Romney's Foreign Policy Fumble Getting Notice in Battleground States

“Blunder," “Reeks of Political Opportunism," “Amateur Comments," “Unpresidential”

IOWA

Des Moines Register: Another View: He blunders again with foreign policy

“Mitt Romney should be ashamed. The way he behaved on Tuesday night and Wednesday after the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and the killing of J. Christopher Stevens, the American ambassador to Libya, is not befitting a candidate for president of the United States.”

NORTH CAROLINA

Raleigh News Observer Editorial: Romney's haste, waste

“But Romney plunged ahead. ‘Apology for America’s values is never the right course,’ he declared. Of course not. Neither is criticism of the president so hasty and poorly informed that it reeks of political opportunism amidst a deadly crisis.”

NEW HAMPSHIRE

Concord Monitor Editorial: Romney's amateur comments on Libya

“The demented attacks on America's embassy in Egypt and consulate in Libya, and Mitt Romney's hasty and hyperbolic response to them, raises similar questions about the Republican presidential candidate's fitness to govern. Romney's condemnation of the Obama administration, at a time when American lives had been lost and its embassies were under siege, calls his judgment and ability to guide foreign policy into question.”

NEW YORK

Utica Observer-Dispatch: Editorial: Romney and the Libya tragedy

On the other hand, what was wholly inappropriate was for presidential challenger Mitt Romney to weigh in when and how he did. "It's disgraceful that the Obama administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks," his campaign first said in a statement at about 10:30 p.m. Tuesday evening. By the next morning he was saying at a Florida campaign stop that "apology for American values is never the right course."

NEVADA

Reno Gazette-Journal: It's Romney and Amodei who sent wrong message on attacks in Libya

“Although who was responsible for the brutal murder was still unclear several days later, and no one knew for sure whether an anti-Muslim film was the cause or simply an excuse, Romney immediately blamed Obama for the attack, accusing him of a failure of leadership, particularly in the Middle East. … Whether you agree with Obama’s policies or not, Romney’s statement was ill-considered, ill-timed and politically opportunistic. There should be no place for it from a man who wants to be president.”

PENNSYLVANIA

Philadelphia Inquirer Editorial: Libya still needs the U.S.

“Unfortunately, because it is election season, Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney didn't wait for expert assessments to use the four diplomats' deaths to launch his own verbal assault.”

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Editorial: Romney’s gamble: He uses a day of American loss for political points

His handling of the Benghazi tragedy was shockingly inept. First, instead of sharing quietly in the grief of those who lost family, friends and colleagues in the firebombing of the U.S. Consulate, Mr. Romney tried to turn a day of American loss into a political opportunity. He accused President Barack Obama of apologizing to America's adversaries and placating foreign extremists. That baseless criticism calls into question not only his judgment but also his sensitivity, sense of decency and even his humanity.

Observer-Reporter: Editorial: Now, election is about ideology, competence

In 1988, as he accepted the Democratic presidential nomination, Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis said the election was not about ideology, but competence. Twenty-four years later, voters have good reason to wonder about the ideology of Dukakis’s successor, Mitt Romney, given his well-documented “flexibility” on numerous issues. But it’s becoming increasingly apparent that they should also start asking serious questions about his competence.

FLORIDA

Miami Herald Editorial: Treacherous currents in the Mideast

“Predictably, the attacks were quickly mired in political controversy at home. Candidate Mitt Romney jumped the gun in attacking Mr. Obama as an ‘apologist’ because of a statement issued by the U.S. Embassy in Cairo before the assaults took place. Reacting to the death of U.S. diplomats by seeking to take political advantage is profoundly inappropriate.”

Tampa Bay Times Editorial: Romney's quick attack ill-advised

Two problems: First, the response was a statement from the embassy in Cairo that was released hours before Americans were attacked. Second, the statement was aimed at preventing violence and calming the angry response over the release of Innocence of Muslims, a hateful film critical of Islam and heavily promoted by fringe anti-Islamic Gainesville pastor Terry Jones. The embassy had criticized the movie as the handiwork of ‘misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions’ Romney disingenuously seized upon the statement as a ‘disgrace’ that sympathized with the protesters rather than a condemnation of the attacks.

