Category Archives: Industry Jobs Oil Economics

Obama Directs Intelligence to be Shared with Cuba

Posted on by

Ah what?

In part from CubaToday: Diaz-Balart, a member of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, said Cuba shares intelligence with Russia and Iran, among others. Earlier this year, Gen. James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that Cuba was among four countries that pose the greatest espionage threat to the United States. The others were Russia, China and Iran.

“The threat from foreign intelligence entities, both state and non-state, is persistent, complex and evolving,” Clapper testified in a February hearing on “Worldwide Threats.” “Targeting collection of U.S. political, military, economic and technical information by foreign intelligence services continues unabated.”  

Over the course of five decades, Fidel Castro built one of the world’s most active intelligence services, whose missions included spying on U.S. military facilities in South Florida and infiltrating leading Cuban exile organizations in Miami. More here.

Previously on this site, it was published that Cuba’s largest source of revenue is stealing and selling intelligence and secrets to enemies of the United States.

Now it appears, Barack Obama is not finished with his new friends in Cuba and handing off gifts to them.

Today, I approved a Presidential Policy Directive that takes another major step forward in our efforts to normalize relations with Cuba. This Directive takes a comprehensive and whole-of-government approach to promote engagement with the Cuban government and people, and make our opening to Cuba irreversible.  Read more here.

It gets worse…..

China and Russia have maintained a sophisticated spy base in Cuba for many years.

The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
October 14, 2016

Presidential Policy Directive — United States-Cuba Normalization

October 14, 2016

 

SUBJECT: United States-Cuba Normalization

I. Introduction

On December 17, 2014, I announced that the United States would chart a new course with Cuba, ending an outdated policy that had failed to advance U.S. interests and support reform and a better life for the Cuban people on the island over several decades. Under the new policy, the United States expands and promotes authorized engagements with Cuba to advance cooperation on areas of mutual interest, and increase travel to, commerce with, and the free flow of information to Cuba. The objective of the new policy is to help the Cuban people to achieve a better future for themselves and to encourage the development of a partner in the region capable of working with the United States to confront regional challenges, such as climate change, disease, and illicit trafficking.

Endogenous changes underway in Cuba offer opportunities to advance U.S. interests and shift away from an embargo, which is an outdated burden on the Cuban people and has impeded U.S. interests. My Administration has repeatedly called on the Congress to lift the embargo. United States policy is designed to create economic opportunities for the Cuban people; promote respect for human rights; further advances on regional security and defense issues, such as health, law enforcement, and migration; and pursue cooperation with the Cuban government that can strengthen our leadership in the hemisphere. We recognize Cuba’s sovereignty and self-determination and acknowledge areas of difference. We seek to address such differences through engagement and dialogue, and by encouraging increased understanding between our governments and our peoples.

The large Cuban-American community in the United States has an integral role to play in normalization, and in reconciliation between members of the diaspora who left Cuba and those who remain on the island. Normalization necessarily extends beyond government-to-government rapprochement — it includes rebuilding bridges between individuals and families.

This directive: (1) describes the U.S. vision for normalization with Cuba and how our policy aligns with U.S. national security interests; (2) assesses progress toward normalization; (3) describes the current and foreseen strategic landscape; (4) describes priority objectives for normalization; and (5) directs actions required to implement this PPD.

II. Vision for United States-Cuba Normalization

The vision of the United States for U.S.-Cuba normalization is guided by the following national security interests, as described in the 2015 National Security Strategy:

  • The security of the United States, its citizens, and U.S. allies and partners.
  • A strong, innovative, and growing U.S. economy in an open international economic system that promotes opportunity and prosperity.
  • Respect for universal values at home and around the world.
  • A rules-based international order that promotes peace, security, and opportunity.

Our vision for U.S.-Cuba normalization reflects my Administration’s support for broad-based economic growth, stability, increased people-to-people ties, and respect for human rights and democratic values in the region. In the long-term, the United States seeks the following end-states:

1. Enhanced security of the United States and U.S. citizens at home and abroad. We seek to ensure U.S. citizens traveling to Cuba are safe and secure and the United States is protected from: those seeking to exploit increased connectivity for illicit ends, irregular migration, and natural or man-made hazards. Our policy advances bilateral cooperation in areas of mutual interest, including diplomatic, agricultural, public health, and environmental matters, as well as disaster preparedness and response, law enforcement, migration, and other security and defense topics. Our policy also supports increased cooperation with Cuba on regional initiatives on behalf of these interests.

2. A prosperous, stable Cuba that offers economic opportunities to its people. Increased travel and economic interconnectedness supports improved livelihoods for the Cuban people, deeper economic engagement between our two countries, as well as the development of a private sector that provides greater economic opportunities for the Cuban people. Efforts by the Cuban authorities to liberalize economic policy would aid these goals and further enable broader engagement with different sectors of the Cuban economy. United States policy helps U.S. businesses gain access to Cuban markets and encourages the sustainable growth of the Cuban economy. The U.S. private sector, scientific and medical researchers, agriculture industry, foundations, and other groups have new avenues for collaboration that can provide opportunities for Cuban entrepreneurs, scientists, farmers, and other professionals. At the same time, increased access to the internet is boosting Cubans’ connectivity to the wider world and expanding the ability of the Cuban people, especially youth, to exchange information and ideas. The United States is prepared to support Cuban government policies that promote social equality and independent economic activity.

3. Increased respect for individual rights in Cuba. Even as we pursue normalization, we recognize we will continue to have differences with the Cuban government. We will continue to speak out in support of human rights, including the rights to freedoms of expression, religion, association, and peaceful assembly as we do around the world. Our policy is designed to support Cubans’ ability to exercise their universal human rights and fundamental freedoms, with the expectation that greater commerce will give a broader segment of the Cuban people the information and resources they need to achieve a prosperous and sustainable future. In pursuit of these objectives, we are not seeking to impose regime change on Cuba; we are, instead, promoting values that we support around the world while respecting that it is up to the Cuban people to make their own choices about their future.

4. Integration of Cuba into international and regional systems. We seek Cuban government participation in regional and international fora, including but not limited to, those related to the Organization of American States (OAS) and Summit of the Americas to advance mutually held member objectives. We believe that a Cuba that subscribes to the purposes and standards of such fora will benefit, over time, from bringing its domestic economic and political practices in line with international norms and globally accepted standards. Our policy strengthens the U.S. position in international systems by removing an irritant from our relationships with our allies and partners and gaining support for a rules-based order.

III. Progress Toward United States-Cuba Normalization

Since the United States announced on December 17, 2014, that it would chart a new course with Cuba, we have re-established diplomatic relations and have made progress toward the normalization of our bilateral relationship. We opened our respective embassies, six U.S. cabinet secretaries visited Havana, four Cuban ministers visited the United States, and I became the first sitting U.S. President to visit Cuba since 1928. We established a Bilateral Commission to prioritize areas of engagement, and we concluded non-binding arrangements on environmental protection, marine sanctuaries, public health and biomedical research, agriculture, counternarcotics, trade and travel security, civil aviation, direct transportation of mail, and hydrography. We launched dialogues or discussions on law enforcement cooperation, regulatory issues, economic issues, claims, and internet and telecommunications policy.

