# Emails

DocNumber: C05771112
MetadataSubject: CALL: FMR. DEP. SEC ARMITAGE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-25T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771112/C05771112.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: RE: Call: Fmr. Dep. Sec Armitage
ExtractedFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Abedin, Huma
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:31 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771112
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  Alexander can talk at 10:50 AM this morning (in 20 minutes). I can lock it in for that time and have Ops connect to you.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771112 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:31 AM
  To:
  Cc: Abedin, Huma
  Subject: RE: Call: Fmr. Dep. Sec Armitage
  Alexander can talk at 10:50 AM this morning (in 20 minutes). I can lock it in for that time and have Ops connect to you.
  Original Message
  From: H [mailto:HDR22@clintonemail.com]
  Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:22 AM
  To: Jiloty, Lauren C
  Subject: Re: Call: Fmr. Dep. Sec Armitage
  Ok. Just let me know when I can talk to Alexander.
  Original Message
  From: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
  To: H
  Cc: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wed Aug 25 10:03:27 2010
  Subject: RE: Call: Fmr. Dep. Sec Armitage
  MS - Bob Einhorn is asking that you hold on the Yu call for now. The Deputy FM is currently in DC. Will meet w/ Einhorn
  at 1:00pm. Einhorn will reassess the need for a call after his meeting.
  I've reached out to Sen. Alexander's office and am waiting to hear back from them about his availability.
  Original Message
  From: H [mailto:HDR22@clintonemailcom]
  Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 9:37 AM
  To: Jiloty, Lauren C
  Subject: Re: Call: Fmr. Dep. Sec Armitage
  Ok. But I want to talk w FM Yu and Lamar Alexander as soon as they could be set up.
  Original Message
  From: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
  To: H
  Cc: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wed Aug 25 09:30:06 2010
  Subject: Call: Fmr. Dep. Sec Armitage
  Has a call into you re: the American Turkish Council.
  ###
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771112 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771113
MetadataSubject: FLIGHTS
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-19T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771113/C05771113.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Flights
ExtractedTo: H; 'ValmoroU@state.gov'
ExtractedFrom: Huma Abedin
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 8:11 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771113
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: Ok sounds good
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771113 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Huma Abedin
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 8:11 AM
  To: H; 'ValmoroU@state.gov'
  Subject: Re: Flights
  Ok sounds good
  Original Message
  From: H
  To: 'ValmoroU@state.gov' <ValmoroU@state.gov>; Huma Abedin
  Sent: Thu Aug 19 08:08:57 2010
  Subject: Flights
  I want to fly back tonight--probably leave around 11. And then probably back to White Plains unless I fly to
  Westhampton from DC. Let's discuss this am.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771113 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771115
MetadataSubject: PROBLEM: BUSTAN PLAN
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-25T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771115/C05771115.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: Problem: Bustan Plan
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob 1 <Sullivan11@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Irwin, Matthew T; Reed, Julia G; Pilz, Amanda C
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:32 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771115
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  FYI - Jerusalem mayor causing problem again with sensitive housing plan that could result in further
  demolitions/dislocations.
  Dan and David have engaged Molho.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771115 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5,B6
  From: Sullivan, Jacob 1 <Sullivan11@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:32 AM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: Problem: Bustan Plan
  FYI - Jerusalem mayor causing problem again with sensitive housing plan that could result in further
  demolitions/dislocations.
  Dan and David have engaged Molho.
  Original Message
  From: Sachar, Alon (NEA/IPA)
  To: Hale, David M; Rudman, Mara; Prince, Jonathan M; Hof, Frederic C;
  Feltman, Jeffrey
  D; Wailes, Jacob; Sutphin, Paul R; Tsou, Leslie M; Djerassi, Alexander M; Sullivan, Jacob J; Goldberger, Thomas H;
  Rubinstein, Daniel H; Igeorge
  .Cc: Irwin, Matthew T; Reed, Julia G; Pilz, Amanda C
  Sent: Wed Aug 25 07:51:10 2010
  Subject: Problem: Bustan Plan
  The Jerusalem city council is set to review the Kings Garden/Gan Hamelech/Bustan plan tomorrow. Recall that the plan
  received approval by a municipal sub committee in late June. The entire city council must now review and approve the
  plan because of an administrative appeal filed against it by a Meretz city council member (this appeal process requires
  that the entire city council review the plan at some point.) Lots of other details here that Jerusalem will be including in a
  front channel cable. Amanda Pilz, CCed here, drafted.
  Bottom line though is that (1) this is on the agenda at the explicit direction of the Mayor and deputy mayor and (2)
  there is no statutory or other need for this review tomorrow.
  Also note that this is not the final step in the process. After full Jerusalem municipal approval the plan must go to
  Ministry of Interior bodies. So there is a whole lot of theater involved in this.
  Lastly, recall that the Gan Hamelech plan involves extensive demolitions and the redevelopment of Bustan, a section of
  the Silwan which is a stone throw away from the Old City. (When S made her comments on demolition in November
  2009 she was referring to Bustan demolitions)
  Best,
  Alon
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771115 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771117
MetadataSubject: FOREIGN AFFAIRS ARTICLE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Slaughter, Anne-Marie
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-18T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771117/C05771117.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Foreign Affairs article
ExtractedTo: H; Muscatine, Lissa
ExtractedFrom: Slaughter, Anne-Marie <SlaughterA@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Sullivan, Jacob J; Fuchs, Michael H
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 8:17 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771117
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  We were aiming for a draft by the end of the day. Part of the problem is that we have also gotten detailed comments
  from jack and raj, as well as v good comments from Jake, that sonni is trying to include. Lissa and I will meet as soon as
  we get in and see how fast we can get you something. I know you are heading for well-deserved vacation, but cd you still
  find some time to review a final draft this weekend? AM

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771117 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Slaughter, Anne-Marie <SlaughterA@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 8:17 AM
  To: H; Muscatine, Lissa
  Cc: Sullivan, Jacob J; Fuchs, Michael H
  Subject: Re: Foreign Affairs article
  We were aiming for a draft by the end of the day. Part of the problem is that we have also gotten detailed comments
  from jack and raj, as well as v good comments from Jake, that sonni is trying to include. Lissa and I will meet as soon as
  we get in and see how fast we can get you something. I know you are heading for well-deserved vacation, but cd you still
  find some time to review a final draft this weekend? AM
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Slaughter, Anne-Marie; Muscatine, Lissa
  Cc: Sullivan, Jacob J; Fuchs, Michael H
  Sent: Wed Aug 18 08:07:47 2010
  Subject: Foreign Affairs article
  Will I get next draft today? I'm running out of time to work on it. Thx.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771117 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771118
MetadataSubject: CALL: FMR. DEP. SEC ARMITAGE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-25T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771118/C05771118.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: RE: Call: Fmr. Dep. Sec Armitage
ExtractedFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.goy>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:32 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771118
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText: Will do.
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771118 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:32 AM
  To:
  Subject: RE: Call: Fmr. Dep. Sec Armitage
  Will do.
  Original Message
  From: H [mailto:HDR22@clintonemail.com]
  Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:31 AM
  To: Jiloty, Lauren C
  Subject: Re: Call: Fmr. Dep. Sec Armitage
  Pis do.
  Original Message
  From: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
  To: H
  Cc: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.goy>
  Sent: Wed Aug 25 10:30:39 2010
  Subject: RE: Call: Fmr. Dep. Sec Armitage
  Alexander can talk at 10:50 AM this morning (in 20 minutes). I can lock it in for that time and have Ops connect to you.
  Original Message
  From: H [mailto:HDR22@clintonemail.com]
  Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:22 AM
  To: Jiloty, Lauren C
  Subject: Re: Call: Fmr. Dep. Sec Armitage
  Ok. Just let me know when I can talk to Alexander.
  Original Message
  From: Jiloty, Lauren C clilotylC@state.gov>
  To: H
  Cc: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wed Aug 25 10:03:27 2010
  Subject: RE: Call: Fmr. Dep. Sec Armitage
  MS - Bob Einhorn is asking that you hold on the Yu call for now. The Deputy FM is currently in DC. Will meet w/ Einhorn
  at 1:00pm. Einhorn will reassess the need for a call after his meeting.
  I've reached out to Sen. Alexander's office and am waiting to hear back from them about his availability.
  Original Message
  From: H [mailto:HDR22@clintonemail.com]
  Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 9:37 AM
  To: Jiloty, Lauren C
  Subject: Re: Call: Fmr. Dep. Sec Armitage
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771118 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771118 Date: 08/31/2015
  Ok. But I want to talk w FM Yu and Lamar Alexander as soon as they could be set up.
  Original Message
  From: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
  To: H
  Cc: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wed Aug 25 09:30:06 2010
  Subject: Call: Fmr. Dep. Sec Armitage
  Has a call into you re: the American Turkish Council.
  ###
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771118 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771119
MetadataSubject: (AFP) HAITI DELAYS FINAL LIST OF PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-18T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771119/C05771119.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: (AFP) Haiti delays final list of presidential candidates
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: SES-O_SWO
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 8:21 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771119
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771119 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 8:21 AM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: (AFP) Haiti delays final list of presidential candidates
  From: Moore, Anna W
  To: NEWS-Mahogany
  Cc: SES-O_SWO
  Sent: Wed Aug 18 01:29:35 2010
  Subject: (AFP) Haiti delays final list of presidential candidates
  PORT-AU-PRINCE (AFP) — Haiti's electoral board has decided to push back until August 20 its release of the final list of
  presidential candidates, a statement released August 17 said. Several of the 34 candidates including hip-hop star Wyclef
  Jean have had their presidential eligibility requirements questioned at the electoral body.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771119 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771120
MetadataSubject: TWO TOPS OF FA PIEC
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Muscatine, Lissa
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-25T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771120/C05771120.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Two tops of FA piec
ExtractedTo: Huma Abedin
ExtractedFrom: Lissa Muscatine
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:36 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771120
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Huma -- Could you print this document. It has the two different openings for the FA piece. Thx. Lissa

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771120 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Lissa Muscatine
  Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:36 AM
  To: Huma Abedin
  Cc:
  Subject: Two tops of FA piec
  Attachments: FA Openings for S.docx; ATT00001.txt; FA Openings for S.docx; ATT00001.txt
  Huma -- Could you print this document. It has the two different openings for the FA piece. Thx. Lissa
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771120 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771121
MetadataSubject: FOREIGN AFFAIRS ARTICLE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Muscatine, Lissa
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-18T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771121/C05771121.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Foreign Affairs article
ExtractedTo: H; Slaughter, Anne-Marie
ExtractedFrom: Muscatine, Lissa <MuscatineL@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Sullivan, Jacob J; Fuchs, Michael H
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 8:22 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771121
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText: Yes. We are trying to re-do the opening per Jake right now. Also adding more granularity.
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771121 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Muscatine, Lissa <MuscatineL@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 8:22 AM
  To: H; Slaughter, Anne-Marie
  Subject: Re: Foreign Affairs article
  Yes. We are trying to re-do the opening per Jake right now. Also adding more granularity.
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Slaughter, Anne-Marie; Muscatine, Lissa
  Cc: Sullivan, Jacob J; Fuchs, Michael H
  Sent: Wed Aug 18 08:07:47 2010
  Subject: Foreign Affairs article
  Will I get next draft today? I'm running out of time to work on it. Thx.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771121 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771122
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: sbwhoeop
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-18T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771122/C05771122.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771122
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  sbwhoeop
  Wednesday, August 18, 2010 9:18 AM
  H: Interesting and relevant contribution to debate on interrelated jobs issue and China policy. Go back to your proposals
  on revival of manufacturing sector, too. What is Bill's program on lm jobs you mentioned? If they won't listen, he should
  simply do an op-ed. Sid
  Does Thomas Friedman Have to Talk to "Senior Economic Policy Makers" to Get So
  Many Things Wrong?
  Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, DC.
  Wednesday, 18 August 2010 04:04
  Thomas Friedman begins his oiece 1Q(44v by telling readers that: "over the past few weeks I've had a chance to
  speak with senior economic policy makers in America and Germany." This might lead readers to believe that
  he is about to share some great insights that would only be possible for someone with special access to these
  senior economic policy makers.
  Readers with this expectation will be seriously disappointed. There is nothing here that is more insightful than
  what can be found on the Washington Post's editorial pages on an average workday. Friedman rehashes the
  usual cliches, with the usual lack of thought. In doing so, he gets both the story of the recent past and the
  present seriously wrong.
  Starting with the past, he badly misrepresents the prior business cycle:
  "we've just ended more than a decade of debt-fueled growth during which we borrowed money from China to
  give ourselves a tax cut and more entitlements but did nothing to curtail spending or make long-term
  investments in new growth engines."
  The main problem facing the U.S. economy of the last decade was a lack of demand. This was in large part due
  to the fact that China lent to us. China's lending was its policy of propping up the value of the dollar in order to
  maintain its export market in the United States. (At the start of the decade, the Clinton administration had also
  tried to promote an over-valued dollar.) The over-valued -U.S. dollar made imports from China and other
  countries very cheap in the United States and made our exports expensive in other countries. This led to a large
  and growing trade deficit over most of the business cycle. The trade deficit replaced domestic demand,
  preventing the economy from approaching normal levels of employment (even with the boost from the housing
  bubble) until just before the crash.
  There is no reason whatsoever to believe that China's decision to prop up the dollar was in any way affected by
  the Bush tax cuts. In other words, neither the Bush tax cuts nor the growth in entitlements had anything to do
  with our borrowing from China. The issue was China's decision to lend and thereby prop up the dollar. Given
  the weakness of demand through most of the decade, these expenses could have been easily filled by domestic
  production without borrowing from abroad.
  Friedman does no better when he shifts the discussion from the past to the present. He refers to businesses'
  reluctance to hire as the result of "unusual uncertainty," a phrase attributed to Federal Reserve Board Chairman
  Ben Bemanke. Of course there is no reluctance to hire, there is simply a lack of demand for labor. A reluctance
  to hire would be reflected in an increasing number of hours per worker, as employers sought to meet their
  demand for labor by working the existing workforce more hours.
  This is not happening. There is a modest uptick in hours from the low point of the downturn, but the increase
  in hours per worker is certainly no more rapid than in other recessions and the average workweek is still far
  shorter in just about every sector than it was before the downturn.
  Later he tells readers:
  "America's solvency inflection point is coinciding with a technological one. Thanks to Internet diffusion, the
  rise of cloud computing, social networking and the shift from laptops and desktops to hand-held iPads and
  iF'hones, technology is destroying older, less skilled jobs that paid a decent wage at a faster pace than ever
  while spinning off more new skilled jobs that pay a decent wage but require more education than ever."
  This is a great story -- social networking is soaring, IPads are everywhere -- does Friedman have any evidence
  whatsoever that this development has increased the demand for educated workers and reduced the demand for
  less educated workers? If so, this would be the place in his column to present the evidence. Otherwise, readers
  might think that the 4.7 percent unemployment rate for college grads (nearly triple the pre-recession level),
  coupled with a decline in their real wages over the decade, implies a reduced demand for the labor of highly
  educated workers as well as less educated workers.
  Friedman's proposed fix also seems a bit wide of the mark. He insists:
  "There is only one way to deal with this challenge: more innovation to stimulate new industries and jobs that
  can pay workers $40 an hour, coupled with a huge initiative to train more Americans to win these jobs over
  their global competitors. There is no other way."
  We better hope there is another way. A wage of $40 an hour would put a worker well over the 90th percentile
  on the wage distribution. Even if we double the number of jobs in this pay range -- an incredible
  accomplishment -- what happens to the other 80 percent of the workforce?
  Friedman then warns us of the challenge from Europe by getting Germany's past and present wrong:
  "Keeping up with Germany won't be easy. A decade ago Germany was the 'sick man of Europe.' No more. The
  Germans pulled together. Labor gave up wage hikes and allowed businesses to improve competitiveness and
  worker flexibility, while the government subsidized firms to keep skilled workers on the job in the downturn."
  Germany clearly has done sorne changes that benefited its economy, like work sharing, and some that haven't,
  but its past as the "sick man of Europe" is an invention of Friedman or his highly placed sources. Germany
  always ran a trade surplus. That is the most basic measure of a country's competitiveness: foreigners are buying
  its goods. Germany's unemployment rate in 2.000 ayeravd 7
  .,5_percept, not hugely different than its current 7.0
  percent rate.
  The story here is that Friedman seems to have completely missed the basics of the current economic crisis in
  spite of his weeks of conversing with senior economic policy makers. The current crisis is due to a lack of
  demand pure and simple. If we generate demand either through more expansionary Fed monetary policy,
  greater fiscal stimulus, or increased exports due to a falling dollar, there is no reason to believe that the
  economy will not return to high levels of employment. Certainly Friedman has presented no evidence that
  increased demand will not generate increased employment as it always has.
  The longer term debt problem is overwhelmingly a health care story. Apparently Mr. Friedman's sources don't
  have access to documents like the Medicare trustees report, which imply that U.S. health care costs will be
  controlled and there will be no serious long-term deficit problem. This may prove -Wrong, but it seems that it
  would have at least been worth noting in his column. Of course, if we have not fixed our health care system,
  we can always achieve huge saving by retyinq on the more efficient health care systems in other countries.
  If Friedman's intention was to scare us, he succeeded. After all, if senior economic policy makers in the U.S.
  and Germany are as badly misinformed as Friedman implies, then we can expect some very had times ahead.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771122 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B6
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  sbwhoeop
  Wednesday, August 18, 2010 9:18 AM
  H: Interesting and relevant contribution to debate on interrelated jobs issue and China policy. Go back to your proposals
  on revival of manufacturing sector, too. What is Bill's program on lm jobs you mentioned? If they won't listen, he should
  simply do an op-ed. Sid
  Does Thomas Friedman Have to Talk to "Senior Economic Policy Makers" to Get So
  Many Things Wrong?
  Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, DC.
  Wednesday, 18 August 2010 04:04
  Thomas Friedman begins his oiece 1Q(44v by telling readers that: "over the past few weeks I've had a chance to
  speak with senior economic policy makers in America and Germany." This might lead readers to believe that
  he is about to share some great insights that would only be possible for someone with special access to these
  senior economic policy makers.
  Readers with this expectation will be seriously disappointed. There is nothing here that is more insightful than
  what can be found on the Washington Post's editorial pages on an average workday. Friedman rehashes the
  usual cliches, with the usual lack of thought. In doing so, he gets both the story of the recent past and the
  present seriously wrong.
  Starting with the past, he badly misrepresents the prior business cycle:
  "we've just ended more than a decade of debt-fueled growth during which we borrowed money from China to
  give ourselves a tax cut and more entitlements but did nothing to curtail spending or make long-term
  investments in new growth engines."
  The main problem facing the U.S. economy of the last decade was a lack of demand. This was in large part due
  to the fact that China lent to us. China's lending was its policy of propping up the value of the dollar in order to
  maintain its export market in the United States. (At the start of the decade, the Clinton administration had also
  tried to promote an over-valued dollar.) The over-valued -U.S. dollar made imports from China and other
  countries very cheap in the United States and made our exports expensive in other countries. This led to a large
  and growing trade deficit over most of the business cycle. The trade deficit replaced domestic demand,
  preventing the economy from approaching normal levels of employment (even with the boost from the housing
  bubble) until just before the crash.
  There is no reason whatsoever to believe that China's decision to prop up the dollar was in any way affected by
  the Bush tax cuts. In other words, neither the Bush tax cuts nor the growth in entitlements had anything to do
  with our borrowing from China. The issue was China's decision to lend and thereby prop up the dollar. Given
  the weakness of demand through most of the decade, these expenses could have been easily filled by domestic
  production without borrowing from abroad.
  Friedman does no better when he shifts the discussion from the past to the present. He refers to businesses'
  reluctance to hire as the result of "unusual uncertainty," a phrase attributed to Federal Reserve Board Chairman
  Ben Bemanke. Of course there is no reluctance to hire, there is simply a lack of demand for labor. A reluctance
  to hire would be reflected in an increasing number of hours per worker, as employers sought to meet their
  demand for labor by working the existing workforce more hours.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771122 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771122 Date: 08/31/2015
  This is not happening. There is a modest uptick in hours from the low point of the downturn, but the increase
  in hours per worker is certainly no more rapid than in other recessions and the average workweek is still far
  shorter in just about every sector than it was before the downturn.
  Later he tells readers:
  "America's solvency inflection point is coinciding with a technological one. Thanks to Internet diffusion, the
  rise of cloud computing, social networking and the shift from laptops and desktops to hand-held iPads and
  iF'hones, technology is destroying older, less skilled jobs that paid a decent wage at a faster pace than ever
  while spinning off more new skilled jobs that pay a decent wage but require more education than ever."
  This is a great story -- social networking is soaring, IPads are everywhere -- does Friedman have any evidence
  whatsoever that this development has increased the demand for educated workers and reduced the demand for
  less educated workers? If so, this would be the place in his column to present the evidence. Otherwise, readers
  might think that the 4.7 percent unemployment rate for college grads (nearly triple the pre-recession level),
  coupled with a decline in their real wages over the decade, implies a reduced demand for the labor of highly
  educated workers as well as less educated workers.
  Friedman's proposed fix also seems a bit wide of the mark. He insists:
  "There is only one way to deal with this challenge: more innovation to stimulate new industries and jobs that
  can pay workers $40 an hour, coupled with a huge initiative to train more Americans to win these jobs over
  their global competitors. There is no other way."
  We better hope there is another way. A wage of $40 an hour would put a worker well over the 90th percentile
  on the wage distribution. Even if we double the number of jobs in this pay range -- an incredible
  accomplishment -- what happens to the other 80 percent of the workforce?
  Friedman then warns us of the challenge from Europe by getting Germany's past and present wrong:
  "Keeping up with Germany won't be easy. A decade ago Germany was the 'sick man of Europe.' No more. The
  Germans pulled together. Labor gave up wage hikes and allowed businesses to improve competitiveness and
  worker flexibility, while the government subsidized firms to keep skilled workers on the job in the downturn."
  Germany clearly has done sorne changes that benefited its economy, like work sharing, and some that haven't,
  but its past as the "sick man of Europe" is an invention of Friedman or his highly placed sources. Germany
  always ran a trade surplus. That is the most basic measure of a country's competitiveness: foreigners are buying
  its goods. Germany's unemployment rate in 2.000 ayeravd 7
  .,5_percept, not hugely different than its current 7.0
  percent rate.
  The story here is that Friedman seems to have completely missed the basics of the current economic crisis in
  spite of his weeks of conversing with senior economic policy makers. The current crisis is due to a lack of
  demand pure and simple. If we generate demand either through more expansionary Fed monetary policy,
  greater fiscal stimulus, or increased exports due to a falling dollar, there is no reason to believe that the
  economy will not return to high levels of employment. Certainly Friedman has presented no evidence that
  increased demand will not generate increased employment as it always has.
  The longer term debt problem is overwhelmingly a health care story. Apparently Mr. Friedman's sources don't
  have access to documents like the Medicare trustees report, which imply that U.S. health care costs will be
  controlled and there will be no serious long-term deficit problem. This may prove -Wrong, but it seems that it
  would have at least been worth noting in his column. Of course, if we have not fixed our health care system,
  we can always achieve huge saving by retyinq on the more efficient health care systems in other countries.
  If Friedman's intention was to scare us, he succeeded. After all, if senior economic policy makers in the U.S.
  and Germany are as badly misinformed as Friedman implies, then we can expect some very had times ahead.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771122 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771124
MetadataSubject: FOREIGN AFFAIRS MAGAZINE - LEADING THROUGH CIVILIAN POWER
MetadataFrom: Foreign Affairs Magazine
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771124/C05771124.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771124
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771124 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  Draft 20 (last night)
  FOREIGN AFFAIRS MAGAZINE
  LEADING THROUGH CIVILIAN POWER
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771124 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771124 Date: 08/31/2015
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771124 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771124 Date: 08/31/2015
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771124 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771126
MetadataSubject: RE:
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Ebeling, Betsy
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-18T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771126/C05771126.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771126
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Ebeling, Betsy <
  Wednesday, August 18, 2010 12:10 PM
  H
  RE:

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771126 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B6
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Subject:
  Ebeling, Betsy <
  Wednesday, August 18, 2010 12:10 PM
  H
  RE:
  Original Message
  From: H [mailto:HDR22@clintonemail.com]
  Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 6:44 PM
  To: Ebeling, Betsy
  Subject: Re:
  Pretty puny outcome for all the hype.
  And, how are you doing? We're trying to get away for a week on Friday. I'd really like to go to one of those Swiss sleep
  sanitariums if they still exist.
  Love and hugs----xxoo Gert
  Original Message
  From: Ebeling, Betsy <
  To: H
  Sent: Tue Aug 17 17:40:57 2010
  Subject:
  Blago found guilty of lying to the FBI; will be retried on the other 23 counts; jury hung on 27 counts (4 agst his brother)
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771126 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771127
MetadataSubject: DRAFT 21 - LEADING THROUGH CIVILIAN POWER
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771127/C05771127.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771127
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771127 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  DRAFT 21 (VERSION THIS MORNING)
  LEADING THROUGH CIVILIAN POWER
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771127 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771127 Date: 08/31/2015
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771127 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771127 Date: 08/31/2015
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771127 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771128
MetadataSubject: FOREIGN AFFAIRS MAGAZINE LEADING THROUGH CIVILIAN POWER
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771128/C05771128.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771128
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771128 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  Draft 20 (last night)
  FOREIGN AFFAIRS MAGAZINE
  LEADING THROUGH CIVILIAN POWER
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771128 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771128 Date: 08/31/2015
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771128 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771128 Date: 08/31/2015
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771128 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771129
MetadataSubject: DRAFT 21 - LEADING THROUGH CIVILIAN POWER
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771129/C05771129.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771129
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771129 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  DRAFT 21 (VERSION THIS MORNING1
  LEADING THROUGH CIVILIAN POWER
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771129 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771129 Date: 08/31/2015
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771129 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771129 Date: 08/31/2015
  B5
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771129 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771130
MetadataSubject: ARTICLE UPDATE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Slaughter, Anne-Marie
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-18T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771130/C05771130.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: FA article update
ExtractedFrom: Slaughter, Anne-Marie <SlaughterA@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Muscatine, Lissa; Sullivan, Jacob J; Abedin, Huma
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 6:31 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771130
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  I don't want to keep you hanging all evening. I will spare you the excuses; we think we can have
  you something by 9:00. In some ways it's getting rougher before it's getting smoother, as we get the
  top right and add examples. But it would be very good to have you engage again to make sure we
  are going in the right direction. This draft also benefits from extensive comments from Jack, Raj,
  and Jake. AM
  Anne-Marie Slaughter
  Director of Policy Planning
  U.S. Department of State
  (202) 647-2972

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771130 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Slaughter, Anne-Marie <SlaughterA@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 6:31 PM
  To:
  Cc: Muscatine, Lissa; Sullivan, Jacob J; Abedin, Huma
  Subject: FA article update
  I don't want to keep you hanging all evening. I will spare you the excuses; we think we can have
  you something by 9:00. In some ways it's getting rougher before it's getting smoother, as we get the
  top right and add examples. But it would be very good to have you engage again to make sure we
  are going in the right direction. This draft also benefits from extensive comments from Jack, Raj,
  and Jake. AM
  Anne-Marie Slaughter
  Director of Policy Planning
  U.S. Department of State
  (202) 647-2972
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771130 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771131
MetadataSubject: ATT00001 (6)
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771131/C05771131.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771131
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771131 Date: 08/31/2015
  ,
  RELEASE IN FULL
  ATT00001 (6)
  Page 1
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771131 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771132
MetadataSubject: ATT00001 (7)
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771132/C05771132.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771132
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771132 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  ATT00001 (7)
  Page 1
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771132 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771133
MetadataSubject: JAKE IS FREE TO TALK WHENEVER YOU ARE.
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-18T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771133/C05771133.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Jake is free to talk whenever you are.
ExtractedTo: H
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 8:25 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771133
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771133 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 8:25 PM
  To: H
  Subject: Jake is free to talk whenever you are.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771133 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771135
MetadataSubject: REFERENCE LETTER
MetadataTo: Hubbard, William
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771135/C05771135.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771135
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771135 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  Reference Letter
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771135 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771135 Date: 08/31/2015
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771135 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771137
MetadataSubject: ATT00001 (8)
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771137/C05771137.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771137
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771137 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  ATT00001 (8)
  Page 1
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771137 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771138
MetadataSubject: FA ARTICLE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Slaughter, Anne-Marie
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-18T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771138/C05771138.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: FA article
ExtractedFrom: Slaughter, Anne-Marie <SlaughterA@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Muscatine, Lissa; Sullivan, Jacob J
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 10:32 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771138
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  As you have probably figured out by now, it's not ready. We were prepared to send you something rough, but it's just
  not in a state where it makes sense for you to engage. I will call Jim Hoge tomorrow and get another week of need be;
  Lissa is going to take over the drafting tomorrow with the aim of getting you a draft by late afternoon that you can really
  take some time with; we will then take your comments Friday or Sat (if you need more time) and then not bother you
  again until we have a final. I'm sorry, but it is most important that this be good.
  AM

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771138 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Slaughter, Anne-Marie <SlaughterA@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 10:32 PM
  To:
  Cc: Muscatine, Lissa; Sullivan, Jacob J
  Subject: FA article
  As you have probably figured out by now, it's not ready. We were prepared to send you something rough, but it's just
  not in a state where it makes sense for you to engage. I will call Jim Hoge tomorrow and get another week of need be;
  Lissa is going to take over the drafting tomorrow with the aim of getting you a draft by late afternoon that you can really
  take some time with; we will then take your comments Friday or Sat (if you need more time) and then not bother you
  again until we have a final. I'm sorry, but it is most important that this be good.
  AM
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771138 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771139
MetadataSubject: (AP) US ANNOUNCES AID BOOST TO PAKISTAN AFTER FLOODING
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-19T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771139/C05771139.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: (AP) US announces aid boost to Pakistan after flooding
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: SES-O_Shift-I
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 7:02 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771139
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771139 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 7:02 AM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: (AP) US announces aid boost to Pakistan after flooding
  From: Moore, Anna W
  To: NEWS-Mahogany; NEWS-SCA
  Cc: SES-O_Shift-I
  Sent: Thu Aug 19 04:30:48 2010
  Subject: (AP) US announces aid boost to Pakistan after flooding
  GHAZI AIR BASE (AP) — The United States will increase its aid to flood-ravaged Pakistan to $150 million, U.S. Sen. John
  Kerry said, stressing that Washington did not want Islamist extremism to increase on the back of the crisis. The United
  States has deployed army helicopters to hard hit areas as part of a package worth $90 million. U.S. Sen. John Kerry, who
  is visiting Pakistan to see the flood damage, said that would increase to $150 million. The figure is expected to be
  announced at a U.N. general assembly meeting in New York August 19. He was speaking after meeting U.S. military
  personnel taking part in helicopter relief missions.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771139 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771142
MetadataSubject: MINI SCHEDULE 8/19/10 THURSDAY
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-18T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771142/C05771142.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Mini Schedule 8/19/10 Thursday
ExtractedFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Abedin, Huma
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 7:42 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771142
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  8:15 am DEPART Private Residence
  En route State Department
  8:25 am ARRIVE State Department
  8:25 am PRESIDENTIAL DAILY BRIEFING
  8:30 am Secretary's Office
  8:30 am DAILY SMALL STAFF MEETING
  8:45 am Secretary's Office
  8:45 am DAILY SENIOR STAFF MEETING
  9:15 am Secretary's Conference Room
  9:15 am WEEKLY MEETING w/REGIONAL BUREAU SECRETARIES
  10:00 am Deputy Secretary's Conference Room
  10:00 am OFFICE TIME
  10:30 am Secretary's Office
  10:30 am TAPED TELEVISION INTERVIEW w/ANVVAR IQBAL, DAWN NEWS
  10:40 am Marshall Room
  10:45 am TAPED TELEVISION INTERVIEW w/SAMI ABRAHAM, GEO TV
  10:55 am Marshall Room
  11:00 am OFFICE TIME
  11:40 am Secretary's Office
  11:45 am DEPART State Department
  En route Andrews AFB
  12:10 pm ARRIVE Andrews AFB
  12:20 pm DEPART Andrews AFB via US Air Force Military Aircraft Tail #70400
  En route New York, NY-LaGuardia Airport
  1:10 pm ARRIVE New York, New York-LaGuardia Airport
  1:20 pm DEPART New York-LaGuardia Airport
  En route United Nations
  2:00 pm ARRIVE United Nations
  2:00 pm MEETING w/FOREIGN MINISTER MEHMOOD QURESHI, PAKISTAN
  2:20 pm Room GA-TSC-03C (P5 Meeting Room) *Camera spray at top.
  2:40 pm MEETING w/SECRETARY GENERAL BAN KI-MOON
  3:00 pm GA-200 (Room directly behind the General Assembly Dias) *Camera spray at
  top.
  3:00 pm REMARKS AT THE UNITED NATIONS SPECIAL PLENARY SESSION
  4:20 pm (t) ON FLOOD RELIEF FOR PAKISTAN General Assembly Hall
  4:20 pm (t) DEPART United Nations
  En route Private Residence
  5:10 pm (t) ARRIVE Private Residence ###