Florida Sun Sentinel Editorial: GOP's criticism unwarranted

“Pointing fingers, playing the blame game, second-guessing without all the facts, and trying to score political points during a time like this is indeed ham-handed, even by the standards of a political campaign that seems to get nastier by the day”

Palm Beach Post: Editorial: Foreign policy no longer a debate afterthought

“For the moment, commentary has focused on Mitt Romney’s premature, inaccurate blast at the Obama administration for “sympathizing” with those who carried out the violence that killed the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans. In fact, the comments were from one Cairo embassy staffer, came before news of the murders in Benghazi, Libya, were aimed at heading off protests over an anti-Muslim video and were ordered removed by the White House. Mr. Romney does himself no favors by doubling down on a very unpresidential response.”

Herald-Tribune: Another 9/11 attack

“When terrorists struck America on Sept. 11, 2001, the nation grieved together. Eleven years later, in the wake of another 9/11 attack -- which Tuesday claimed the lives of a U.S. ambassador and three other brave Americans at a consulate in Libya -- that spirit of unity was missing. In its place was partisan finger-pointing by Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who prematurely lobbed off-base criticism at the wording of the U.S. diplomatic response.”

MICHIGAN

Detroit News Op-Ed: Romney fails the statesmanship test

“A real leader doesn’t jump the gun and put countless lives in danger with careless bravado in responding to acts of aggression. A good president waits for reliable reports, considers the implications of his words, which will be closely parsed, and makes a measured statement. Mitt Romney did the exact opposite, immediately leaping to wild accusations long before all the facts were in.”

OHIO

Cleveland Plain Dealer Editorial: A shocking attack in Libya: editorial

“Republican nominee Mitt Romney's trigger finger was so quick that he didn't even get it right.”

Akron Beacon Journal: Attack in Libya

“Unfortunately, Mitt Romney chose to ignore the distinction. In a statement, the Republican presidential candidate expressed outrage at the attacks and the death of an American consulate worker. He then cudgeled the White House for a “first response” that did not condemn but showed sympathy “with those who waged the attacks.” The idea of any American president, Republican or Democratic, taking such a stance is ludicrous. As it is, Romney strained in grabbing the moment to press a familiar campaign theme.”

WISCONSIN

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: A martyr for freedom

“Mitt Romney, the Republican nominee for president, was quick to criticize President Barack Obama, noting Tuesday night that he was "outraged by the attacks" and that it was disgraceful that "the administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks." The chairman of the Republican National Committee, Reince Priebus of Wisconsin, tweeted: "Obama sympathizes with attackers in Egypt. Sad and pathetic." Sad and pathetic? Yes, it was sad and pathetic to see such callous and uninformed statements from politicians who couldn't wait until they had the facts to use an international incident for political gain.”

COLORADO

Daily Camera: Terrible tragedy on anniversary of terrible day

“That democratic peace relies on tolerance of people with different beliefs. Without that tolerance for other beliefs, it all falls to pieces. That couldn't be more clear in the wake of the deaths in Libya. And stating that commitment to one of our core values is not an "apology" as candidate Mitt Romney tried to portray it. Not only irresponsibly, when he was clueless as to the extent of the attack but even the next morning when more information was available to him. For someone whose campaign has been studded with tone-deafness abroad, this was stunning, undiplomatic and undemocratic rhetoric.”

Denver Post: Editorial: Deadly enemies of free speech

“Still, Republican candidate Mitt Romney was out line when he criticized the embassy statement for "sympathizing" with rioters. U.S. diplomats obviously have no sympathy for such criminals, and the statement doesn't imply they do.”

VIRGINIA

Virginian Pilot Editorial: Candidate Romney's unpresidential gaffe

“American presidents don't indulge in public tantrums during international crises. They don't exploit the deaths of American servants in an attempt to score cheap political points. And they don't accuse American diplomats of sympathizing with terrorists. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney did all of those things this week, in the midst of attacks on U.S. embassies in the Middle East, thus providing his opponents and voters with ample reason to question his ability and judgment in foreign affairs.”

Roanoke Times: Editorial: Ready, shoot, aim on Libya

“Mitt Romney's response to the attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya, which killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans, cast further doubt on the Republican presidential nominee's ability to navigate sometimes roiling foreign policy seas. Relying on scant reports gathered in the haze of battle, Romney was too quick and too brash in his criticism of the Obama administration's reaction to events in the Middle East.”

Source: DNC Press

Halt the war provocatio​ns against Iran

The Communist Party USA (CPUSA) deplores the rapid escalation of tensions between Iran on the one hand, and Israel, the United States and the United Kingdom on the other. This escalation represents a threat to world peace; as various irresponsible parties, such as Republican politicians in the United States and various persons in the Israeli government, talk more and more openly of acts like strikes on Iranian facilities, which would certainly be acts of war. Assassinations of Iranian scientists on the streets of their own country are further provocations.
 