Given Cuba’s proximity to the United States, increased engagement by U.S. citizens, companies, and the nongovernmental sector holds extraordinary promise for supporting our national interests. Bearing in mind the limits imposed by the Cuban Liberty and Democratic (LIBERTAD) Solidarity Act of 1996 (“Libertad Act”) and other relevant statutes, the Departments of the Treasury and Commerce implemented six packages of regulatory amendments to the Cuba sanctions program, easing restrictions on travel, trade, and financial transactions. United States individuals, firms, and nongovernmental organizations are availing themselves of these regulatory changes to visit Cuba, and authorized travel to Cuba increased by more than 75 percent from 2014 to 2015. Future U.S. citizen travel will be supported by scheduled air service, which began in August 2016, and the first U.S. cruise liner visited Cuban ports in May 2016. We also commenced direct transportation of mail between our two countries, and U.S. telecommunications firms established direct voice and roaming agreements with Cuba. For its part, the Cuban government has continued to pursue incremental economic reforms and launched more than 100 public Wi-Fi hotspots across the island.

These developments lay the foundation for long-term engagement with Cuba that advances U.S. interests. But we have a great deal more to do to build on that foundation based on a realistic assessment of the strategic landscape surrounding normalization.

IV. Strategic Landscape

Cuba is experiencing several transitions in areas such as leadership, the economy, technological development, civil society, and regional and global integration. Cuba’s leaders recognize the need to transition to the next generation, but they prioritize gradual, incremental changes to ensure stability.

Cuba has important economic potential rooted in the dynamism of its people, as well as a sustained commitment in areas like education and health care. Yet the Cuban government faces significant economic challenges, including eliminating its dual-exchange-rate system, making its state-run enterprises more efficient and transparent, developing a financial system that provides expanded services to individuals and the private sector, and reducing its reliance on foreign subsidies. Cuba remains highly dependent on food and energy imports, yet must cope with limited sources of hard currency to pay for import needs. Significant emigration of working age Cubans further exacerbates Cuba’s demographic problem of a rapidly aging population.

A series of statutes limits U.S. economic engagement with Cuba, precluding a complete lifting of restrictions on U.S. travel to Cuba, prohibiting United States Government export assistance and the provision of U.S. credit for Cuban purchases of agricultural commodities, and requiring that the embargo not be suspended or terminated unless the President determines that a transition or democratically elected government has come to power in Cuba.

Due to Cuba’s legal, political, and regulatory constraints, its economy is not generating adequate foreign exchange to purchase U.S. exports that could flow from the easing of the embargo. Even if the U.S. Congress were to lift the embargo, Cubans would not realize their potential without continued economic reform in Cuba. Cuban government regulations and opaque procurement practices hamper transactions with U.S. companies that would be permitted under U.S. law.

Normalization efforts have raised Cubans’ expectations for greater economic opportunities. With an estimated 1 in 4 working Cubans engaged in entrepreneurship, a dynamic, independent private sector is emerging. Expansion of the private sector has increased resources for individual Cubans and created nascent openings for Cuban entrepreneurs to engage with U.S. firms and nongovernmental organizations. We take note of the Cuban government’s limited, but meaningful steps to expand legal protections and opportunities for small- and medium-sized businesses, which, if expanded and sustained, will improve the investment climate.

Cuba is not a member of international financial institutions (IFIs), such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the Inter-American Development Bank, which could provide expertise and potentially finance economic reforms and viable investment projects.

Although Cuba has reached agreement with several creditor nations on bilateral debt relief through restructuring and forgiveness, it remains in default to the United States Government on pre-Cuban revolution bilateral debts and does not participate in international capital markets. Cuba and the United States are both members of the World Trade Organization (WTO); however, neither country applies the agreement to the other because of the U.S. embargo toward Cuba.

Rapprochement has enabled us to increase our engagement with Cuba on regional issues such as the Colombia peace process and healthcare in Haiti, and has undermined an historic rallying point for regimes critical of the United States. Although Cuba has expressed no interest in participating in the OAS, it did attend the Summit of the Americas in 2015. We also welcome engagement between Cuba and other U.S. allies from around the world, including our European and Asian treaty allies. At the same time, we recognize that Cuba and the United States will continue to have differences on many regional and global issues.

U.S. engagement with the Cuban government will also be constrained by Cuba’s continued repression of civil and political liberties. We anticipate the Cuban government will continue to object to U.S. migration policies and operations, democracy programs, Radio and TV Marti, the U.S. presence at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Station, and the embargo. The United States Government has no intention to alter the existing lease treaty and other arrangements related to the Guantanamo Bay Naval Station, which enables the United States to enhance and preserve regional security.

In this strategic environment, the policies and actions the United States pursues to advance our vision for U.S.-Cuba normalization will significantly shape the future of bilateral and regional relations, as well as our shared security and prosperity.

V. Six U.S. Objectives for the Medium-Term U.S.-Cuba Relationship

To advance the four end-state goals associated with our strategic vision for U.S.-Cuba normalization, the United States will move concurrently on the following six priority objectives:

1. Government-to-Government Interaction

We will continue high-level and technical engagement in areas of mutual interest, including agriculture, the economy and small businesses, transportation, science and technology, environment, climate, health, law enforcement, migration, national security, disaster preparedness and response, and counterterrorism. Through the Bilateral Commission, we will identify and prioritize areas of collaboration and engagement that advance our end-state goals. Stronger diplomatic ties will enable constructive engagement on bilateral differences, including our democracy and broadcasting programs, while protecting our interests and assets, such as the Guantanamo Bay Naval Station. We will utilize engagement to urge Cuba to make demonstrable progress on human rights and religious freedom. As the United States and Cuban governments build trust through more frequent engagement, we will increasingly conduct working-level interactions between Cuban ministries and U.S. agencies and departments that lessen the need for high-level conversations on routine matters. Given the lack of diplomatic relations over the past several decades, we will seek broad engagement across the Cuban government, including ministries and local officials. When appropriate and legally available, we will engage with Cuba to normalize trade relations fully.

2. Engagement and Connectivity

The United States will continue to encourage people-to-people linkages through government and privately sponsored exchanges, including those involving educational, cultural, business, science, environment, technology, and sports. As permitted by law, we will continue to support the development of scheduled and chartered air service and maritime links, including ferries. An ongoing partnership with the Cuban-American community is of particular importance given Cuban-Americans’ strong family and socio-cultural ties, as well as their natural role as citizen-ambassadors. We will facilitate opportunities for Cuban-Americans to rebuild and create new bonds with family to support reconciliation. To facilitate Cuba’s goal of increasing its internet access from 5 percent to 50 percent of the population by 2020, we will seek the establishment of a bilateral working group to expand internet connectivity. We will seek opportunities that enable U.S. foundations and universities to establish linkages with Cuba.

3. Expanded Commerce

The United States Government will seek to expand opportunities for U.S. companies to engage with Cuba. The embargo is outdated and should be lifted. My Administration has repeatedly called upon the Congress to lift the embargo, and we will continue to work toward that goal. While the embargo remains in place, our role will be to pursue policies that enable authorized U.S. private sector engagement with Cuba’s emerging private sector and with state-owned enterprises that provide goods and services to the Cuban people. Law enforcement cooperation will ensure that authorized commerce and authorized travelers move rapidly between the United States and Cuba. Although we recognize the priority given to state-owned enterprises in the Cuban model, we seek to encourage reforms that align these entities with international norms, especially transparency.

United States regulatory changes have created space for the Cuban government to introduce comparable changes. In tandem with the Department of the Treasury’s regulatory change to expand Cuba’s access to the U.S. financial system and U.S. dollar transit accounts, the Cuban government announced in early 2016 plans to eliminate the 10 percent penalty on U.S. dollar conversion transactions, subject to improved access to the international banking system. We will sustain private and public efforts to explain our regulatory changes to U.S. firms and banks, Cuban entrepreneurs, and the Cuban government.