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771142 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 7:42 AM
  To:
  Cc: Abedin, Huma
  Subject: Mini Schedule 8/19/10 Thursday
  8:15 am DEPART Private Residence
  En route State Department
  8:25 am ARRIVE State Department
  8:25 am PRESIDENTIAL DAILY BRIEFING
  8:30 am Secretary's Office
  8:30 am DAILY SMALL STAFF MEETING
  8:45 am Secretary's Office
  8:45 am DAILY SENIOR STAFF MEETING
  9:15 am Secretary's Conference Room
  9:15 am WEEKLY MEETING w/REGIONAL BUREAU SECRETARIES
  10:00 am Deputy Secretary's Conference Room
  10:00 am OFFICE TIME
  10:30 am Secretary's Office
  10:30 am TAPED TELEVISION INTERVIEW w/ANVVAR IQBAL, DAWN NEWS
  10:40 am Marshall Room
  10:45 am TAPED TELEVISION INTERVIEW w/SAMI ABRAHAM, GEO TV
  10:55 am Marshall Room
  11:00 am OFFICE TIME
  11:40 am Secretary's Office
  11:45 am DEPART State Department
  En route Andrews AFB
  12:10 pm ARRIVE Andrews AFB
  12:20 pm DEPART Andrews AFB via US Air Force Military Aircraft Tail #70400
  En route New York, NY-LaGuardia Airport
  1:10 pm ARRIVE New York, New York-LaGuardia Airport
  1:20 pm DEPART New York-LaGuardia Airport
  En route United Nations
  2:00 pm ARRIVE United Nations
  2:00 pm MEETING w/FOREIGN MINISTER MEHMOOD QURESHI, PAKISTAN
  2:20 pm Room GA-TSC-03C (P5 Meeting Room) *Camera spray at top.
  2:40 pm MEETING w/SECRETARY GENERAL BAN KI-MOON
  3:00 pm GA-200 (Room directly behind the General Assembly Dias) *Camera spray at
  top.
  3:00 pm REMARKS AT THE UNITED NATIONS SPECIAL PLENARY SESSION
  4:20 pm (t) ON FLOOD RELIEF FOR PAKISTAN General Assembly Hall
  4:20 pm (t) DEPART United Nations
  En route Private Residence
  5:10 pm (t) ARRIVE Private Residence ###
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771142 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771143
MetadataSubject: CALLS
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-25T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771143/C05771143.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Calls
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:51 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771143
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  Waiting on yu.
  Alexander will be pretty soon.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771143 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:51 AM
  To:
  Subject: Re: Calls
  Waiting on yu.
  Alexander will be pretty soon.
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Abedin, Huma
  Sent: Wed Aug 25 09:25:16 2010
  Subject: Re: Calls
  Schedule Yu and Alexander for before noon. Just let me know when.
  Original Message
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  To: H
  Sent: Wed Aug 25 09:18:10 2010
  Subject: Calls
  - did u get yu call sheet in pouch. Let me know if u want to schedule.
  -alexander available until 1.
  - menendez: can talk at 8pm today or tomorrow or thurs after 12pm
  - mashabane is traveling in china so no word yet.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771143 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771145
MetadataSubject: WORTH READING, EVEN IF YOU KNOW THE INTEL
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: sbwhoeop
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-25T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771145/C05771145.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771145
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  sbwhoeop
  Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:52 AM
  worth reading, even if you know the Intel
  B6
  H: I'm sure you know the facts in this well-informed piece, how Mullah Omar was saved by ISI, for example, but the idea
  of Afghanistan as an aspect of lndo-Pak war is the best and overarching strategic concept. Sid
  http://www.newstatesman.com/asia/2010/08/india-pakistan-afghanistan
  iNT aLOSE
  The military and the mullahs
  William Dalrymple
  Published 23 August 2010
  The Pakistani state has a long history of nurturing jihadis as a means of dominating Afghanistan and undermining India.
  It is proving a fatal alliance.
  It May have been a nightmarish year for Pakistan but it has been a pretty good one for the country's inscrutable chief of
  army staff, the most powerful man in the Land of the Pure, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.
  For a start, the army's response to the floods has compared well to the usual corrupt incompetence of Pakistan's civilian
  politicians, guided by their chateau-hopping president, Asif Ali Zardari (while minister for investment, he was nicknamed
  "Mr 10 Per Cent"; he has now been upgraded to "Mr 110 Per Cent"). This has led to discussion in army circles about
  whether it is time to drop the civilian fig leaf and return the country to the loving embrace of its military. So serious is this
  threat, that one of the country's most senior and well-connected journalists. Najam Sethi, editor-in-chief of the Friday
  Times, went on the record this month to warn that elements in the army were plotting yet another coup."( know this is
  definitely being discussed," he said.
  Then there was the news that Kayani was going to be allowed to keep his job for a second term: "an extraordinary
  situation requires an extraordinary decision to overcome it", explained a brigadier, writing in the Nation newspaper.
  Kayani, a former head of Pakistan's notorious intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISO, can now continue
  to run the army, and by default Pakistan's foreign policy, until November 2013.
  But Kayani's biggest triumph this year, arguably the greatest of his career, was his visit to Kabul in July as the honoured
  guest of the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai. The visit marked an important thawing in Pak-Afghan relations, which
  have been glacial ever since Karzai came to power in 2001. It also coincided with the sacking of Amrullah Saleh,
  Karzai's pro-Indian and rabidly anti-ISI former security chief. Saleh is a tough Tajik who rose to prominence as a
  mujahedin protege of Ahmed Shah Massoud, the Indian-backed "Lion of Panjshir". The Taliban, and their sponsors in
  the ISI, had regarded Saleh as their fiercest opponent, something Saleh was enormously proud of.
  When I had dinner with him in Kabul in May, he spoke at length of his frustration with the ineffectiveness of Karzai's
  government in taking the fight to the Taliban, and the extent to which the ISI was managing to aid, arm and train its
  puppet insurgents in North Waziristan and Balochistan. Saleh's sacking gave notice of an important change of direction
  by Karzai. As Bruce Riedel, Barack Obama's Af-Pak adviser, said when the news broke, "it means that Karzai is already
  planning for a post-American Afghanistan". •
  It seems that Kayani and Karzai are discussing some sort of accommodation between the Afghan government and ISI-
  sponsored elements in the Taliban, maybe those of Sirajuddin Haqqani, which could give over much of the Pashtun
  south to pro-Pakistan Taliban, but preserve Karzai in power in Kabul after the US withdrawal. The expulsion of India,
  Pakistan's great regional rival, from Afghanistan, or at least the closing of its four regional consulates, would be a top
  priority for the ISI in return for any deal that kept Karzai in power.
  With the US toppling of the Taliban after the 11 September 2001 attacks, Pakistan's influence disappeared abruptly from
  Afghanistan and
  India quickly filled the vacuum. To the ISI's horror, in the early years of this decade, India provided reconstruction
  assistance and training worth roughly £835m in total. It also built roads, sanitation projects, the new Afghan parliament
  and free medical facilities across the country. It even offered to help train the Afghan army. Nato refused. As General
  Stanley McChrystal put it in a report last year, "while Indian activities largely benefit the Afghan people, increasing Indian
  influence in Afghanistan is likely to exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani countermeasures".
  McChrystal was right. The Pakistanis have always been paranoid about the small Indian presence in Afghanistan. "We
  have strong evidence [that India is] using Afghanistan against Pakistan's interests to destabilise Pakistan," a foreign
  ministry spokesman claimed in March. Pakistan's military establishment, terrified of the economic superpower emerging
  to the south, believes it would be suicide to accept an Indian presence in what it regards as its Afghan backyard - a
  potential point of retreat for the army in the event of an Indian invasion, something Pakistani analysts refer to as vital
  "strategic depth".
  According to Indian diplomatic sources, there are still fewer than 3,600 Indians in Afghanistan; there are only ten Indian
  diplomatic officers, as opposed to nearly 150 in the UK embassy. Yet the horror of being encircled has led the ISI to risk
  Pakistan's relationship with its main strategic ally, the US, in order to keep the Taliban in play and its leadership under
  ISI patronage in Quetta - a policy Kayani developed while head of the IS!. Karzai's new deal with the Pakistanis, and his
  clear intention to try to reach some accommodation with their proxies among the Taliban, therefore represents a major
  strategic victory for Kayani and Pakistan's military, as well as a grave diplomatic defeat for India.
  Pakistan's support for the Taliban today is only the most recent chapter of an old story of complicity between jihadi
  movements and the Pakistani state. Since the days of the anti-Soviet mujahedin, Pakistan's army saw violent Islamic
  groups as an ingenious and cost-effective means of both dominating Afghanistan (which they finally achieved with the
  retreat of the Soviets in 1987) and bogging down the Hindu-dominated Indian army in Kashmir (which they managed
  with great effect from 1990 onwards).
  The former ISI director and Dick Dastardly lookalike Hamid Gul, who was largely responsible for developing the strategy,
  once said to me: "If the jihadis go out and contain India, tying down one rnillion men of their army on their own soil, for a
  legitimate cause, why should we not support them?" Next to Gul in his Islamabad living room lay a piece of the Berlin
  Wall presented to him by the city's people for "delivering the first blow" to the Soviet empire through his use of jihadis in
  the 1980s. The WikiLeaks documents suggest he is still busy liaising with jihadis in his "retirement".
  The Pakistani military top brass were long convinced that they could control the militants they have nurtured. In a taped
  conversation between President Pervez Musharraf and Muhammad Aziz Khan, his chief of general staff, that India
  released in 1999, Aziz said the army had the jihadis by their "tooti" (balls). Yet the Islamists have increasingly followed
  their own agendas, sending suicide bombers out against not just Pakistan's religious minorities and political leaders, but
  even the IS! headquarters. Nonetheless, many in the army still believe the jihadis are a more practical defence against
  Indian hegemony than nuclear weapons. For them, supporting Islamist groups is not an ideological or religious whim, so
  much as a practical and patriotic imperative - a vital survival strategy for a Pakistani state.
  The army and ISI continued this duplicitous and risky policy after 11 September 2001 despite Musharrafs public
  promises to the contrary. The speed with which the US lost interest in Afghanistan after its invasion and embarked on
  plans to invade Iraq convinced the Pakistani army that the Washington had no long-term commitment to Karzai's
  regime. This led to the generals keeping the Taliban in reserve, to be used to reinstal a pro-Pakistani regime in Kabul
  once the American gaze had turned elsewhere.
  So it was that the .ISI gave refuge to the leadership of the Taliban after it fled from Afghanistan in 2001. Mullah
  Mohammed Omar was kept in an IS! safehouse in Quetta; his militia was lodged in the sprawling suburb of
  Pashtunabad. There, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar presided over the Taliban military committee and war chest.
  Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the leader of Hizb-e-lslami, was lured back from exile in Iran and allowed to operate freely
  outside Peshawar, while Jalaluddin Haqqani, one of the most violent Taliban commanders, was given sanctuary in North
  Waziristan. Other groups were despatched to safehouses in Balochistan.
  By 2004, the US had filmed Pakistani army trucks delivering Taliban fighters at the Afghan border and recovering them
  a few days later; wireless monitoring at the US base at Bagram picked up Taliban commanders arranging with Pakistani
  army officers at the border for safe passage as they came in and out of Afghanistan. Western intelligence agencies
  concluded that the ISI was running a full training programme for the Afghan Taliban, turning a blind eye as they raised
  funds in the Gulf and allowing them to import materiel, mainly via Dubai. By 2005 the Taliban, with covert Pakistani
  support, were launching a full-scale assault on Nato troops in Afghanistan and being given covering fire as they returned
  to their bases in Pakistan.
  At the same time, Taliban attacks on Indian interests in Afghanistan intensified, beginning the process of turning the
  Afghan conflict, like that in Kashmir, into what it is today: an lndo-Pak proxy war. The Indian embassy in Kabul was twice
  bombed - in July 2008 and October 2009 - as were two city-centre hotels thought to have been used by the Research
  and Analysis Wing (Raw), the Indian intelligence agency. Seven Indian civilians and two Indian military officers died in
  the blasts.
  The degree to which the ISI has been controlling the Afghan Taliban has only just become clear, and not just in the
  documents published by WikiLeaks. A report by Matt Waldman of the Carr Centre for Human Rights at Harvard, based
  on interviews with ten former senior Taliban commanders, closely documents how the IS! "orchestrates, sustains and
  strongly influences" the Taliban and shows how the !SI is even represented on the Taliban's supreme leadership
  council, the Quetta Shura.
  Meanwhile, in the Punjab, Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, founder of Lashkar-e-Toiba, and the man believed to have been
  behind the 2008 Bombay attacks, has been allowed to continue operating from Muridke, near Lahore. "The powerful
  western world is terrorising Muslims," he told a conference in Islamabad this year. "We are being invaded, manipulated
  and looted. We must fight the evil trio of America, Israel and India. Suicide missions are in accordance with Islam. In
  fact, a suicide attack is the best form of jihad."
  At the same time as Pursuing its policy of selectively using jihadis, Pakistan has appeased the US by giving generous
  assistance to the CIA in arresting foreign Arab al-Qaeda personnel. A major assault was also launched against both the
  militants who took over the Lal Masjid and the ultra-radical Pakistan Taliban who took over the Swat Valley and
  announced their intention of turning the country into an Islamic Emirate. In the course of these operations and others in
  the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, more than 1,500 Pakistani soldiers and policemen were killed; another 250,000
  people were made homeless in the Pak army assault on Bajaur. The IS1 has even been prepared to arrest any members
  of the Afghan Taliban who didn't follow orders. Hence the seizure in Karachi, in February, of the Taliban second-in-
  command, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, along with aboutia dozen other senior Taliban whom the ISI regarded as
  infringing on their hospitality by opening talks with the Karzai administration via the Saudis, without ISI clearance.
  Yet, even though the Pakistani army has conducted major offensives in six of the tribal areas, the seventh, North
  Waziristan, has been left alone, as it is home to the ISI's favourite proxies: Haqqani and Hekmatyar. Similarly, Pakistan's
  foot-dragging response to the 2008 attacks on Bombay, and the lack of response to the attacks on minority faith groups
  in Pakistan over the past few months, show that the Janus-faced policy remains in place. This summer, the chief
  minister of the Punjab, Shahbaz Sharif, was quoted heatedly denying that there were any militant groups working in the
  Pakistani Punjab, or that the Punjabi Taliban even existed. There are still, in the eyes of many in the Pakistani
  establishment, good Taliban and bad Taliban, useful militants and expendable ones.
  In their eyes, the ongoing defeat of Nato in Afghanistan, with US and British troops suffering record casualties last
  month, is a vindication of its long-term strategy. Islamabad has succeeded in regaining influence in Afghanistan and
  Delhi has been checked. But India will not take this lying down. Already the Indian press has reported attempts to -
  resuscitate the Northern Alliance as a contingency against the Taliban's takeover of the south, and here India is working
  in conjuction with Russia, Iran and the central Asian "stans". The Indian national security adviser, Shivshankar Menon,
  was despatched to Afghanistan in March, and the foreign minister, S M Krishna, has visited Tehran. Post-American
  Afghanistan is looking increasingly likely to be divided between the Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara north and the Pashtun
  south, either formally, with a partition, or more likely, to slip into inter-ethnic civil war, with India supporting and arming
  the north and Pakistan the south.
  As diplomacy gathers pace, the Afghan Taliban, who already control over 70 per cent of the country. continue to
  increase their power. The most worrying development has been the spread of Taliban units to the previously peaceful
  north, where they have taken over pockets of Pathan settlement around Kunduz and Badakhshan. The death of the
  British aid worker Karen Woo on 5 August was a direct result.
  In Pakistan. too, jihadi activity is growing. Last year there were 87 suicide attacks across the country, killing roughly
  3,000 people and the ISI this week stated that, for the first time in the nation's history, it regarded home-grown Islamic
  militants to be a bigger threat to the integrity of the nation than India. Yet the army continues to obsess about India. In a
  recent speech, Kayani emphasised that although the army knows the dangers of militancy, it was against Indian attacks
  that he was principally focused. At a time when Pakistan's economy is in crisis, electricity supply increasingly erratic and
  the educational system in complete breakdown, Kayani has secured a huge increase in the country's defence budget.
  It is not a pretty picture: growing violence everywhere, increasing Indo-Pak tensions and a defeat for western interests in
  the region. Worst of all, because the Pakistani army regards this as a major triumph, it is unlikely to change its policy any
  time soon.
  William Dalrymple's "Nine Lives: in Search of the Sacred in Modern India" won the first Asia House Literary Award in
  May and is newly published in paperback (Bloomsbury, £8.99)

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771145 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Subject:
  sbwhoeop
  Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:52 AM
  worth reading, even if you know the Intel
  B6
  H: I'm sure you know the facts in this well-informed piece, how Mullah Omar was saved by ISI, for example, but the idea
  of Afghanistan as an aspect of lndo-Pak war is the best and overarching strategic concept. Sid
  http://www.newstatesman.com/asia/2010/08/india-pakistan-afghanistan
  iNT aLOSE
  The military and the mullahs
  William Dalrymple
  Published 23 August 2010
  The Pakistani state has a long history of nurturing jihadis as a means of dominating Afghanistan and undermining India.
  It is proving a fatal alliance.
  It May have been a nightmarish year for Pakistan but it has been a pretty good one for the country's inscrutable chief of
  army staff, the most powerful man in the Land of the Pure, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.
  For a start, the army's response to the floods has compared well to the usual corrupt incompetence of Pakistan's civilian
  politicians, guided by their chateau-hopping president, Asif Ali Zardari (while minister for investment, he was nicknamed
  "Mr 10 Per Cent"; he has now been upgraded to "Mr 110 Per Cent"). This has led to discussion in army circles about
  whether it is time to drop the civilian fig leaf and return the country to the loving embrace of its military. So serious is this
  threat, that one of the country's most senior and well-connected journalists. Najam Sethi, editor-in-chief of the Friday
  Times, went on the record this month to warn that elements in the army were plotting yet another coup."( know this is
  definitely being discussed," he said.
  Then there was the news that Kayani was going to be allowed to keep his job for a second term: "an extraordinary
  situation requires an extraordinary decision to overcome it", explained a brigadier, writing in the Nation newspaper.
  Kayani, a former head of Pakistan's notorious intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISO, can now continue
  to run the army, and by default Pakistan's foreign policy, until November 2013.
  But Kayani's biggest triumph this year, arguably the greatest of his career, was his visit to Kabul in July as the honoured
  guest of the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai. The visit marked an important thawing in Pak-Afghan relations, which
  have been glacial ever since Karzai came to power in 2001. It also coincided with the sacking of Amrullah Saleh,
  Karzai's pro-Indian and rabidly anti-ISI former security chief. Saleh is a tough Tajik who rose to prominence as a
  mujahedin protege of Ahmed Shah Massoud, the Indian-backed "Lion of Panjshir". The Taliban, and their sponsors in
  the ISI, had regarded Saleh as their fiercest opponent, something Saleh was enormously proud of.
  When I had dinner with him in Kabul in May, he spoke at length of his frustration with the ineffectiveness of Karzai's
  government in taking the fight to the Taliban, and the extent to which the ISI was managing to aid, arm and train its
  puppet insurgents in North Waziristan and Balochistan. Saleh's sacking gave notice of an important change of direction
  by Karzai. As Bruce Riedel, Barack Obama's Af-Pak adviser, said when the news broke, "it means that Karzai is already
  planning for a post-American Afghanistan". •
  It seems that Kayani and Karzai are discussing some sort of accommodation between the Afghan government and ISI-
  sponsored elements in the Taliban, maybe those of Sirajuddin Haqqani, which could give over much of the Pashtun
  south to pro-Pakistan Taliban, but preserve Karzai in power in Kabul after the US withdrawal. The expulsion of India,
  Pakistan's great regional rival, from Afghanistan, or at least the closing of its four regional consulates, would be a top
  priority for the ISI in return for any deal that kept Karzai in power.
  With the US toppling of the Taliban after the 11 September 2001 attacks, Pakistan's influence disappeared abruptly from
  Afghanistan and
  India quickly filled the vacuum. To the ISI's horror, in the early years of this decade, India provided reconstruction
  assistance and training worth roughly £835m in total. It also built roads, sanitation projects, the new Afghan parliament
  and free medical facilities across the country. It even offered to help train the Afghan army. Nato refused. As General
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771145 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771145 Date: 08/31/2015
  Stanley McChrystal put it in a report last year, "while Indian activities largely benefit the Afghan people, increasing Indian
  influence in Afghanistan is likely to exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani countermeasures".
  McChrystal was right. The Pakistanis have always been paranoid about the small Indian presence in Afghanistan. "We
  have strong evidence [that India is] using Afghanistan against Pakistan's interests to destabilise Pakistan," a foreign
  ministry spokesman claimed in March. Pakistan's military establishment, terrified of the economic superpower emerging
  to the south, believes it would be suicide to accept an Indian presence in what it regards as its Afghan backyard - a
  potential point of retreat for the army in the event of an Indian invasion, something Pakistani analysts refer to as vital
  "strategic depth".
  According to Indian diplomatic sources, there are still fewer than 3,600 Indians in Afghanistan; there are only ten Indian
  diplomatic officers, as opposed to nearly 150 in the UK embassy. Yet the horror of being encircled has led the ISI to risk
  Pakistan's relationship with its main strategic ally, the US, in order to keep the Taliban in play and its leadership under
  ISI patronage in Quetta - a policy Kayani developed while head of the IS!. Karzai's new deal with the Pakistanis, and his
  clear intention to try to reach some accommodation with their proxies among the Taliban, therefore represents a major
  strategic victory for Kayani and Pakistan's military, as well as a grave diplomatic defeat for India.
  Pakistan's support for the Taliban today is only the most recent chapter of an old story of complicity between jihadi
  movements and the Pakistani state. Since the days of the anti-Soviet mujahedin, Pakistan's army saw violent Islamic
  groups as an ingenious and cost-effective means of both dominating Afghanistan (which they finally achieved with the
  retreat of the Soviets in 1987) and bogging down the Hindu-dominated Indian army in Kashmir (which they managed
  with great effect from 1990 onwards).
  The former ISI director and Dick Dastardly lookalike Hamid Gul, who was largely responsible for developing the strategy,
  once said to me: "If the jihadis go out and contain India, tying down one rnillion men of their army on their own soil, for a
  legitimate cause, why should we not support them?" Next to Gul in his Islamabad living room lay a piece of the Berlin
  Wall presented to him by the city's people for "delivering the first blow" to the Soviet empire through his use of jihadis in
  the 1980s. The WikiLeaks documents suggest he is still busy liaising with jihadis in his "retirement".
  The Pakistani military top brass were long convinced that they could control the militants they have nurtured. In a taped
  conversation between President Pervez Musharraf and Muhammad Aziz Khan, his chief of general staff, that India
  released in 1999, Aziz said the army had the jihadis by their "tooti" (balls). Yet the Islamists have increasingly followed
  their own agendas, sending suicide bombers out against not just Pakistan's religious minorities and political leaders, but
  even the IS! headquarters. Nonetheless, many in the army still believe the jihadis are a more practical defence against
  Indian hegemony than nuclear weapons. For them, supporting Islamist groups is not an ideological or religious whim, so
  much as a practical and patriotic imperative - a vital survival strategy for a Pakistani state.
  The army and ISI continued this duplicitous and risky policy after 11 September 2001 despite Musharrafs public
  promises to the contrary. The speed with which the US lost interest in Afghanistan after its invasion and embarked on
  plans to invade Iraq convinced the Pakistani army that the Washington had no long-term commitment to Karzai's
  regime. This led to the generals keeping the Taliban in reserve, to be used to reinstal a pro-Pakistani regime in Kabul
  once the American gaze had turned elsewhere.
  So it was that the .ISI gave refuge to the leadership of the Taliban after it fled from Afghanistan in 2001. Mullah
  Mohammed Omar was kept in an IS! safehouse in Quetta; his militia was lodged in the sprawling suburb of
  Pashtunabad. There, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar presided over the Taliban military committee and war chest.
  Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the leader of Hizb-e-lslami, was lured back from exile in Iran and allowed to operate freely
  outside Peshawar, while Jalaluddin Haqqani, one of the most violent Taliban commanders, was given sanctuary in North
  Waziristan. Other groups were despatched to safehouses in Balochistan.
  By 2004, the US had filmed Pakistani army trucks delivering Taliban fighters at the Afghan border and recovering them
  a few days later; wireless monitoring at the US base at Bagram picked up Taliban commanders arranging with Pakistani
  army officers at the border for safe passage as they came in and out of Afghanistan. Western intelligence agencies
  concluded that the ISI was running a full training programme for the Afghan Taliban, turning a blind eye as they raised
  funds in the Gulf and allowing them to import materiel, mainly via Dubai. By 2005 the Taliban, with covert Pakistani
  support, were launching a full-scale assault on Nato troops in Afghanistan and being given covering fire as they returned
  to their bases in Pakistan.
  At the same time, Taliban attacks on Indian interests in Afghanistan intensified, beginning the process of turning the
  Afghan conflict, like that in Kashmir, into what it is today: an lndo-Pak proxy war. The Indian embassy in Kabul was twice
  bombed - in July 2008 and October 2009 - as were two city-centre hotels thought to have been used by the Research
  and Analysis Wing (Raw), the Indian intelligence agency. Seven Indian civilians and two Indian military officers died in
  the blasts.
  The degree to which the ISI has been controlling the Afghan Taliban has only just become clear, and not just in the
  documents published by WikiLeaks. A report by Matt Waldman of the Carr Centre for Human Rights at Harvard, based
  on interviews with ten former senior Taliban commanders, closely documents how the IS! "orchestrates, sustains and
  strongly influences" the Taliban and shows how the !SI is even represented on the Taliban's supreme leadership
  council, the Quetta Shura.
  Meanwhile, in the Punjab, Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, founder of Lashkar-e-Toiba, and the man believed to have been
  behind the 2008 Bombay attacks, has been allowed to continue operating from Muridke, near Lahore. "The powerful
  western world is terrorising Muslims," he told a conference in Islamabad this year. "We are being invaded, manipulated
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771145 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771145 Date: 08/31/2015
  and looted. We must fight the evil trio of America, Israel and India. Suicide missions are in accordance with Islam. In
  fact, a suicide attack is the best form of jihad."
  At the same time as Pursuing its policy of selectively using jihadis, Pakistan has appeased the US by giving generous
  assistance to the CIA in arresting foreign Arab al-Qaeda personnel. A major assault was also launched against both the
  militants who took over the Lal Masjid and the ultra-radical Pakistan Taliban who took over the Swat Valley and
  announced their intention of turning the country into an Islamic Emirate. In the course of these operations and others in
  the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, more than 1,500 Pakistani soldiers and policemen were killed; another 250,000
  people were made homeless in the Pak army assault on Bajaur. The IS1 has even been prepared to arrest any members
  of the Afghan Taliban who didn't follow orders. Hence the seizure in Karachi, in February, of the Taliban second-in-
  command, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, along with aboutia dozen other senior Taliban whom the ISI regarded as
  infringing on their hospitality by opening talks with the Karzai administration via the Saudis, without ISI clearance.
  Yet, even though the Pakistani army has conducted major offensives in six of the tribal areas, the seventh, North
  Waziristan, has been left alone, as it is home to the ISI's favourite proxies: Haqqani and Hekmatyar. Similarly, Pakistan's
  foot-dragging response to the 2008 attacks on Bombay, and the lack of response to the attacks on minority faith groups
  in Pakistan over the past few months, show that the Janus-faced policy remains in place. This summer, the chief
  minister of the Punjab, Shahbaz Sharif, was quoted heatedly denying that there were any militant groups working in the
  Pakistani Punjab, or that the Punjabi Taliban even existed. There are still, in the eyes of many in the Pakistani
  establishment, good Taliban and bad Taliban, useful militants and expendable ones.
  In their eyes, the ongoing defeat of Nato in Afghanistan, with US and British troops suffering record casualties last
  month, is a vindication of its long-term strategy. Islamabad has succeeded in regaining influence in Afghanistan and
  Delhi has been checked. But India will not take this lying down. Already the Indian press has reported attempts to -
  resuscitate the Northern Alliance as a contingency against the Taliban's takeover of the south, and here India is working
  in conjuction with Russia, Iran and the central Asian "stans". The Indian national security adviser, Shivshankar Menon,
  was despatched to Afghanistan in March, and the foreign minister, S M Krishna, has visited Tehran. Post-American
  Afghanistan is looking increasingly likely to be divided between the Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara north and the Pashtun
  south, either formally, with a partition, or more likely, to slip into inter-ethnic civil war, with India supporting and arming
  the north and Pakistan the south.
  As diplomacy gathers pace, the Afghan Taliban, who already control over 70 per cent of the country. continue to
  increase their power. The most worrying development has been the spread of Taliban units to the previously peaceful
  north, where they have taken over pockets of Pathan settlement around Kunduz and Badakhshan. The death of the
  British aid worker Karen Woo on 5 August was a direct result.
  In Pakistan. too, jihadi activity is growing. Last year there were 87 suicide attacks across the country, killing roughly
  3,000 people and the ISI this week stated that, for the first time in the nation's history, it regarded home-grown Islamic
  militants to be a bigger threat to the integrity of the nation than India. Yet the army continues to obsess about India. In a
  recent speech, Kayani emphasised that although the army knows the dangers of militancy, it was against Indian attacks
  that he was principally focused. At a time when Pakistan's economy is in crisis, electricity supply increasingly erratic and
  the educational system in complete breakdown, Kayani has secured a huge increase in the country's defence budget.
  It is not a pretty picture: growing violence everywhere, increasing Indo-Pak tensions and a defeat for western interests in
  the region. Worst of all, because the Pakistani army regards this as a major triumph, it is unlikely to change its policy any
  time soon.
  William Dalrymple's "Nine Lives: in Search of the Sacred in Modern India" won the first Asia House Literary Award in
  May and is newly published in paperback (Bloomsbury, £8.99)
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771145 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771146
MetadataSubject: INDIAN PM SHOWS SOLIDARITY WITH PAKISTAN AGAINST FLOODS
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-19T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771146/C05771146.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: Indian PM shows solidarity with Pakistan against floods
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.goy>
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 12:42 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771146
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771146 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.goy>
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 12:42 PM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: Indian PM shows solidarity with Pakistan against floods
  From: Sullivan, Jacob 3
  To: Abedin, Huma
  Sent: Thu Aug 19 11:07:01 2010
  Subject: FW: Indian PM shows solidarity with Pakistan against floods
  Can you flag for S —Singh is doing a good thing here.
  From: membership_services@fma.sosiltd.com [mailto:membership_services@fma.sosiltd.com] On Behalf Of News Desk
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 10:55 AM
  To: Afghanistan-Pakistan News Alerts; CENTCOM News Alerts; PACOM News Alerts
  Subject: Indian PM shows solidarity with Pakistan against floods
  Indian PM shows solidarity with Pakistan against floods
  ISLAMABAD, Aug. 19 (Xinhua) -- Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called his Pakistani
  counterpart Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani over phone Thursday to convey the condolences and
  commensurations of his government and the people of India on the loss of precious lives
  and damage to the properties and infrastructure caused by floods in Pakistan.
  The Indian prime minister said that the member States in the South Asian Association for
  Regional Cooperation should come together to help Pakistan in every way possible at this
  critical juncture, according to the Pakistani PM office.
  Gilani thanked his Indian counterpart for his kind gesture of calling him to express his
  sympathies and solidarity with Pakistan in its hour of trial.
  He briefed the Indian prime minister over the huge damage caused by this unprecedented
  natural calamity in all the provinces of the country, which, according to UN estimates,
  was far bigger than the effects of earthquakes and tsunami which hit Pakistan in 2005 and
  Haiti last year respectively.
  Gilani also availed the opportunity to reiterate Pakistan's keen desire to have friendly,
  cooperative and good neighborly relations with India.
  He hoped that in accordance with the agreement reached in Thimphu in Bhutan in April, the
  bilateral dialogue between the two countries would progress a meaningful, substantive and
  result- oriented way by addressing all the issues of concern to both countries including
  Kashmir dispute.
  Media Analysis and Watch Center
  USSTRATCOM Foreign Media Analysis Program
  SOS International Ltd.
  www.soMhd.com
  For additional information, please visit the SOSi USSTRATCOM FMA portal at http://fma.sosiltd.com/secure/?SID=SECF83EFBEF.
  Once registered, you may access FMA products and manage your subscriptions. Write to helpdeskfma@sosiltd.com or call 703-483-
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771146 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771146 Date: 08/31/2015
  4898 for assistance.
  To unsubscribe from this list, please use the following link:
  r*https://fmaonline.sosiltd.comimemprofile/default. aspx?Context=Member&Action=SP*1
  SOS International Ltd. E-mail Disclaimer.
  SOS International Ltd. E-mail Disclaimer.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771146 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771147
MetadataSubject: IF FACEBOOK EXISTED IN THE OLD DAYS...
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: McHale, Judith A
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-16T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0097/DOC_0C05771147/C05771147.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: O-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: FW: If Facebook existed in the old days...
ExtractedTo: H; Mills, Cheryl D; Sullivan, Jacob J; Abedin, Hume
ExtractedFrom: McHale, Judith A <McHaleJA@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 4:50 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771147
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Nice work from one of our star PAO's --- Joann Lockard in Kampala
  im