Take action to prevent a war with Iran by calling your senators and representatives at (202)224-3121 and signing a petition to Pres. Obama here.
 
The current Iranian regime has repressed the working class and the left, including our fraternal party, the Tudeh, and has increasingly turned to the same neo-liberal economic policies which have caused suffering to people around the world. However, external intervention and provocations by Israeli, U.S., British and other governments in no way help the Iranian people.
 
Indeed, progressives in Iran, while criticizing their own government, have explicitly opposed such outside intervention, including the kind of sanctions that are now being pushed by the United States and its allies, as hurting the Iranian people while playing into the hands of the regime. Further, an accident or irresponsible move by either side could set off a military confrontation which would have a strong impact on the world economy and especially on the poorer countries that rely highly on Iranian oil for their own survival.
 
Iran is much larger than Iraq and much more developed than Afghanistan, and for the United States to get into a war with Iran could have disastrous consequences for all of us. To allow this to happen would be outrageous.
 
There are all sorts of games and intrigues going on which shape the current crisis.  Iranian President Ahmadinejad is under attack by other reactionary elements in his own country, as legislative elections approach.  The Israeli government is under sharp criticism from many of its citizens because of failed economic policies that have widened the gap between rich and poor. There is a bitter feud going on between Iran and Saudi Arabia.  And of course we have our own election campaigns, with the usual push by the Republicans to portray the Obama administration as "soft" on the country's enemies.
 
All of these dynamics heighten the danger of a drift toward war.
 
Call your senators and representatives at (202)224-3121 and tell Pres. Obama you oppose any military action against Iran here.
 
The Communist Party USA calls for an end to the intrigues and provocations coming out of the Israeli, British and US governments and political factions. We denounce the push for armed strikes against Iran by Israel, which is the only nuclear-armed state in the region and the killings of Iranian scientists as criminal acts of terrorism.
 
We reiterate that only the Iranian people have the right to decide what sort of government their country will have, and we oppose activities by outside parties aimed at “regime change”.  We call for continued negotiations as the only viable way to relieve tensions in the Gulf region.
 
Emile Schepers
CPUSA International Secretary

Source: e-letter from CPUSA

Libertarian Party: End Dangerous Sanctions Now; Peace Through Free Trade

WASHINGTON - Libertarian National Committee Chair, Mark Hinkle, released the following statement today:

 

"As relations with Iran deteriorate, President Barrack Obama and the Bipartisan Senate Committee are making things worse: inciting yet another war in the Middle East through economic sanctions.

 

"On February 2nd,  2012 the Senate Banking Committee unanimously approved increased sanctions against Iran. Not willing to wait for a full Senate vote, President Obama increased sanctions by executive order on February 6th.

 

"The United States must stop meddling and return to our traditional libertarian foreign policy of free trade in order to give peace a chance in the Middle East.

 

"Trade sanctions are proven failures. In the 1990s, Presidents George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton enforced trade sanctions against Iraq which led to the deaths of more than 100,000 innocent men, women and children.

 

"Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, in an appearance on 60 Minutes in 1996, was asked about the child deaths from sanctions, and replied "I think this a very hard choice, but the price - we think the price is worth it." Albright's willingness to sacrifice Arab children to achieve US policy goals was broadcast throughout the Arab world and was cited by Osama Bin Laden as a key motivation for the 9/11 attacks.

 

"Now the US government is doing the same thing to Iran, a country that not only has never attacked the United States, but has attacked no other country in over 200 years.

 

"Sanctions don't work. They unite the people of a country behind their political leaders, no matter how bad that leader may be. By meddling in foreign affairs, U.S. politicians turn foreign citizens - who support the United States - against us.

 

"Rather than repeat failed policies of past presidents, we must use the successful policies of those who kept us out of war.  Presidents George Washington and Thomas Jefferson kept the United States out of the bloody French Revolution and allowed us to make peace with our archenemy, the British, by pursuing Free Trade and a noninterventionist foreign policy.

 

"The Libertarian Party calls for removing all restrictions on trade. Free Trade is the best way to foster peace in the Middle East.