4. Economic Reform

While the Cuban government pursues its economic goals based on its national priorities, we will utilize our expanded cooperation to support further economic reforms by the Cuban government. Recent exchanges among financial service institutions and regulators have provided greater mutual understanding of our respective financial system and economic priorities. We will undertake government-to-government dialogues to discuss options for macro- and microeconomic reform, with the goal of connecting the changes in U.S. policy with Cuban reforms in a manner that creates opportunity for U.S. firms and the Cuban people.

If and when the Congress lifts the embargo, my Administration will engage with the Congress and stakeholders on preparatory commercial and economic exchanges and dialogues. My Administration would then similarly engage the Congress on the substance and timing of a new bilateral commercial agreement to address remaining statutory trade requirements.

5. Respect for Universal Human Rights, Fundamental Freedoms, and Democratic Values

We will not pursue regime change in Cuba. We will continue to make clear that the United States cannot impose a different model on Cuba because the future of Cuba is up to the Cuban people. We seek greater Cuban government respect for universal human rights and fundamental freedoms for every individual. Progress in this area will have a positive impact on the other objectives. We will encourage the Cuban government to respect human rights; support Cuba’s emerging, broad-based civil society; and encourage partners and nongovernmental actors to join us in advocating for reforms. While remaining committed to supporting democratic activists as we do around the world, we will also engage community leaders, bloggers, activists, and other social issue leaders who can contribute to Cuba’s internal dialogue on civic participation. We will continue to pursue engagements with civil society through the U.S. Embassy in Havana and during official United States Government visits to Cuba. We will seek to institutionalize a regular human rights dialogue with the Cuban government to advance progress on human rights. We will pursue democracy programming that is transparent and consistent with programming in other similarly situated societies around the world. We will utilize our increased ability to engage regional partners, both bilaterally and through regional bodies, to encourage respect for human rights in Cuba. We will consult with nongovernmental actors such as the Catholic Church and other religious institutions. Finally, we will work with the European Union and likeminded international organizations and countries to encourage the Cuban government to respect universal values.

6. Cuban Integration into International and Regional Systems

We will expand dialogue with Cuba in the organizations in which it already holds membership, such as the WTO and the World Customs Organization (WCO), and we will encourage Cuba to move toward rules-based engagement, subject to statutory requirements. We will encourage Cuba to bring its legal framework, particularly its commercial law, in line with international standards. We will encourage Cuba to meet WCO standards for supply chain security. To the extent permitted by and consistent with applicable law, we will facilitate integration into international bodies, including through the use of technical assistance programs. We will pursue cooperation with Cuba on regional and global issues (e.g., combating the Ebola outbreak and the Colombia peace process). Ending the embargo and satisfying other statutory requirements relating to trade will allow the United States to normalize trade relations with Cuba.

VI. Policy Implementation

1. Roles and Responsibilities

To facilitate the effective implementation of this directive, departments and agencies will have the following roles and responsibilities, consistent with the relevant legal authorities and limits:

The National Security Council (NSC) staff will provide ongoing policy coordination and oversight of the implementation of this PPD and the overall Cuba strategy as necessary.

The Department of State will continue to be responsible for formulation of U.S. policy toward and coordination of relations with Cuba. This includes supporting the operations of Embassy Havana and ensuring it has adequate resources and staffing. Other responsibilities include the issuance of nonimmigrant and immigrant visas, refugee processing, promotion of educational and cultural exchanges, coordination of democracy programs, and political and economic reporting. State will continue to lead the U.S.-Cuba Bilateral Commission and coordinate a number of dialogues, such as the Law Enforcement Dialogue, annual migration talks, and meetings to resolve outstanding claims.

State will continue to co-lead efforts with the U.S. Agency for International Development to ensure democracy programming is transparent and consistent with programming in other similarly situated societies. State will coordinate efforts to advance science and technology cooperation with Cuba. State will support telecommunications and internet access growth in Cuba and provide foreign policy guidance to the Departments of Commerce and the Treasury on certain exports, financial transactions, and other license applications.

The U.S. Mission to the United Nations (USUN), in coordination with State, will oversee multilateral issues involving Cuba at the United Nations. USUN will identify areas of possible collaboration with Cuba that could help foster a more collaborative relationship between the United States and Cuba at the United Nations. The USUN will also participate in discussions regarding the annual Cuban embargo resolution at the United Nations, as our bilateral relationship continues to develop in a positive trajectory.

The Department of the Treasury is responsible for implementation of the economic embargo restrictions and licensing policies. The Treasury will continue its outreach to help the public, businesses, and financial institutions understand the regulatory changes. The Treasury will continue to review and respond to public questions and feedback on regulations and public guidance that could be further clarified and to discuss with State any novel license requests that the Treasury receives from the public to determine whether such requests are consistent with the regulatory changes and existing law. The Treasury will make use of available channels for bilateral dialogue to understand Cuba’s economic and financial system and encourage reforms and will continue to engage in dialogue with the Cuban government about our regulatory changes.

The Department of Commerce will continue to support the development of the Cuban private sector, entrepreneurship, commercial law development, and intellectual property rights as well as environmental protection and storm prediction. If statutory restrictions are lifted, Commerce will promote increased trade with Cuba by providing export assistance to U.S. companies. In the meantime, Commerce will continue a robust outreach effort to ensure that U.S. companies understand that U.S. regulatory changes provide new opportunities to obtain licenses or use license exceptions to increase authorized exports to Cuba, including to Cuban state-owned enterprises that provide goods and services to meet the needs of the Cuban people. Additionally, Commerce will continue to engage in dialogue with the Cuban government about our regulatory changes, as well as the need for simplification of the Cuban import process, transparency in Cuban business regulations, and other steps that will lead to full realization of the benefits of our regulatory changes.

The Department of Defense (DOD) will continue to take steps to expand the defense relationship with Cuba where it will advance U.S. interests, with an initial focus on humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, and counternarcotics in the Caribbean. The DOD will support Cuba’s inclusion in the inter-American defense system and regional security and defense conferences, which will give Cuba a stake in hemispheric stability. The DOD will continue to make contingency preparations and support the capacity of the Department of Homeland Security and State to address mass migration and maritime migration issues pursuant to Executive Orders 12807 and 13276 and consistent with other applicable interagency guidance and strategy.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will engage, together with the Department of Justice, with the Cuban government to combat terrorism and transnational organized crime. In support of U.S. security and foreign policy objectives, DHS will develop protocols for investigative cooperation with Cuba in coordination with other departments and agencies. The DHS will strengthen the security and efficiency of cross-border supply chains and travel systems in support of people-to-people engagement and authorized U.S. trade with the Cuban private sector. The DHS will safeguard the integrity of the U.S. immigration system, to include the facilitation of lawful immigration and ensure protection of refugees. The Secretary of Homeland Security, the United States Government lead for a maritime migration or mass migration, with support from the Secretaries of State and Defense, will address a maritime migration or mass migration pursuant to Executive Orders 12807 and 13276 and consistent with applicable interagency guidance and strategy.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) will engage, together with DHS, with the Cuban government to combat terrorism and transnational organized crime. The DOJ will work with Cuba to expand security and law enforcement cooperation, increase information sharing, and share best practices with Cuban counterparts. This work will build upon, and strengthen, current law enforcement cooperation with Cuba under the umbrella of the U.S.-Cuba Law Enforcement Dialogue and its various working groups, which focus on counterterrorism, counternarcotics, cybercrime, human trafficking, and other areas of criminal activity.