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771147 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: McHale, Judith A <McHaleJA@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 4:50 PM
  To: H; Mills, Cheryl D; Sullivan, Jacob J; Abedin, Hume
  Subject: FW: If Facebook existed in the old days...
  Nice work from one of our star PAO's --- Joann Lockard in Kampala
  im
  From: Lockard, Joann M
  Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 6:21 AM
  To: Diallo, Robin D; Stewart, Kristin M; Millar, Diane M; Mallinger, Stephen M; Sene, Demba ; Diallo, Khalil B; Roche,
  Lynn W
  Subject: RE: If Facebook existed in the old days...
  We're still working on Facebook...But I've got YouTube now!
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?y=k2GyLiiNgo
  je;a4i.11.
  Joann M. Lockard
  Public Affairs Officer
  U.S. Mission Uganda
  Plot 1577 Ggaba Road
  P.O. Box 7007
  Kampala, Uganda
  Tel: (256) 414-259-791 x6310
  Fax: (256) 414-250-314
  Mobile:
  This email is UNCLASSIFIED.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771147 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771148
MetadataSubject: TWO TOPS OF FA PIEC
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-25T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771148/C05771148.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Two tops of FA piec
ExtractedTo: Imuscatine
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:56 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771148
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: Yes
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771148 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 10:56 AM
  To: Imuscatine
  Cc:
  Subject: Re: Two tops of FA piec
  Yes
  Original Message
  From: Lissa Muscatine
  To: Abedin, Huma
  Cc: H <hdr22@clintonemail.com>
  Sent: Wed Aug 25 10:36:26 2010
  Subject: Two tops of FA piec
  Huma -- Could you print this document. It has the two different openings for the FA piece. Thx. Lissa
  B6
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771148 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771149
MetadataSubject: TWO TOPS OF FA PIEC
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-25T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771149/C05771149.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: . Fw: Two tops of FA piec
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: H <hdr22@clintonemail.com>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 11:03 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771149
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Justin printing for you
  Talked to einhorn, he doesn't have mtg till 1pm. So if you called, needs to be after meeting. And there will be a new call
  sheet.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771149 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 11:03 AM
  To:
  Subject: . Fw: Two tops of FA piec
  Attachments: FA Openings for S.docx; ATT3298894.txt; FA Openings for S.docx; ATT3298894.txt
  Justin printing for you
  Talked to einhorn, he doesn't have mtg till 1pm. So if you called, needs to be after meeting. And there will be a new call
  sheet.
  Original Message --
  B6
  From: Lissa Muscatine
  To: Abedin, Huma
  Cc: H <hdr22@clintonemail.com>
  Sent: Wed Aug 25 10:36:26 2010
  Subject: Two tops of FA piec
  Huma Could you print this document. It has the two different openings for the FA piece. Thx. Lissa
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771149 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771150
MetadataSubject: LOVED DINNER LAST NIGHT
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Verveer, Melanne S
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-19T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771150/C05771150.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Loved dinner last night
ExtractedTo: H; williamsbarrett
ExtractedFrom: Verveer, Melanne S <VerveerMS@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Mills, Cheryl D
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 1:11 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771150
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: The girls' team will deliver!
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771150 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B6
  From: Verveer, Melanne S <VerveerMS@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 1:11 PM
  To: H; williamsbarrett
  Cc: Mills, Cheryl D
  Subject: Re: Loved dinner last night
  The girls' team will deliver!
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: 'williamsbarrett
  Cc: Mills, Cheryl 0; Verveer, Melanne S
  Sent: Thu Aug 19 13:06:52 2010
  Subject: Loved dinner last night
  And I passed on our "girl talk" to Cheryl who's anxious to follow up. I suggested a four way call w the three of us and
  Melanne and so am copying both to try to start scheduling it.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771150 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771151
MetadataSubject: MY STATUS
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jake J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-10-01T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0101/DOC_0C05771151/C05771151.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: My status
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <Sullivan.1.1@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: jake.sullivan B6
ExtractedDateSent: Friday, October 1, 2010 2:06 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771151
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771151 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B6
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <Sullivan.1.1@state.gov>
  Sent: Friday, October 1, 2010 2:06 AM
  To:
  Cc: jake.sullivan B6
  Subject: Fw: My status
  Original Message
  From: Sullivan, Jacobi
  To: 'hdr22@clintonemail.com' <hdr22@clintonemail.com>
  Sent: Thu Sep 30 20:09:05 2010
  Subject: My status
  Mitchell and team leave at 5 tomorrow for Qatar. My inclination is that my value add to the team declines in making
  these Arab rounds, so I was thinking of flying back overnight tomorrow night. But if you believe I can be of use out here,
  I'm certainly prepared to stay.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771151 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771154
MetadataSubject: FOREIGN AFFAIRS MAGAZINE - LEADING THROUGH CIVILIAN POWER
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771154/C05771154.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771154
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771154 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  Draft 20 (last night)
  FOREIGN AFFAIRS MAGAZINE
  • LEADING THROUGH CIVILIAN POWER
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771154 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771154 Date: 08/31/2015
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771154 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771154 Date: 08/31/2015
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771154 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771155
MetadataSubject: DRAFT 21 - LEADING THROUGH CIVILIAN POWER
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771155/C05771155.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771155
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771155 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  DRAFT 21 (VERSION THIS MORNING)
  LEADING THROUGH CIVILIAN POWER
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771155 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771155 Date: 08/31/2015
  N
  N.
  \
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771155 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771155 Date: 08/31/2015
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771155 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771156
MetadataSubject: FUTURE CALL
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-19T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771156/C05771156.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: FW: Future call
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD©state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 2:57 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771156
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771156 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD©state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 2:57 PM
  To:
  Subject: FW: Future call
  Original Message
  From: Verveer, Melanne S
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 2:28 PM
  To: Mills, Cheryl D
  Subject: Re: Future call
  Yep, one of my plans is to bring all the girl effect people together to get their ideas. Maria is definitely on the list.
  I'm off to Italy but reachable.
  Original Message
  From: Mills, Cheryl D
  To: Verveer, Melanne S
  Sent: Thu Aug 19 13:37:26 2010
  Subject: RE: Future call
  It's a great idea. I think this woman Mari Eitel can be helpful given what they did with the girl effect video.
  cdm
  Original Message
  From: Verveer, Melanne S
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 1:15 PM
  To: Mills, Cheryl D
  Subject: Future call
  Hi there, I will be on vacation (FNALLY), but reachable. Just have your guys work with Anita in my office to set up a time.
  When I'm back, I want to talk to you about a couple of personnel issues too. I love H's idea aboit girls and we're already
  thinking about it.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771156 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771157
MetadataSubject: (REUTERS) U.S. SENATE PANEL APPROVES NEW ARMS TREATY WITH RUSSIA
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-16T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0097/DOC_0C05771157/C05771157.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: O-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: (Reuters) U.S. Senate panel approves new arms treaty with Russia
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: SES-O_Shift-II
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 4:58 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771157
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771157 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 4:58 PM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: (Reuters) U.S. Senate panel approves new arms treaty with Russia
  From: Withers, Anne M
  To: NEWS-Mahogany
  Cc: SES-O_Shift-II
  Sent: Thu Sep 16 13:32:23 2010
  Subject: (Reuters) U.S. Senate panel approves new arms treaty with Russia
  WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. Senate panel approved a new strategic nuclear arms control treaty with Russia on
  September 16, advancing one of President Barack Obama's main foreign policy priorities to an uncertain future in the
  full Senate. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted 14-4 to approve the new START treaty. The full Senate must
  consent to the agreement before it can go into effect, but with Congress in the hottest part of the political season
  before mid-term congressional elections, it is unclear when the treaty will get a vote on the Senate floor. The
  agreement signed by Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in April commits former Cold War foes
  Washington and Moscow to reducing deployed nuclear warheads by about 30 percent.
  It picked up some Republican support in the foreign relations committee from Senators Bob Corker and Johnny lsakson.
  They voted aye along with Richard Lugar, previously the only Senate Republican who had publicly supported the
  treaty. But since 67 votes are needed to meet the two-thirds minimum required for treaties to pass the full Senate, at
  least eight Republicans will have to vote for it. Most Republicans have remained uncommitted for months, leaving the
  treaty's fate in limbo. The weak Republican support to date and the fact the Senate has a lot of business to take care of
  before the congressional November 2 elections, makes the new START treaty a likely candidate for the "lame duck"
  session to follow.
  Obama wants the new START ratified this year as part of his "reset" of relations with Russia and a step toward his goal of
  a world without nuclear weapons. Russia must also ratify the treaty, but is waiting to see what the United States will
  do. The treaty is broadly supported as an important step forward in arms control by former senior security officials from
  both Republican and Democratic administrations. But some Republican senators say they worry it may limit U.S. missile
  defenses, and some want Obama to promise to spend more money modernizing the nuclear weapons that remain.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771157 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771158
MetadataSubject: FUTURE CALL
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-19T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771158/C05771158.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: RE: Future call
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 4:14 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771158
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText: David is interested - we will need to discuss what I add to my discussion with torn re portfolio
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771158 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 4:14 PM
  To:
  Subject: RE: Future call
  David is interested - we will need to discuss what I add to my discussion with torn re portfolio
  Original Message
  From: H [mailto:HDR22@clintonemail.com]
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 3:49 PM
  To: Mills, Cheryl D
  Subject: Re: Future call
  I'm sitting in the UN--anything I need to know?
  Original Message
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  To: H
  Sent: Thu Aug 19 14:57:07 2010
  Subject: FW: Future call
  Original Message
  From: Verveer, Melanne S
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 2:28 PM
  To: Mills, Cheryl D
  Subject: Re: Future call
  Yep, one of my plans is to bring all the girl effect people together to get their ideas. Maria is definitely on the list.
  I'm off to Italy but reachable.
  Original Message
  From: Mills, Cheryl D
  To: Verveer, Melanne S
  Sent: Thu Aug 19 13:37:26 2010
  Subject: RE: Future call
  It's a great idea. I think this woman Mari Eitel can be helpful given what they did with the girl effect video.
  cdm
  Original Message
  From: Verveer, Melanne S
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 1:15 PM
  To: Mills, Cheryl D
  Subject: Future call
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771158 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771158 Date: 08/31/2015
  Hi there, I will be on vacation (FNALLY), but reachable. Just have your guys work with Anita in my office to set up a time.
  When I'm back, I want to talk to you about a couple of personnel issues too. I love H's idea a boit girls and we're already
  thinking about it.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771158 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771161
MetadataSubject: CALLS
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-25T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0093/DOC_0C05771161/C05771161.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Calls
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 11:36 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771161
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  7pm start time
  Casual buffet dinner at their house in east hampton Book party for rosanne cash

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771161 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 11:36 AM
  To:
  Subject: Re: Calls
  7pm start time
  Casual buffet dinner at their house in east hampton Book party for rosanne cash
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Abedin, Huma
  Sent: Wed Aug 25 11:08:08 2010
  Subject: Re: Calls
  Can you give me info again on Tom and Ann's event tonight?
  Original Message
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  To: H
  Sent: Wed Aug 25 10:51:23 2010
  Subject: Re: Calls
  Waiting on yu.
  Alexander will be pretty soon.
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Abedin, Huma
  Sent: Wed Aug 25 09:25:16 2010
  Subject: Re: Calls
  Schedule Yu and Alexander for before noon. Just let me know when.
  Original Message
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  To: H
  Sent: Wed Aug 25 09:18:10 2010
  Subject: Calls
  - did u get yu call sheet in pouch. Let me know if u want to schedule.
  - alexander available until 1.
  - menendez: can talk at 8pm today or tomorrow or thurs after 12pm
  - mashabane is traveling in china so no word yet.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771161 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771165
MetadataSubject: WE HAVE ANOTHER WEEK ON FA ARTICLE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Slaughter, Anne-Marie
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-19T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771165/C05771165.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: We have another week on FA article
ExtractedFrom: Slaughter, Anne-Marie <SlaughterA@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Sullivan, Jacob 1; Mills, Cheryl D; Muscatine, Lissa
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 5:00 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771165
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  Jim Hoge says that he REALLY would like it by next Wed but can stretch it to next Friday — after
  that it's a "no go." AM
  Anne-Marie Slaughter
  Director of Policy Planning
  U.S. Department of State
  (202) 647-2972

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771165 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Slaughter, Anne-Marie <SlaughterA@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 5:00 PM
  To:
  Cc: Sullivan, Jacob 1; Mills, Cheryl D; Muscatine, Lissa
  Subject: We have another week on FA article
  Jim Hoge says that he REALLY would like it by next Wed but can stretch it to next Friday — after
  that it's a "no go." AM
  Anne-Marie Slaughter
  Director of Policy Planning
  U.S. Department of State
  (202) 647-2972
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771165 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771166
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-19T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771166/C05771166.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <Sullivann@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 5:01 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771166
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  This is the proposed statement:
  STATEMENT BY SECRETARY CLINTON
  One-Year Anniversary of Release of Abdel Basset Mohamed al-Megrahi

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771166 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B5
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <Sullivann@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 5:01 PM
  To:
  This is the proposed statement:
  STATEMENT BY SECRETARY CLINTON
  One-Year Anniversary of Release of Abdel Basset Mohamed al-Megrahi
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771166 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771168
MetadataSubject: WASHPOST
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-19T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771168/C05771168.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: WashPost
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob .1 <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 6:13 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771168
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText: You've probably heard but they are holding the article for a day at least.
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771168 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Sullivan, Jacob .1 <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 6:13 PM
  To:
  Subject: WashPost
  You've probably heard but they are holding the article for a day at least.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771168 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771170
MetadataSubject: FOREIGN AFFAIRS MAGAZINE
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771170/C05771170.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771170
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B5
  DRAFT 15
  1m /thurs 4:45 pm
  FOREIGN AFFAIRS MAGAZINE
  1
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015
  2
  \
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015
  3
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015
  4
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015
  5
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015
  6
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015
  B
  7
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015
  8
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015
  9
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015
  10
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771170 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771172
MetadataSubject: WHAT'S YOUR ETA?
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-19T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771172/C05771172.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: What's your ETA?
ExtractedTo: H; 'hanleymr@state.gov'
ExtractedFrom: Huma Abedin <Huma@clintonemail.com >
ExtractedCc: Huma Abed in
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 6:26 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771172
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  She's driving and not checking email maybe.
  Just called. She thinks 7:15pm is realistic.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771172 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Huma Abedin <Huma@clintonemail.com >
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 6:26 PM
  To: H; 'hanleymr@state.gov'
  Subject: Re: What's your ETA?
  She's driving and not checking email maybe.
  Just called. She thinks 7:15pm is realistic.
  Original Message
  From: H
  To: lhanleymr@state.govi <hanleymr@state.gov>
  Cc: Huma Abed in
  Sent: Thu Aug 19 18:18:56 2010
  Subject: What's your ETA?
  How close are you to getting here to our house?
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771172 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771173
MetadataSubject: WHAT'S YOUR ETA?
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: HanleyMR@state.gov
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-19T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771173/C05771173.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: What's your ETA?
ExtractedFrom: Hanley, Monica R <HanleyMR@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Huma Abedin
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 6:45 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771173
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText: Sorry for the delay. Abt 15 minutes away. We hit some traffic in new jersey.
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771173 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Hanley, Monica R <HanleyMR@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 6:45 PM
  To:
  Cc: Huma Abedin
  Subject: Re: What's your ETA?
  Sorry for the delay. Abt 15 minutes away. We hit some traffic in new jersey.
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Hanley, Monica R
  Cc: Huma Abedin <Huma@clintonemail.com>
  Sent: Thu Aug 19 18:18:56 2010
  Subject: What's your ETA?
  How close are you to getting here to our house?
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771173 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771175
MetadataSubject: HERE IT IS
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-19T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771175/C05771175.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: RE: HERE IT IS
ExtractedTo: H; Mills, Cheryl D
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob.) <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 6:57 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771175
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: I just got it. CDM now has.
ExtractedCc:
  Sullivan, Jacobi <Sullivanil@state.gov>; Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>; Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>;

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771175 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  From: Sullivan, Jacob.) <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 6:57 PM
  To: H; Mills, Cheryl D
  Subject: RE: HERE IT IS
  I just got it. CDM now has.
  Original Message-----
  From: H [mailto:HDR22@clintonemail.com]
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 6:43 PM
  To: Sullivan, Jacob J; MIlls, Cheryl D
  Subject: Fw: HERE IT IS
  Did you get a copy?
  Original Message
  From: Slaughter, Anne-Marie <SlaughterA@state.gov>
  To: H
  Cc: Sullivan, Jacobi <Sullivanil@state.gov>; Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>; Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>;
  Muscatine, Lissa <MuscatineL@state.gov>
  Sent: Thu Aug 19 18:30:47 2010
  Subject: HERE IT IS
  Lissa has done heroic work pulling this together — it is still rough in many places and needs lots to be added with respect
  to what the QDDR is actually going to do in each of the three buckets, but it now makes a strong case
  Lissa, Sonni and I have all blocked out time tomorrow and Saturday to make revisions and get it to a point where we can
  recirculate to Jack and Raj, as well as to Bill Burns and Jim, who both want to see it.
  Happy reading (we hope). AM
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771175 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771177
MetadataSubject: WASHPOST
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-19T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771177/C05771177.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: WashPost
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <Sullivann@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 7:03 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771177
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  Also, WashPost has now flipped it's decision and intends to run the piece. RCH will reach out to Hiatt, but it's not clear
  what else we can do.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771177 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <Sullivann@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 7:03 PM
  To:
  Subject: WashPost
  Also, WashPost has now flipped it's decision and intends to run the piece. RCH will reach out to Hiatt, but it's not clear
  what else we can do.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771177 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771179
MetadataSubject: (REUTERS) WYCLEF NOT ON HAITI CANDIDATES LIST - ELECTORAL SOURCE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-19T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771179/C05771179.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: (Reuters) Wyclef not on Haiti candidates list - electoral source
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: SES-O_Shift-III
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 7:18 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771179
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771179 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 7:18 PM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: (Reuters) Wyclef not on Haiti candidates list - electoral source
  From: Simmons, Krista M
  To: NEWS-Mahogany
  Cc: SES-O_Shift-III
  Sent: Thu Aug 19 19:17:33 2010
  Subject: (Reuters) Wyclef not on Haiti candidates list - electoral source
  PORT-AU-PRINCE (Reuters) - Haiti hip-hop star Wyclef Jean is not on the list of approved candidates who satisfy legal
  requirements to run in a Nov. 28 presidential election, a member of the provisional electoral council told Reuters.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771179 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771181
MetadataSubject: MITCHELL, ROSS AND INDYK....
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-11-01T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0106/DOC_0C05771181/C05771181.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: FW: Mitchell, Ross and Indyk...
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Monday, November 1, 2010 12:08 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771181
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: FYI
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771181 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Monday, November 1, 2010 12:08 PM
  To:
  Subject: FW: Mitchell, Ross and Indyk...
  FYI
  From: Jonathan Prince
  Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 10:03 AM
  To: Jacob Sullivan; Mills, Cheryl D; Sullivan, Jacob J
  Subject: Fwd: Mitchell, Ross and Indyk...
  Translated from Ma'ariv
  MITCHELL LIKELY TO PAY THE PRICE
  Ma 'arty (11/1/2010, p. 6) by Eli Bardenstein -- The US administration intends to replace its
  special envoy to the Middle East, George Mitchell, said sources in Washington. A number of
  additional top officials are expected to be replaced at the same opportunity.
  The reasons for Mitchell's replacement are the failure he and his team have had at renewing
  the talks between Israel and the Palestinians, the Administration's desire to bring new blood into
  the efforts, and pressures to resume the peace process in the region.
  One of the names that has already begun to circulate as a potential successor is the former US
  ambassador to Israel, Martin Indyk. Another possible course of action suggested by the blog
  "Politico" is to divide Mitchell's job into two: Indyk will deal with the Palestinians, while
  Obama's senior aide, Dennis Ross, will deal with the Israelis.
  Mitchell's spokesman, Jonathan Prince, has already left his post under unclear circumstances
  and has turned to the world of private business. The State Department denied allegations that
  Prince left because of criticism that he had aired about Ross maintaining positions that were
  closer to the Israeli positions than to those of the White House.
  Another top official in Mitchell's team, Mara Rudman, was supposed to have left her post as
  the director of Mitchell's staff for a senior position in the State Department, but decided to
  remain after she was not given the job.
  Reports have repeatedly been received in Jerusalem about mounting tension between Mitchell
  and his team, on the one hand, and Dennis Ross, who works directly for the White House, on the
  other. The two parties were said to be divided over the way in which it would be possible to
  persuade Netanyahu to renew the direct talks. Ross, who served in the past in Mitchell's current
  capacity and headed an Israeli research center—the Jewish People Policy Planning Institute—is
  believed to have been opposed to the intense pressure that the US administration applied on
  Israel, arguing that that pressure would not yield the desired results. Ross believed that the
  administration would be better served by "working with the Israelis and understanding them
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771181 Date: 08/31/2015
  B6

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771181 Date: 08/31/2015
  better," said one source in Jerusalem. An alternate position was maintained by Mitchell and
  Rudman, who believed that it would be advisable to pressure Netanyahu. It now appears that
  Ross's approach has prevailed, and that the administration is going to replace the people who
  guided the negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.
  As Ma 'any reported, Netanyahu is scheduled to fly to New Orleans next week to attend the
  general assembly of the Jewish communities, where he will meet Vice President Joe Biden. From
  there, Netanyahu will make a short visit to New York, where he will meet other Jewish leaders
  and will give interviews to the American media.
  Netanyahu is not going to meet President Obama this time, despite intense efforts that were
  made by his office to arrange such a meeting. The reason the two men are not going to meet is
  that President Obama is scheduled to leave for long trip to India, Indonesia and South Korea on
  the day that Netanyahu arrives. One observer in Washington said: "Obama ran as far away from
  Bibi as possible in order to avoid a meeting with him. If he could, Obama would take a space
  ship to Mars."
  Netanyahu decided to defy protocol and to go to the United States in any event, Obama's
  absence notwithstanding.
  This email is UNCLASSIFIED.
  This email is UNCLASSIFIED.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771181 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771182
MetadataSubject: MINI SCHEDULE 8/20/10 FRIDAY
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-20T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771182/C05771182.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Mini Schedule 8/20/10 Friday
ExtractedFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC©state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Abedin, Huma
ExtractedDateSent: Friday, August 20, 2010 7:45 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771182
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  8:00 am Call Iv/ Israeli PM Netanyahu
  8:10 am Private Residence
  8:15 am DEPART Private Residence
  En route State Department
  8:25 am ARRIVE State Department
  8:25 am PRESIDENTIAL DAILY BRIEFING
  8:30 am Secretary's Office
  8:30 am DAILY SMALL STAFF MEETING
  8:45 am Secretary's Office
  8:45 am DAILY SENIOR STAFF MEETING
  9:15 am Secretary's Conference Room
  9:15 am OFFICE TIME
  11:15 am Secretary's Office
  11:20 am DEPART State Department
  En route Andrews Air Force Base
  11:50 am ARRIVE Andrews Air Force Base
  12:00 pm DEPART Andrews Air Force Base
  En route White Plains, Westchester County Airport
  1:00 pm ARRIVE White Plains, Westchester County Airport
  1:10 pm DEPART Westchester County Airport
  En route Private Residence
  1:25 pm ARRIVE Private Residence
  ###

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771182 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC©state.gov>
  Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 7:45 AM
  To:
  Cc: Abedin, Huma
  Subject: Mini Schedule 8/20/10 Friday
  8:00 am Call Iv/ Israeli PM Netanyahu
  8:10 am Private Residence
  8:15 am DEPART Private Residence
  En route State Department
  8:25 am ARRIVE State Department
  8:25 am PRESIDENTIAL DAILY BRIEFING
  8:30 am Secretary's Office
  8:30 am DAILY SMALL STAFF MEETING
  8:45 am Secretary's Office
  8:45 am DAILY SENIOR STAFF MEETING
  9:15 am Secretary's Conference Room
  9:15 am OFFICE TIME
  11:15 am Secretary's Office
  11:20 am DEPART State Department
  En route Andrews Air Force Base
  11:50 am ARRIVE Andrews Air Force Base
  12:00 pm DEPART Andrews Air Force Base
  En route White Plains, Westchester County Airport
  1:00 pm ARRIVE White Plains, Westchester County Airport
  1:10 pm DEPART Westchester County Airport
  En route Private Residence
  1:25 pm ARRIVE Private Residence
  ###
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771182 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771183
MetadataSubject: CAN THE DUDE ABIDE? (NOT THAT I LIKE HER...)
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-11-01T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0106/DOC_0C05771183/C05771183.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: FW: Can the Dude Abide? (not that I like her...)
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Monday, November 1, 2010 1:44 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771183
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771183 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Monday, November 1, 2010 1:44 PM
  To:
  Subject: FW: Can the Dude Abide? (not that I like her...)
  From: Toiv, Nora F
  Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 1:36 PM
  To: Mills, Cheryl D; 'Minyon Moore'; twilliamsbarred
  Subject: Can the Dude Abide? (not that I like her...)
  the;Kewfork Mines
  October 30, 2010
  Can the Dude Abide?
  By MAUREEN DOWD
  WASHINGTON
  Barack Obama became president by brilliantly telling his own story. To stay president, he will need to show he
  can understand our story.
  At first it was exciting that Obama was the sort of brainy, cultivated Democrat who would be at home in a
  "West Wing" episode.
  But now he acts like he really thinks he's on "West Wing," gliding through an imaginary, amber-lit set where
  his righteous self-regard is bound to be rewarded by the end of the hour.
  Hey, dude, you're a politician. Act like one.
  As the head of the Democratic Party, the president should have supported the Democratic candidate for
  governor in Rhode Island, the one the Democratic Governors Association had already lavished more than $1
  million in TV ads on. If Obama was going to refuse to endorse Frank Caprio out of respect for Lincoln Chafee,
  the former Republican who endorsed him for president and is now running as an independent, the president
  should have at least stayed out of Providence.
  Reductio ad absurdum: After two years of taking his base for granted, the former Pied Piper of America's youth
  had to spar with Jon Stewart to try to get the attention of young people who once idolized him.
  Obama still has the killer smile, but he's more often sniffy than funny. When Stewart called White House
  legislation "timid," Obama got defensive and offered a less-than-thrilling new mantra: "Yes, we can but ..."
  "We have done things that people don't even know about," said Obama, who left his Great Communicator
  mantle back in Grant Park on election night.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771183 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771183 Date: 08/31/2015
  In 2008, the message was him. The promise was him. And that's why 2010 is a referendum on him.
  With his coalition and governing majority shattering around him, President Obama will have to summon
  political skills — starting Wednesday — that he has not yet shown he has.
  His arrogance led him to assume: If I build it, they will understand. He can't get the gratitude he feels he
  deserves for his achievements if no one knows what he achieved and why those achievements are so vital.
  Once it seemed impressive that he was so comfortable in his own skin. Now that comfort comes across as an
  unwillingness to be wrong.
  We want the best people to govern us, but many voters are so turned off by Obama's superior air that they're
  rushing into the arms of disturbingly inferior pols.
  Obama admitted to The Times's Peter Baker: "There is probably a perverse pride in my administration — and I
  take responsibility for this; this was blowing from the top — that we were going to do the right thing, even if
  short term it was unpopular."
  But who defines what's "right"?
  With the exception of Obama, most Americans seemed to agree that the "right" thing to do until the economy
  recovered was to focus on jobs instead of getting the Congress mired for months in making over health
  insurance and energy policy. And the "right" thing to do was to come down harder on the big banks for
  spending on bonuses instead of lending to small businesses that don't get bailouts.
  Many of us thought the "right" thing to do was to ratify the civil rights of gay Americans in marriage and the
  military. (A new Pentagon study shows that most U.S. troops and their families don't care if gays are allowed to
  serve openly.)
  In an interview with progressive bloggers, the president was asked why he was lagging behind Republicans like
  Ted Olson on gay marriage.
  Noting that he has a lot of friends and staffers in committed gay relationships, Obama conceded only that his
  attitude was evolving. "I think it's pretty clear where the trend lines are going," the president said.
  Trend lines? Really inspiring, dude.
  One top aide told me that the president — who perversely tried to marginalize a once-captivated press corps —
  was beginning to realize that he had not used his charm as effectively as he could have.
  His inner circle believed too much in the power of the Aura and in protecting the Brand. They didn't think they
  needed to sell anything or fight back when the crazies started sliming them. They didn't care that the average
  citizen needed an M.B.A. to understand the financial plan and a Ph.D. to fathom what the health care plan
  would mean.
  Because Obama stayed above it all on health care and delegated to Max Baucus, he missed the moment in
  August of 2009 when Sarah Palin and the Tea Party got oxygen with their loopy rants on death panels. It never
  occurred to the Icon that such wildness and gullibility would trump lofty rationality.
  As the president tries to ride the Tea Party tiger, let's hope for this change: that he puts some audacity in his
  audacity.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771183 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771184
MetadataSubject: FROM JIMMY CARTER
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-01T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771184/C05771184.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: From jimmy carter
ExtractedFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Abedin, Huma
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, September 1, 2010 6:32 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771184
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771184 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2010 6:32 AM
  To:
  Cc: Abedin, Huma
  Subject: From jimmy carter
  From: Jimmy
  To: Jiloty, Lauren C
  Sent: Wed Sep 01 06:30:01 2010
  Subject: MidEast talks
  To Secretary Clinton: I'm very grateful for your kind reception yesterday.
  My hope is that progress can now be made in the Middle East, Korea, Sudan, and Cuba, and we are eager to help
  if you call on us. For instance, we have an enormous group of religious leaders with whom we have been working, which
  includes prominent Mainline Protestants, Catholics, Evangelicals, African-Americans and Hispanics from across the
  theological and political spectrum. They can issue public statements, OpEds, etc. to support your efforts with the Israelis
  and Palestinians. Just have one of your staff members let me know at any time. Also, The Elders are eager for our efforts
  to be constructive. Our prayers and hopes are with you. Jimmy
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771184 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771187
MetadataSubject: RE:
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Jiloty, Lauren
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-01T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771187/C05771187.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: RE:
ExtractedFrom: Lauren Jiloty <laurenjiloty
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, September 1; 2010 9:07 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771187
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Rec'd and printed all 13. Will be on your desk.
  >