Recent Violence in Bahrain

Victoria Nuland

Department Spokesperson, Office of the Spokesperson

Washington, DC

January 7, 2012

 

The United States is deeply concerned by continuing incidents of violence in Bahrain between police and demonstrators. Officials from the United States Embassy in Manama met today with human rights activist Nabeel Rajab, who was injured during a demonstration on Friday; they also spoke with senior Bahraini government officials regarding the incident. While the facts surrounding the violence that transpired remain in dispute, we strongly urge the Government of Bahrain to undertake a full investigation to determine if excessive force was employed by police. In general we urge all demonstrators to refrain from acts of violence and for police and security forces also to avoid excessive use of force.

 

The Government of Bahrain has taken significant steps to implement recommendations of the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry, and we urge it to complete this important undertaking without delay and continue the work of comprehensive reform . We encourage all the citizens of Bahrain to join in this effort, which can be the foundation for genuine reconciliation and a renewed spirit of national unity.

A Palestinian State?

An Israeli child injured from a Hamas

Grad rocket fired at Beer Sheba awaits

medical attention.

The Palestinian Authority's recent announcement that it would seek UN recognition as an independent state dominated the news and the political debate in the United States last week, though in truth it should mean very little to us. Only a political class harboring the illusion it can run the world obsesses over the aspirations of a tiny population on a tiny piece of land thousands of miles away.  Remember, the UN initiated this persistent conflict with its 1947 Partition Plan.

Unfortunately the debate is dominated by those who either support the Israeli side in the conflict, or those who support the Palestinian desire for statehood.  We rarely seem to hear the view of those who support the US side and US interests.  I am on that side.  I believe that we can no longer police the world. We can no longer bribe the Israelis and Palestinians to continue an endless "peace process" that goes nowhere. It is not in our interest to hector the Palestinians or the Israelis, or to "export" democracy to the region but reject it when people vote the "wrong" way.

I have reservations about the Palestinian drive for UN recognition. Personally I wish the United States would de-recognize the United Nations.  As most readers already know, in every Congress I introduce legislation to end our membership in that organization. The UN is a threat to our sovereignty-- and as we are the main source of its income, it is a threat to our economic well-being. Increasingly over the past several years, we see the United Nations providing political and legal cover for the military aspirations of interventionists rather than serving as an international forum to preserve peace. Neoconservatives in the US have grown to love the United Nations as they co-opt the organization under the guise of endless "reform."  Under the sovereignty-destroying doctrine of "Responsibility to Protect," adopted at the 2005 World Summit, the UN takes it upon itself to intervene in internal conflicts of its member states whenever it believes that human rights are being violated.  Thus under "Responsibility to Protect," the UN provides the green light for a kind of global no-knock raid on any sovereign country.

If asked, I would personally counsel the Palestinians to avoid the United Nations.  UN membership and participation is no guarantee that sovereignty will be respected.  We see what happens to UN members such as Iraq and Libya when those countries' leaders fall out of favor with US administrations: under US and allied pressure a fig leaf resolution is adopted in the UN to facilitate devastating military intervention.  When the UN gave NATO the green light to bomb Libya there was no genocide taking place.  It was a purely preventative war.  The result?  Thousands dead, a destroyed country, and extremely dubious new leaders.

Jordanian artillery fired on Jerusalem,
1948.

While I do not see UN membership as a particularly productive move for the Palestinian leadership, I do not believe the US should use its position in the UN Security Council to block their membership.  I believe in self-determination of peoples and I recognize that peoples may wish to pursue statehood by different means.  As we saw after the Cold War, numerous new states were born out of the ruins of the USSR as the various old Soviet Republics decided that smaller states were preferable to an enormous and oppressive multi-national conglomerate.

The real, pro-US solution to the problems in the Middle East is for us to end all foreign aid, stop arming foreign countries, encourage peaceful diplomatic resolutions to conflicts, and disengage militarily.  In others words, follow Jefferson's admonition:  "Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none."

—Ron Paul

This article is in the public domain (source: paul.house.gov). Wounded child photo is the property of Edi Israel and is used via Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license. Artillery photo is in the public domain. Both photos were obtained from Wikimedia Commons.

VIDEO: Libertarians respond to Obama speech and Republican debate

WASHINGTON - Libertarian Party Executive Director Wes Benedict has released a video response to President Obama's jobs speech. The video is available here:

A transcript follows:

“My name is Wes Benedict and I'm the Executive Director of the Libertarian National Committee in Washington, DC.

I have a message for the American people in response to President Obama's proposal tonight for an American Jobs Act. I also have a few comments about last night's Republican Presidential debate.