The Small Business Administration (SBA) will continue to engage with the Cuban government, entrepreneurs, small businesses, and cooperative enterprises. The SBA will support exchanges with the Cuban government in areas of mutual interest, particularly on formalization of small businesses and to spur the growth of new enterprises.

The Office of the United States Trade Representative will provide trade policy coordination in international fora and, consistent with statutory requirements and restrictions, prepare for negotiations to normalize and expand U.S.-Cuba trade.

The Department of Agriculture (USDA) will work to increase U.S. food and agricultural exports to Cuba by building market opportunities, improving the competitive position of U.S. agriculture, and building Cuba’s food security and agricultural capacity, while protecting plant, animal, and human health. USDA will work with the Government of Cuba to advance cooperation outlined in the U.S.-Cuba agricultural memorandum of understanding signed in March 2016. The USDA will build the U.S.-Cuba trade and development relationship to the extent permitted by and consistent with applicable law.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), in accordance with the June 2016 memorandum of understanding between HHS and the Ministry of Public Health of the Republic of Cuba, will collaborate with Cuban counterparts in the areas of public health, research, and biomedical sciences, including collaboration to confront the Zika virus, dengue, chikungunya, and other arboviruses. The HHS will promote joint work, such as development of vaccines, treatments, and diagnostics; partner with Cuba to prevent, detect, and respond to infectious disease outbreaks; collaborate in the field of cancer control, treatment programs, and joint research; and exchange best practices related to access to healthcare.

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) will coordinate with departments and agencies the United States Government’s response to unplanned environmental occurrences, such as natural or manmade disasters. The USAID will co-lead efforts with State to ensure that democracy programming is transparent and consistent with programming in other similarly situated societies.

The Department of Transportation (DOT) will continue to develop air and surface transportation links between the United States and Cuba in support of transportation providers, authorized travelers, and commerce, while providing required regulatory and safety oversight of transportation providers and systems.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) will support broader United States Government efforts to normalize relations with Cuba, with Intelligence Community elements working to find opportunities for engagement on areas of common interest through which we could exchange information on mutual threats with Cuban counterparts.

The Department of the Interior (DOI) will continue cooperation with Cuba on marine protected areas and continue to engage Cuban counterparts to finalize arrangements on wildlife conservation, terrestrial national protected areas, and seismic records.

2. Congressional Outreach

Strong support in the Congress for U.S.-Cuba normalization would contribute to the speed and success of the aforementioned goals, particularly with respect to the embargo and adequate embassy staffing. We will seek to build support in the Congress to lift the embargo and other statutory constraints to enable expanded travel and commerce with Cuba and accelerate normalization. We will regularly engage with Members of Congress and staff on challenges and opportunities in Cuba, advocate for United States Government policies and sufficient staff and resources to implement the aforementioned goals and policy priorities, and encourage and facilitate congressional travel to the region.

3. Monitoring and Oversight

The Interagency Policy Committee (IPC), or its future equivalent, will have primary responsibility for coordinating and overseeing the implementation of this policy. The NSC staff will convene regular IPC and Deputies Committee meetings as necessary to monitor implementation and resolve obstacles to progress. The following departments and agencies will designate senior individuals responsible for managing policy implementation in their agency: State, the Treasury, Commerce, DOD (Office of the Secretary of Defense and Joint Staff), DHS, DOJ, USDA, HHS, DOT, USUN, the Office of the United States Trade Representative, USAID, SBA, and DNI.

4. Previous Guidance

Executive Order 13276, Delegation of Responsibilities Concerning Undocumented Aliens Interdicted or Intercepted in the Caribbean Region, dated November 15, 2002, and Executive Order 12807, Interdiction of Illegal Aliens, dated May 24, 1992, remain in effect.

BARACK OBAMA

Courtesy of WikiLeaks: Here Comes Obama’s Emails

Posted on by

WikiLeaks Releases First Batch Of Barack Obama’s Emails

WikiLeaks has released a new batch of leaked emails, containing messages sent to and from Barack Obama prior to his inauguration.

The emails were sent from what WikiLeaks claims is a secret address, “[email protected].”

****

Breitbart: The top email in today’s leak contains a message from John Podesta about a potential invitation from President George W. Bush to the “President-Elect.” Podesta sent the email while votes were still being cast on November 4th.

The emails show a transition plan being worked on before the 2008 election had taken place. According to an attached memo in one of the emails, Obama was already discussing his transition to office with members of the Bush Administration, including then-Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, prior to the election.

As you have observed in your interactions with Secretary Paulson, he is apparently eager to involve you and your transition team extensively in his policy choices following the election.

Another attached memo acknowledges that it was unusual to start the transition process so soon.

We are now at the point of deciding how to staff economic policy during the transition, who should be the point of contact with Treasury and how to blend the transition and campaign economic policy talent.

Normally these decisions could be made after the election, and ideally after the selection of a National Economic Advisor, but, of course, these are not normal times.

One of the emails, from Citigroup executive and later Assistant to the President Michael Froman, shows a proposed “diversity list” for the cabinet. In Froman’s own words, the lists consist of :

A list of African American, Latino and Asian American candidates, divided between Cabinet/Deputy and Under/Assistant/Deputy Assistant Sectetary levels, as well as lists of senior Native Americans, Arab/Muslim Americans and Disabled Americans. We have longer lists, but these are candidates whose names have been recommended by a number of sources for senior level jobs in a potential Administration.

A list of women, similarly divided between candidates for Cabinet/Deputy and other senior level positions.

The lists can be viewed in full at the “attachements” tab here.

Subject: Re: G-20
2008-11-04 22:05 2016-10-19 [email protected] [email protected]
Subject: RE: G-20
2008-11-04 21:59 2016-10-19 [email protected] [email protected]
Subject: G-20
2008-11-04 21:39 2016-10-19 [email protected] [email protected]
Subject: Diversity
2008-10-06 22:38 2016-10-18 [email protected] [email protected]
Subject: Economic Staffing Decisions
2008-10-30 19:17 2016-10-17 [email protected] [email protected]
Subject: Re: Economic Staffing Decisions
2008-10-31 01:47 2016-10-17 [email protected] [email protected]
Subject: Contact Information
2008-10-06 15:41 2016-10-13 [email protected] [email protected]
What is curious however is the domain of Ameritech.com…..seems there may be a connection here…..thoughts?
ameritech

ABOUT US

Our vision takes into account a broad range of solution that improve healthcare by focusing on the physicians. In today’s $1.6 trillion healthcare market, 80% of all healthcare costs are the direct result of physician-driven decision. The best way for healthcare providers to improve their revenue by developing a strong relationship with an information partner whom they can trust… and also can help them to manage their entire information infrastructure.

We provide easy-to use, affordable, intuitive interface, scalability solution. It automates and supports the administrative, billing and business process of the practices, which helps to increase your revenue and reduce your cost by providing comprehensive list of services. Ameritech provide fill comprehensive solutions to all aspects of the healthcare industry.

US Office

Ameritech Inc
1 Rockefeller Plaza
New York
NY–10020.

Tel: 917-639 4063
 Fax: 917-639 4005

Dubai Office

Ameritech Inc
Dubai Airport Free Zone East Wing 3, 4th Floor, P.O. Box 54620, Dubai, UAE.

Indian Office

Amerimedtech India Pvt. Ltd.
Tek Towers, Ground Floor,
11, Rajiv Gandhi Salai (OMR),
Okkiyam Thoraipakkam,
 Chennai – 600 097.