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771187 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Lauren Jiloty <laurenjiloty
  Sent: Wednesday, September 1; 2010 9:07 AM
  To:
  Subject: RE:
  Rec'd and printed all 13. Will be on your desk.
  > From: HDR22@clintonemail.com
  > To: Laurenjiloty B6
  > Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 07:17:06 -0400
  > Subject: Fw:
  > PIs print.
  > Original Message
  > From: Hillary Clinton
  > To: Hillary Clinton
  > Subject:
  > Sent: Aug 28, 2010 2:04 PM
  > AIDS contracting.
  > Change rules if you put $ into health can't withdraw indigenous $
  > E0 on guidelines for AIDS contracting. Or I make a speech and issue guidelines
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771187 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771190
MetadataSubject: DID YOU RECEIVED ALL THE EMAILS I SENT YOU FOR PRINTING?
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Jiloty, Lauren
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-01T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771190/C05771190.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: RE: Did you receive all the emails I sent you for printing?
ExtractedFrom: Lauren Jiloty <laurenjiloty B6
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, September 1, 2010 9:07 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771190
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Yep! Received 13. Printed and on your desk.
  >

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771190 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Lauren Jiloty <laurenjiloty B6
  Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2010 9:07 AM
  To:
  Subject: RE: Did you receive all the emails I sent you for printing?
  Yep! Received 13. Printed and on your desk.
  > From: HDR22@clintonemail.com
  > To: Laurenjiloty JilotyLC@state.gov
  > Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 08:58:20 -0400
  > Subject: Did you receive all the emails I sent you for printing?
  > Pls just put on my desk. Thx.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771190 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771192
MetadataSubject: FYI, IT'S THE ECONOMY, ANY GESTURE TO REVERSE THIS. SID
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: sbwhoeop
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-01T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771192/C05771192.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: fyi, it's the economy, any gesture to reverse this... Sid
ExtractedFrom: sbwhoeop
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, September 1, 2010 9:24 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771192
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  http://www.ft.com/cms/s/5799a774-b534-11df-9af8-00144feabdc0,dwp_uuid=236ce648-33fa-11da-adae-
  00000e2511c8,print=yes.html
  Financial Times FT.com
  r
  .
  OLUMNISTS
  JVlartin Wolf
  Obama was too cautious in fearful times
  By Martin Wolf
  Published: Au• ust 31 2010 22:48 j Last updated: August 31 2010 22:48
  Suppose that the US presidential election of 1932 had, in fact, taken place in 1930, at an early stage in the Great
  Depression. Suppose, too, that Franklin Delano Roosevelt had won then, though not by the landslide of 1932. How
  different subsequent events might have been. The president might have watched helplessly as output and employment
  collapsed. The decades of Democratic dominance might not have happened.
  On such chances the wheel of history turns. But this time was different: the crisis brought Barack Obama to power close
  to the beginning of the economic collapse. I (among others) then argued that policy needed to be hugely aggressive. Alas,
  it was not. I noted on February 4 2009, at the beginning of the new presidency: "Instead of an overwhelming fiscal
  stimulus, what is emerging is too small, too wasteful and too ill-focused." A week later, I asked: "Has Barack Obama's
  presidency already failed? In normal times, this would be a ludicrous question. But these are not normal times. They are
  times of great danger. Today, the new US administration can disown responsibility for its inheritance; tomorrow, it will own
  it. Today, it can offer solutions; tomorrow it will have become the problem. Today, it is in control of events; tomorrow,
  events will take control of it. Doing too little is now far riskier than doing too much." This was right.
  The direction of policy was not wrong: policymakers — though not all economists — had learnt a great deal from the 1930s.
  Sensible people knew that aggressive monetary and fiscal expansion was needed, together with reconstruction of the
  financial sector.
  But, as Larry Summers, Mr Obama's chief economic adviser, had said: "When markets overshoot, policymakers must
  overshoot too". Unfortunately, the administration failed to follow his excellent advice. This has allowed opponents to claim
  that policy has been ineffective when it has merely been inadequate.
  In consequence, the administration has lost credibility with the public and the chances of a renewed fiscal expansion have
  disappeared. With the Federal Reserve cautious, too, the likelihood of a lengthy period of weak growth and heavy
  joblessness is high. So, too, are the chances of domestic and global political friction.
  True, the idea that the policies adopted in the last few months of the Bush administration and the first months of this one
  were far better than nothing is weirdly controversial in the US. A recent paper by Alan Blinder, former vice-chairman of the
  Fed, and Mark Zandi of Moody's argues that such critics are wrong. They use a standard macro-economic model to
  assess what would have happened without any intervention, without the financial interventions (including monetary policy)
  and without the fiscal action. They conclude that the peak to trough decline in gross domestic product would have been
  close to 12 per cent with no policy response, compared to an actual decline of just 4 per cent (see chart). Similarly, the
  unemployment rate would have peaked at 16.5 per cent, instead of the actual 10 per cent. The bigger collapse would also
  have meant a fiscal deficit of $2,600bn in fiscal year 2011. The outcome is also disastrous with the modest fiscal response
  but no financial •olic res•onse. It is a little better the other way round.
  The implication that the modest stimulus package of February 2009 — a mere 5.7 per cent of 2009 GDP, spread over
  several years — made a positive contribution is supported by the analysis of the Congressional Budget Office: it argues
  that in 2010, US GDP will be between 1.5 per cent and 4.1 per cent higher and the unemployment rate between 0.7 and
  1.8 percentage points lower, as a result of the package.
  Panglossians who believe the private economy is always in equilibrium, unless governments intervene, disagree. I wish
  there were some way to run this experiment without hurting hundreds of millions of people. But I find the idea that allowing
  the collapse of much of the financial system, avoiding unconventional monetary policy and struggling to close the fiscal
  deficit would have been consistent with a more rapid and sustained recovery quite bizarre.
  A fascinating perspective does come, however, from comparisons with what happened in other advanced countries. The
  recession in US output (and so demand) has been relatively small, but the decline in employment has been exceptionally
  large, as a result of an extraordinary surge in US productivity (see charts). This contrast between what would happen to
  output and what would happen to employment was missed in the initial Congressional Budget Office analysis of the
  stimulus.
  Since the US was the epicentre of the financial crisis, the relatively small decline in output is remarkable. Moreover, since
  fiscal and monetary stimuli bear directly on demand and output, not jobs, this is a policy success. At the same time, the
  enthusiasm with which US managers laid off workers is also extraordinary. No doubt, some of this is due to the collapse in
  construction. But some of it must be due to the ease with which US companies can lay off workers and the incentives for
  managers to maintain profits in a downturn at the expense of jobs.
  Debate is emerging on how much of the surge in unemployment is structural. My answer, from European experience, is
  that one way to ensure it becomes structural is to let it linger. In the short run, the simplest way to prevent that from
  happening is to expand demand and so output. Since there is huge slack in the labour market, not the slightest threat of
  inflation — far more a risk of deflation — and no constraint from bond or foreign exchange markets on further monetary and
  fiscal stimulus, these are the policies that have to be pursued. Yet, alas, the Fed seems to have decided to fall asleep and
  the administration has lost the initiative.
  So what is going to happen? I assume that, after the midterm elections, resurgent Republicans will offer new tax cuts and
  ignore the fiscal deficits. They will pretend that this has nothing to do with any reviled stimulus, though it is much the same
  thing — increasing fiscal deficits, thereby offsetting private frugality. That would put the administration on the spot. It would
  have to choose between vetoing the tax cuts and accepting them, so allowing the Republicans to get the credit for their
  "yacht and mansion-led" recovery. Any recovery is better than none. But it could have been much better than this. Those
  who were cautious when they should have been bold will pay a big price.
  martin.wolf@ft.com
  More columns at www.ft.com/martinwolf
  Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2010. Print a single copy of this article for personal use. Contact us if you wish to
  print more to distribute to others.
  "FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times. Privacy policy I Terms
  Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2010.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771192 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: sbwhoeop
  Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2010 9:24 AM
  To:
  Subject: fyi, it's the economy, any gesture to reverse this... Sid
  http://www.ft.com/cms/s/5799a774-b534-11df-9af8-00144feabdc0,dwp_uuid=236ce648-33fa-11da-adae-
  00000e2511c8,print=yes.html
  Financial Times FT.com
  r
  .
  OLUMNISTS
  JVlartin Wolf
  Obama was too cautious in fearful times
  By Martin Wolf
  Published: Au• ust 31 2010 22:48 j Last updated: August 31 2010 22:48
  Suppose that the US presidential election of 1932 had, in fact, taken place in 1930, at an early stage in the Great
  Depression. Suppose, too, that Franklin Delano Roosevelt had won then, though not by the landslide of 1932. How
  different subsequent events might have been. The president might have watched helplessly as output and employment
  collapsed. The decades of Democratic dominance might not have happened.
  On such chances the wheel of history turns. But this time was different: the crisis brought Barack Obama to power close
  to the beginning of the economic collapse. I (among others) then argued that policy needed to be hugely aggressive. Alas,
  it was not. I noted on February 4 2009, at the beginning of the new presidency: "Instead of an overwhelming fiscal
  stimulus, what is emerging is too small, too wasteful and too ill-focused." A week later, I asked: "Has Barack Obama's
  presidency already failed? In normal times, this would be a ludicrous question. But these are not normal times. They are
  times of great danger. Today, the new US administration can disown responsibility for its inheritance; tomorrow, it will own
  it. Today, it can offer solutions; tomorrow it will have become the problem. Today, it is in control of events; tomorrow,
  events will take control of it. Doing too little is now far riskier than doing too much." This was right.
  The direction of policy was not wrong: policymakers — though not all economists — had learnt a great deal from the 1930s.
  Sensible people knew that aggressive monetary and fiscal expansion was needed, together with reconstruction of the
  financial sector.
  But, as Larry Summers, Mr Obama's chief economic adviser, had said: "When markets overshoot, policymakers must
  overshoot too". Unfortunately, the administration failed to follow his excellent advice. This has allowed opponents to claim
  that policy has been ineffective when it has merely been inadequate.
  In consequence, the administration has lost credibility with the public and the chances of a renewed fiscal expansion have
  disappeared. With the Federal Reserve cautious, too, the likelihood of a lengthy period of weak growth and heavy
  joblessness is high. So, too, are the chances of domestic and global political friction.
  True, the idea that the policies adopted in the last few months of the Bush administration and the first months of this one
  were far better than nothing is weirdly controversial in the US. A recent paper by Alan Blinder, former vice-chairman of the
  Fed, and Mark Zandi of Moody's argues that such critics are wrong. They use a standard macro-economic model to
  assess what would have happened without any intervention, without the financial interventions (including monetary policy)
  and without the fiscal action. They conclude that the peak to trough decline in gross domestic product would have been
  close to 12 per cent with no policy response, compared to an actual decline of just 4 per cent (see chart). Similarly, the
  unemployment rate would have peaked at 16.5 per cent, instead of the actual 10 per cent. The bigger collapse would also
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771192 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771192 Date: 08/31/2015
  have meant a fiscal deficit of $2,600bn in fiscal year 2011. The outcome is also disastrous with the modest fiscal response
  but no financial •olic res•onse. It is a little better the other way round.
  The implication that the modest stimulus package of February 2009 — a mere 5.7 per cent of 2009 GDP, spread over
  several years — made a positive contribution is supported by the analysis of the Congressional Budget Office: it argues
  that in 2010, US GDP will be between 1.5 per cent and 4.1 per cent higher and the unemployment rate between 0.7 and
  1.8 percentage points lower, as a result of the package.
  Panglossians who believe the private economy is always in equilibrium, unless governments intervene, disagree. I wish
  there were some way to run this experiment without hurting hundreds of millions of people. But I find the idea that allowing
  the collapse of much of the financial system, avoiding unconventional monetary policy and struggling to close the fiscal
  deficit would have been consistent with a more rapid and sustained recovery quite bizarre.
  A fascinating perspective does come, however, from comparisons with what happened in other advanced countries. The
  recession in US output (and so demand) has been relatively small, but the decline in employment has been exceptionally
  large, as a result of an extraordinary surge in US productivity (see charts). This contrast between what would happen to
  output and what would happen to employment was missed in the initial Congressional Budget Office analysis of the
  stimulus.
  Since the US was the epicentre of the financial crisis, the relatively small decline in output is remarkable. Moreover, since
  fiscal and monetary stimuli bear directly on demand and output, not jobs, this is a policy success. At the same time, the
  enthusiasm with which US managers laid off workers is also extraordinary. No doubt, some of this is due to the collapse in
  construction. But some of it must be due to the ease with which US companies can lay off workers and the incentives for
  managers to maintain profits in a downturn at the expense of jobs.
  Debate is emerging on how much of the surge in unemployment is structural. My answer, from European experience, is
  that one way to ensure it becomes structural is to let it linger. In the short run, the simplest way to prevent that from
  happening is to expand demand and so output. Since there is huge slack in the labour market, not the slightest threat of
  inflation — far more a risk of deflation — and no constraint from bond or foreign exchange markets on further monetary and
  fiscal stimulus, these are the policies that have to be pursued. Yet, alas, the Fed seems to have decided to fall asleep and
  the administration has lost the initiative.
  So what is going to happen? I assume that, after the midterm elections, resurgent Republicans will offer new tax cuts and
  ignore the fiscal deficits. They will pretend that this has nothing to do with any reviled stimulus, though it is much the same
  thing — increasing fiscal deficits, thereby offsetting private frugality. That would put the administration on the spot. It would
  have to choose between vetoing the tax cuts and accepting them, so allowing the Republicans to get the credit for their
  "yacht and mansion-led" recovery. Any recovery is better than none. But it could have been much better than this. Those
  who were cautious when they should have been bold will pay a big price.
  martin.wolf@ft.com
  More columns at www.ft.com/martinwolf
  Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2010. Print a single copy of this article for personal use. Contact us if you wish to
  print more to distribute to others.
  "FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times. Privacy policy I Terms
  Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2010.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771192 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771193
MetadataSubject: FURTHER TO THIS MORNING'S SESSION WITH P'S
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-01T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771193/C05771193.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: further to this morning's session with P's
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, September 1, 2010 10:16 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771193
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: Word from palestinians
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771193 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B1,1.4(B),1.4(D)
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2010 10:16 AM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: further to this morning's session with P's
  Word from palestinians
  From: Feltman, Jeffrey D
  To: Abedin, Huma; Sullivan, Jacob J
  Sent: Wed Sep 01 09:41:57 2010
  Subject: FW: further to this morning's session with P's
  S should see this.
  Jeffrey Feltman
  Assistant Secretary
  Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs
  Department of State
  202-647-7209
  SBU
  This email is UNCLASSIFIED.
  1.4(B)
  1.4(D)
  B1
  From: Rubinstein, Daniel H
  Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 8:38 AM
  To: Hale, David M; 'Shapiro, Daniel B.'
  Subject: further to this morning's session with P's
  SBU
  This email is UNCLASSIFIED.
  Classified by DAS, A/GIS, DoS on 08/27/2015 - Class: CONFIDENTIAL - Reason: 1.4(B), 1.4(D), B1 - Declassify
  on: 09/01/2025
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771193 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771194
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Tanden, Neera
MetadataDateSent: 2010-11-01T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0106/DOC_0C05771194/C05771194.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771194
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Neera Tanden
  Monday, November 1, 2010 11:35 PM
  Hi Hillary,
  I hope you are enjoying your travels. I'm trying to keep the Go, Fight, Win spirit, but I must confess,
  it's a bit hard.
  I promise I will do this rarely, if at all, in the future, but I am once again sending my column. This
  time I am doing so because it references you and also because it created some buzz related to the
  primaries.
  Looking forward to seeing you in December.
  Neera
  PO,!T1CS
  The Female Factor
  Jcw the Democrats can regain women 3 faith—and fightfor their interests.
  era 111"(leP1
  MORE FROM TH!S AUTHOR
  Neera Tanden: How °barna Can Win the Battle Over the Economy
  What Will It Tate For the Left to Rally Behind Obama Again?
  Tanden: Why Liberal Dissatisfaction With Obarna Is Way Overblown
  Last week, as Democratic candidates across the country reached out to female voters in the final swing
  before Election Day. the White House released a report on how
  The report highlights the Obama's administration's efforts and accomplishments on behalf of
  .‘vomen's economic success—small business expansion that helps female business owners, jobs tax credits
  that help women (and lnera) find jobs, and laws to enforce equal pay for equal work„ among other
  initiatives. Yet the report passed with little fanfare and even less media attention—like so many other
  aspects of the president's remarkably pro-woman policy agenda.
  It's almost tragic how this agenda has fallen under the radar during Obama's first two years in office. We
  hear too often about abortion's controversial role in the year-long health care negotiations—but not
  enough about other women-centered issues that, after being promoted by activists for years, have finally
  made it into legislation. These go beyond the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. The American Reinvestment
  and Recovery Act dramatically expanded child care provisions and Head Start. The health cafe bill
  contained over $i billion to support nurses visiting new and expectant mothers at home, a program that
  women's groups and economists alike have championed as a smart investment. An even bigger victory is
  the CLASS Act, also part of the health care bill, which provides a basic cash benefit to people (often
  women) who are taking care of the elderly at home.
  Yet I can probably count on my hand the number of people, including women, who actually know about
  these new laws. Amid the din of bad news about the economy and misinformation about health care
  reform, these policies don't stand a chance, sadly, of getting much media coverage. it doesn't help that the
  Democrats haven't done enough to shine a public spotlight on them.
  But they could soon be lost in an even deeper abyss: The rampant individualism and free-market
  fundamentalism support-ed by the Republican Party, which seems on the 1
  .Drecipice of controlling -die
  House and possibly the Senate, could undo these initiatives entirely. What's more, the new Republiicpm
  wave could mute the voice of women and their most important advocates on the national stage.
  The Ten Parties, fueled by wealthy multimillionaires, are running extreme candidates—including
  women like Sharron Angie and Christine O'Donnell—who want to get rid of policies that help women the
  most. If the health care bill gets repealed, for instance, the new provisions for !ong-term care would go out
  the window, making decades worth of advocacy work moot.
  But the Tea Parties threaten women in other ways, too. .ff the Republicans take back the _House, the
  Democratic Party will lose one of its most powerful women: Speaker Nanc,
  „' Pelosi, who currently has more
  clout than any woman on the other side of the aisle, Meanwhile, Republicans like Sarah Palin and Nikki
  Haley will only gain political power—and, with that .power, attract more attention to their extreme views.
  If these Republicans become the nation's loudest voices of seemingly strong women, that could portend
  for a shift among younger women's allegiances toward the Republican Party and its platform.
  Already, despite the stark realities about what Republicans will likely take away from women once. they are
  in power, we are seeing rumbling of such a change: After forming the backbone of Democratic majorities
  for years, working-class women are wobbling in theii support the the Obama administration. According to
  a fron. last week, while femaie college graduates savor Democratic over
  Republican control (56 percent to 36 percent), women With only some college or a vocational education
  are running almost even k A • '
  Perhaps, in their growing economic anxiety, this group of women wafits to throw out incumbents they
  perceive have not sufficiently focused on their economic progress. But, of course, if the media paid more
  attention to Obama's pro-woman agenda—and both advocates and policymakers did more to broadcast
  it—these key voters would know that the Democrats, not Republicans, are the politicians who have their
  interests in mind.
  Democrats can't let this continue—they can't allow Republicans to brand themselves as the party of strong
  female leaders, or allow women to gradually become a constituency of the right. That's why it's critical to
  have standout women in the party. If Pelosi loses, is there a powerful enough Democratic woman to
  compete with these Republicans in the national spotlight? There's Hillary Clinton who, as Secretary of
  State, has sent a powerful signal to the country and the world about the importance of female leadership in
  the Obama administration, But, as a technically non-partisan international figure, Hillary won't be able to
  do public battle with the rising right,
  Perhaps a Governor Sink—if she wins—in Florida could be among a new class of strong female Democrats.
  The °barna administration would also do well to elevate v.,/onien in the exe.cutive branch and turn public
  attention to those who are already there.
  In addition to •presenting women as the face of the patty, Democrats must focus on issues like long-term
  care, child care, and equal pay, all of which could rise to the legislatle fore in the coming months.
  Republicans will likely directly attack or cut beck investments in these initiatives. When this happens, the
  White House (and Democrats more broadly) would be wise to e.:;olain what ili niean for women if these
  i •
  nitiatives are gutted or lost—and to fight tooth and nail to make s-a•.e that doesn't happen.
  If it doesn't take these steps, the Democratic Party could lose ts grasr on a cr3-ni‘al. Pveii central 7-,eit of its
  coalition. And women, in the long run, would suffer under conservative laws that parrot family -values, but
  do nothing to value families.
  Neera Tanden is the chiTcoperatina office, of Center for . ozriefn P—oc,-ress, SJ.e served in the
  ObalRe. and C:-
  :;qton adininistrUHOTZS.
  .■1?;;RT :•IAR7.0 0;n:cr,,

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771194 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Neera Tanden
  Monday, November 1, 2010 11:35 PM
  Hi Hillary,
  I hope you are enjoying your travels. I'm trying to keep the Go, Fight, Win spirit, but I must confess,
  it's a bit hard.
  I promise I will do this rarely, if at all, in the future, but I am once again sending my column. This
  time I am doing so because it references you and also because it created some buzz related to the
  primaries.
  Looking forward to seeing you in December.
  Neera
  PO,!T1CS
  The Female Factor
  Jcw the Democrats can regain women 3 faith—and fightfor their interests.
  era 111"(leP1
  MORE FROM TH!S AUTHOR
  Neera Tanden: How °barna Can Win the Battle Over the Economy
  What Will It Tate For the Left to Rally Behind Obama Again?
  Tanden: Why Liberal Dissatisfaction With Obarna Is Way Overblown
  Last week, as Democratic candidates across the country reached out to female voters in the final swing
  before Election Day. the White House released a report on how
  The report highlights the Obama's administration's efforts and accomplishments on behalf of
  .‘vomen's economic success—small business expansion that helps female business owners, jobs tax credits
  that help women (and lnera) find jobs, and laws to enforce equal pay for equal work„ among other
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771194 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771194 Date: 08/31/2015
  initiatives. Yet the report passed with little fanfare and even less media attention—like so many other
  aspects of the president's remarkably pro-woman policy agenda.
  It's almost tragic how this agenda has fallen under the radar during Obama's first two years in office. We
  hear too often about abortion's controversial role in the year-long health care negotiations—but not
  enough about other women-centered issues that, after being promoted by activists for years, have finally
  made it into legislation. These go beyond the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. The American Reinvestment
  and Recovery Act dramatically expanded child care provisions and Head Start. The health cafe bill
  contained over $i billion to support nurses visiting new and expectant mothers at home, a program that
  women's groups and economists alike have championed as a smart investment. An even bigger victory is
  the CLASS Act, also part of the health care bill, which provides a basic cash benefit to people (often
  women) who are taking care of the elderly at home.
  Yet I can probably count on my hand the number of people, including women, who actually know about
  these new laws. Amid the din of bad news about the economy and misinformation about health care
  reform, these policies don't stand a chance, sadly, of getting much media coverage. it doesn't help that the
  Democrats haven't done enough to shine a public spotlight on them.
  But they could soon be lost in an even deeper abyss: The rampant individualism and free-market
  fundamentalism support-ed by the Republican Party, which seems on the 1
  .Drecipice of controlling -die
  House and possibly the Senate, could undo these initiatives entirely. What's more, the new Republiicpm
  wave could mute the voice of women and their most important advocates on the national stage.
  The Ten Parties, fueled by wealthy multimillionaires, are running extreme candidates—including
  women like Sharron Angie and Christine O'Donnell—who want to get rid of policies that help women the
  most. If the health care bill gets repealed, for instance, the new provisions for !ong-term care would go out
  the window, making decades worth of advocacy work moot.
  But the Tea Parties threaten women in other ways, too. .ff the Republicans take back the _House, the
  Democratic Party will lose one of its most powerful women: Speaker Nanc,
  „' Pelosi, who currently has more
  clout than any woman on the other side of the aisle, Meanwhile, Republicans like Sarah Palin and Nikki
  Haley will only gain political power—and, with that .power, attract more attention to their extreme views.
  If these Republicans become the nation's loudest voices of seemingly strong women, that could portend
  for a shift among younger women's allegiances toward the Republican Party and its platform.
  Already, despite the stark realities about what Republicans will likely take away from women once. they are
  in power, we are seeing rumbling of such a change: After forming the backbone of Democratic majorities
  for years, working-class women are wobbling in theii support the the Obama administration. According to
  a fron. last week, while femaie college graduates savor Democratic over
  Republican control (56 percent to 36 percent), women With only some college or a vocational education
  are running almost even k A • '
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771194 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771194 Date: 08/31/2015
  Perhaps, in their growing economic anxiety, this group of women wafits to throw out incumbents they
  perceive have not sufficiently focused on their economic progress. But, of course, if the media paid more
  attention to Obama's pro-woman agenda—and both advocates and policymakers did more to broadcast
  it—these key voters would know that the Democrats, not Republicans, are the politicians who have their
  interests in mind.
  Democrats can't let this continue—they can't allow Republicans to brand themselves as the party of strong
  female leaders, or allow women to gradually become a constituency of the right. That's why it's critical to
  have standout women in the party. If Pelosi loses, is there a powerful enough Democratic woman to
  compete with these Republicans in the national spotlight? There's Hillary Clinton who, as Secretary of
  State, has sent a powerful signal to the country and the world about the importance of female leadership in
  the Obama administration, But, as a technically non-partisan international figure, Hillary won't be able to
  do public battle with the rising right,
  Perhaps a Governor Sink—if she wins—in Florida could be among a new class of strong female Democrats.
  The °barna administration would also do well to elevate v.,/onien in the exe.cutive branch and turn public
  attention to those who are already there.
  In addition to •presenting women as the face of the patty, Democrats must focus on issues like long-term
  care, child care, and equal pay, all of which could rise to the legislatle fore in the coming months.
  Republicans will likely directly attack or cut beck investments in these initiatives. When this happens, the
  White House (and Democrats more broadly) would be wise to e.:;olain what ili niean for women if these
  i •
  nitiatives are gutted or lost—and to fight tooth and nail to make s-a•.e that doesn't happen.
  If it doesn't take these steps, the Democratic Party could lose ts grasr on a cr3-ni‘al. Pveii central 7-,eit of its
  coalition. And women, in the long run, would suffer under conservative laws that parrot family -values, but
  do nothing to value families.
  Neera Tanden is the chiTcoperatina office, of Center for . ozriefn P—oc,-ress, SJ.e served in the
  ObalRe. and C:-
  :;qton adininistrUHOTZS.
  .■1?;;RT :•IAR7.0 0;n:cr,,
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771194 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771195
MetadataSubject: IMPACT OF US ASSISTANCE IN PAKISTAN
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: McHale, Judith A
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-20T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771195/C05771195.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: FW: Impact of US assistance in Pakistan
ExtractedFrom: McHale, Judith A <McHaleJA@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Friday, August 20, 2010 8:39 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771195
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  See below. Terrific piece from the BBC which I will circulate.
  Meant to mention yesterday that I am going to Buenos Aires, Montevideo and Santiago next week. In Buenos Aires and
  Montevideo I will speaking at two business conferences being hosted by Council of the Americas and in Chile I will be
  visiting some of the public diplomacy programs we launched after the earthquake.
  You may recall that I have a long-standing relationship with Christina Kirchner going back to my Discovery days. We had
  quite a large and successful business there. We are trying to arrange for me to meet with her when I am in BA
  and Arturo has briefed me on points he would like me to make if I get to spend some time with her.
  I thought yesterday went well although I think it is going to be hard going to keep the world interested and committed
  to raising the necessary funding.
  im

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771195 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B6
  From: McHale, Judith A <McHaleJA@state.gov>
  Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 8:39 AM
  To:
  Subject: FW: Impact of US assistance in Pakistan
  See below. Terrific piece from the BBC which I will circulate.
  Meant to mention yesterday that I am going to Buenos Aires, Montevideo and Santiago next week. In Buenos Aires and
  Montevideo I will speaking at two business conferences being hosted by Council of the Americas and in Chile I will be
  visiting some of the public diplomacy programs we launched after the earthquake.
  You may recall that I have a long-standing relationship with Christina Kirchner going back to my Discovery days. We had
  quite a large and successful business there. We are trying to arrange for me to meet with her when I am in BA
  and Arturo has briefed me on points he would like me to make if I get to spend some time with her.
  I thought yesterday went well although I think it is going to be hard going to keep the world interested and committed
  to raising the necessary funding.
  im
  From: Mellott, Joseph
  Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 6:50 AM
  To: McHale, Judith A
  Subject: Fw: Impact of US assistance in Pakistan
  Judith -
  See below from at BBC.
  Joe
  Joe Mellott
  Sent from my Blackberry
  From
  To: Mellott, Joseph
  Sent: Fri Aug 20 06:29:43 2010
  Subject: Impact of US assistance in Pakistan
  Joe
  How are things?
  I thought Judith might be interested in this piece by the BBC's Islamabad editor. The piece
  should be on BBC News website soon.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771195 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771195 Date: 08/31/2015
  Haroon Rashid,
  Kalam Valley, NorthWeat Pakistan
  A population of around 70,000 in Pakistan's remote Kalam valley in Swat district is cut off after
  road links were swept away by flood waters three weeks back. Dozens of multi-story hotels
  perched on the river banks can't be seen anymore. The people are without electricity and
  telephone services too.
  But despite this dismal picture, what follows natural disasters is not always all bad.
  International assistance led by the US forces here is changing people's perceptions while local
  volunteers have joined hands to start rebuilding bridges and roads to restore their connection
  with the outside world.
  Until last year Kalam, as rest of the Swat district, was hit hard by Islamic militancy. They
  espoused anti-US agenda. But Pakistani troops helped by local people flushed the Taleban out of
  the picturesque valley surrounded by tall green mountains. The incident of a few women too
  killing some Taleban is still proudly told here.
  With the routing of Taleban last year and arrival of the US Marines helicopters in Kalam, local
  perception of the Americans is changing fast. Suddenly the local population, mostly Pashtoon,
  now appreciate the American presence.
  Thirty-year old Habib Rasul, a local Taxi driver, says before floods they used to consider
  Americans enemy. "We used to consider them bad, our enemies. Muslim countries did not give
  us any assistance but they did so they're good."
  Kalam is cut off by road. Depending on weather, US military helicopters are bringing in relief
  goods, mostly flour and medicines in a number of sorties each day. They land at Kalam's green
  Shahi ground where hundreds of affectees' sit around the helipad waiting for their turn for aid or
  to be taken on board.
  Despite the helipad open to general public, no untoward incident has so far taken place. But the
  Pakistani authorities it seems don't wish to take any chances. Apart from two Pakistani military
  commandoes on each chopper, the helipad's security is in the Pakistani military's hands.
  On their way back, these Blackhawks take the sick and the wounded out of the secluded valley.
  'A friend in need is a friend indeed. In the past we thought the Americans were supporting
  militants, that it was their game, but now I am sure ninety-five percent of people in Kalam
  believe they are friends," says a local social worker Ehsanul Haq. "We're grateful to them."
  Kalam is a place for leisure lover and hikers. The small tourist resort had around 300 small and
  medium sized hotels. But the spread of militancy had badly affected the local hotel economy for
  two years. In a bid to attract tourists and restore their confidence, the military in July held a
  festival in Kalam. But a few days later, floods wreaked havoc with the local hotel industry. Over
  4000 tourists had to be evacuated in helicopters. The local hoteliers fear getting the tourists back
  now would take a lot of time.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771195 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771195 Date: 08/31/2015
  Another positive thing to come out of the current disaster is the local population's decision not to
  wait for any government help and start rebuilding bridges and clear roads.
  Malik Ghazan Khan, head of local volunteers, told the BBC they know if they look towards the
  government it could take months or even years. "We are doing it on the basis of self help
  because who else can assist us at this moment except God. The Chief Minister has told us they
  can't do it immediately. He said they had to go through processes and procedures so it takes time.
  So we have decided to do it ourselves by taking God name. I salute the brave people of Kalam,
  they have so far reconstructed six bridges. We have made 18 to 20 kms road useable now."
  These volunteers have their own problems. Three fell in the gushing river Swat in front of us
  while putting a log across the river. Luckily all three were rescued but one had his leg broken
  and had to be evacuated the next day.
  Like food and medicines, fuel is in short supply too. A volunteer Noorul Ahad told me they don't
  have the fuels. "While fasting its impossible for us to travel 20 krns up and down a day."
  Haroon Rashid,
  BBC Pakistan.
  www.bbcurdu.com
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771195 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771196
MetadataSubject: (REUTERS) BLASTS IN PAKISTAN'S LAHORE KILL AT LEAST 3
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-01T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771196/C05771196.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: (Reuters) Blasts in Pakistan's Lahore kill at least 3
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: SES-O_Shift-II
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, September 1, 2010 10:42 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771196
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771196 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2010 10:42 AM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: (Reuters) Blasts in Pakistan's Lahore kill at least 3
  From: Moore, Anna W
  To: NEWS-Mahogany; NEWS-Pakistan
  Cc: SES-O_Shift-II
  Sent: Wed Sep 01 10:38:05 2010
  Subject: (Reuters) Blasts in PakistaWs Lahore kill at least 3
  LAHORE (Reuters) —Two bombs exploded at a Shi'ite procession in the Pakistani city of Lahore, killing at least three
  people and wounding 25, police and witnesses said, after a lull in violence during devastating floods. The attacks came
  after two days of government air raids on militant strongholds in the northwest region.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771196 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771197
MetadataSubject: FYI, PAT LANG
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: sbwhoeop
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-20T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771197/C05771197.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: fyi, pat lang
ExtractedFrom: sbwhoeop
ExtractedDateSent: Friday, August 20, 2010 10:52 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771197
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  H: Pat Lang's view of the resumed talks. Sid
  ."IsraePaestinialpeace talks expected to resume in Se4zitember" Washst
  "The Middle East peace process resumed in May, after a hiatus of 19 months, but it stalled
  again over the terms of moving from indirect talks, mediated by U.S. envoy George Mitchell,
  to direct negotiations.
  .israel insists it is ready for direct talks, provided there are no preconditions. The Palestinians
  are ready provided there is a clear agenda. Israel says an agenda means preconditions.
  Resolving the snag over terms is crucial, diplomats say." Washpost
  The former NY Times reporter Judy Miller likes to address me as "gloomy gus" or some such
  thing when I encounter her. Well, stand by for some more gloom.
  The second Camp David talks failed because Dennis Ross and company placed the
  Palestinian delegation in a position in which a "solution" was demanded and expected by the
  Americans and Israelis on the basis of bargaining during the negotiations themselves.
  This seemed reasonable at the time to the US and Israeli negotiators. After all, is this not
  what one does? Should not the outcome be the product of the dialectic of argument and
  persuasion?
  Arabs generally think not. They tend to believe that negotiations are for the purpose of of
  arranging the details of outcomes that are understood in advance of the conference itself. For
  them, anything else is an attempt to win concessions through trickery.
  "The Palestinians are ready provided there is a clear agenda. Israel says an agenda means
  preconditions."
  Hello! What kind of nonsense is this? Have we learned nothing?
  And then, there is the "little" matter of the non-participation of Hamas. Does the Obama
  Administration really think that this 600 pound gorilla can be ignored? Is this some sort of
  scheme on the part of Natanyahu, and "the boys" to discredit Abbas so that an isolated
  Hamas can be attacked and destroyed later?
  Realism in diplomacy is a desirable thing. George Mitchell used to be smarter than this. His
  staff should be advising him not to do this. Failure will be catastrophic.
  All the players should be engaged, and they are not. The outcome should be known in
  advance and it is not.
  This is both childish and destructive. pl
  http://www.washiLigtorsost. cortilwp-dyn/contentiarticie;2010/0811 9/AR201 0081 907203 htrni