Unemployment is at 9 percent. Four years ago, in late 2007, unemployment was less than 5 percent. Then in 2008, President Bush mailed out millions of 300-dollar government stimulus checks. Later that year, he supported the massive TARP bailout. Unemployment rose. In 2009, President Obama said if we passed another big stimulus plan, unemployment would stay below 8 percent. Now it's at 9 percent. Government spending does not help the economy, it hurts the economy.

Stimulus spending doesn't create jobs, it destroys them. When investors hear that the U.S. government is going to flush more money down the spending hole, they react immediately by cutting back on investments that would have created jobs.

Government stimulus spending benefits a few, but at great expense to everyone else. Politicians like to be able to say they're "doing something," but too often, "doing something" means handing out money to special interests. Often these programs are promoted with false claims that they will benefit the poor and middle class. Usually the opposite happens.

We don't need the government "doing something" if it involves more spending and new programs.

We'd be better off if the government stopped trying to help, and gave Americans a chance to recover, adjust their plans, and start solving economic problems themselves.

However, if politicians feel like they must be seen "doing something", then they should cut spending, bring our troops home from the Middle East, reduce Medicare and Social Security benefits, cut taxes, and eliminate burdensome licensing laws and minimum wage laws. Licensing and minimum wage laws take the bottom rungs off the economic ladder.

The President's tax cut proposals are good and bad. Libertarians always support broad-based tax cuts. But targeted special-interest cuts and loopholes just amount to social engineering, and they pit different interest groups against each other. And tax cuts without spending cuts virtually guarantee that future generations will suffer a heavier tax burden.

It's foolish to talk about increasing taxes on the wealthy. That would be a great way to destroy even more jobs. Libertarians want to cut spending, and cut taxes for everyone.

Last night, I watched the Republican Presidential debate, and it was the same old nonsense from Republicans. They sometimes say they are for free markets. Yet, Mitt Romney defended his Romney Care plan. Rick Perry boasted about his new 3-billion-dollar taxpayer funded medical research center in Texas. Newt Gingrich said we need to grow revenue. Mr. Gingrich, the last thing we need is to put more money into the incompetent, wasteful, and corrupt hands of the federal government.

Libertarians want less government, and more jobs. We support free markets, civil liberties, and peace.

You can find out more on our website at LP.org.

Thank you, and good night.”

For more information, or to arrange an interview, call LP Executive Director Wes Benedict at 202-333-0008 ext. 222.

The LP is America's third-largest political party, founded in 1971. The Libertarian Party stands for free markets, civil liberties, and peace. You can find more information on the Libertarian Party at our website.

P.S. If you have not already done so, please join the Libertarian Party. We are the only political party dedicated to free markets, civil liberties, and peace. You can also renew your membership. Or, you can make a contribution separate from membership.

U.S. Policy in Yemen

Janet Sanderson

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs

Thank you, Mr. Chairman:

Chairman Casey, Ranking Member Risch, distinguished members of the committee, let me first join with my colleagues to thank you for inviting us to appear before you today. We appreciate the committee's abiding interest in and attention to our nation's priorities and goals in the region.

We are pleased to present the committee with an overview of the administration's policy and our relationship with Yemen. As you rightly know, Mr. Chairman, civil unrest in the Middle East and North Africa in the past six months has focused attention on governance across the region.

Yemen is, indeed, confronting a myriad of political, economic, social, security and governance challenges, and the current political crisis has exacerbated systemic issues such as unemployment, a rapidly growing population, weak state institutions, declining government revenues, growing natural resource scarcity, and of course, violent extremism.

Consistent with U.S. national interests, we have adopted a two-pronged strategy for Yemen: helping the government confront the immediate security threat represented by Al Qaida, and mitigating serious political, economic and governance issues that the country faces over the long terms, the drivers of instability.

The United States continues its regular engagement with the government, including with President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who's currently, as you know, recovering in Saudi Arabia from his injuries following a June 3rd attack on his compound; the acting president, Vice President Abd-Rabbu Mansur al-Hadi; the opposition; civil society activists and others interested in Yemen's future.

We strongly support the Gulf Cooperation Council's initiative which we believe would lead to a peaceful and orderly political transition. The GCC initiative signed by both the ruling General People's Congress Party and the opposition coalition Joint Meeting Parties. Only President Saleh is blocking the agreement moving forward and we continue to call on him to sign the initiative.

The situation on the ground remains extremely fluid, but the solution will come and must come from the Yemeni people, with the assistance and support of their international partners, namely the GCC and Saudi Arabia. Conditions in Yemen continue to deteriorate under the pressure of growing protests and increasing divisions throughout the country. Widespread inflation, including rising commodity prices, decreasing liquidity in the threat of a food shortage this summer foreshadow an economic crisis in the coming months.