Tel: 044-30226600, 044-30439900, 044-30439901, 044-30439902, 044-30439903+ 91-44-64500233

Dirty Production of NHS Drugs Helps Create Superbugs

Posted on by

Drug resistance

Revealed: How dirty production of NHS drugs helps create superbugs

by Andrew Wasley and Madlen Davies

TheBureau: The NHS is buying drugs from pharmaceutical companies in India whose dirty production methods are fuelling the rise of superbugs, and there are no checks or regulations in place to stop this happening.

The busy intensive care unit at Gandhi Hospital in Hyderabad, a state-run hospital with 1,200 beds

The emergency room at a hospital in Hyderabad, India, where antibiotic resistance is a public health crisis.     Photo by Jagan. S

The growth in superbugs – infections which are resistant to antibiotics – is one of the biggest public health crises facing the world today, and pollution in drug companies’ supply chains is one of its causes. Yet the Bureau of Investigative Journalism has established that firms with a history of bad practice and pollution are supplying the NHS, and environmental standards do not feature in NHS procurement protocols.

New tests on water samples taken outside pharmaceutical factories in India which sell to the NHS found they contained bacteria which were resistant to the antibiotics made inside the plants.

This suggests industrial waste containing active antibiotic ingredients is being leaked into the surrounding environment. Studies have shown how this causes nearby bacteria to develop immunity to the drugs – creating “superbugs” – and that those resistant bacteria then spread around the world.

Responding to the Bureau’s findings, the Department of Health (DoH) said it would consider bringing in new rules for antibiotic factories which export drugs to Britain.

The Bureau’s investigation also established that at least three companies licensed to supply the NHS have not signed up to a new roadmap put in place following a recent United Nations antibiotic resistance summit, in which 13 global pharmaceutical firms pledged to review manufacturing and supply chains to make sure the release of antibiotics into the environment was being properly controlled.

Economist Lord Jim O’Neill, who conducted a major review into global antibiotic resistance, also known as antimicrobial resistance (AMR), told the Bureau the results of the tests were “deeply troubling”. His government-commissioned study found superbugs would kill more people than cancer by 2050 if no action is taken, and cited pollution in pharmaceutical supply chains as a major problem.

The Medicines and Healthcare Regulatory Authority (MHRA) – which licenses companies to make drugs for the UK market and carries out audits of factories – told us it currently has no regulations around waste, and neither does the European Medicines Agency.

Both agencies require manufacturers to meet Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP), a set of rules companies must meet to show their drugs are safe to be sold in the European Union (EU) or the UK. But GMP standards do not cover environmental emissions.

The influential purchasing power of national health services and authorities means they have the ability to bring about significant change in the way drugs are sourced and produced, said Natasha Hurley from the pressure group Changing Markets, which commissioned the water sample testing.

“Purchasers of antibiotics such as the NHS must immediately blacklist pharmaceutical companies with manufacturing practices that contribute to the spread of AMR, and to implement procurement policies that include environmental criteria,” she said.

Changing Markets tested water samples collected at 36 locations across India – including sites adjacent to drug manufacturing plants as well as rivers and wastewater treatment plants – and found 16 contained antibiotic resistant E.coli bacteria.

The highest level of drug resistant bacteria was found in water samples originating from a factory in India run by multinational drug company Aurobindo Pharma.

Freedom of Information requests reveal Aurobindo, through its UK subsidiary Milpharm Ltd, has supplied antibiotics to  NHS trusts across England during the past three years – including the UK’s biggest, Barts Health NHS Trust in East London. Aurobindo also has a £450,000-a-year contract supplying every NHS health region in Scotland with antibiotics including flucloxacillin, metronidazole and meropenem.

The company exports to more than 150 countries around the globe and 87% of its profits – which last year totalled about £200 million – are made from international operations, according to its most recent annual report.

Analysis of water originating inside the perimeter of the company’s plant near the Indian city of Hyderabad found that 70% of E.coli bacteria present were resistant to fluoroquinolones – a class of antibiotics classified by the World Health Organisation (WHO) as being critically important to human medicine.

Fluoroquinolones are manufactured at the plant and despatched all over the world – though the Bureau does not know if drugs made at this particular factory are exported to Britain. However the factory was inspected and certified as meeting the EU’s GMP standards in 2013 – meaning it is authorised to supply the UK.

This graph shows the percentage of resistant bacteria found in or near these sites in India in tests supervised by Dr Mark Holmes at the University of Cambridge. The samples taken from outside Aurobindo’s pharmaceutical factory in Hyderabad are on the far left. They show the highest levels of resistance for all the classes of antibiotics tested in all of the sites visited. This included cefepime, cefpodoxime, ceftazidime and cefotaxime – which are all cephalosporin antibiotics, a class used to treat a wide range of infections. It also included ciprofloxacin, a fluoroquinolone antibiotic and ertapenem, a carbapenem antibiotic. Fluoroquinolones are made at the plant and penicillin-type antibiotics are despatched from them. The tests cannot confirm the resistant E.coli are present as a result of antibiotic manufacturing. Mylan says it operates a zero discharge policy, so antibiotic-related material found in the lake near its Unit 1 cannot have come from there. The Bureau also contacted Hetero and Orchid Pharma, who are licensed to supply the US and UK markets, about the results, who did not respond or declined to comment.

Various studies have found “high levels of hazardous waste” and “large volumes of effluent waste” being dumped into the environment surrounding factories in India and China, where most of the world’s antibiotics are produced. Active ingredients used in antibiotics get into the local soil and water systems, leading to bacteria in the environment becoming resistant to the drugs.

Once established in the environment, the bacteria can exchange genetic material with nearby germs. They can then spread around the world through air and water, and by travellers visiting countries where the bacteria are prevalent.

Aurobindo was caught breaking pollution laws in 2012. The Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board ordered closure of two Aurobindo facilities (along with ten other pharmaceutical plants in Hyderabad) “in the interest of protecting public health and the environment”.

The company did not respond to the Bureau’s request for comment.

Changing Markets’ findings follow stark warnings in O’Neill’s review that a failure to tackle pollution from antibiotic production would exacerbate the spread of global superbugs.

The release of untreated waste products from substandard antibiotic factories “acts as a driver for the development of drug resistance, creating environmental ‘reservoirs’ of antibiotic-resistant bacteria,” said the report.

One major 2007 study found “shocking” levels of active antibiotic ingredients being discharged into a river in India, and concentration of the commonly-used antibiotic ciprofloxacin in the water exceeded levels toxic to some bacteria by 1000-fold.

Responding to the new findings, O’Neill told the Bureau: “Reports of this type of untreated antibiotic waste being released into the environment are deeply troubling, and it is the responsibility of all manufacturers – and their suppliers – to ensure that negligent or irresponsible practices do not add fuel to the fire of rising drug resistance”.

O’Neill backed a recent initiative by 13 global pharmaceutical companies to produce an industry “roadmap” to combat antibiotic resistance, pledging to reduce environmental impact of antibiotic production.

The pledge, signed ahead of a high-level UN meeting on AMR last month, included promises to review manufacturing and supply chains to make sure they adhered to good practices and were not releasing antibiotics into the environment. Aurobindo and Milpharm were not among the list of signatories to the document.

Aurobindo also sells antibiotics from the Hyderabad plant in the USA and supplies drugs for the American pharmaceutical company McKesson.

The DoH told the Bureau that emissions from antibiotic factories were a growing concern and one where strong international action was needed.