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771197 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B6
  From: sbwhoeop
  Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 10:52 AM
  To:
  Subject: fyi, pat lang
  H: Pat Lang's view of the resumed talks. Sid
  ."IsraePaestinialpeace talks expected to resume in Se4zitember" Washst
  "The Middle East peace process resumed in May, after a hiatus of 19 months, but it stalled
  again over the terms of moving from indirect talks, mediated by U.S. envoy George Mitchell,
  to direct negotiations.
  .israel insists it is ready for direct talks, provided there are no preconditions. The Palestinians
  are ready provided there is a clear agenda. Israel says an agenda means preconditions.
  Resolving the snag over terms is crucial, diplomats say." Washpost
  The former NY Times reporter Judy Miller likes to address me as "gloomy gus" or some such
  thing when I encounter her. Well, stand by for some more gloom.
  The second Camp David talks failed because Dennis Ross and company placed the
  Palestinian delegation in a position in which a "solution" was demanded and expected by the
  Americans and Israelis on the basis of bargaining during the negotiations themselves.
  This seemed reasonable at the time to the US and Israeli negotiators. After all, is this not
  what one does? Should not the outcome be the product of the dialectic of argument and
  persuasion?
  Arabs generally think not. They tend to believe that negotiations are for the purpose of of
  arranging the details of outcomes that are understood in advance of the conference itself. For
  them, anything else is an attempt to win concessions through trickery.
  "The Palestinians are ready provided there is a clear agenda. Israel says an agenda means
  preconditions."
  Hello! What kind of nonsense is this? Have we learned nothing?
  And then, there is the "little" matter of the non-participation of Hamas. Does the Obama
  Administration really think that this 600 pound gorilla can be ignored? Is this some sort of
  scheme on the part of Natanyahu, and "the boys" to discredit Abbas so that an isolated
  Hamas can be attacked and destroyed later?
  Realism in diplomacy is a desirable thing. George Mitchell used to be smarter than this. His
  staff should be advising him not to do this. Failure will be catastrophic.
  All the players should be engaged, and they are not. The outcome should be known in
  advance and it is not.
  This is both childish and destructive. pl
  http://www.washiLigtorsost. cortilwp-dyn/contentiarticie;2010/0811 9/AR201 0081 907203 htrni
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771197 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771198
MetadataSubject: FYI, MORE ON MID-TERM STRATEGY... SID
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: sbwhoeop
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-01T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771198/C05771198.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771198
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  sbwhoeop
  Wednesday, September 1, 2010 11:47 AM
  H
  H: fyi. more on mid-term strategy... Sid
  Since you are on this tack: This is a cri de coeur from the guy who wrote "The Political Brain" and was a major Obama
  supporter, Drew Westen. I'll write you another memo very soon... Sid
  AlterNet / By Drew Westen
  ,24 COMMENTS
  What Created the Populist Explosion and How
  Democrats Can Avoid the Shrapnel in
  November
  To say that the American people are angry is an understatement. The only question at this point is how to mitigate the
  damage when the bomb detonates in November.
  September 1, 2010
  LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
  Join our mailing list:
  Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.
  ftagiou,
  -b ialEffilgandwa ol§to PolilitN
  To say that the American people are angry is an understatement. The political brain of Americans today reflects a volatile
  mixture of fear and fury, and when you mix those together, you get an explosion. The only question at this point is how to
  mitigate the damage when the bomb detonates in November.
  The bad news is that it's too late for Democrats to do what would have been both good policy and good politics (and what
  the House actually did do), namely to pass a major jobs bill when it was clear that the private sector couldn't keep
  Americans employed. The "Obama Doctrine" should have been that Americans who want to work and have the ability to
  contribute to our productivity as a nation should have the right to work, and that if the private sector can't meet the
  demand for jobs, we have plenty of roads and bridges to fix, new energy sources to develop and manufacture, and
  schools to build and renovate so our kids and workers returning for training can compete in the 21st century global
  economy. From having spent much of the last four years testing messages on a range of issues, from immigration to
  taxes and deficits, I can say with some certainty that nothing John Boehner or Eric Cantor could say could come within 30
  points of generating the enthusiasm -- particularly among swing voters -- of a message that began, "We don't have a
  shortage of work ethic in this country, we have a shortage of work." That message resonates across the political
  spectrum. And it isn't even the strongest message we've tested in the last weeks or months that beats back the toughest
  deficit-cutting language the other side can muster.
  But it's too late for that. The administration opted for an alternative doctrine, which Larry Summers enunciated on This
  Week several months ago: that unemployment is going to remain high for the foreseeable future and eventually come
  down -- as if there's nothing we can do about it -- and that they will push here and there for small symbolic measures
  whose symbolism tends to escape people who are out of work. It's hard to be excited by symbolism when your children
  are hungry or the bank is repossessing your home -- although you didn't do anything to deserve it -- while the people who
  did are once again making out like bandits.
  Although the situation looks bleak for Democrats in November, it ain't over 'til it's over. Republicans are shooting
  themselves in the foot all over the country, running Tea Party candidates who are so far to the right you can't see Middle
  America from their porch. And some endangered Democrats will likely see victory in November from theirs if they
  understand the public mood and speak to it.
  What is that public mood? It can be characterized by a single phrase -- populist anger -- and it cuts across partisan lines.
  On the right, it is alloyed with racial anxiety and prejudice. On the left, it is alloyed with tremendous disappointment at
  what could have been if we had the kind of bold leadership for which times like these cry out. And among people in the
  vast political center, populist anger is alloyed with anxiety and uncertainty -- about their jobs, their homes, and their
  children's future.
  How to Create a Populist Explosion: A Tragedy in Two Acts
  So how did we get here? The story can be told as a tragedy in two acts.
  Act I: The GOP Sets the Country on a Course of Economic Destruction and the President Calls for Truth and
  Reconciliation without the Truth Part
  • A strong economic downturn devolves into a Great Recession, as the stock market crashes and major banks fail.
  By October 2008, upper middle class moderate Republicans in the suburbs are so frightened by what's happening
  to their assets that they're willing to give Democrats a chance.
  • A Republican administration that believes in neither government nor regulation creates a 700 billion bank bailout
  with no accountability. Unlike Republicans, who would say "no" in a situation like this and let a Great Recession
  turn into a Great Depression, Democrats do the right thing, but they don't make it clear from the start that these
  are Bush Bailouts and remind Americans, over and over, that the cause of all the bankruptcies is the bankruptcy
  of Republican ideology.
  • A charismatic young president raises people's hopes and expectations, as he uniquely can. Americans are
  frightened, but they are willing and waiting to hear an alternative narrative to "government is the problem, not the
  solution" and a path back to economic recovery and security.
  • The White House refuses to tell the American people three stories they desperately need to hear.
  • The first is why the economy has gone into the ditch, and who did it. The president is steadfast in his position that
  we should "look forward, not backward," even as the GOP is blocking his every initiative to clean up its mess. As
  conservative attacks on him and Democrats increase, he refuses to indict the Republicans in Congress or
  President Bush for having destroyed our economy and putting one in eight Americans out of work and one in five
  either behind on their mortgage or in the process of having their homes foreclosed by the same bankers who
  gambled them away. Why did he need to tell the American people who was responsible for their misery -- and to
  repeat it again and again? Because otherwise, if the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression didn't
  subside within a year and half, voters would start to associate it with him and his party. This is Neuroscience 101 -
  - it's how mental associations are formed. But the president never even uttered George W. Bush's name in his
  first year in office, and the first time he did mention Bush was to appoint him, along with former President Clinton,
  to co-lead American relief efforts in Haiti. The president doesn't like putting antagonists in any of his stories, but if
  forced to, he would cite unnamed "naysayers," "Washington politics as usual," or "Congress," which was
  counterproductive given that Congress was held by his party. The guiding belief at the White House implicit in this
  messaging strategy was that Americans have a good grasp on economics and good memories:
  • The second story the American people needed to hear from the president was why deficit spending is essential
  when the economy is spiraling downward. It's not a hard story to tell, even in a sound bite. But one of the best
  educators to occupy the Oval Office in decades chose not to educate -- he actually did it once, with prodding, but
  never repeated what was a superb explanation --- nor did he remind voters every time his opponents attacked
  him for deficit spending that they had left him with a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit on the day he walked into office
  because of their unpaid-for tax cuts to millionaires and unpaid-for war on Iraq that called on no one to sacrifice
  except our soldiers and their families (and our kids and grandkids, who will be paying off this war for generations).
  A year later, with Democrats on the ropes, the president started to tell that story. It was the right move, but
  appeared defensive because it hadn't been part of his guiding narrative from the start.
  • The third story the president needed to offer was an alternative narrative on government. The president and his
  party were about to offer effective government as a solution to multiple problems after 30 years of solid branding
  by conservatives since Ronald Reagan about how government is the problem. But the narrative never came.
  • The White House and Democratic Congress pass what virtually all economists outside the Goldman Sachs-to-
  Washington pipeline consider a half-stimulus that they predict will likely produce half-results. It fulfilled its promise.
  But the equally predictable political result was a discrediting of the concept of government intervention to
  stimulate the economy in the eyes of the public -- enough to scare off Democratic lawmakers from doing what
  they learned about Keynesian economics in intro economics for the indefinite future. Instead of blasting the
  Republicans for having hurled the country toward an abyss that would now take drastic measures to avert and
  warning the American people that this could easily be the first of two or three trillion-dollar packages that might be
  needed to get Americans back to work and to get the gears of the economy grinding again before we could start
  returning to the kinds of surpluses Bill Clinton had left the last time a Democrat was in the White House, the
  president chose to compromise with a party that was so unpopular when he took office that only 20 percent of
  voters at that point would even admit to a pollster that they considered themselves Republicans -- the lowest point
  for the GOP since the rise of public opinion polling 50 years earlier.
  • The economy continues its free-fall, shedding 700,000 jobs a month. Meanwhile, Democrats don't take the kind of
  dramatic steps necessary to stop the bleeding. Americans are becoming desperate, but they remain hopeful that
  this new president will turn things around, and that perhaps the jobs provisions of the new "stimulus" act will do
  cauterize the wound. Meanwhile, the stimulus is being portrayed by Republicans as a mixture of pork and fat, and
  no one is effectively answering the charges, creating increasingly negative associations to an act that was never
  adequately crafted or sold.
  • The logical follow-up to a bill designed to pull the economy out of a ditch is to make such a bill unnecessary in the
  future, by attacking Wall Street for having thrown us into crisis and passing strong legislation to rein in the
  excesses that created the economic meltdown. This would have sealed the American people's loyalty to the new
  president and Congress. (Heading into November, this is, in fact, the most popular piece of legislation the
  Democrats have passed, but it took them nearly a year and a half to get there, and by then, neither the president
  nor the Democratic Congress enjoyed the good will of the average American.) Instead, the same banks that
  received bailouts are foreclosing in record rates on the homeowners whose payroll taxes funded the bailouts but
  don't seem to get the same kind of attention to their needs from the federal government. Adding insult to injury,
  the banks double and triple credit card interest rates to as high as 30 percent, including on people's existing credit
  card debt -- while continuing to receive no-interest loans from the federal government.
  • Despite talk of accountability, no one is fired (except one auto executive), virtually no one is prosecuted or even
  investigated as far as anyone knows, and banks that received bailouts flaunt record bonuses.
  Act II: An Anemic Economy Meets an Anemic Health Care Plan
  • The public has been clamoring for health care reform. Over 40 million people don't have health insurance at all,
  and the 85 percent of voters who do have health care have seen their costs double during the Bush years at the
  same time as real income has declined. Effective narratives on health care are widely available that win by a 2:1
  margin against the toughest Harry-and-Louise anti-reform language from the other side. The opposition knows it,
  as evident in a leaked memo by Republican wordsmith Frank Luntz, who warns that this will be an uphill climb for
  opponents of reform, who would do well to accept some major elements of it.
  • But instead of using any of the well-tested narratives that were highly effective during the campaign or devising
  any new ones of its own, the administration decides to try to "sell" health care without a narrative. (I wrote about
  this in detail a year ago and will not repeat that history here, except in telegraphic form.) The president refuses to
  state where he stands on any of the substantive debates about health reform for a year, such as whether we
  should have a "public option" (a term so ill-conceived it's hard to believe the public supported it anyway; imagine
  the support it might have received if it had been called instead "the one health care plan the health insurance
  companies don't get to control"). Instead, the White House uses phrases such as "bending the cost curve" while
  conservatives flood the airwaves with evocative phrases such as "government takeover," "a bureaucrat between
  you and your doctor," and "death panels."
  • Instead of using Big Pharma and the health insurance industry as the villains of the health care story, which would
  explain why we need an overhaul rather than a Band-Aid, the White House once again offers a story without
  protagonists or antagonists, and cuts secret deals with both industries that become public.
  • Over interminable months of trying to get the votes of the same Republicans who fought against Medicare for
  seniors for 30 years until the program was just too popular to keep attacking it and who are still trying to gut Social
  Security despite its popularity, the public then watches what George Will describes as the "serial bribery" of
  Republican and Democratic Senators alike, as each gets to take his or her turn as the 60th vote.
  • At the 11th hour, as a compromise plan is finally going to pass, the president nixes the idea of a Medicare-like
  alternative Americans can choose over a health-insurance industry plan if they so desire, despite 60 percent of
  even swing voters wanting it included in the bill.
  • Instead of being the signature bill that demonstrates both that Democrats can govern effectively and that
  government can be a force for good for working and middle class Americans (who have just been told that the
  better plans they've negotiated or been offered for years by their employers are "Cadillacs" that are going to be
  taxed out of existence), the entire process proves to the average American that government can't do anything
  right and scares moderate Democrats away from voting for any other bill that would ever put them on the record
  supporting government or spending.
  • "Government" hits an all-time low in the polls, matching the popularity of big corporations, CEOs, and bailouts.
  • Populist anger emerges as the primary emotion across the political spectrum, and the president's job approval
  with swing voters drops into the high thirties.
  • Following the conventional wisdom, Democrats return to their all-too-familiar defensive crouch, and conclude that
  when in trouble, tack right. On health care, the president and his Cabinet fan out all over television to "reassure"
  the public on health care that abortion won't be covered (thanks for the reassurance, but most of us didn't find that
  reassuring), that domestic partners won't be covered, and that immigrants won't be covered. None of these issues
  needed to be conceded. (I know this because I tested messages on them, and well- messaged progressive
  positions on them would have boosted the popularity of the bill with swing voters.)
  • The White House starts adopting failed conservative policies and talking points that leave the public utterly
  confused about where the president, and by extension, his party, stands on the central issues of the day. The
  president talks about cutting deficits and increasing spending in the same breath, using the metaphor of families
  tightening their belt in tough times, which only strengthens resolve against stimulating a faltering economy;
  pledges support for massively expanding offshore drilling and "clean coal" (which doesn't exist, by the way) in a
  speech on climate change; and sends in 1200 additional National Guards to Arizona as an apparent reward for
  passing "No Latino Left Behind," while publicly objecting to the legislation.
  • The underlying psychological assumption of these moves is that if you mix policies from the right and left in equal
  parts, you win the center. In fact, no one has ever won the center that way. It appears weak, opportunistic, and
  incoherent to the average swing voter, which is particularly problematic at a time when people in the center
  desperately want to know that their leaders have a vision and a coherent plan for what to do (which is why both
  FDR and Ronald Reagan were so effective in moving voters in the center). It doesn't win any votes on the right.
  But it does have one predictable effect: It sucks the motivation out of your base, who feel demoralized and
  betrayed (if they're part of the "professional left") or less likely to vote (if they're average voters who don't follow
  politics carefully but just don't feel very enthusiastic anymore, even if they don't really know why).
  • Capping it all off, the BP disaster occurs two weeks after the president has adopted the "drill here, drill now," "all
  of the above" position of the Republican Party and the oil companies. This could have been the perfect
  opportunity to go on the offensive, contrast what Democrats stand for (common sense, protection of our safety,
  the land we leave our children, and key American industries and jobs, and sticking up for ordinary Americans
  against big businesses and their lobbyists) with what Republicans stand for; and connect the dots between what
  happened on Wall Street (with regulators owned and operated by the companies they were supposed to regulate)
  and what happened in the Gulf (where precisely the same thing happened). Instead, the administration finds itself
  on the defensive, increasingly sounding like a subsidiary of BP, allowing BP to call the shots and control
  information for weeks, defending increasingly hard-to-believe statistics, and issuing press releases that appear
  indistinguishable from those issued by BP but are inconsistent with assessments of independent scientists.
  Where Do We Go from Here?
  So that is where we find ourselves today: a Democratic Party and Democratic base that is demoralized and unlikely to
  vote in high numbers in November; a Republican Party that is selling replanted Bushes with tremendous enthusiasm; and
  a vast political center filled with voters who are utterly confused and unsure who to turn to but certain that things aren't
  going well.
  In January 2009 no one could have predicted that Democrats would be in this predicament today. Perhaps Democrats
  might lose a few seats lost in an off-year election, but certainly no more than that. We had just seen -- and the American
  public knew we had just seen -- the most disastrous performance by a president and party in living history, and the
  American people had elected a tremendously charismatic young president with enormous Democratic majorities in both
  houses of Congress. They had given the president and Congress a strong mandate for whatever kind of change was
  necessary to get us out of economic free-fall and to put Americans back to work.
  But there were red flags already by the end of Obama's first week in office that led me to offer the following advice to the
  new administration: Tell the story of how we got in this mess or you'll own it. Tell a coherent story about deficit spending.
  Re-brand government because there's only one story out there now (Reagan's), and it's not one that supports a
  progressive agenda. Never let attacks go unanswered, because doing so only emboldens your opposition and leads the
  public to believe that you have no answers to them. And if you throw a bipartisan party and no one comes, don't throw
  another one. All of what followed has been as predictable as it has been unfortunate. A year and a half later, the White
  House hasn't consistently done any of these things, although the President is now intermittently doing some of them, and
  when he does, he does them well.
  The question today is whether Democrats can channel the populist anger we are seeing around the country this late in the
  game. The answer is that we'd better try. Having recently tested messages on economics and jobs, including how to talk
  about deficits and taxes -- widely assumed to be Democrats' Achilles Heel, particularly now -- there is little question that if
  Democrats and progressives from center to left simply say what they believe in ways that are evocative, values-driven,
  and speak to people's worries and 'anger, many stand a good chance of surviving November, particularly when their
  opponents have nothing to say other than warmed-over rhetoric about cutting taxes to millionaires and multinationals and
  fiscal restraint except where it cuts into profits of their campaign contributors. Even the most evocative boilerplate
  conservative messages fall flat against honest messages that speak to the need to get Americans working again. And on
  issue after issue, no message is more resonant right now than one that sides with working and middle class Americans
  and small business owners against special interests, big business, and their lobbyists.
  But actions speak louder than words, and Americans want to see action. It may be too late for the kind of jobs bill we
  should have seen a year and a half ago, but it isn't too late for Democrats to go on the offensive against the Republicans -
  - virtually all of them -- who opposed extending unemployment insurance to millions of Americans who were thrown out of
  work by the Republicans' corporate sponsors. It isn't too late for Democrats to contrast their support for the highly popular
  aid to state and local governments that just saved the jobs of hundreds of thousands of teachers, firefighters, and police
  all over the country with Republicans' desire to throw them out onto the street. It isn't too late to make a voting issue out of
  the bill the Republicans are stalling that would give small businesses a fighting chance in an economy stacked against
  them, and to make clear that one party stands for small businesses, which create 75 percent of the new jobs in this
  country, and the other party stands for big businesses that outsource American jobs and offshore their profits to avoid
  paying their fair share of American taxes. It's not too late to pass a bill that would limit credit card interest rates to a
  reasonable percent above the rate at which credit is made available to credit card companies. It's not too late to pass the
  first badly need "fix" to the health care reform act to demonstrate to Americans that Democrats mean it when they say this
  was just the first step, namely a law that stops insurance companies from increasing their premiums by 40 percent while
  cutting the size of their networks by 50-75 percent, which violates the principles of affordability and choice that were so
  essential to efforts to sell health care reform to the public. It's not too late to vow to change the rules of the Senate to
  prevent the use of the filibuster to give every special interest veto power over every important piece of legislation. It's not
  too late to introduce legislation that's been on hold in both the House and Senate to guarantee fair elections, so that the
  voice of everyday Americans is heard over the voice of the special interests that finance political campaigns.
  On every one of these issues, a strong populist message trounces anything the other side can say. But Democrats need
  to play offense. They need to take up-or-down votes on bill after bill, including those they expect the other side to block,
  knowing that every one of those votes has the leverage of a campaign ad behind it. They need to change the narrative
  from what sounds to the average American like a whiny and impotent one -- "the Republicans won't let us do it" -- to a
  narrative of strength in numbers shared with their constituents. And they need to make every election a choice between
  two well-articulated approaches to governance -- and to offer their articulation of both sides' positions and values.
  That leads to a final point. What Democrats have needed to offer the American people is a clear narrative about what and
  who led our country to the mess in which we find ourselves today and a clear vision of what and who will lead us out. That
  narrative would have laid a roadmap for our elected officials and voters alike, rather than making each legislative issue a
  seemingly discrete turn onto a dirt road. That narrative might have included -- and should include today -- some key
  elements: that if the economy is tumbling, it's the role of leadership and government to stop the free-fall; that if Wall Street
  is gambling with our financial security, our homes, and our jobs, true leaders do not sit back helplessly and wax eloquent
  aboUt the free market, they take away the dice; that if the private sector can't create jobs for people who want to work,
  then we'll put Americans back to work rebuilding our roads, bridges, and schools; that if Big Oil is preventing us from
  competing with China's wind and solar energy programs, then we'll eliminate the tax breaks that lead to dysfunctional
  investments in 19th century fuels and have a public-private partnership with companies that will create the clean, safe
  fuels of the 21st century and the millions of good American jobs that will follow.
  That's what Democrats stand for. It's time they said it.
  Drew Westen, Ph.D., is Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry at Emory University, founder of Westen Strategies, and
  author of The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771198 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Subject:
  sbwhoeop
  Wednesday, September 1, 2010 11:47 AM
  H
  H: fyi. more on mid-term strategy... Sid
  Since you are on this tack: This is a cri de coeur from the guy who wrote "The Political Brain" and was a major Obama
  supporter, Drew Westen. I'll write you another memo very soon... Sid
  AlterNet / By Drew Westen
  ,24 COMMENTS
  What Created the Populist Explosion and How
  Democrats Can Avoid the Shrapnel in
  November
  To say that the American people are angry is an understatement. The only question at this point is how to mitigate the
  damage when the bomb detonates in November.
  September 1, 2010
  LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
  Join our mailing list:
  Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.
  ftagiou,
  -b ialEffilgandwa ol§to PolilitN
  To say that the American people are angry is an understatement. The political brain of Americans today reflects a volatile
  mixture of fear and fury, and when you mix those together, you get an explosion. The only question at this point is how to
  mitigate the damage when the bomb detonates in November.
  The bad news is that it's too late for Democrats to do what would have been both good policy and good politics (and what
  the House actually did do), namely to pass a major jobs bill when it was clear that the private sector couldn't keep
  Americans employed. The "Obama Doctrine" should have been that Americans who want to work and have the ability to
  contribute to our productivity as a nation should have the right to work, and that if the private sector can't meet the
  demand for jobs, we have plenty of roads and bridges to fix, new energy sources to develop and manufacture, and
  schools to build and renovate so our kids and workers returning for training can compete in the 21st century global
  economy. From having spent much of the last four years testing messages on a range of issues, from immigration to
  taxes and deficits, I can say with some certainty that nothing John Boehner or Eric Cantor could say could come within 30
  points of generating the enthusiasm -- particularly among swing voters -- of a message that began, "We don't have a
  shortage of work ethic in this country, we have a shortage of work." That message resonates across the political
  spectrum. And it isn't even the strongest message we've tested in the last weeks or months that beats back the toughest
  deficit-cutting language the other side can muster.
  But it's too late for that. The administration opted for an alternative doctrine, which Larry Summers enunciated on This
  Week several months ago: that unemployment is going to remain high for the foreseeable future and eventually come
  down -- as if there's nothing we can do about it -- and that they will push here and there for small symbolic measures
  whose symbolism tends to escape people who are out of work. It's hard to be excited by symbolism when your children
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771198 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771198 Date: 08/31/2015
  are hungry or the bank is repossessing your home -- although you didn't do anything to deserve it -- while the people who
  did are once again making out like bandits.
  Although the situation looks bleak for Democrats in November, it ain't over 'til it's over. Republicans are shooting
  themselves in the foot all over the country, running Tea Party candidates who are so far to the right you can't see Middle
  America from their porch. And some endangered Democrats will likely see victory in November from theirs if they
  understand the public mood and speak to it.
  What is that public mood? It can be characterized by a single phrase -- populist anger -- and it cuts across partisan lines.
  On the right, it is alloyed with racial anxiety and prejudice. On the left, it is alloyed with tremendous disappointment at
  what could have been if we had the kind of bold leadership for which times like these cry out. And among people in the
  vast political center, populist anger is alloyed with anxiety and uncertainty -- about their jobs, their homes, and their
  children's future.
  How to Create a Populist Explosion: A Tragedy in Two Acts
  So how did we get here? The story can be told as a tragedy in two acts.
  Act I: The GOP Sets the Country on a Course of Economic Destruction and the President Calls for Truth and
  Reconciliation without the Truth Part
  • A strong economic downturn devolves into a Great Recession, as the stock market crashes and major banks fail.
  By October 2008, upper middle class moderate Republicans in the suburbs are so frightened by what's happening
  to their assets that they're willing to give Democrats a chance.
  • A Republican administration that believes in neither government nor regulation creates a 700 billion bank bailout
  with no accountability. Unlike Republicans, who would say "no" in a situation like this and let a Great Recession
  turn into a Great Depression, Democrats do the right thing, but they don't make it clear from the start that these
  are Bush Bailouts and remind Americans, over and over, that the cause of all the bankruptcies is the bankruptcy
  of Republican ideology.
  • A charismatic young president raises people's hopes and expectations, as he uniquely can. Americans are
  frightened, but they are willing and waiting to hear an alternative narrative to "government is the problem, not the
  solution" and a path back to economic recovery and security.
  • The White House refuses to tell the American people three stories they desperately need to hear.
  • The first is why the economy has gone into the ditch, and who did it. The president is steadfast in his position that
  we should "look forward, not backward," even as the GOP is blocking his every initiative to clean up its mess. As
  conservative attacks on him and Democrats increase, he refuses to indict the Republicans in Congress or
  President Bush for having destroyed our economy and putting one in eight Americans out of work and one in five
  either behind on their mortgage or in the process of having their homes foreclosed by the same bankers who
  gambled them away. Why did he need to tell the American people who was responsible for their misery -- and to
  repeat it again and again? Because otherwise, if the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression didn't
  subside within a year and half, voters would start to associate it with him and his party. This is Neuroscience 101 -
  - it's how mental associations are formed. But the president never even uttered George W. Bush's name in his
  first year in office, and the first time he did mention Bush was to appoint him, along with former President Clinton,
  to co-lead American relief efforts in Haiti. The president doesn't like putting antagonists in any of his stories, but if
  forced to, he would cite unnamed "naysayers," "Washington politics as usual," or "Congress," which was
  counterproductive given that Congress was held by his party. The guiding belief at the White House implicit in this
  messaging strategy was that Americans have a good grasp on economics and good memories:
  • The second story the American people needed to hear from the president was why deficit spending is essential
  when the economy is spiraling downward. It's not a hard story to tell, even in a sound bite. But one of the best
  educators to occupy the Oval Office in decades chose not to educate -- he actually did it once, with prodding, but
  never repeated what was a superb explanation --- nor did he remind voters every time his opponents attacked
  him for deficit spending that they had left him with a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit on the day he walked into office
  because of their unpaid-for tax cuts to millionaires and unpaid-for war on Iraq that called on no one to sacrifice
  except our soldiers and their families (and our kids and grandkids, who will be paying off this war for generations).
  A year later, with Democrats on the ropes, the president started to tell that story. It was the right move, but
  appeared defensive because it hadn't been part of his guiding narrative from the start.
  • The third story the president needed to offer was an alternative narrative on government. The president and his
  party were about to offer effective government as a solution to multiple problems after 30 years of solid branding
  by conservatives since Ronald Reagan about how government is the problem. But the narrative never came.
  • The White House and Democratic Congress pass what virtually all economists outside the Goldman Sachs-to-
  Washington pipeline consider a half-stimulus that they predict will likely produce half-results. It fulfilled its promise.
  But the equally predictable political result was a discrediting of the concept of government intervention to
  stimulate the economy in the eyes of the public -- enough to scare off Democratic lawmakers from doing what
  they learned about Keynesian economics in intro economics for the indefinite future. Instead of blasting the
  Republicans for having hurled the country toward an abyss that would now take drastic measures to avert and
  warning the American people that this could easily be the first of two or three trillion-dollar packages that might be
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771198 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771198 Date: 08/31/2015
  needed to get Americans back to work and to get the gears of the economy grinding again before we could start
  returning to the kinds of surpluses Bill Clinton had left the last time a Democrat was in the White House, the
  president chose to compromise with a party that was so unpopular when he took office that only 20 percent of
  voters at that point would even admit to a pollster that they considered themselves Republicans -- the lowest point
  for the GOP since the rise of public opinion polling 50 years earlier.
  • The economy continues its free-fall, shedding 700,000 jobs a month. Meanwhile, Democrats don't take the kind of
  dramatic steps necessary to stop the bleeding. Americans are becoming desperate, but they remain hopeful that
  this new president will turn things around, and that perhaps the jobs provisions of the new "stimulus" act will do
  cauterize the wound. Meanwhile, the stimulus is being portrayed by Republicans as a mixture of pork and fat, and
  no one is effectively answering the charges, creating increasingly negative associations to an act that was never
  adequately crafted or sold.
  • The logical follow-up to a bill designed to pull the economy out of a ditch is to make such a bill unnecessary in the
  future, by attacking Wall Street for having thrown us into crisis and passing strong legislation to rein in the
  excesses that created the economic meltdown. This would have sealed the American people's loyalty to the new
  president and Congress. (Heading into November, this is, in fact, the most popular piece of legislation the
  Democrats have passed, but it took them nearly a year and a half to get there, and by then, neither the president
  nor the Democratic Congress enjoyed the good will of the average American.) Instead, the same banks that
  received bailouts are foreclosing in record rates on the homeowners whose payroll taxes funded the bailouts but
  don't seem to get the same kind of attention to their needs from the federal government. Adding insult to injury,
  the banks double and triple credit card interest rates to as high as 30 percent, including on people's existing credit
  card debt -- while continuing to receive no-interest loans from the federal government.
  • Despite talk of accountability, no one is fired (except one auto executive), virtually no one is prosecuted or even
  investigated as far as anyone knows, and banks that received bailouts flaunt record bonuses.
  Act II: An Anemic Economy Meets an Anemic Health Care Plan
  • The public has been clamoring for health care reform. Over 40 million people don't have health insurance at all,
  and the 85 percent of voters who do have health care have seen their costs double during the Bush years at the
  same time as real income has declined. Effective narratives on health care are widely available that win by a 2:1
  margin against the toughest Harry-and-Louise anti-reform language from the other side. The opposition knows it,
  as evident in a leaked memo by Republican wordsmith Frank Luntz, who warns that this will be an uphill climb for
  opponents of reform, who would do well to accept some major elements of it.
  • But instead of using any of the well-tested narratives that were highly effective during the campaign or devising
  any new ones of its own, the administration decides to try to "sell" health care without a narrative. (I wrote about
  this in detail a year ago and will not repeat that history here, except in telegraphic form.) The president refuses to
  state where he stands on any of the substantive debates about health reform for a year, such as whether we
  should have a "public option" (a term so ill-conceived it's hard to believe the public supported it anyway; imagine
  the support it might have received if it had been called instead "the one health care plan the health insurance
  companies don't get to control"). Instead, the White House uses phrases such as "bending the cost curve" while
  conservatives flood the airwaves with evocative phrases such as "government takeover," "a bureaucrat between
  you and your doctor," and "death panels."
  • Instead of using Big Pharma and the health insurance industry as the villains of the health care story, which would
  explain why we need an overhaul rather than a Band-Aid, the White House once again offers a story without
  protagonists or antagonists, and cuts secret deals with both industries that become public.
  • Over interminable months of trying to get the votes of the same Republicans who fought against Medicare for
  seniors for 30 years until the program was just too popular to keep attacking it and who are still trying to gut Social
  Security despite its popularity, the public then watches what George Will describes as the "serial bribery" of
  Republican and Democratic Senators alike, as each gets to take his or her turn as the 60th vote.
  • At the 11th hour, as a compromise plan is finally going to pass, the president nixes the idea of a Medicare-like
  alternative Americans can choose over a health-insurance industry plan if they so desire, despite 60 percent of
  even swing voters wanting it included in the bill.
  • Instead of being the signature bill that demonstrates both that Democrats can govern effectively and that
  government can be a force for good for working and middle class Americans (who have just been told that the
  better plans they've negotiated or been offered for years by their employers are "Cadillacs" that are going to be
  taxed out of existence), the entire process proves to the average American that government can't do anything
  right and scares moderate Democrats away from voting for any other bill that would ever put them on the record
  supporting government or spending.
  • "Government" hits an all-time low in the polls, matching the popularity of big corporations, CEOs, and bailouts.
  • Populist anger emerges as the primary emotion across the political spectrum, and the president's job approval
  with swing voters drops into the high thirties.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771198 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771198 Date: 08/31/2015
  • Following the conventional wisdom, Democrats return to their all-too-familiar defensive crouch, and conclude that
  when in trouble, tack right. On health care, the president and his Cabinet fan out all over television to "reassure"
  the public on health care that abortion won't be covered (thanks for the reassurance, but most of us didn't find that
  reassuring), that domestic partners won't be covered, and that immigrants won't be covered. None of these issues
  needed to be conceded. (I know this because I tested messages on them, and well- messaged progressive
  positions on them would have boosted the popularity of the bill with swing voters.)
  • The White House starts adopting failed conservative policies and talking points that leave the public utterly
  confused about where the president, and by extension, his party, stands on the central issues of the day. The
  president talks about cutting deficits and increasing spending in the same breath, using the metaphor of families
  tightening their belt in tough times, which only strengthens resolve against stimulating a faltering economy;
  pledges support for massively expanding offshore drilling and "clean coal" (which doesn't exist, by the way) in a
  speech on climate change; and sends in 1200 additional National Guards to Arizona as an apparent reward for
  passing "No Latino Left Behind," while publicly objecting to the legislation.
  • The underlying psychological assumption of these moves is that if you mix policies from the right and left in equal
  parts, you win the center. In fact, no one has ever won the center that way. It appears weak, opportunistic, and
  incoherent to the average swing voter, which is particularly problematic at a time when people in the center
  desperately want to know that their leaders have a vision and a coherent plan for what to do (which is why both
  FDR and Ronald Reagan were so effective in moving voters in the center). It doesn't win any votes on the right.
  But it does have one predictable effect: It sucks the motivation out of your base, who feel demoralized and
  betrayed (if they're part of the "professional left") or less likely to vote (if they're average voters who don't follow
  politics carefully but just don't feel very enthusiastic anymore, even if they don't really know why).
  • Capping it all off, the BP disaster occurs two weeks after the president has adopted the "drill here, drill now," "all
  of the above" position of the Republican Party and the oil companies. This could have been the perfect
  opportunity to go on the offensive, contrast what Democrats stand for (common sense, protection of our safety,
  the land we leave our children, and key American industries and jobs, and sticking up for ordinary Americans
  against big businesses and their lobbyists) with what Republicans stand for; and connect the dots between what
  happened on Wall Street (with regulators owned and operated by the companies they were supposed to regulate)
  and what happened in the Gulf (where precisely the same thing happened). Instead, the administration finds itself
  on the defensive, increasingly sounding like a subsidiary of BP, allowing BP to call the shots and control
  information for weeks, defending increasingly hard-to-believe statistics, and issuing press releases that appear
  indistinguishable from those issued by BP but are inconsistent with assessments of independent scientists.
  Where Do We Go from Here?
  So that is where we find ourselves today: a Democratic Party and Democratic base that is demoralized and unlikely to
  vote in high numbers in November; a Republican Party that is selling replanted Bushes with tremendous enthusiasm; and
  a vast political center filled with voters who are utterly confused and unsure who to turn to but certain that things aren't
  going well.
  In January 2009 no one could have predicted that Democrats would be in this predicament today. Perhaps Democrats
  might lose a few seats lost in an off-year election, but certainly no more than that. We had just seen -- and the American
  public knew we had just seen -- the most disastrous performance by a president and party in living history, and the
  American people had elected a tremendously charismatic young president with enormous Democratic majorities in both
  houses of Congress. They had given the president and Congress a strong mandate for whatever kind of change was
  necessary to get us out of economic free-fall and to put Americans back to work.
  But there were red flags already by the end of Obama's first week in office that led me to offer the following advice to the
  new administration: Tell the story of how we got in this mess or you'll own it. Tell a coherent story about deficit spending.
  Re-brand government because there's only one story out there now (Reagan's), and it's not one that supports a
  progressive agenda. Never let attacks go unanswered, because doing so only emboldens your opposition and leads the
  public to believe that you have no answers to them. And if you throw a bipartisan party and no one comes, don't throw
  another one. All of what followed has been as predictable as it has been unfortunate. A year and a half later, the White
  House hasn't consistently done any of these things, although the President is now intermittently doing some of them, and
  when he does, he does them well.
  The question today is whether Democrats can channel the populist anger we are seeing around the country this late in the
  game. The answer is that we'd better try. Having recently tested messages on economics and jobs, including how to talk
  about deficits and taxes -- widely assumed to be Democrats' Achilles Heel, particularly now -- there is little question that if
  Democrats and progressives from center to left simply say what they believe in ways that are evocative, values-driven,
  and speak to people's worries and 'anger, many stand a good chance of surviving November, particularly when their
  opponents have nothing to say other than warmed-over rhetoric about cutting taxes to millionaires and multinationals and
  fiscal restraint except where it cuts into profits of their campaign contributors. Even the most evocative boilerplate
  conservative messages fall flat against honest messages that speak to the need to get Americans working again. And on
  issue after issue, no message is more resonant right now than one that sides with working and middle class Americans
  and small business owners against special interests, big business, and their lobbyists.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771198 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771198 Date: 08/31/2015
  But actions speak louder than words, and Americans want to see action. It may be too late for the kind of jobs bill we
  should have seen a year and a half ago, but it isn't too late for Democrats to go on the offensive against the Republicans -
  - virtually all of them -- who opposed extending unemployment insurance to millions of Americans who were thrown out of
  work by the Republicans' corporate sponsors. It isn't too late for Democrats to contrast their support for the highly popular
  aid to state and local governments that just saved the jobs of hundreds of thousands of teachers, firefighters, and police
  all over the country with Republicans' desire to throw them out onto the street. It isn't too late to make a voting issue out of
  the bill the Republicans are stalling that would give small businesses a fighting chance in an economy stacked against
  them, and to make clear that one party stands for small businesses, which create 75 percent of the new jobs in this
  country, and the other party stands for big businesses that outsource American jobs and offshore their profits to avoid
  paying their fair share of American taxes. It's not too late to pass a bill that would limit credit card interest rates to a
  reasonable percent above the rate at which credit is made available to credit card companies. It's not too late to pass the
  first badly need "fix" to the health care reform act to demonstrate to Americans that Democrats mean it when they say this
  was just the first step, namely a law that stops insurance companies from increasing their premiums by 40 percent while
  cutting the size of their networks by 50-75 percent, which violates the principles of affordability and choice that were so
  essential to efforts to sell health care reform to the public. It's not too late to vow to change the rules of the Senate to
  prevent the use of the filibuster to give every special interest veto power over every important piece of legislation. It's not
  too late to introduce legislation that's been on hold in both the House and Senate to guarantee fair elections, so that the
  voice of everyday Americans is heard over the voice of the special interests that finance political campaigns.
  On every one of these issues, a strong populist message trounces anything the other side can say. But Democrats need
  to play offense. They need to take up-or-down votes on bill after bill, including those they expect the other side to block,
  knowing that every one of those votes has the leverage of a campaign ad behind it. They need to change the narrative
  from what sounds to the average American like a whiny and impotent one -- "the Republicans won't let us do it" -- to a
  narrative of strength in numbers shared with their constituents. And they need to make every election a choice between
  two well-articulated approaches to governance -- and to offer their articulation of both sides' positions and values.
  That leads to a final point. What Democrats have needed to offer the American people is a clear narrative about what and
  who led our country to the mess in which we find ourselves today and a clear vision of what and who will lead us out. That
  narrative would have laid a roadmap for our elected officials and voters alike, rather than making each legislative issue a
  seemingly discrete turn onto a dirt road. That narrative might have included -- and should include today -- some key
  elements: that if the economy is tumbling, it's the role of leadership and government to stop the free-fall; that if Wall Street
  is gambling with our financial security, our homes, and our jobs, true leaders do not sit back helplessly and wax eloquent
  aboUt the free market, they take away the dice; that if the private sector can't create jobs for people who want to work,
  then we'll put Americans back to work rebuilding our roads, bridges, and schools; that if Big Oil is preventing us from
  competing with China's wind and solar energy programs, then we'll eliminate the tax breaks that lead to dysfunctional
  investments in 19th century fuels and have a public-private partnership with companies that will create the clean, safe
  fuels of the 21st century and the millions of good American jobs that will follow.
  That's what Democrats stand for. It's time they said it.
  Drew Westen, Ph.D., is Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry at Emory University, founder of Westen Strategies, and
  author of The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771198 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771200
MetadataSubject: YEMEN CHARGES U.S.-BORN CLERIC ANWAR AL-AWLAKI WITH PLOTTING TO KILL FOREIGNERS
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-11-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0106/DOC_0C05771200/C05771200.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: Yemen charges U.S.-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki with plotting to kill foreigners (SBU)
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Tuesday, November 2, 2010 4:59 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771200
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771200 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Tuesday, November 2, 2010 4:59 AM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: Yemen charges U.S.-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki with plotting to kill foreigners (SBU)
  From: OpsAlert@state.gov <OpsAlert@state.gov>
  Sent: Tue Nov 02 04:30:43 2010
  Subject: Yemen charges U.S.-born cleric Anwar al-Awlaki with plotting to kill foreigners (SBU)
  (SBU) Yemeni prosecutors charged in absentia al-Qaida linked radical cleric al-Awlaki, according to press. Embassy
  Sanaa confirms the indictment against al-Awlaki for participating in armed gang activity and inciting the killing of
  foreigners. Post adds the indictment establishes a legal basis for his arrest and potential trial.
  Automatic electronic distribution to: S, D(S), D(L), P, E, C, M, DG, T, R, PA, G, AF, EAP, EUR, NEA, SCA, WHA, 10,
  S/CRS, S/CT, S/HSC, H, DS, CA, PMAT, INR, AVC, 11P, ISN, CMS, S/ES, S/ES-0, NSOC, and WHSR.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771200 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771201
MetadataSubject: MOST IMPORTANTLY...
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Muscatine, Lissa
MetadataDateSent: 2010-08-20T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0092/DOC_0C05771201/C05771201.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771201
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Lissa Muscatine <
  Friday, August 20, 2010 11:09 AM
  Re: Most importantly....
  Thanks for your nice words. They mean a lot. I will always, always play for your team, officially or not!
  Many more thoughts on sports diplomacy that I'm excited about. And yes, once a jock, now an aging jock!
  On QDDR article, you'll see that a lot is missing (most notably a section on the Middle East, as well as China, Western
  Hemisphere (we should probably mention ECPA), a good energy example per David Goldwyn, et. al). it may also be too
  Pakistan heavy, though it is a great example of everything we are trying to do. My main goal was to try to ground the
  many elements at play in a more coherent narrative with a theme and thread that carried through. Didn't have enough
  time on the bottom third. Hopefully this version gives us something to work with, though.
  And I really hope you get some semblance of time off this week. If only the world would, for once, cooperate.
  On Aug 19, 2010, at 3:51 PM, H wrote:
  > It has, as always, been a joy to have you on the team. We've worked
  > together for so long, that I always feel better when I know you're
  > there--putting words in my mouth and watching my back.
  > I enjoyed our talk and was delighted to hear about all you're planning
  > to do--especially on the sports front. Just goes to show, once a jock
  > always a jock!
  > Thx too for the rescue effort you're doing on the ODOR article.
  >