While most protests in Yemen have been peaceful over the last couple of months, there have been violent clashes between pro- and anti-government demonstrators and between protesters and government security forces and irregular elements using force to break up demonstrations. The United States has strongly urged the Yemeni government to investigate and prosecute all acts of violence against protesters.

Ultimately, Mr. Chairman, the goal of the U.S. and international efforts is a stable, secure, prosperous and effectively governed Yemen. This is an ambitious, long-term goal that demands the deep and ongoing coordination with the Yemeni government and the international partners. We will be able to more effectively engage in Yemen once the Yemeni government initiates the political transition and identifies its way forward.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for inviting us to testify before your committee today, and thank you so much on behalf of Ambassador Feierstein and his colleagues at MAC (ph) Sana'a for your very kind words. They certainly deserve it. My colleagues and I are very happy now to take your questions. Thank you.

Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

Secretary Clinton and Secretary Geithner Joint Letter to G8 Ministers

Dear G8 Colleagues,

As President Obama said on May 19, the courage of the people of the Middle East and North Africa has created a historic opportunity. This is a time for the region and the world to work together to support successful transitions toward democratic societies and more inclusive economies.

As our nations gather at Deauville, we should consider several steps to support these goals. We share a compelling interest in seeing the transitions in Egypt and Tunisia succeed and become models for the region. Otherwise, we risk losing this moment of opportunity.

Experience from other democratic transitions has taught us that we should focus on trade, not just aid, and on investment, not just assistance. Moreover, our efforts should be aligned with the needs and aspirations of the people of the region. In Egypt and Tunisia, citizens have outlined several key priorities: improving financial stability, strengthening the private sector, curbing corruption, creating jobs, and further integrating their markets with the region and the global economy.

With these priorities in mind, we should first offer our strong support for the Joint Action Plan of the Multilateral Development Banks. The World Bank and the African Development Bank will bring their resources to bear by supporting home-grown policies and reform agendas. We call on governments around the world—including in the Middle East and the Gulf—to join us in forming a broad and long-term partnership to support Egypt and Tunisia. It will be important to ensure that public dollars help leverage private dollars and grow private enterprise, and that the reforms are driven by the people and leaders of the region themselves.

Second, we should help Egypt convert the debts of the past into investments for the future. The United States is committed to a debt swap for Egypt and we are asking our partners to join us in this initiative. A debt swap will enable Egypt to channel its debt payments toward underwriting swift, sustainable job creation. A shared response in the form of a multi-creditor debt swap for job creation would provide Egypt with financial relief while also ensuring that critical investments are made to improve the lives of Egyptian people. We also should stand ready in the Paris Club to reinforce the forthcoming IMF package for Egypt. At the same time, we should collectively commit to helping newly democratic governments recover assets that were stolen.

Third, the G-8 should lead efforts to reorient the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) so that it can play the same role today in supporting democratic transitions in the Middle East and North Africa that it has played over the past two decades in Central and Eastern Europe. Our countries should use the Deauville Summit to support a mechanism that enables the EBRD to engage in the near-term to support private sector development in the region, as well as reforms that create conditions for successful entrepreneurship.

These immediate steps will provide important support to the democratic transitions already underway. But to be most effective, they must be part of a larger vision that connects the region to the global economy.

Non-oil exports within the Middle East and North Africa currently account for less than 10 percent of the region’s total trade— lower than that of any other region in the world. This lack of regional integration has contributed to chronic unemployment and hindered diversification.

To begin reversing this trend, President Obama announced a comprehensive Trade and Investment Partnership Initiative in the Middle East and North Africa. We ask members of the G-8 and the EU to join the United States and other willing partners across the region to facilitate more trade within the region, as well as between the region and global markets. This plan will increase market access and create new economic opportunities in new sectors, driven by new technologies. Just as membership in the European Union served as a powerful incentive for economic transformation in Central and Eastern Europe after the Cold War, so should the prospect of participating in an integrated and dynamic regional economy create a powerful force for reform in the Middle East and North Africa.

As President Obama said, the greatest untapped resource in the Middle East and North Africa is the talent of its people. Ultimately, they are the ones who will determine the future of their region. The nations of the G-8 share an interest and a responsibility in supporting these people and their countries as they move toward genuine democracy and more vibrant and open economies. The proposals we have outlined are important steps toward that future and we should waste no time in seizing this moment of opportunity. We look forward to working with you in translating these proposals into results.