A spokesperson said: “Although manufacturing practices of companies that supply the NHS are closely monitored by the MHRA, there are no current rules around antibiotic supply. This is something we will consider carefully as our world-leading work on antimicrobial resistance continues.”

O’Neill’s review stressed that it was local populations whose health was most harmed by pharmaceutical pollution. India has become the epicentre of the global antibiotic resistance crisis, due to rampant overuse and misuse of the drugs in human medicine and livestock farming, as well as bad practice by factories.

A study published in the Lancet medical journal last year estimated the deaths of 58,000 newborn Indian babies a year were attributable to blood poisoning from infections resistance to antibiotics.

Dr J.V. Reddy, the chief doctor at Gandhi Hospital in Hyderabad, a state-run hospital with 1,200 beds, told the Bureau that half of all samples sent for testing, including blood and urine samples taken from patients seeking treatment, contained drug-resistant bacteria.

This included Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteria and E.coli, Klebsiella and Pseudomonas bacteria – most of which contained enzymes which can break down penicillin and cephalosporin antibiotics.

Some E.coli and Klebsiella found were also resistant to carbapenems, last resort antibiotics given when bacteria have become resistant to other types. “Every three days a patient at the hospital dies of sepsis, with antibiotic resistance contributing to these deaths,” Dr Reddy said.

Overuse of antibiotics, the drugs being given for the wrong illnesses, and multiple types being given in one go exacerbates the problem, as well as patients using them irregularly.

By the time they arrive at Gandhi hospital, most people have already been prescribed several antibiotics, he said.

Resistance spreads from India back into the rest of the world. An enzyme called NDM-1, which makes bacteria resistant to carbapenems, was first detected in 2008 in a patient who had been treated in a New Delhi hospital. It has now spread to countries across the world, including the UK.

dsc_0103

‘I was blinded in one eye by an infection resistant to antibiotics’

Anji Reddy, a former farmer, was one of 13 people to lose vision in one of their eyes after an outbreak of a resistant infection. The 70-year-old, from a village near Hyderabad, went to the city’s Sarojini Devi Eye Hospital on June 30 for a cataract operation on his right eye.

A few days after the surgery, doctors removed his bandages and found his eye red, swollen and seeping with pus. Tests revealed it was infected with Klebsiella and E.coli bacteria that was resistant to antibiotics.

It is believed the solution used to irrigate his eyes during the surgery was contaminated. Three months later, Mr Reddy is still in constant pain and can no longer work to provide for his family.

‘I cannot do anything,’ he told the Bureau. ‘Earlier I used to tend to farm animals, clean the litter. I used do some digging. But now I cannot even see the path to walk”.

Thousands like Mr Reddy fall ill with drug resistant infections every year in India.

10/18/2016: Lawsuit Filed Against Hillary Clinton

Posted on by

WikiLeaks has in fact been of great assistance and will continue to be. WikiLeaks also tells us Hillary wants Obamacare to fail in order to implement a single payer system.

.pdf of Formal Complaint is here.

October 18, 2016

Office of the General Counsel

Federal Election Commission

999 E Street, NW

Washington, D.C. 20463

Re: Complaint Against Hillary for America, the Democratic National

Committee, Democracy Partners, Americans United for Change, and other

known and unknown individuals and groups.

To Whom It May Concern:

Complainant

The Public Interest Legal Foundation (“PILF”) is a non-profit educational and legal foundation

dedicated to protect the right to vote, preserve the Constitutional framework of American

elections, and educate the public on the issue of election integrity. As part of its mission, PILF

gathers and analyzes information regarding potential violations of federal and state election laws

and informs the public about these violations and concerns.

This complaint is filed on behalf of the Public Interest Legal Foundation by Joseph A.

Vanderhulst, Legal Counsel with PILF at 209 West Main Street, Plainfield, Indiana 46168,

pursuant to 52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(1).

Respondents

Hillary for America

(Committee ID C00575795)

P.O. Box 5256

New York, NY 10185-5256

Jose H. Villarreal

Treasurer, Hillary for America

P.O. Box 5256

New York, NY 10185-5256

Democratic National Committee

430 South Capitol Street Southeast

Washington, DC 20003

Democracy Partners

1250 Eye Street, NW, Ste. 250

Washington, DC 20005

Bob Creamer

Strategist, Democracy Partners

1250 Eye Street, NW, Ste. 250

Washington, DC 20005

Americans United for Change

P.O. Box 34606

Washington, D.C. 20043

202-470-6954

Scott Foval

National Field Director, Americans United for Change

P.O. Box 34606

Washington, D.C. 20043

202-470-6954

Voces de la Frontera Action

1027 S. 5th Street

Milwaukee, WI 53204

Tel. 414-643-1620

Unknown Groups and Individuals Associated with Respondents

Summary

This complaint is based on information and belief that respondents have engaged in public

communications, campaign activity, targeted voter registration drives, and other targeted GOTV

activity under 11 C.F.R. 100.26 and 11 C.F.R. 114.4 at the request, direction, and approval of the

Hillary for America campaign committee and the Democratic National Committee in violation of

11 C.F.R. 109.20 and 11 C.F.R. 114.4(d)(2) and (3).

Complainant’s information and belief is based on findings from an investigation conducted by

Project Veritas Action and their published reports regarding the same, as well as on news

sources.

“If the Commission, upon receiving a complaint . . . has reason to believe that a person has

committed, or is about to commit, a violation of [the FECA] . . . [t]he Commission shall make an

investigation of such alleged violation . . . .” 52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(2); see also 11 C.F.R. §

111.4(a).

Facts and Violations

Alien Registration Drives

On information and belief based on published reports and findings from an investigation by

Project Veritas Action, several groups including Americans United for Change and Voces de la

Frontera Action and other unknown groups have engaged in voter registration drives and other

GOTV activity during the 2016 election cycle. These activities potentially registered persons

who were not citizens. This activity is regulated under 11 C.F.R. 114.4.

On the same information and belief, these voter registration drives and other GOTV activity

were coordinated with DNC and HFA by express communication through agents of Democracy

Partners and The Foval Group. These communications resulted in coordination of voter

registration activity in violation of 11 C.F.R. 114.4(c)(2) and (d)(2)-(4) by all parties involved.

Also, because they were coordinated with a political party or campaign, there voter registration

activities deliberated targeted demographic groups because they were statistically more likely to

support a particular party or candidate in violation of 11 C.F.R. 114.4(c)(2) and (d)(2)-(4) by all

parties involved.

Paid Protesters

As reported in several news sources, disruptions, including incidents of violence, have occurred

at rallies held by the Trump for President campaign. Based on published reports, these

disruptions were instigated by paid professional protestors arranged by third party groups at the

coordination and direction of agents of Democracy Partners and The Foval Group at the request

and approval of agents of DNC and HFA.

On information and belief based on published reports and findings from an investigation by

Project Veritas Action, these disruptions include the payment of protesters “wherever Trump and

Pence are going to be.” Based on these reports, it appears that all violent disruptions at Trump

for President campaign rallies have been executed by paid protesters trained and instructed in

their speech and conduct to advocate against Trump and in support of Clinton.

On information and belief based on the same source, agents of DNC and HFA communicated

with the third party groups and individuals engaging in the activity and content through agents of

Democracy Partners and The Foval Group in order to request and approve the communications.

Through a direct chain of communication, this constituted coordination under 11 C.F.R.

109.21(d)(1)-(5).