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771201 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN
  PART B6
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Subject:
  Lissa Muscatine <
  Friday, August 20, 2010 11:09 AM
  Re: Most importantly....
  Thanks for your nice words. They mean a lot. I will always, always play for your team, officially or not!
  Many more thoughts on sports diplomacy that I'm excited about. And yes, once a jock, now an aging jock!
  On QDDR article, you'll see that a lot is missing (most notably a section on the Middle East, as well as China, Western
  Hemisphere (we should probably mention ECPA), a good energy example per David Goldwyn, et. al). it may also be too
  Pakistan heavy, though it is a great example of everything we are trying to do. My main goal was to try to ground the
  many elements at play in a more coherent narrative with a theme and thread that carried through. Didn't have enough
  time on the bottom third. Hopefully this version gives us something to work with, though.
  And I really hope you get some semblance of time off this week. If only the world would, for once, cooperate.
  On Aug 19, 2010, at 3:51 PM, H wrote:
  > It has, as always, been a joy to have you on the team. We've worked
  > together for so long, that I always feel better when I know you're
  > there--putting words in my mouth and watching my back.
  > I enjoyed our talk and was delighted to hear about all you're planning
  > to do--especially on the sports front. Just goes to show, once a jock
  > always a jock!
  > Thx too for the rescue effort you're doing on the ODOR article.
  > Original Message
  > From: Lissa Muscatine
  > To: H
  > Sent: Tue Aug 17 23:43:47 2010
  > Subject: Most importantly....
  > I enjoyed our talk too, but forgot to mention the most important thing
  > of all -- how much I appreciate your bringing me to State and giving
  > me this opportunity. I have learned so much, meant so many smart and
  > capable people, and hope I have contributed in some small way to what
  > you are working so hard to accomplish.
  > I'll write a formal letter for "the file" when I leave conveying all
  > of these thoughts„ but I wanted to say something in person too.
  > Unfortunately, I got carried away on sports diplomacy and everything
  > else and ....another senior moment!
  > I'll let you know when I have had a chance to talk to Judith and Ann
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771201 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771201 Date: 08/31/2015
  > about the ideas I'm putting together on sports. I do think there is
  > potential to do much more than is being done now -- and more
  > creatively.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771201 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771204
MetadataSubject: H: SHAUN, NI AND JOE WILSON. SID
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: sbwhoeop
MetadataDateSent: 2010-10-12T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0103/DOC_0C05771204/C05771204.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: H: Shaun, NI and Joe Wilson. Sid
ExtractedFrom: sbwhoeop
ExtractedDateSent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 7:07 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771204
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  October 12, 2010
  For: Hillary

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771204 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: sbwhoeop
  Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 7:07 PM
  To:
  Subject: H: Shaun, NI and Joe Wilson. Sid
  Attachments: hrc memo shaun ni conf 101210.docx; hrc memo shaun ni cont 101210.docx
  CONFIDENTIAL
  October 12, 2010
  For: Hillary
  From: Sid
  Re: Shaun, NI
  1. Not only is Shaun eager to come to the NI conference but Ed Miliband also very much would like him to attend. Should
  Shaun contact Jake or DecIan, or should they contact him? Ed M. would like Shaun to establish the channel to you and
  also through me. If you have time the three of us might meet to discuss current UK politics and policies.
  2. Joe Wilson is in Washington next week for the special advance showing of the movie, "Fair Game," (starring Sean Penn
  as Joe, Naomi Watts as Valerie). He wants to know if you want to attend one of the showings or whether he can arrange
  for a special private showing for you.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771204 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771205
MetadataSubject: (AP) DUTCH PROSECUTORS SAY YEMENIS FREED
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-01T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771205/C05771205.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: (AP) Dutch prosecutors say Yemenis freed
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: SES-O_Shift-III
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, September 1, 2010 4:07 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771205
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771205 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2010 4:07 PM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: (AP) Dutch prosecutors say Yemenis freed
  From: Simmons, Krista M
  To: NEWS-EUR; NEWS-NEA; NEWS-Mahogany
  Cc: SES-O_Shift-III
  Sent: Wed Sep 01 15:34:50 2010
  Subject: (AP) Dutch prosecutors say Yemenis freed
  THE HAGUE (AP) - Two Yemeni men arrested on arrival from the United States on suspicion they may have been
  conducting a dry run for an airline terror attack were released without charge September 1 after investigations turned
  up no evidence to link them to a terror plot, Dutch prosecutors said.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771205 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771210
MetadataSubject: (AP) PALESTINIAN PM LAYS NEW CLAIM TO EAST JERUSALEM
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-11-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0106/DOC_0C05771210/C05771210.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: (AP) Palestinian PM lays new claim to east Jerusalem
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: SES-O_OS
ExtractedDateSent: Tuesday, November 2, 2010 9:28 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771210
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText: Fyi
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771210 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Tuesday, November 2, 2010 9:28 AM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: (AP) Palestinian PM lays new claim to east Jerusalem
  Fyi
  From: Simmons, Krista M
  To: NEWS-Mahogany
  Cc: SES-O_OS
  Sent: Tue Nov 02 08:40:40 2010
  Subject: (AP) Palestinian PM lays new claim to east Jerusalem
  DAHIAT AL-BARID (AP) - The Palestinian prime minister has staked a new claim in Israel-controlled east Jerusalem,
  announcing that his government has helped fund the renovation of 14 schools there.
  Israel said it will not give up any part of Jerusalem, including the eastern sector, which it captured in 1967. The
  Palestinians want to make east Jerusalem their future capital.
  The Israeli government has tried to suppress any activity by Prime Minister Fayyad's Palestinian Authority in east
  Jerusalem and has warned him against entering Jerusalem on November 2 to make the announcement about the
  renovations.
  Fayyad avoided confrontation and chose a West Bank school on the edge of Jerusalem. The West Bank government
  has spent more than $5 million on the renovations.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771210 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771211
MetadataSubject: (AP) HAMAS CLAIMS RESPONSIBILITY FOR SEPTEMBER 1 WEST BANK ATTACK
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-01T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771211/C05771211.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: (AP) Hamas claims responsibility for September 1 West Bank attack
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, September 1, 2010 9:32 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771211
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771211 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2010 9:32 PM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: (AP) Hamas claims responsibility for September 1 West Bank attack
  From: Simmons, Krista M
  To: NEWS-Mahogany
  Sent: Wed Sep 01 21:30:21 2010
  Subject: (AP) Hamas claims responsibility for September 1 West Bank attack
  GAZA CITY (AP) - In a text message to reporters early September 2, Hamas claimed responsibility for a September 1
  drive-by shooting in the northern West Bank which injured to Israelis.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771211 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771216
MetadataSubject: BASEBALL CAP
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-16T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0097/DOC_0C05771216/C05771216.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: O-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: Baseball cap
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 5:26 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771216
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText: Fyi
ExtractedCc:
  Ruggiero, Frank J; Feldman, Daniel F; McHale, Judith A; Singh, Vikram J; Sullivan, Jacob J; Shah, Rajiv (AID/A);

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771216 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 5:26 PM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: Baseball cap
  Fyi
  Original Message
  From: Holbrooke, Richard
  To: Nasr, S Vali R
  Cc: Ruggiero, Frank J; Feldman, Daniel F; McHale, Judith A; Singh, Vikram J; Sullivan, Jacob J; Shah, Rajiv (AID/A);
  Bommer, Ashley F
  Sent: Thu Sep 16 15:21:28 2010
  Subject: Re: Baseball cap
  Vali--per your query, the cap I wore says "USAID from the People of the United States" and on the back "DART". It was
  practically the only sign, however temporary, that there was a US civilian effort in Sindh. So it got some media attention,
  which was good.
  Every other country's aid here, even Iran's, is better branded than us. Only our helicopters are visible. China's field
  hospital (which I drove by in Thatta) Turkey, Saudi Arabia (I visited their refugee camp, where they are building a
  mosque), Australia (field hospital in multan), Switzerland, UK, etc. While we hide and the NGO partners refuse to admit
  that we fund them.
  In addition, our employees are prevented from spending time in the affected areas, which they can visit only under very
  stringent conditions and heavy security imposed by RSOs. For example, the fabled AID DART teamn can hardly get out of
  l'bad and relies primarily on reports from NGois, a notably unreliable method.
  We are going to try to change this. It won't be easy.
  Original Message
  From: Nasr, S Vali R
  To: 'HolbrookeR@state.govs <HolbrookeR@state.gov>
  Sent: Thu Sep 16 14:42:55 2010
  Subject: Re: Baseball cap
  I don't know but there seems to be a lot of commentary about your cap; does it say something like a "gift from the US?"
  Original Message
  From: Holbrooke, Richard
  To: Nasr, S Vali R
  Sent: Thu Sep 16 14:32:31 2010
  Subject: Re: Baseball cap
  Does that have deeper meaning, Dr Freud?
  Original Message
  From: Nasr, S Vali R
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771216 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771216 Date: 08/31/2015
  To: 'HolbrookeR@state.goy' <HolbrookeR@state.goy>; Bommer, Ashley F
  Cc: Pauli, Rosemarie
  Sent: Thu Sep 16 12:45:17 2010
  Subject: Baseball cap
  Seems like Pakistani press is taking particular interest in RCH baseball cap.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771216 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771218
MetadataSubject: FYI FW: USS IWO JIMA DEPLOYS TO HAITI AS TROPICAL STORM APPROACHES
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-11-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0106/DOC_0C05771218/C05771218.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: FW: Fyi Fw: USS IWO JIMA DEPLOYS TO HAITI AS TROPICAL STORM APPROACHES
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Tuesday, November 2, 2010 9:43 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771218
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  Hurricane Tomas in route to Haiti to hit 4 Nov right now on southern claw.
  SouthCom's announcement:
  USS IWO JIMA DEPLOYS TO HAITI AS TROPICAL STORM APPROACHES
  MIAMI - U.S. Southern Command directed the amphibious ship USS Iwo Jima (LHD 7) to steam toward Haiti today in
  preparation for the forecasted arrival of tropical storm Tomas later this week.
  Iwo Jima will deploy to Haiti from Suriname, where it arrived Thursday on its final country visit for Continuing Promise
  2010, a four-month, humanitarian civic assistance deployment to eight nations in the Caribbean region. The ship is
  scheduled to arrive in Haiti later this week.
  Large amphibious ships, like Iwo Jima, resemble small aircraft carriers and include the ability to support helicopter and
  landing craft operations to quickly move personnel and cargo, making it an ideal platform to support humanitarian-relief
  missions on short notice.
  A crew of 1,600 military and civilian medical, engineering, aviation, logistical and other support personnel are embarked
  aboard Iwo Jima, including U.S. Navy engineers, a contingent of 500 Marines with logistical-support expertise,
  volunteers from the U.S. Public Health Service and various non-governmental organizations (NG0s), as well as medical,
  dental and engineering professionals from Europe, North America and South America.
  Eight CH-46 Sea Knight, medium-lift, dual-rotor helicopters; two MH-60 Knight Hawk helicopters and two amphibious
  landing craft units (ICU's) are on Iwo Jima to support the ship's operations.
  Iwo Jima is a Wasp-class amphibious ship capable of speeds in excess of
  20 knots that can provide robust ship-to-shore, as well as shore-to-shore logistics support during contingencies ranging
  from traditional military operations to humanitarian and disaster-relief missions.
  Because of the Caribbean region's history of severe-weather events during the peak months of the hurricane season, the
  ship has remained in the area throughout its present deployment, ready to support U.S.
  disaster relief efforts when directed.
  Iwo Jima was in Port-de-Paix, Haiti, from July 24 through Aug. 3. It was the first stop on CP10 and the crew provided
  medical assistance to more than 4,000 Haitian citizens, performed 32 surgeries, completed six engineering projects, and
  delivered 231 pallets of humanitarian-assistance supplies donated by NG0s.
  In September 2008, the amphibious ship USS Kearsarge deployed to Haiti to support U.S. relief efforts after a succession
  of storms (Fay, Gustav, Hanna and Ike) devastated the country. Kearsarge provided robust air and sealift support,
  delivering 3.3 million pounds of food, water and other aid to communities impacted by the disasters.
  ###
  Related links:
  About Continuing Promise 2010:
  http://www.southcom.mil/AppsSC/factFiles.php?id=155
  Photo of USS Iwo Jima:
  http://www.southcom.mil/AppsSC/images/uploads/634159131775283089.jpg
  CLASSIFICAT1ON:UNCLASSIFIED

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771218 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Tuesday, November 2, 2010 9:43 AM
  To:
  Subject: FW: Fyi Fw: USS IWO JIMA DEPLOYS TO HAITI AS TROPICAL STORM APPROACHES
  Attachments: USS IWO JIMA DEPLOYS TO HAITI AS TROPICAL STORM APPROACHES.doc
  Hurricane Tomas in route to Haiti to hit 4 Nov right now on southern claw.
  SouthCom's announcement:
  USS IWO JIMA DEPLOYS TO HAITI AS TROPICAL STORM APPROACHES
  MIAMI - U.S. Southern Command directed the amphibious ship USS Iwo Jima (LHD 7) to steam toward Haiti today in
  preparation for the forecasted arrival of tropical storm Tomas later this week.
  Iwo Jima will deploy to Haiti from Suriname, where it arrived Thursday on its final country visit for Continuing Promise
  2010, a four-month, humanitarian civic assistance deployment to eight nations in the Caribbean region. The ship is
  scheduled to arrive in Haiti later this week.
  Large amphibious ships, like Iwo Jima, resemble small aircraft carriers and include the ability to support helicopter and
  landing craft operations to quickly move personnel and cargo, making it an ideal platform to support humanitarian-relief
  missions on short notice.
  A crew of 1,600 military and civilian medical, engineering, aviation, logistical and other support personnel are embarked
  aboard Iwo Jima, including U.S. Navy engineers, a contingent of 500 Marines with logistical-support expertise,
  volunteers from the U.S. Public Health Service and various non-governmental organizations (NG0s), as well as medical,
  dental and engineering professionals from Europe, North America and South America.
  Eight CH-46 Sea Knight, medium-lift, dual-rotor helicopters; two MH-60 Knight Hawk helicopters and two amphibious
  landing craft units (ICU's) are on Iwo Jima to support the ship's operations.
  Iwo Jima is a Wasp-class amphibious ship capable of speeds in excess of
  20 knots that can provide robust ship-to-shore, as well as shore-to-shore logistics support during contingencies ranging
  from traditional military operations to humanitarian and disaster-relief missions.
  Because of the Caribbean region's history of severe-weather events during the peak months of the hurricane season, the
  ship has remained in the area throughout its present deployment, ready to support U.S.
  disaster relief efforts when directed.
  Iwo Jima was in Port-de-Paix, Haiti, from July 24 through Aug. 3. It was the first stop on CP10 and the crew provided
  medical assistance to more than 4,000 Haitian citizens, performed 32 surgeries, completed six engineering projects, and
  delivered 231 pallets of humanitarian-assistance supplies donated by NG0s.
  In September 2008, the amphibious ship USS Kearsarge deployed to Haiti to support U.S. relief efforts after a succession
  of storms (Fay, Gustav, Hanna and Ike) devastated the country. Kearsarge provided robust air and sealift support,
  delivering 3.3 million pounds of food, water and other aid to communities impacted by the disasters.
  ###
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771218 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771218 Date: 08/31/2015
  Related links:
  About Continuing Promise 2010:
  http://www.southcom.mil/AppsSC/factFiles.php?id=155
  Photo of USS Iwo Jima:
  http://www.southcom.mil/AppsSC/images/uploads/634159131775283089.jpg
  CLASSIFICAT1ON:UNCLASSIFIED
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771218 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771219
MetadataSubject: (REUTERS) HAMAS SAYS WILL CONTINUE ATTACKS ON ISRAELIS
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771219/C05771219.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: (Reuters) Hamas says will continue attacks on Israelis
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: SES-O_Shift-I
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, September 2, 2010 6:55 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771219
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771219 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2010 6:55 AM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: (Reuters) Hamas says will continue attacks on Israelis
  From: Goldberg, Joshua W
  To: NEWS-Mahogany
  Cc: SES-O_Shift-I
  Sent: Thu Sep 02 05:39:30 2010
  Subject: (Reuters) Hamas says will continue attacks on Israelis
  GAZA (Reuters) - A Hamas spokesman said the Islamist group would pursue attacks against Israelis despite a crackdown
  against its activists in the occupied West Bank since a deadly shooting that killed four settlers. Sami Abu Zuhri said
  "operations of resistance will continue and the measures by the occupation and Fatah will not block them", referring to
  Israel and the Palestinian Authority which has arrested hundreds of Hamas members since the August 31 attack.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771219 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771220
MetadataSubject: (REUTERS) HAMAS ISRAELI SETTLERS START NEW CONSTRUCTIO, DEFY TALKS
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771220/C05771220.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: (Reuters) Israeli settlers start new construction, defy talks
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: SES-O_Shift-I
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, September 2, 2010 6:55 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771220
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771220 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2010 6:55 AM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: (Reuters) Israeli settlers start new construction, defy talks
  From: Goldberg, Joshua W
  To: NEWS-Mahogany; NEWS-NEA
  Cc: SES-O_Shift-I
  Sent: Thu Sep 02 05:48:01 2010
  Subject: (Reuters) Israeli settlers start new construction, defy talks
  JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Hours before peace talks were set to begin in Washington, Jewish settlers announced plans to
  launch new construction in their West Bank enclaves. Naftali Bennett, director of the settlers' YESHA council, said
  settlers would begin building homes and public structures in at least 80 settlements, breaking a partial government
  freeze on building that ends on Sept. 26.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771220 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771221
MetadataSubject: FROM JOE WILSON
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: sbwhoeop
MetadataDateSent: 2010-10-12T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0103/DOC_0C05771221/C05771221.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: From Joe Wilson
ExtractedFrom: sbwhoeop
ExtractedDateSent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 8:27 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771221
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Sent via DROID on Verizon Wireless
  Original message

