in many places around the world. So we haven’t outlined them in full today, but we will be talking. This is not the end of the conversation; this is the beginning of the conversation on that particular point, and we’re going to continue to harp on this over time to ensure that we are doing this right.

On the issue of sectors in specific, it was asked during the previous backgrounder about sectors, and off the cuff, we would list various sectors that raised questions and such or – and I – we still – there are still questions, I think, about mining and timber and oil and gas. I mean, they’re legitimate questions. I think we can get at them effectively through the method that we are, which is to, again, target the entities, the individuals, and the activities rather than do it simply by sector. So it’s just that I think the last time, we were at the start of the process and we’ve been doing some very, very careful consideration, and we’re very confident this is the best way to go in that effort.

MODERATOR: Very good. Next question.

OPERATOR: Our next question comes from Jill Dougherty with CNN. Your line is open.

QUESTION: Yes. Hi there. I just wanted to get into the bad actors part again, just more specifically. Are these individuals who are defined by their actions or their positions? And will there be a publicly available list of the ones that have – American companies cannot do business with? And also, did you consult with Aung San Suu Kyi on any of the specifics about this? Thank you.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Can I ask maybe [agency withheld] to take a first stab on that?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL TWO: There is already authority, both statutory and by Executive Order, for the Executive Branch to target problematic actors in Burma – not only human rights abusers, but other figures. So we think we have the authority to address the kind of concerns that were just discussed. And the usual way for this to be promulgated is through [agency withheld] specially designated nationals list.

As to the particular bad actors, I think I would refer that question back to [agency withheld].

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Yeah, there will be a public document, and we are looking at actions and behavior. What we want to do is incentivize or disincentivize the bad behaviors and incentivize constructive behavior. And obviously that sounds easier than it will be in practice, but there are ways that we target folks and we demonstrate, as we have in the past, and I think it has worked in the past with some – with individuals that you and your family and others are not going to get any benefit from the United States or others and try to lead other countries as well the best we can by saying these are folks that are not consistent with reform, that we can potentially create a positive environment inside the country. So it’s really based on actions and behavior as much as anything about positions, but we will be working on those sort of criteria or those tools going forward.

Consultation with Aung San Suu Kyi on this – we have general conversations with her about everything, and we do want to consult with a wide range of actors and people inside the country and get more information about who’s who, on who is considered reformist and has – is trying to do the right thing in our view, and those who are not, who are moving against the tide and are getting in the way of reform and are regressive. So we will be consulting with a wide range of people in that regard going forward.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you. I think we have time for just one more question, Operator.

OPERATOR: Our next question comes from Matthew Pennington. Your line is open.

QUESTION: Yeah, hello, and thanks for doing this. On the corporate standards, I’m still not sort of clear whether these standards would be legally binding under U.S. law. And on the SDN list, will – that’s going to be renewed now – how long do you think that process will take? And do you think the Myanmar Oil & Gas Enterprise would be a company that U.S. companies could deal with?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: Does [agency withheld] want to take the issue of the process, the SDN process?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL TWO: There’s a process underway to consider the new landscape within Burma, the progress we’ve seen and the actors and activities that still cause concern. So it’s the usual process of sifting through a lot of information, using our best judgment, see how to use our tools to preserve the good things that have happened over the course of the past few months. I couldn’t make any kind of comment on any particular person or types of persons or actors that we would focus on.

QUESTION: How long would that process take, do you think, to renew the list?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL TWO: The (inaudible) is reviewed as matter of course every year, and that is being renewed as a matter of course to keep in place all the statutory authorities that are used to enforce the current Burma sanctions. The SDN list is ongoing; it’s organic. We add people, we subtract people, on an ongoing basis. How long any particular set of designations would take, I can’t tell you except to say that this is obviously a priority as we work forward and try to balance the need for the general licenses with the understanding that we have to be careful and target those who would impede the process we’d all like to see.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: On the issue of a binding CSR, it will not be legally binding. But we will, as I say, put mechanisms in place that will ideally be – have oversight functions to ensure that there’s transparency about what’s going on, that no one can do anything in the shadows, and that there will be therefore the ability for folks to see and that these – that companies know that their practices will be viewed negatively. And we will find ways to ensure that they’re uncomfortable – made uncomfortable. And I’m sure so will be NGO community and the people of Burma should they find their practices contrary to reform efforts inside the country.

And I know our companies are quite aware of this. And I think companies should be – also note that even though we are moving today on easing the restrictions, it is not a very welcoming environment right now for investment. They need to understand very well the context in which they are operating. It is a very complex context; it is a very fraught context. The human rights situation, the corruption situation, the legal environment, regulatory environment, very, very rudimentary, still a lot of problems inside the country. And they need to be extraordinarily careful as they move in.

And this also goes with the SDN process, because if they move in swiftly and we find they’re working actors that are on the SDN list, they will be held accountable for that. They will need to ensure they are not working with the wrong people. So we will work closely with them. And they, I am sure, will be in touch with us. And we will try to be as clear as possible, making things as public as possible. And I know that’s what companies care most about. They want clarity. What are the rules? What do they need to be aware of? And what should they be doing? What do we expect? And I have great confidence in our corporations to be partners in the effort of what we call principled engagement in Burma going forward.

On the issue of the MOGE, again, we have a process for looking at all the different entities, individuals and such, and that process will be ongoing. So I think it’s premature to talk about any specific item or entity.

QUESTION: Thank you.

MODERATOR: And thank you. And thanks to both of our interlocutors today for taking time out, as well as to all of you who joined us on this call. That’s all we have time for, so have a great afternoon and evening. Bye-bye.