Other Public Communications and Campaign Activities

On information and belief based on published reports, all public communications as defined in

11 C.F.R. 109.21(c) done by Americans United for Change, including the activities described in

Exhibit A, were done at or with the direction, approval, suggestion, or after material discussion

regarding the timing, content, and audience of the communications, of the DNC and Hillary for

America campaign.

Conclusion

Upon information and belief, and based upon the facts set forth above, Respondents Hillary for

America, the Democratic National Committee, Democracy Partners, Americans United for

Change, and their agents, named and unnamed above, have, each of them, individually and

collectively, violated the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended, and must be held

accountable and liable for their unlawful actions.

On behalf of PILF, I hereby request an investigation into whether the respondents identified

above, or any other related parties, have violated federal campaign finance laws. The information

uncovered by this investigation, including this initial complaint, will be used by PILF to educate

the American people about the laws governing our elections and current and potential threats to

election integrity.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Please contact me if you have further

questions.

Respectfully submitted,

PUBLIC INTEREST LEGAL FOUNDATION

Joseph A. Vanderhulst

Legal Counsel

I hereby affirm and state under penalty of perjury that the foregoing statements are true and

correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Joseph A. Vanderhulst

Subscribed and sworn to me on this day of , 2016, by Joseph A.

Vanderhulst, President and General Counsel of Public Interest Legal Foundation.

Notary Public

**** Additionally, here is yet an additional Federal Statue where Hillary Clinton is in violation and a lawsuit may be pending in this regard.

 

18 U.S.C. § 208, the basic criminal conflict of interest statute, prohibits an executive branch employee from participating personally and substantially in a particular Government matter that will affect his own financial interests, as well as the financial interests of:

  • His spouse or minor child;
  • His general partner;
  • An organization in which he serves as an officer, director, trustee, general partner or employee; and
  • A person with whom he is negotiating for or has an arrangement concerning prospective employment.

Financial Interests in a Particular Matter

An employee has a disqualifying financial interest in a particular matter only if there is a close causal link between a particular Government matter in which the employee participates and any effect on the asset or other interest (direct effect) and if there is a real possibility of gain or loss as a result of development in or resolution of that matter (predictable effect). Gain or loss need not be probable. The possibility of a benefit or detriment must be real, not speculative. One common point of confusion is distinguishing between an asset or other interest and a financial interest in a particular matter under 18 U.S.C. § 208. The financial interest is the possibility of gain or loss (of the value of an asset or other interest) resulting from a particular matter, not the asset or interest itself. Thus, a person could have a large holding but only a relatively small financial interest in the particular matter, because the potential for gain or loss is small.

Exemptions

The criminal prohibition has no de minimis level. That is, it applies where any financial interest exists, no matter how small. Under 18 U.S.C. § 208(b)(2), however, OGE has the authority to establish blanket exemptions for financial interests considered too remote or too inconsequential to affect the integrity of the employee’s services. OGE has established several exemptions. The exemptions can be found in the implementing regulation for the statute, 5 C.F.R. part 2640. An employee who qualifies for an exemption can participate in official matters without violating 18 U.S.C. § 208, even though he has what would otherwise be a disqualifying financial interest in the matters. In addition to the exemptions established by OGE, there is an exception in the statute itself at 18 U.S.C. § 208(b)(4) for employees that have certain Native American or Alaska Native birthrights. If the financial interest that would be affected by the particular matter is that resulting solely from the interest of employee or the spouse or minor children in certain Native American or Alaska Native birthrights, the employee may participate in the particular matter without violating 18 U.S.C. § 208.

Waivers

The criminal financial conflict of interest statute has two separate waiver provisions. An employee who has been granted a waiver can participate in official matters without violating 18 U.S.C. § 208, even though he has what would otherwise be a disqualifying financial interest in the matters. Ethics officials often use waivers for broad particular matters, such as general policy matters, in conjunction with a recusal from particular matters involving specific parties for a specific financial interest. The two types of waivers are:

  • 208(b)(1): A waiver issued by the employee’s agency that covers certain financial interests that are not so substantial as to affect the integrity of the employee’s services.
  • 208(b)(3): A waiver for special government employees on Federal Advisory Committee Act committees when the need for services outweighs the potential for conflicts.

About this New Secretary General at the United Nations

Posted on by

He joined the Socialist party in 1974 – the same year five decades of dictatorship came to an end in Portugal – and soon became a full-time politician. In 1992 he became secretary general of the Socialist party, in opposition at the time. Guterres led the party to victory in the next general election in 1995, becoming prime minister.

Then Mr Guterres, fluent in Portuguese, English, Spanish and French, turned his attention to the world of international diplomacy, becoming the UN’s high commissioner for refugees in 2005. More here from BBC.

Antonio Guterres will serve as the 9th Secretary General and he has been assigned some key items as he begins this new role.

  1. He is to bridge all the divisions of the General Assembly.
  2. He is to be the peacemaker for countries such as Syria, Yemen and South Sudan.
  3. To fulfill all the items listed in his own vision statement.

António Guterres

Se

Challenges and Opportunities for the United Nations

“We the peoples”

The United Nations Charter is an achievement exceptional in the annals of history. Seventy years after being adopted, its validity remains undiminished. The Charter is the source of the United Nations’ unique legitimacy and provides guidance for its every activity. All its signatories decided to abide by its purposes, principles and provisions to “achieve international cooperation in solving international problems”.

The UN is the institutional expression of the international community, the cornerstone of our international system and the key actor of effective multilateralism. It is the essential instrument of member States to confront common challenges, manage shared responsibilities and exercise collective action, in an enduring quest for a peaceful, inclusive and sustainably developed world, in which international law and the dignity and worth of the human person are fully pursued.

Challenges

Understanding global mega-trends is crucial. We live in times of multiple, evolving and mutually-reinforcing shifts. These dynamics, of geopolitical, demographic, climatic, technological, social and economic nature, enhance threats and opportunities on an unprecedented scale.

Globalization and technological progress fostered extraordinary economic growth and created conditions for unparalleled reduction of extreme poverty and generalized improvement of living standards. But their unbalanced nature led to high income concentration and extreme inequality, and made exclusion even more intolerable. Exclusion, competition over dwindling resources and shortcomings in governance undermine social cohesion and institutional robustness, further contributing to the eruption of violent conflicts.

In addition to traditional threats to international peace and security, the nature of conflict is changing, with a multiplicity of armed actors, many employing asymmetric methods.

Terrorism, international organized crime and illicit trafficking pose real threats. Devastating epidemics loom persistently on the horizon. Climate change affects economies and peoples, their lands, oceans and seas. More and more States are turning to the oceans as a source of economic and social development, while realizing that their resources have to be developed in a sustainable manner.

Against this background, the UN faces new challenges in ensuring peace and security, promoting sustainable development, protecting human rights and delivering humanitarian aid.

Connecting the dots

The UN is uniquely placed to connect the dots to overcome these challenges. To succeed, it must further strengthen the nexus between peace and security, sustainable development and human rights policies – a holistic approach to the mutually-reinforcing linkages between its three pillars.

The 2015 landmark agreements on sustainable development, notably the Agenda 2030, the Paris Climate Agreement and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda lay out a clear strategy for action. They represent a unique opportunity that must be seized. Achieving these important goals has direct implications for peace and the realization of human needs and fundamental rights. For many it means survival.

Now that we know what, we must work on how. With clear priorities, tangible benchmarks and the power to mobilize all stakeholders, promoting national ownership and ensuring no-one is left behind. The reform and fine tuning of the UN Development System should be pursued to deliver full support to member States. With the horizon of 2030 the focus is on action and the watchword is implementation, implementation, implementation.