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771221 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN
  PART B6
  From: sbwhoeop
  Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 8:27 PM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: From Joe Wilson
  Attachments: image001,jpg; image002.png; image001 jpg; image002.png
  Sent via DROID on Verizon Wireless
  Original message
  From: Joe Wilson
  To: "sbwhoeor <sbwhoeop
  Sent: Wed, Oct 13, 2010 00:11:03 GMT+00:00
  Subject: From Joe Wilson
  Dear Hillary,
  Next Sunday (October 17th) Valerie and I arrive in DC for a week of screenings of Fair Game, the film of
  our fight with the Bush administration. I plan to be in DC through the following Thursday. There are
  screenings in Silver Spring on Tuesday at the American Film Institute festival and on Wednesday in
  Georgetown as a benefit for the Treatment Action Group, an HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment
  organization. You, Potus (ret) and whomever you would like to bring are invited to either or
  both. Alternatively, I would be pleased to arrange a private screening for you and your guests either at
  your home or elsewhere. Depending on the time, either Valerie or I would be delighted to attend and
  answer questions afterwards.
  If these dates do not work for you, I am also happy to ensure that a screening is arranged whenever is
  convenient.
  Valerie and I think that the film tells the story of that time and are proud of it. I would be pleased to
  share it with you.
  With warmest regards. Joe
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771221 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771221 Date: 08/31/2015
  0
  Ambassador Joseph Wilson
  Chairman, Symbion Africa
  tel.
  Email: joseph.wilsoLi
  Personal Email: joel
  skype
  www.symbion-power.com
  http://www.vimeo.com/6884821
  This transmission is intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain
  information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under
  applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, any use of this
  communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in
  error, please notify us immediately.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771221 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771222
MetadataSubject: MINI SCHEDULE 9/2/10 THURSDAY
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771222/C05771222.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Mini Schedule 9/2/10 Thursday
ExtractedFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Abedin, Hume
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, September 2, 2010 8:17 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771222
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  8:15 am DEPART Private Residence *En route State Department
  8:25 am ARRIVE State Department
  8:25 am PRESIDENTIAL DAILY BRIEFING
  8:30 am Secretary's Office
  8:30 am DAILY SMALL STAFF MEETING
  8:45 am Secretary's Office
  8:45 am DAILY SENIOR STAFF MEETING
  9:15 am Secretary's Conference Room
  9:15 am PREP MEETING
  9:45 am Secretary's Outer Office
  10:00 am TRILATERAL w/ISRAELI PM BINYAMIN NETANYAHU AND
  10:30 am (t) PALESTIAN NATIONAL AUTHORITY PRESIDENT MAHMOUD
  ABBAS Benjamin Franklin Room, 8`h Floor
  10:30 am (t) TRILAT w/ISFtAELI PM BINYAMIN NETANYAHU, PALESTIAN
  11:30 am (t) NAT'L AUTHORITY PRES. MAHMOUD ABBAS, & SPECIAL
  ENVOY GEORGE MITCHELL Secretary's Outer Office, 7th Floor
  11:30 am (t) BILATERAL w/ ISRAELI PM BINYAMIN NETANYAHU AND
  12:30 pm (t) PALESTIAN NATIONAL AUTHORITY PRESIDENT MAHMOUD
  ABBAS Secretary's Outer Office, 7th Floor
  12:30 pm (t) OFFICE TIME
  6:00 pm (t) Secretary's Office
  6:00 pm (t) DEPART State Department *En route Private Residence
  6:10 pm (t) ARRIVE Private Residence
  ###