It’s widely recognized that there is no peace without development and no development without peace; it is also true that there is no peace and sustainable development without respect for human rights. Based on its acquis and normative framework, the UN human rights system has a key role to play in strengthening member States’ capacity to comply with their human rights obligations, without discrimination. The SG should ensure the mainstreaming of human rights across the whole UN system, notably through the Human Rights Up Front initiative, preventing violations and abuses, ensuring accountability and addressing the plight of victims.

The UN must be at the forefront of the global movement towards gender equality, an inalienable and indivisible feature of all human rights and fundamental freedoms: progressively moving from perceiving women and girls as a subject of protection to promoting their empowerment; from an isolated focus on women to gender mainstreaming.

Similarly, fully respecting the humanitarian principles and the autonomy of the humanitarian space, it is clear that there is no humanitarian solution for humanitarian problems. The solution is always political. And the protracted nature of present humanitarian emergencies also requires a medium and long-term resilience and development perspective.

Three concrete examples, discussed in the preparatory work of the upcoming World Humanitarian Summit, demonstrate how dots can be connected:

  • More than bridging a traditional gap, humanitarian and development actors must work together from the very beginning of a crisis, ideally contributing to prevent it;
  • States that are the largest recipients of refugees, pillars of regional stability and first line of defense of our collective security, should be a priority of development cooperation and UN agencies´ support, even if middle-income countries;
  • Development cooperation policies must take much greater account of human mobility. Migration should be an option, not a necessity; out of hope, not despair.

The Centrality of Prevention

The world spends much more energy and resources managing crises than preventing them. Thus the UN must uphold a strategic commitment to a “culture of prevention”, pledged in 2005 but yet to materialize.

First, we need a surge in diplomacy for peace. Under the guidance of the Security Council and in accordance with the Charter, the SG should actively, consistently and tirelessly exercise his good offices and mediation capacity as an honest broker, bridge builder and messenger of peace. Full use should be made of the Organization’s convening power, as a forum for dialogue, to ease tensions and facilitate peaceful solutions.

Second, the reviews on peacekeeping, peacebuilding and on women, peace and security create a unique opportunity to develop a comprehensive, modern and effective operational peace architecture, encompassing prevention, conflict resolution, peacekeeping, peacebuilding and long-term development – the “peace continuum”.

Those reviews should not be artificially treated as a package, but strategies and policies must converge. The UN should ensure the primacy of political solutions at all stages, promote preventive approaches, mainstream human rights, and foster inclusive engagement and empowerment of women and girls. Full participation of women is essential to the success of any peace process.

People in need of protection are not getting enough. The most vulnerable, such as women and children, are an absolute priority. We must make sure that when someone sees the Blue Flag she or he can say: “I am protected”.

Third, further investment in capacity and institution-building of States is another central element of prevention, promoting inclusive and sustainable development, overcoming fragilities and strengthening the ability of Governments to address the needs of their people and respect their rights.

Fourth, prevention is also crucial to combating terrorism. Force must be used when necessary and in accordance with the Charter, but let us not forget that it is also a battle for values; our common battle. Terrorist attacks target not just their direct victims, but all who subscribe to the purposes and principles of the Charter. The international community has the legal right and the moral duty to act collectively to put an end to terrorism “in all its forms and manifestations, committed by whomever, wherever and for whatever purposes”. In doing so, we shall neither concede to fear nor abdicate our values.

Fifth, values are, indeed, the defining argument and the vital strength in our collective mobilization against intolerance, violent extremism and radicalization. To prevent them, we need to foster inclusion, solidarity and the cohesion of multiethnic, multicultural and multi-religious societies.

This is also the best antidote to racism, xenophobia, islamophobia and anti-semitism.

Informal Dialogue at UN AG. Photo LUSA.

Informal Dialogue at UN AG. Photo LUSA.

Coordination and Partnerships

Global coherence demands a permanent strategic cooperation culture at all levels. The key to further enhancing UN’s effectiveness is attitude: cooperation instead of duplication, sharing instead of competing, and collective responsibility instead of circumstantial individual interests. This requires leadership and more and better coordination – delivery-centered, not process oriented.

Breaking silos requires accountability at three levels: system-wide; within each UN institution regarding its mandate; and how each of them contributes to the performance of the whole system. The Chief Executive Board and the Senior Management Group must be the beacons of the strategic coherence of the UN’s operational dimension.

To ensure effective multilateralism, the UN needs to develop a strong culture of partnership at three levels:

First, increasing cooperation with regional organizations, as foreseen in Chapter VIII of the Charter. They are essential actors in conflict prevention and resolution, in peace operations and promotion of development and human rights. The relationship with the African Union deserves particular commitment.

Second, strengthening partnerships with International Financial Institutions, seizing synergies of working together in addressing global and local challenges.

Third, enhancing engagement with civil society and the private sector. Their role providing global public goods must be fully recognized. Relevant UN organizations should develop strategic cooperation with their civil society partners. Since there can be no poverty eradication without generation of wealth, we should further promote the UN Global Compact, highlighting the mutual benefits of corporate responsibility.

Reform and Innovation

The future of the UN will be determined by its readiness to change and adapt, in full respect of the provisions of the Charter and the competences of the main bodies. The SG must promote reform and innovation, focused on delivery and results.

Reform is not a onetime action, it is a permanent attitude to make the UN less bureaucratic and more efficient, productive and field oriented; to simplify processes, eliminate redundant structural costs and make full use of modern technology and innovation.

As chief administrative officer, the SG must maintain unwavering commitment to transparency, accountability and oversight.

Moreover, the SG must stand firmly for the reputation of the UN and its dedicated staff. Leading by example and imposing the highest ethical standards on everyone serving under the UN flag. In particular, elevating the prestige of the blue helmet, the soldier standing for peace, and eradicating, once and for all, the exploitative and abusive conduct of those UN agents who do not represent what the Organization stands for.

Staff policies need to address substantial gaps in gender equality and regional diversity. Given that previous commitments to gender parity were not fulfilled, the SG should present and implement a road map for gender parity at all levels, with clear benchmarks and timeframes within the next mandate, giving priority to senior staff selection. In particular, parity should henceforth be respected in the appointments by the SG of members of the Chief Executive Board and the Senior Management Group. And a clear shift in this direction is required in the selection of Special Representatives and Envoys. A similar commitment is necessary to move consistently into regional equilibrium in senior appointments.

The SG should further enhance the Organization’s communication capacity. The UN must communicate in ways that everybody understands and use the most modern digital platforms, reaching out to common citizens and making the most of its unique and powerful brand.

Values

Peace, justice, human dignity, tolerance and solidarity are enshrined in the Charter and bind us together. These values are central to all cultures and religions in the world and are reflected in the Holy Books – from the Qur’an to the Gospels and the Torah, from the Upanishads to the Pali canon.

As Kofi Annan put it, “of course having such common values does not solve all problems, or eliminate the scope for different societies to solve them in different ways.(…) Each society should be given the space, not to distort or undermine universal values, but to express them in a way that reflects its own traditions and culture.”

In times of insecurity, when people feel uncertain about their future, when anxieties and fears are promoted and exploited by political populists, old-fashioned nationalists or religious fundamentalists, the success of the UN and the international community lies in our common commitment to our common values. The UN must be proud of its diversity. A diversity that only enriches the strength of the expression of our common humanity.

António Guterres

General designate of the United Nations