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771222 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2010 8:17 AM
  To:
  Cc: Abedin, Hume
  Subject: Mini Schedule 9/2/10 Thursday
  8:15 am DEPART Private Residence *En route State Department
  8:25 am ARRIVE State Department
  8:25 am PRESIDENTIAL DAILY BRIEFING
  8:30 am Secretary's Office
  8:30 am DAILY SMALL STAFF MEETING
  8:45 am Secretary's Office
  8:45 am DAILY SENIOR STAFF MEETING
  9:15 am Secretary's Conference Room
  9:15 am PREP MEETING
  9:45 am Secretary's Outer Office
  10:00 am TRILATERAL w/ISRAELI PM BINYAMIN NETANYAHU AND
  10:30 am (t) PALESTIAN NATIONAL AUTHORITY PRESIDENT MAHMOUD
  ABBAS Benjamin Franklin Room, 8`h Floor
  10:30 am (t) TRILAT w/ISFtAELI PM BINYAMIN NETANYAHU, PALESTIAN
  11:30 am (t) NAT'L AUTHORITY PRES. MAHMOUD ABBAS, & SPECIAL
  ENVOY GEORGE MITCHELL Secretary's Outer Office, 7th Floor
  11:30 am (t) BILATERAL w/ ISRAELI PM BINYAMIN NETANYAHU AND
  12:30 pm (t) PALESTIAN NATIONAL AUTHORITY PRESIDENT MAHMOUD
  ABBAS Secretary's Outer Office, 7th Floor
  12:30 pm (t) OFFICE TIME
  6:00 pm (t) Secretary's Office
  6:00 pm (t) DEPART State Department *En route Private Residence
  6:10 pm (t) ARRIVE Private Residence
  ###
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771222 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771223
MetadataSubject: NEW START PASSES OUT OF SFRC 14-4
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-16T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0097/DOC_0C05771223/C05771223.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: O-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: New Start passes out of SFRC 14-4
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 5:27 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771223
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: Fyi
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771223 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 5:27 PM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: New Start passes out of SFRC 14-4
  Fyi
  Original Message
  From: Tauscher, Ellen 0
  To: Sullivan, Jacob J; Gottemoeller, Rose E; Limage, Simon G
  Sent: Thu Sep 16 15:10:43 2010
  Subject: New Start passes out of SFRC 14-4
  We pick up Lugar, Corker and lsakson.
  Happy to discuss.
  Best,
  Ellen
  Be
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771223 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771224
MetadataSubject: FYI. FREEMAN REFLECTS SAUDI VIEW AND MOST OF STATE. SID
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: sbwhoeop
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771224/C05771224.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: H: FYI. Freeman reflects Saudi view and most of State. Sid
ExtractedFrom: sbwhoeop
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, September 2, 2010 10:00 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771224
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  America's Faltering Search for Peace in the Middle East: Openings for Others?
  Remarks to staff of the Royal Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs
  and, separately, to members of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
  Ambassador Chas W. Freeman, Jr. (USFS, Ret.)
  1 September 2010, Oslo, Norway
  You have asked me to speak to current American policies in the Middle East, with an emphasis on the prospects for
  peace in the Holy Land. You have further suggested that I touch on the relationship of the Gulf Arabs, especially Saudi
  Arabia, to this. It is both an honor and a challenge to address this subject in this capital / at this ministry.
  The declaration of principles worked out in Oslo seventeen years ago was the last direct negotiation between Israelis and
  Palestinian Arabs to reach consequential, positive results. The Oslo accords were a real step toward peace, not another
  deceptive pseudo-event in an endlessly unproductive, so-called "peace process." And if that one step forward in Oslo in
  1993 was followed by several steps backwards, there is a great deal to be learned from how and why that happened.
  There can be no doubt about the importance of today's topic. The ongoing conflict in the Holy Land increasingly disturbs
  the world's conscience as well as its tranquility. The Israel-Palestine issue began as a struggle in the context of European
  colonialism. In the post-colonial era, tension between Israelis and the Palestinians they dispossessed became, by
  degrees, the principal source of radicalization and instability in the Arab East and then the Arab world as a whole. It
  stimulated escalating terrorism against Israelis at home and their allies abroad. Since the end of the Cold War, the
  interaction between Israel and its captive Palestinian population has emerged as the fountainhead of global strife. It is
  increasingly difficult to distinguish this strife from a war of religions or a conflict of civilizations.
  For better or ill, my own country, the United States has played and continues to play the key international part in this
  contest. American policies, more than those of any other external actor, have the capacity to stoke or stifle the hatreds in
  the Middle East and to spread or reverse their infection of the wider world. American policies and actions in the Middle
  East thus affect much more than that region.
  Yet, as I will argue, the United States has been obsessed with process rather than substance. It has failed to involve
  parties who are essential to peace. It has acted on Israel's behalf to preempt rather than enlist international and regional
  support for peace. It has defined the issues in ways that preclude rather than promote progress. Its concept of a "peace
  process" has therefore become the handmaiden of Israeli expansionism rather than a driver for peace. There are
  alternatives to tomorrow's diplomatic peace pageant on the Potomac. And, as Norway has shown, there is a role for
  powers other than America in crafting peace in the Holy Land.
  Over thirty years ago, at Camp David, Jimmy Carter pushed Israel through the door to peace that Egypt's Anwar Sadat
  had opened. Twenty years ago, the first Bush administration pressed Israel to the negotiating table with Palestinian
  leaders, setting the stage for their clandestine meetings in Oslo. The capacity of the United States to rally other
  governments behind a cause that it espouses may have atrophied, but American power remains far greater than that of
  any other nation. Nowhere is this more evident than in the Middle East.
  For more than four decades, Israel has been able to rely on aid from the United States to dominate its region militarily and
  to sustain its economic prosperity. It has counted on its leverage in American politics to block the application of
  international law and to protect itself from the political repercussions of its policies and actions. Unquestioning American
  support has enabled Israel to put the seizure of ever more land ahead of the achievement of a modus vivendi with the
  Palestinians or other Arabs. Neither violent resistance from the dispossessed nor objections from abroad have brought
  successive Israeli governments to question, let alone alter the priority they assign to land over peace.
  Ironically, Palestinians too have developed a dependency relationship with America. This has locked them into a political
  framework over which Israel exercises decisive influence. They have been powerless to end occupation, pogroms, ethnic
  cleansing, and other humiliations by Jewish soldiers and settlers. Nor have they been able to prevent their progressive
  confinement in checkpoint-encircled ghettos on the West Bank and the great open-air prison of Gaza.
  Despite this appalling record of failure, the American monopoly on the management of the search for peace in Palestine
  remains unchallenged. Since the end of the Cold War, Russia — once a contender for countervailing influence in the
  region — has lapsed into impotence. The former colonial powers of the European Union, having earlier laid the basis for
  conflict in the region, have largely sat on their hands while ringing them, content to let America take the lead. China,
  India, and other Asian powers have prudently kept their political and military distance. In the region itself, Iran has
  postured and exploited the Palestinian cause without doing anything to advance it. Until recently, Turkey remained aloof.
  On rare occasions, as in the case of the 1973 Arab oil embargo, the Arabs have backed their verbal opposition to Israel
  with action. Egypt and Jordan have settled into an unpopular coexistence with Israel that is now sustained only by U.S.
  subventions. Saudi Arabia has twice taken the initiative to offer Israel diplomatic concessions if it were to conclude
  arrangements for peaceful coexistence with the Palestinians. But, overall, Arab governments have earned the contempt
  of the Palestinians and their own people for their lack of serious engagement. For the most part, Arab leaders have
  timorously demanded that America solve the Israel-Palestine problem for them, while obsequiously courting American
  protection against Israel, each other, Iran, and — in some cases — their own increasingly frustrated and angry subjects and
  citizens.
  Islam charges rulers with the duty to defend the faithful and to uphold justice. It demands that they embody
  righteousness. The resentment of mostly Muslim Arabs at their governing elites' failure to meet these standards
  generates sympathy for terrorism directed not just at Israel but at both the United States and Arab governments
  associated with it.
  The perpetrators of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the United States saw it in part as reprisal for American
  complicity in Israeli cruelties to Palestinians and other Arabs. They justified it as a strike against Washington's protection
  of Arab governments willing to overlook American contributions to Muslim suffering. Washington's response to the attack
  included suspending its efforts to make peace in the Holy Land as well as invading and occupying Afghanistan and
  Iraq. All three actions inadvertently strengthened the terrorist case for further attacks on America and its allies. The
  armed struggle between Americans and Muslim radicals has already spilled over to Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and other
  countries. Authoritative voices in Israel now call for adding Iran to the list of countries at war with America. They are
  echoed by Zionist and neo-conservative spokesmen in the United States,
  The widening involvement of Americans in combat in Muslim lands has inflamed anti-American passions and catalyzed a
  metastasis of terrorism. It has caused a growing majority of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims to see the United States as a
  menace to their faith, their way of life, their homelands, and their personal security. American populists and European
  xenophobes have meanwhile undercut liberal and centrist Muslim arguments against the intolerance that empowers
  terrorism by equating terrorism and its extremist advocates with Islam and its followers. The current outburst of bigoted
  demagoguery over the construction of an Islamic cultural center and mosque in New York is merely the most recent
  illustration of this. It suggests that the blatant racism and Islamophobia of contemporary Israeli politics is contagious. It
  rules out the global alliances against religious extremists that are essential to encompass their political defeat.
  President Obama's inability to break this pattern must be an enormous personal disappointment to him. He came into
  office committed to crafting a new relationship with the Arab and Muslim worlds. His first interview with the international
  media was with Arab satellite television. He reached out publicly and privately to Iran. He addressed the Turkish
  parliament with persuasive empathy. He traveled to a great center of Islamic learning in Cairo to deliver a remarkably
  eloquent message of conciliation to Muslims everywhere. He made it clear that he understood the centrality of injustices
  in the Holy Land to Muslim estrangement from the West. He promised a responsible withdrawal from Iraq and a judicious
  recrafting of strategy in Afghanistan. Few doubt Mr. Obama's sincerity. Yet none of his initiatives has led to policy
  change anyone can detect, let alone believe in
  It is not for me to analyze or explain the wide gaps between rhetoric and achievement in the Obama Administration's
  stewardship of so many aspects of my country's affairs. American voters will render their first formal verdict on this two
  months from tomorrow, on the 2nd of November. The situation in the Holy Land, Iraq, Afghanistan, and adjacent areas is
  only part of what they will consider as they do so. But I do think it worthwhile briefly to examine some of the changes in
  the situation that ensure that many policies that once helped us to get by in the Middle East will no longer do this.
  Let me begin with the "peace process," a hardy perennial of America's diplomatic repertoire that the Obama
  Administration will put back on public display tomorrow. In the Cold War, the appearance of an earnest and "even-
  handed" American search for peace in the Holy Land was the price of U.S. access and influence in the Middle East. It
  provided political cover for conservative Arab governments to set aside their anger at American backing of Israel so as to
  stand with America and the Western bloc against Soviet Communism. It kept American relations with Israel and the
  Arabs from becoming a zero-sum game. It mobilized domestic Jewish support for incumbent presidents. Of course, there
  hasn't been an American-led "peace process" in the Middle East for at least a decade. Still the conceit of a "peace
  process" became an essential political convenience for all concerned. No one could bear to admit that the "peace
  process" had expired. It therefore lived on in phantom form.
  Even when there was no "peace process," the possibility of resurrecting one provided hope to the gullible, cover to the
  guileful, beguilement for the press, an excuse for doing nothing to those gaining from the status quo, and — last but far
  from least — lifetime employment for career "peace processors." The perpetual processing of peace without the
  requirement to produce it has been especially appreciated by Israeli leaders. It has enabled them to behave like
  magicians, riveting foreign attention on meaningless distractions as they systematically removed Palestinians from their
  homes, settled half a million or more Jews in newly vacated areas of the occupied territories, and annexed a widening
  swath of land to a Jerusalem they insist belongs only to Israel.
  Palestinian leaders with legitimacy problems have also had reason to collaborate in the search for a "peace process." It's
  not just that there has been no obviously better way to end their people's suffering. Playing "peace process" charades
  justifies the international patronage and Israeli backing these leaders need to retain their status in the occupied
  territories. It ensures that they have media access and high-level visiting rights in Washington. Meanwhile, for American
  leaders, engagement in some sort of Middle East "peace process" has been essential to credibility in the Arab and Islamic
  worlds, as well as with the ever-generous American Jewish community. Polls show that most American Jews are
  impatient for peace. Despite all the evidence to the contrary, they are eager to believe in the willingness of the
  government of Israel to trade land for it.
  Previous "peace processes" have exploited all these impulses. In practice, however, these diplomatic distractions have
  served to obscure Israeli actions and evasions that were more often prejudicial to peace than helpful in achieving
  it. Behind all the blather, the rumble of bulldozers has never stopped. Given this history, it has taken a year and a half of
  relentless effort by U.S. Special Envoy George Mitchell to persuade the parties even to meet directly to talk about talks as
  they first did here in Oslo, seventeen years ago. When the curtain goes up on the diplomatic show in Washington
  tomorrow, will the players put on a different skit? There are many reasons to doubt that they will.
  One is that the Obama administration has engaged the same aging impresarios who staged all the previously failed
  "peace processes" to produce and direct this one with no agreed script. The last time these guys staged such an ill-
  prepared meeting, at Camp David in 2000, it cost both heads of delegation, Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat, their political
  authority. It led not to peace but to escalating violence. The parties are showing up this time to minimize President
  Obama's political embarrassment in advance of midterm elections in the United States, not to address his agenda — still
  less to address each other's agendas. These are indeed difficulties. But the problems with this latest — and possibly final
  — iteration of the perpetually ineffectual "peace process" are more fundamental.
  The Likud Party charter flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan River and stipulates
  that: "The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign
  state." This Israeli government is committed to that charter as well as to the Jewish holy war for land in Palestine. It has
  no interest in trading land it covets for a peace that might thwart further territorial expansion. It considers itself unbound
  by the applicable UN resolutions, agreements from past peace talks, the "Roadmap," or the premise of the "two-state
  solution."
  The Palestinians are desperate for the dignity and security that only the end of the Israeli occupation can provide. But the
  authority of Palestinian negotiators to negotiate rests on their recognition by Israel and the United States, not on their
  standing in the occupied territories, Gaza, or the Palestinian diaspora. Fatah is the ruling faction in part of Palestine. Its
  authority to govern was repudiated by voters in the last Palestinian elections. The Mahmoud Abbas administration retains
  power by grace of the Israeli occupation authorities and the United States, which prefer it to the government empowered
  by the Palestinian people at the polls. Mr. Abbas's constitutional term of office has long since expired. He presides over
  a parliament whose most influential members are locked up in Israeli jails. It is not clear for whom he, his faction, or his
  administration can now speak.
  So the talks that begin tomorrow promise to be a case of the disinterested going through the motions of negotiating with
  the mandate-less. The parties to these talks seek to mollify an America that has severely lessened international
  credibility. The United States government had to borrow the modest reputations for objectivity of others — the EU, Russia,
  and the UN — to be able to convene this discussion. It will be held under the auspices of an American president who was
  publicly humiliated by Israel's prime minister on the issue that is at the center of the Israel-Palestine dispute — Israel's
  continuing seizure and colonization of Arab land.
  Vague promises of a Palestinian state within a year now waft through the air. But the "peace process" has always
  sneered at deadlines, even much, much firmer ones. A more definitive promise of an independent Palestine within a year
  was made at Annapolis three years ago. Analogous promises of Palestinian self-determination have preceded or resulted
  from previous meetings over the decades, beginning with the Camp David accords of 1979. Many in this audience will
  recall the five-year deadline fixed at Oslo. The talks about talks that begin tomorrow can yield concrete results only if the
  international community is prepared this time to insist on the one-year deadline put forward for recognizing a Palestinian
  state. Even then there will be no peace unless long-neglected issues are addressed.
  Peace is a pattern of stability acceptable to those with the capacity to disturb it by violence. It is almost impossible to
  impose. It cannot become a reality, still less be sustained, if those who must accept it are excluded from it. This reality
  directs our attention to who is not at this gathering in Washington and what must be done to remedy the problems these
  absences create.
  Obviously, the party that won the democratically expressed mandate of the Palestinian people to represent them — Hamas
  — is not there. Yet there can be no peace without its buy-in. Egypt and Jordan have been invited as observers. Yet they
  have nothing to add to the separate peace agreements each long ago made with Israel. (Both these agreements were
  explicitly premised on grudging Israeli undertakings to accept Palestinian self-determination. The Jewish state quickly
  finessed both.) Activists from the Jewish diaspora disproportionately staff the American delegation. A failure to reconcile
  either American Jews or the Palestine diaspora to peace would doom any accord. But the Palestinian diaspora will be
  represented in Washington only in tenuous theory, not in fact.
  Other Arabs, including the Arab League and the author of its peace initiative, Saudi Arabia, will not be at the talks
  tomorrow. The reasons for this are both simple and complex. At one level they reflect both a conviction that this latest
  installment of the "peace process" is just another in a long series of public entertainments for the American electorate and
  also a lack of confidence in the authenticity of the Palestinian delegation. At another level, they result from the way the
  United States has defined the problems to be solved and the indifference to Arab interests and views this definition
  evidences. Then too, they reflect disconnects in political culture and negotiating style between Israelis, Arabs, and
  Americans.
  To begin with, neither Israel nor the conveners of this proposed new "peace process" have officially acknowledged or
  responded to the Arab peace initiative of 2002. This offered normalization of relations with the Jewish state, should Israel
  make peace with the Palestinians. Instead, the United States and the Quartet have seemed to pocket the Arab offer,
  ignore its precondition that Israelis come to terms with Palestinians, and gone on to levy new demands.
  In this connection, making Arab recognition of Israel's "right to exist" the central purpose of the "peace process" offends
  Arabs on many levels. In framing the issue this way, Israel and the United States appear to be asking for something well
  beyond pragmatic accommodation of the reality of a Jewish state in the Middle East. To the Arabs, Americans now seem
  to be insisting on Arab endorsement of the idea of the state of Israel, the means by which that state was established, and
  the manner in which it has comported itself. Must Arabs really embrace Zionism before Israel can cease expansion and
  accept peace?
  Arabs and Muslims familiar with European history can accept that European anti-Semitism justified the establishment of a
  homeland for traumatized European Jews. But asking them even implicitly to agree that the forcible eviction of
  Palestinian Arabs was a morally appropriate means to this end is both a nonstarter and seriously off-putting. So is asking
  them to affirm that resistance to such displacement was and is sinful. Similarly, the Arabs see the demand that they
  recognize a Jewish state with no fixed borders as a clever attempt to extract their endorsement of Israel's unilateral
  expansion at Palestinian expense.
  The lack of appeal in this approach has been compounded by a longstanding American habit of treating Arab concerns
  about Israel as a form of anti-Semitism and tuning them out. Instead of hearing out and addressing Arab views, U.S.
  peace processors have repeatedly focused on soliciting Arab acts of kindness toward Israel. They argue that gestures of
  acceptance can help Israelis overcome their Holocaust-inspired political neuroses and take risks for peace.
  Each time this notion of Arab diplomacy as psychotherapy for Israelis has been trotted out, it has been met with
  incredulity. To most in the region, it encapsulates the contrast between Washington's sympathy and solicitude for Israelis
  and its condescendingly exploitative view of Arabs. Some see it as a barely disguised appeal for a policy of appeasement
  of Israel. Still others suspect an attempt to construct a "peace process" in which Arabs begin to supply Israel with gifts of
  carrots so that Americans can continue to avoid applying sticks to it.
  The effort to encourage Arab generosity as an offset to American political pusillanimity vis-a-vis Israel is ludicrously
  unpersuasive. It has failed so many times that it should be obvious that it will not work. Yet it was a central element of
  George Mitchell's mandate for "peace process" diplomacy. And it appears to have resurfaced as part of the proposed
  follow-up to tomorrow's meeting between the parties in Washington. It should be no puzzle why the Saudis and other
  Arabs could not be persuaded to join this gathering.
  As a last thought before turning to what must be done, let me make a quick comment on a relevant cultural factor. Arabic
  has two quite different words that are both translated as "negotiation," making a distinction that doesn't exist in either
  English or Hebrew. One word, "musaawama," refers to the no-holds-barred bargaining process that takes place in
  bazaars between strangers who may never see each other again and who therefore feel no obligation not to scam each
  other. Another, "mufaawadhat," describes the dignified formal discussions about matters of honor and high principle that
  take place on a basis of mutual respect and equality between statesmen who seek a continuing relationship.
  Egyptian President Anwar Sadat's travel to Jerusalem was a grand act of statesmanship to initiate a process of
  mufaawadhat — relationship-building between leaders and their polities. So was the Arab peace initiative of 2002. It
  called for a response in kind. The West muttered approvingly but did not act. After a while, Israel responded with
  intermittent, somewhat oblique suggestions of willingness to haggle over terms. But an offer to bicker over the terms on
  which a grand gesture has been granted is, not surprisingly, seen as insultingly unresponsive.
  I cite this not to suggest that non-Arabs should adopt Arabic canons of thought, but to make a point about diplomatic
  effectiveness. To move a negotiating partner in a desired direction, one must understand how that partner understands
  things and help him to see a way forward that will bring him to an end he has been persuaded to want. One of the
  reasons we can't seem to move things as we desire in the Middle East is that we don't make much effort to understand
  how others reason and how they rank their interests. In the case of the Israel-Palestine conundrum, we Americans are
  long on empathy and expertise about Israel and very, very short on these for the various Arab parties. The essential
  militarism of U.S. policies in the Middle East adds to our difficulties. We have become skilled at killing Arabs. We have
  forgotten how to listen to them or persuade them.
  I am not myself an "Arabist," but I am old enough to remember when there were more than a few such people in the
  American diplomatic service. These were officers who had devoted themselves to the cultivation of understanding and
  empathy with Arab leaders so as to be able to convince these leaders that it was in their own interest to do things we saw
  as in our interest. If we still have such people, we are hiding them well; we are certainly not applying their skills in our
  Middle East diplomacy.
  This brings me to a few thoughts about the Western and Arab interests at stake in the Holy Land and their implications for
  what must be done.
  In foreign affairs, interests are the measure of all things. My assumption is that Americans and Norwegians, indeed
  Europeans in general, share common interests that require peace in the Holy Land. To my mind, these interests include -
  but are, of course, not limited to — gaining security and acceptance for a democratic state of Israel; eliminating the gross
  injustices and daily humiliations that foster Arab terrorism against Israel and its foreign allies and supporters, as well as
  friendly Arab regimes; and reversing the global spread of religious strife and prejudice, including, very likely, a revival of
  anti-Semitism in the West if current trends are not arrested. None of these aspirations can be fulfilled without an end to
  the Israeli occupation and freedom for Palestinians.
  Arab states, like Saudi Arabia, also have compelling reasons to want relief from occupation as well as self-determination
  for Palestinians. They may not be concerned to preserve Israel's democracy, as we are, but they share an urgent interest
  in ending the radicalization of their own populations, curbing the spread of Islamist terrorism, and eliminating the tensions
  with the West that the conflict in the Holy Land fuels. These are the concerns that have driven them to propose peace, as
  they very clearly did eight years ago. For related reasons, Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah has made inter-faith dialogue
  and the promotion of religious tolerance a main focus of his domestic and international policy.
  As the custodian of two of Islam's three sacred places of pilgrimage — Mecca and Medina — Saudi Arabia has long
  transcended its own notorious religious narrow-mindedness to hold the holy places in its charge open to Muslims of all
  sects and persuasions. This experience, joined with Islamic piety, reinforces a Saudi insistence on the exemption of
  religious pilgrimage to Jerusalem from political interference or manipulation. The Ottoman Turks were careful to ensure
  freedom of access for worship to adherents of the three Abrahamic faiths when they administered the city. It is an interest
  that Jews, Christians, and Muslims share.
  There is, in short, far greater congruity between Western and Arab interests affecting the Israel-Palestine dispute than is
  generally recognized. This can be the basis for creative diplomacy. The fact that this has not occurred reflects
  pathologies of political life in the United States that paralyze the American diplomatic imagination. Tomorrow's meeting
  may well demonstrate that, the election of Barack Obama notwithstanding, the United States is still unfit to manage the
  achievement of peace between Israel and the Arabs. If so, it is in the American interest as well as everyone else's that
  others become the path-breakers, enlisting the United States as best they can in support of what they achieve, but not
  expecting America to overcome its incapacity to lead.
  Here, I think, there is a lesson to be drawn from the Norwegian experience in the 1990s. The Clinton Administration was
  happy to organize the public relations for the Oslo accords but did not take ownership of them. It did little to protect them
  from subversion and overthrow, and nothing to insist on their implementation. Only a peace process that is protected
  from Israel's ability to manipulate American politics can succeed.
  This brings me to how Europeans and Arabs might work together to realize the objectives both share with most
  Americans: establishing internationally recognized borders for Israel, securing freedom for the Palestinians, and ending
  the stimulus to terrorism in the region and beyond it that strife in the Holy Land entails. I have only four suggestions to
  present today. I expect that more ideas will emerge from the discussion period. A serious effort to cooperate with the
  Arabs of the sort that Norway is uniquely capable of contriving could lead to the development of still more options for joint
  or parallel action on behalf of peace.
  Now to my suggestions, presented in ascending order of difficulty, from the least to the most controversial.
  First, get behind the Arab peace initiative. Saudi Arab culture frowns on self-promotion and the Kingdom is less gifted
  than most at public diplomacy. Political factors inhibit official Arab access to the Israeli press. The Israeli media have
  published some — mostly dismissive — commentary on the Arab peace initiative but left most Israelis ignorant of its
  contents and unfamiliar with its text. Why not buy space in the Israeli media to give Israelis a chance to read the Arab
  League declaration and consider the opportunities it presents? I suspect the Saudis, as well as other members of the
  Arab League, would consider it constructive for an outside party to do this. It might facilitate other sorts of cooperation
  with them in which European capabilities can also compensate for Arab reticence. The Turks and other non-Arab
  Muslims should be brought in as full participants in any such efforts. This wouldn't be bad for Europe's relations with
  both. By the way, given the U.S. media's notorious one-sidedness and American ignorance about the Arab peace plan, a
  well-targeted advertising campaign in the United States might not be a bad idea either.
  Second, help create a Palestinian partner for peace. There can be no peace with Israel unless there are officials who
  are empowered by the Palestinian people to negotiate and ratify it. Israel has worked hard to divide the Palestinians so
  as to consolidate its conquest of their homeland. Saudi Arabia has several times sought to create a Palestinian peace
  partner for Israel by bringing Fatah, Hamas, and other factions together. On each occasion, Israel, with U.S. support, has
  acted to preclude this. Active organization of non-American Western support for diplomacy aimed at restoring a unity
  government to the Palestinian Authority could make a big difference. The Obama Administration would be under strong
  domestic political pressure to join Israel in blocking a joint European-Arab effort to accomplish this. Under some
  circumstances, however, it might welcome being put to this test.
  Third, reaffirm and enforce international law. The UN Security Council is charged with enforcing the rule of law
  internationally. In the case of the Middle East, however, the Council's position at the apex of the international system has
  served to erode and subvert the ideal of a rule-bound international order. Almost forty American vetoes have prevented
  the application to the Israeli occupying authorities of the Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg precedents, human rights
  conventions, and relevant Security Council directives. American diplomacy on behalf of the Jewish state has silenced the
  collective voice of the international community as Israel has illegally colonized and annexed broad swaths of occupied
  territory, administered collective punishment to a captive people, assassinated their political leaders, massacred civilians,
  barred UN investigators, defied mandatory Security Council resolutions, and otherwise engaged in scofflaw behavior,
  usually with only the flimsiest of legally irrelevant excuses.
  If ethnic cleansing, settlement activity, and the like are not just "unhelpful" but illegal, the international community should
  find a way to say so, even if the UN Security Council cannot. Otherwise, the most valuable legacy of Atlantic civilization -
  its vision of the rule of law — will be lost. When one side to a dispute is routinely exempted from principles, all exempt
  themselves, and the law of the jungle prevails. The international community needs collectively to affirm that Israel, both
  as occupier and as regional military hegemon, is legally accountable internationally for its actions. If the UN General
  Assembly cannot "unite for peace" to do what an incapacitated Security Council cannot, member states should not shrink
  from working in conference outside the UN framework. All sides in the murder and mayhem in the Holy Land and beyond
  need to understand that they are not above the law. If this message is firmly delivered and enforced, there will be a better
  chance for peace.
  Fourth, set a deadline linked to an ultimatum. Accept that the United States will frustrate any attempt by the UN
  Security Council to address the continuing impasse between Israel and the Palestinians. Organize a global conference
  outside the UN system to coordinate a decision to inform the parties to the dispute that if they cannot reach agreement in
  a year, one of two solutions will be imposed. Schedule a follow-up conference for a year later. The second conference
  would consider whether to recommend universal recognition of a Palestinian state in the area beyond Israel's 1967
  borders or recognition of Israel's achievement of de jure as well as de facto sovereignty throughout Palestine (requiring
  Israel to grant all governed by it citizenship and equal rights at pain of international sanctions, boycott, and
  disinvestment). Either formula would force the parties to make a serious effort to strike a deal or to face the
  consequences of their recalcitrance. Either formula could be implemented directly by the states members of the
  international community. Admittedly, any serious deadline would provoke a political crisis in Israel and lead to diplomatic
  confrontation with the United States as well as Israel, despite the Obama Administration itself having proclaimed a one-
  year deadline in order to entice the Palestinians to tomorrow's talks. Yet both Israel and the United States would benefit
  immensely from peace with the Palestinians.
  Time is running out. The two-state solution may already have been overtaken by Israeli land grabs and settlement
  activity. Another cycle of violence is likely in the offing. If so, it will not be local or regional, but global in its reach. Israel's
  actions are delegitimizing and isolating it even as they multiply the numbers of those in the region and beyond who are
  determined to destroy it. Palestinian suffering is a reproach to all humanity that posturing alone cannot begin to
  alleviate. It has become a cancer on the Islamic body politic. It is infecting every extremity of the globe with the rage
  against injustice that incites terrorism.
  It is time to try new approaches. That is why the question of whether there is a basis for expanded diplomatic cooperation
  between Europeans and Arabs is such a timely one. And it is why I was pleased as well as honored to have been asked
  to set the stage for a discussion of this issue.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: sbwhoeop
  Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2010 10:00 AM
  To:
  Subject: H: FYI. Freeman reflects Saudi view and most of State. Sid
  America's Faltering Search for Peace in the Middle East: Openings for Others?
  Remarks to staff of the Royal Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs
  and, separately, to members of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
  Ambassador Chas W. Freeman, Jr. (USFS, Ret.)
  1 September 2010, Oslo, Norway
  You have asked me to speak to current American policies in the Middle East, with an emphasis on the prospects for
  peace in the Holy Land. You have further suggested that I touch on the relationship of the Gulf Arabs, especially Saudi
  Arabia, to this. It is both an honor and a challenge to address this subject in this capital / at this ministry.
  The declaration of principles worked out in Oslo seventeen years ago was the last direct negotiation between Israelis and
  Palestinian Arabs to reach consequential, positive results. The Oslo accords were a real step toward peace, not another
  deceptive pseudo-event in an endlessly unproductive, so-called "peace process." And if that one step forward in Oslo in
  1993 was followed by several steps backwards, there is a great deal to be learned from how and why that happened.
  There can be no doubt about the importance of today's topic. The ongoing conflict in the Holy Land increasingly disturbs
  the world's conscience as well as its tranquility. The Israel-Palestine issue began as a struggle in the context of European
  colonialism. In the post-colonial era, tension between Israelis and the Palestinians they dispossessed became, by
  degrees, the principal source of radicalization and instability in the Arab East and then the Arab world as a whole. It
  stimulated escalating terrorism against Israelis at home and their allies abroad. Since the end of the Cold War, the
  interaction between Israel and its captive Palestinian population has emerged as the fountainhead of global strife. It is
  increasingly difficult to distinguish this strife from a war of religions or a conflict of civilizations.
  For better or ill, my own country, the United States has played and continues to play the key international part in this
  contest. American policies, more than those of any other external actor, have the capacity to stoke or stifle the hatreds in
  the Middle East and to spread or reverse their infection of the wider world. American policies and actions in the Middle
  East thus affect much more than that region.
  Yet, as I will argue, the United States has been obsessed with process rather than substance. It has failed to involve
  parties who are essential to peace. It has acted on Israel's behalf to preempt rather than enlist international and regional
  support for peace. It has defined the issues in ways that preclude rather than promote progress. Its concept of a "peace
  process" has therefore become the handmaiden of Israeli expansionism rather than a driver for peace. There are
  alternatives to tomorrow's diplomatic peace pageant on the Potomac. And, as Norway has shown, there is a role for
  powers other than America in crafting peace in the Holy Land.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015
  Over thirty years ago, at Camp David, Jimmy Carter pushed Israel through the door to peace that Egypt's Anwar Sadat
  had opened. Twenty years ago, the first Bush administration pressed Israel to the negotiating table with Palestinian
  leaders, setting the stage for their clandestine meetings in Oslo. The capacity of the United States to rally other
  governments behind a cause that it espouses may have atrophied, but American power remains far greater than that of
  any other nation. Nowhere is this more evident than in the Middle East.
  For more than four decades, Israel has been able to rely on aid from the United States to dominate its region militarily and
  to sustain its economic prosperity. It has counted on its leverage in American politics to block the application of
  international law and to protect itself from the political repercussions of its policies and actions. Unquestioning American
  support has enabled Israel to put the seizure of ever more land ahead of the achievement of a modus vivendi with the
  Palestinians or other Arabs. Neither violent resistance from the dispossessed nor objections from abroad have brought
  successive Israeli governments to question, let alone alter the priority they assign to land over peace.
  Ironically, Palestinians too have developed a dependency relationship with America. This has locked them into a political
  framework over which Israel exercises decisive influence. They have been powerless to end occupation, pogroms, ethnic
  cleansing, and other humiliations by Jewish soldiers and settlers. Nor have they been able to prevent their progressive
  confinement in checkpoint-encircled ghettos on the West Bank and the great open-air prison of Gaza.
  Despite this appalling record of failure, the American monopoly on the management of the search for peace in Palestine
  remains unchallenged. Since the end of the Cold War, Russia — once a contender for countervailing influence in the
  region — has lapsed into impotence. The former colonial powers of the European Union, having earlier laid the basis for
  conflict in the region, have largely sat on their hands while ringing them, content to let America take the lead. China,
  India, and other Asian powers have prudently kept their political and military distance. In the region itself, Iran has
  postured and exploited the Palestinian cause without doing anything to advance it. Until recently, Turkey remained aloof.
  On rare occasions, as in the case of the 1973 Arab oil embargo, the Arabs have backed their verbal opposition to Israel
  with action. Egypt and Jordan have settled into an unpopular coexistence with Israel that is now sustained only by U.S.
  subventions. Saudi Arabia has twice taken the initiative to offer Israel diplomatic concessions if it were to conclude
  arrangements for peaceful coexistence with the Palestinians. But, overall, Arab governments have earned the contempt
  of the Palestinians and their own people for their lack of serious engagement. For the most part, Arab leaders have
  timorously demanded that America solve the Israel-Palestine problem for them, while obsequiously courting American
  protection against Israel, each other, Iran, and — in some cases — their own increasingly frustrated and angry subjects and
  citizens.
  Islam charges rulers with the duty to defend the faithful and to uphold justice. It demands that they embody
  righteousness. The resentment of mostly Muslim Arabs at their governing elites' failure to meet these standards
  generates sympathy for terrorism directed not just at Israel but at both the United States and Arab governments
  associated with it.
  The perpetrators of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the United States saw it in part as reprisal for American
  complicity in Israeli cruelties to Palestinians and other Arabs. They justified it as a strike against Washington's protection
  of Arab governments willing to overlook American contributions to Muslim suffering. Washington's response to the attack
  included suspending its efforts to make peace in the Holy Land as well as invading and occupying Afghanistan and
  Iraq. All three actions inadvertently strengthened the terrorist case for further attacks on America and its allies. The
  armed struggle between Americans and Muslim radicals has already spilled over to Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and other
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015
  countries. Authoritative voices in Israel now call for adding Iran to the list of countries at war with America. They are
  echoed by Zionist and neo-conservative spokesmen in the United States,
  The widening involvement of Americans in combat in Muslim lands has inflamed anti-American passions and catalyzed a
  metastasis of terrorism. It has caused a growing majority of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims to see the United States as a
  menace to their faith, their way of life, their homelands, and their personal security. American populists and European
  xenophobes have meanwhile undercut liberal and centrist Muslim arguments against the intolerance that empowers
  terrorism by equating terrorism and its extremist advocates with Islam and its followers. The current outburst of bigoted
  demagoguery over the construction of an Islamic cultural center and mosque in New York is merely the most recent
  illustration of this. It suggests that the blatant racism and Islamophobia of contemporary Israeli politics is contagious. It
  rules out the global alliances against religious extremists that are essential to encompass their political defeat.
  President Obama's inability to break this pattern must be an enormous personal disappointment to him. He came into
  office committed to crafting a new relationship with the Arab and Muslim worlds. His first interview with the international
  media was with Arab satellite television. He reached out publicly and privately to Iran. He addressed the Turkish
  parliament with persuasive empathy. He traveled to a great center of Islamic learning in Cairo to deliver a remarkably
  eloquent message of conciliation to Muslims everywhere. He made it clear that he understood the centrality of injustices
  in the Holy Land to Muslim estrangement from the West. He promised a responsible withdrawal from Iraq and a judicious
  recrafting of strategy in Afghanistan. Few doubt Mr. Obama's sincerity. Yet none of his initiatives has led to policy
  change anyone can detect, let alone believe in
  It is not for me to analyze or explain the wide gaps between rhetoric and achievement in the Obama Administration's
  stewardship of so many aspects of my country's affairs. American voters will render their first formal verdict on this two
  months from tomorrow, on the 2nd of November. The situation in the Holy Land, Iraq, Afghanistan, and adjacent areas is
  only part of what they will consider as they do so. But I do think it worthwhile briefly to examine some of the changes in
  the situation that ensure that many policies that once helped us to get by in the Middle East will no longer do this.
  Let me begin with the "peace process," a hardy perennial of America's diplomatic repertoire that the Obama
  Administration will put back on public display tomorrow. In the Cold War, the appearance of an earnest and "even-
  handed" American search for peace in the Holy Land was the price of U.S. access and influence in the Middle East. It
  provided political cover for conservative Arab governments to set aside their anger at American backing of Israel so as to
  stand with America and the Western bloc against Soviet Communism. It kept American relations with Israel and the
  Arabs from becoming a zero-sum game. It mobilized domestic Jewish support for incumbent presidents. Of course, there
  hasn't been an American-led "peace process" in the Middle East for at least a decade. Still the conceit of a "peace
  process" became an essential political convenience for all concerned. No one could bear to admit that the "peace
  process" had expired. It therefore lived on in phantom form.
  Even when there was no "peace process," the possibility of resurrecting one provided hope to the gullible, cover to the
  guileful, beguilement for the press, an excuse for doing nothing to those gaining from the status quo, and — last but far
  from least — lifetime employment for career "peace processors." The perpetual processing of peace without the
  requirement to produce it has been especially appreciated by Israeli leaders. It has enabled them to behave like
  magicians, riveting foreign attention on meaningless distractions as they systematically removed Palestinians from their
  homes, settled half a million or more Jews in newly vacated areas of the occupied territories, and annexed a widening
  swath of land to a Jerusalem they insist belongs only to Israel.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015
  Palestinian leaders with legitimacy problems have also had reason to collaborate in the search for a "peace process." It's
  not just that there has been no obviously better way to end their people's suffering. Playing "peace process" charades
  justifies the international patronage and Israeli backing these leaders need to retain their status in the occupied
  territories. It ensures that they have media access and high-level visiting rights in Washington. Meanwhile, for American
  leaders, engagement in some sort of Middle East "peace process" has been essential to credibility in the Arab and Islamic
  worlds, as well as with the ever-generous American Jewish community. Polls show that most American Jews are
  impatient for peace. Despite all the evidence to the contrary, they are eager to believe in the willingness of the
  government of Israel to trade land for it.
  Previous "peace processes" have exploited all these impulses. In practice, however, these diplomatic distractions have
  served to obscure Israeli actions and evasions that were more often prejudicial to peace than helpful in achieving
  it. Behind all the blather, the rumble of bulldozers has never stopped. Given this history, it has taken a year and a half of
  relentless effort by U.S. Special Envoy George Mitchell to persuade the parties even to meet directly to talk about talks as
  they first did here in Oslo, seventeen years ago. When the curtain goes up on the diplomatic show in Washington
  tomorrow, will the players put on a different skit? There are many reasons to doubt that they will.
  One is that the Obama administration has engaged the same aging impresarios who staged all the previously failed
  "peace processes" to produce and direct this one with no agreed script. The last time these guys staged such an ill-
  prepared meeting, at Camp David in 2000, it cost both heads of delegation, Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat, their political
  authority. It led not to peace but to escalating violence. The parties are showing up this time to minimize President
  Obama's political embarrassment in advance of midterm elections in the United States, not to address his agenda — still
  less to address each other's agendas. These are indeed difficulties. But the problems with this latest — and possibly final
  — iteration of the perpetually ineffectual "peace process" are more fundamental.
  The Likud Party charter flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan River and stipulates
  that: "The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign
  state." This Israeli government is committed to that charter as well as to the Jewish holy war for land in Palestine. It has
  no interest in trading land it covets for a peace that might thwart further territorial expansion. It considers itself unbound
  by the applicable UN resolutions, agreements from past peace talks, the "Roadmap," or the premise of the "two-state
  solution."
  The Palestinians are desperate for the dignity and security that only the end of the Israeli occupation can provide. But the
  authority of Palestinian negotiators to negotiate rests on their recognition by Israel and the United States, not on their
  standing in the occupied territories, Gaza, or the Palestinian diaspora. Fatah is the ruling faction in part of Palestine. Its
  authority to govern was repudiated by voters in the last Palestinian elections. The Mahmoud Abbas administration retains
  power by grace of the Israeli occupation authorities and the United States, which prefer it to the government empowered
  by the Palestinian people at the polls. Mr. Abbas's constitutional term of office has long since expired. He presides over
  a parliament whose most influential members are locked up in Israeli jails. It is not clear for whom he, his faction, or his
  administration can now speak.
  So the talks that begin tomorrow promise to be a case of the disinterested going through the motions of negotiating with
  the mandate-less. The parties to these talks seek to mollify an America that has severely lessened international
  credibility. The United States government had to borrow the modest reputations for objectivity of others — the EU, Russia,
  and the UN — to be able to convene this discussion. It will be held under the auspices of an American president who was
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015
  publicly humiliated by Israel's prime minister on the issue that is at the center of the Israel-Palestine dispute — Israel's
  continuing seizure and colonization of Arab land.
  Vague promises of a Palestinian state within a year now waft through the air. But the "peace process" has always
  sneered at deadlines, even much, much firmer ones. A more definitive promise of an independent Palestine within a year
  was made at Annapolis three years ago. Analogous promises of Palestinian self-determination have preceded or resulted
  from previous meetings over the decades, beginning with the Camp David accords of 1979. Many in this audience will
  recall the five-year deadline fixed at Oslo. The talks about talks that begin tomorrow can yield concrete results only if the
  international community is prepared this time to insist on the one-year deadline put forward for recognizing a Palestinian
  state. Even then there will be no peace unless long-neglected issues are addressed.
  Peace is a pattern of stability acceptable to those with the capacity to disturb it by violence. It is almost impossible to
  impose. It cannot become a reality, still less be sustained, if those who must accept it are excluded from it. This reality
  directs our attention to who is not at this gathering in Washington and what must be done to remedy the problems these
  absences create.
  Obviously, the party that won the democratically expressed mandate of the Palestinian people to represent them — Hamas
  — is not there. Yet there can be no peace without its buy-in. Egypt and Jordan have been invited as observers. Yet they
  have nothing to add to the separate peace agreements each long ago made with Israel. (Both these agreements were
  explicitly premised on grudging Israeli undertakings to accept Palestinian self-determination. The Jewish state quickly
  finessed both.) Activists from the Jewish diaspora disproportionately staff the American delegation. A failure to reconcile
  either American Jews or the Palestine diaspora to peace would doom any accord. But the Palestinian diaspora will be
  represented in Washington only in tenuous theory, not in fact.
  Other Arabs, including the Arab League and the author of its peace initiative, Saudi Arabia, will not be at the talks
  tomorrow. The reasons for this are both simple and complex. At one level they reflect both a conviction that this latest
  installment of the "peace process" is just another in a long series of public entertainments for the American electorate and
  also a lack of confidence in the authenticity of the Palestinian delegation. At another level, they result from the way the
  United States has defined the problems to be solved and the indifference to Arab interests and views this definition
  evidences. Then too, they reflect disconnects in political culture and negotiating style between Israelis, Arabs, and
  Americans.
  To begin with, neither Israel nor the conveners of this proposed new "peace process" have officially acknowledged or
  responded to the Arab peace initiative of 2002. This offered normalization of relations with the Jewish state, should Israel
  make peace with the Palestinians. Instead, the United States and the Quartet have seemed to pocket the Arab offer,
  ignore its precondition that Israelis come to terms with Palestinians, and gone on to levy new demands.
  In this connection, making Arab recognition of Israel's "right to exist" the central purpose of the "peace process" offends
  Arabs on many levels. In framing the issue this way, Israel and the United States appear to be asking for something well
  beyond pragmatic accommodation of the reality of a Jewish state in the Middle East. To the Arabs, Americans now seem
  to be insisting on Arab endorsement of the idea of the state of Israel, the means by which that state was established, and
  the manner in which it has comported itself. Must Arabs really embrace Zionism before Israel can cease expansion and
  accept peace?
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015
  Arabs and Muslims familiar with European history can accept that European anti-Semitism justified the establishment of a
  homeland for traumatized European Jews. But asking them even implicitly to agree that the forcible eviction of
  Palestinian Arabs was a morally appropriate means to this end is both a nonstarter and seriously off-putting. So is asking
  them to affirm that resistance to such displacement was and is sinful. Similarly, the Arabs see the demand that they
  recognize a Jewish state with no fixed borders as a clever attempt to extract their endorsement of Israel's unilateral
  expansion at Palestinian expense.
  The lack of appeal in this approach has been compounded by a longstanding American habit of treating Arab concerns
  about Israel as a form of anti-Semitism and tuning them out. Instead of hearing out and addressing Arab views, U.S.
  peace processors have repeatedly focused on soliciting Arab acts of kindness toward Israel. They argue that gestures of
  acceptance can help Israelis overcome their Holocaust-inspired political neuroses and take risks for peace.
  Each time this notion of Arab diplomacy as psychotherapy for Israelis has been trotted out, it has been met with
  incredulity. To most in the region, it encapsulates the contrast between Washington's sympathy and solicitude for Israelis
  and its condescendingly exploitative view of Arabs. Some see it as a barely disguised appeal for a policy of appeasement
  of Israel. Still others suspect an attempt to construct a "peace process" in which Arabs begin to supply Israel with gifts of
  carrots so that Americans can continue to avoid applying sticks to it.
  The effort to encourage Arab generosity as an offset to American political pusillanimity vis-a-vis Israel is ludicrously
  unpersuasive. It has failed so many times that it should be obvious that it will not work. Yet it was a central element of
  George Mitchell's mandate for "peace process" diplomacy. And it appears to have resurfaced as part of the proposed
  follow-up to tomorrow's meeting between the parties in Washington. It should be no puzzle why the Saudis and other
  Arabs could not be persuaded to join this gathering.
  As a last thought before turning to what must be done, let me make a quick comment on a relevant cultural factor. Arabic
  has two quite different words that are both translated as "negotiation," making a distinction that doesn't exist in either
  English or Hebrew. One word, "musaawama," refers to the no-holds-barred bargaining process that takes place in
  bazaars between strangers who may never see each other again and who therefore feel no obligation not to scam each
  other. Another, "mufaawadhat," describes the dignified formal discussions about matters of honor and high principle that
  take place on a basis of mutual respect and equality between statesmen who seek a continuing relationship.
  Egyptian President Anwar Sadat's travel to Jerusalem was a grand act of statesmanship to initiate a process of
  mufaawadhat — relationship-building between leaders and their polities. So was the Arab peace initiative of 2002. It
  called for a response in kind. The West muttered approvingly but did not act. After a while, Israel responded with
  intermittent, somewhat oblique suggestions of willingness to haggle over terms. But an offer to bicker over the terms on
  which a grand gesture has been granted is, not surprisingly, seen as insultingly unresponsive.
  I cite this not to suggest that non-Arabs should adopt Arabic canons of thought, but to make a point about diplomatic
  effectiveness. To move a negotiating partner in a desired direction, one must understand how that partner understands
  things and help him to see a way forward that will bring him to an end he has been persuaded to want. One of the
  reasons we can't seem to move things as we desire in the Middle East is that we don't make much effort to understand
  how others reason and how they rank their interests. In the case of the Israel-Palestine conundrum, we Americans are
  long on empathy and expertise about Israel and very, very short on these for the various Arab parties. The essential
  militarism of U.S. policies in the Middle East adds to our difficulties. We have become skilled at killing Arabs. We have
  forgotten how to listen to them or persuade them.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015
  I am not myself an "Arabist," but I am old enough to remember when there were more than a few such people in the
  American diplomatic service. These were officers who had devoted themselves to the cultivation of understanding and
  empathy with Arab leaders so as to be able to convince these leaders that it was in their own interest to do things we saw
  as in our interest. If we still have such people, we are hiding them well; we are certainly not applying their skills in our
  Middle East diplomacy.
  This brings me to a few thoughts about the Western and Arab interests at stake in the Holy Land and their implications for
  what must be done.
  In foreign affairs, interests are the measure of all things. My assumption is that Americans and Norwegians, indeed
  Europeans in general, share common interests that require peace in the Holy Land. To my mind, these interests include -
  but are, of course, not limited to — gaining security and acceptance for a democratic state of Israel; eliminating the gross
  injustices and daily humiliations that foster Arab terrorism against Israel and its foreign allies and supporters, as well as
  friendly Arab regimes; and reversing the global spread of religious strife and prejudice, including, very likely, a revival of
  anti-Semitism in the West if current trends are not arrested. None of these aspirations can be fulfilled without an end to
  the Israeli occupation and freedom for Palestinians.
  Arab states, like Saudi Arabia, also have compelling reasons to want relief from occupation as well as self-determination
  for Palestinians. They may not be concerned to preserve Israel's democracy, as we are, but they share an urgent interest
  in ending the radicalization of their own populations, curbing the spread of Islamist terrorism, and eliminating the tensions
  with the West that the conflict in the Holy Land fuels. These are the concerns that have driven them to propose peace, as
  they very clearly did eight years ago. For related reasons, Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah has made inter-faith dialogue
  and the promotion of religious tolerance a main focus of his domestic and international policy.
  As the custodian of two of Islam's three sacred places of pilgrimage — Mecca and Medina — Saudi Arabia has long
  transcended its own notorious religious narrow-mindedness to hold the holy places in its charge open to Muslims of all
  sects and persuasions. This experience, joined with Islamic piety, reinforces a Saudi insistence on the exemption of
  religious pilgrimage to Jerusalem from political interference or manipulation. The Ottoman Turks were careful to ensure
  freedom of access for worship to adherents of the three Abrahamic faiths when they administered the city. It is an interest
  that Jews, Christians, and Muslims share.
  There is, in short, far greater congruity between Western and Arab interests affecting the Israel-Palestine dispute than is
  generally recognized. This can be the basis for creative diplomacy. The fact that this has not occurred reflects
  pathologies of political life in the United States that paralyze the American diplomatic imagination. Tomorrow's meeting
  may well demonstrate that, the election of Barack Obama notwithstanding, the United States is still unfit to manage the
  achievement of peace between Israel and the Arabs. If so, it is in the American interest as well as everyone else's that
  others become the path-breakers, enlisting the United States as best they can in support of what they achieve, but not
  expecting America to overcome its incapacity to lead.
  Here, I think, there is a lesson to be drawn from the Norwegian experience in the 1990s. The Clinton Administration was
  happy to organize the public relations for the Oslo accords but did not take ownership of them. It did little to protect them
  from subversion and overthrow, and nothing to insist on their implementation. Only a peace process that is protected
  from Israel's ability to manipulate American politics can succeed.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015
  This brings me to how Europeans and Arabs might work together to realize the objectives both share with most
  Americans: establishing internationally recognized borders for Israel, securing freedom for the Palestinians, and ending
  the stimulus to terrorism in the region and beyond it that strife in the Holy Land entails. I have only four suggestions to
  present today. I expect that more ideas will emerge from the discussion period. A serious effort to cooperate with the
  Arabs of the sort that Norway is uniquely capable of contriving could lead to the development of still more options for joint
  or parallel action on behalf of peace.
  Now to my suggestions, presented in ascending order of difficulty, from the least to the most controversial.
  First, get behind the Arab peace initiative. Saudi Arab culture frowns on self-promotion and the Kingdom is less gifted
  than most at public diplomacy. Political factors inhibit official Arab access to the Israeli press. The Israeli media have
  published some — mostly dismissive — commentary on the Arab peace initiative but left most Israelis ignorant of its
  contents and unfamiliar with its text. Why not buy space in the Israeli media to give Israelis a chance to read the Arab
  League declaration and consider the opportunities it presents? I suspect the Saudis, as well as other members of the
  Arab League, would consider it constructive for an outside party to do this. It might facilitate other sorts of cooperation
  with them in which European capabilities can also compensate for Arab reticence. The Turks and other non-Arab
  Muslims should be brought in as full participants in any such efforts. This wouldn't be bad for Europe's relations with
  both. By the way, given the U.S. media's notorious one-sidedness and American ignorance about the Arab peace plan, a
  well-targeted advertising campaign in the United States might not be a bad idea either.
  Second, help create a Palestinian partner for peace. There can be no peace with Israel unless there are officials who
  are empowered by the Palestinian people to negotiate and ratify it. Israel has worked hard to divide the Palestinians so
  as to consolidate its conquest of their homeland. Saudi Arabia has several times sought to create a Palestinian peace
  partner for Israel by bringing Fatah, Hamas, and other factions together. On each occasion, Israel, with U.S. support, has
  acted to preclude this. Active organization of non-American Western support for diplomacy aimed at restoring a unity
  government to the Palestinian Authority could make a big difference. The Obama Administration would be under strong
  domestic political pressure to join Israel in blocking a joint European-Arab effort to accomplish this. Under some
  circumstances, however, it might welcome being put to this test.
  Third, reaffirm and enforce international law. The UN Security Council is charged with enforcing the rule of law
  internationally. In the case of the Middle East, however, the Council's position at the apex of the international system has
  served to erode and subvert the ideal of a rule-bound international order. Almost forty American vetoes have prevented
  the application to the Israeli occupying authorities of the Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg precedents, human rights
  conventions, and relevant Security Council directives. American diplomacy on behalf of the Jewish state has silenced the
  collective voice of the international community as Israel has illegally colonized and annexed broad swaths of occupied
  territory, administered collective punishment to a captive people, assassinated their political leaders, massacred civilians,
  barred UN investigators, defied mandatory Security Council resolutions, and otherwise engaged in scofflaw behavior,
  usually with only the flimsiest of legally irrelevant excuses.
  If ethnic cleansing, settlement activity, and the like are not just "unhelpful" but illegal, the international community should
  find a way to say so, even if the UN Security Council cannot. Otherwise, the most valuable legacy of Atlantic civilization -
  its vision of the rule of law — will be lost. When one side to a dispute is routinely exempted from principles, all exempt
  themselves, and the law of the jungle prevails. The international community needs collectively to affirm that Israel, both
  as occupier and as regional military hegemon, is legally accountable internationally for its actions. If the UN General
  Assembly cannot "unite for peace" to do what an incapacitated Security Council cannot, member states should not shrink
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015
  from working in conference outside the UN framework. All sides in the murder and mayhem in the Holy Land and beyond
  need to understand that they are not above the law. If this message is firmly delivered and enforced, there will be a better
  chance for peace.
  Fourth, set a deadline linked to an ultimatum. Accept that the United States will frustrate any attempt by the UN
  Security Council to address the continuing impasse between Israel and the Palestinians. Organize a global conference
  outside the UN system to coordinate a decision to inform the parties to the dispute that if they cannot reach agreement in
  a year, one of two solutions will be imposed. Schedule a follow-up conference for a year later. The second conference
  would consider whether to recommend universal recognition of a Palestinian state in the area beyond Israel's 1967
  borders or recognition of Israel's achievement of de jure as well as de facto sovereignty throughout Palestine (requiring
  Israel to grant all governed by it citizenship and equal rights at pain of international sanctions, boycott, and
  disinvestment). Either formula would force the parties to make a serious effort to strike a deal or to face the
  consequences of their recalcitrance. Either formula could be implemented directly by the states members of the
  international community. Admittedly, any serious deadline would provoke a political crisis in Israel and lead to diplomatic
  confrontation with the United States as well as Israel, despite the Obama Administration itself having proclaimed a one-
  year deadline in order to entice the Palestinians to tomorrow's talks. Yet both Israel and the United States would benefit
  immensely from peace with the Palestinians.
  Time is running out. The two-state solution may already have been overtaken by Israeli land grabs and settlement
  activity. Another cycle of violence is likely in the offing. If so, it will not be local or regional, but global in its reach. Israel's
  actions are delegitimizing and isolating it even as they multiply the numbers of those in the region and beyond who are
  determined to destroy it. Palestinian suffering is a reproach to all humanity that posturing alone cannot begin to
  alleviate. It has become a cancer on the Islamic body politic. It is infecting every extremity of the globe with the rage
  against injustice that incites terrorism.
  It is time to try new approaches. That is why the question of whether there is a basis for expanded diplomatic cooperation
  between Europeans and Arabs is such a timely one. And it is why I was pleased as well as honored to have been asked
  to set the stage for a discussion of this issue.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771224 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771225
MetadataSubject: YOU LOOK BEAUTIFUL!!!!
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Ebeling, Betsy
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771225/C05771225.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771225
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Ebeling, Betsy
  Thursday, September 2, 2010 2:38 PM
  H
  You look beautiful!!!!
  ole0.bmp; ole0.bmp

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771225 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Subject:
  Attachments:
  Ebeling, Betsy
  Thursday, September 2, 2010 2:38 PM
  H
  You look beautiful!!!!
  ole0.bmp; ole0.bmp
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771225 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771226
MetadataSubject: EYES ON HILLARY CLINTON AS SHE LEADS MIDWAST PEACE TALKS
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771226/C05771226.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: FW: Eyes on Hillary Clinton as She Leads Mideast Peace Talks
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, September 2, 2010 4:58 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771226
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771226 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2010 4:58 PM
  To:
  Subject: FW: Eyes on Hillary Clinton as She Leads Mideast Peace Talks
  From: Toiv, Nora F
  Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 4:09 PM
  To: Mills, Cheryl D
  Subject: Eyes on Hillary Clinton as She Leads Mideast Peace Talks
  NEWS
  Eyes on Hillary Clinton as She Leads Mideast Peace Talks
  Opinions Are Split on Whether Secretary of State Has Skills Necessary for Negotiations
  By JAKE TAPPER
  WASHINGTON, Sept. 2, 2010 —
  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton today stepped into the international spotlight, assuming the day-to-day
  responsibility of trying to broker a Mideast peace that has eluded her predecessors for decades.
  Seated between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas at the
  State Department, Clinton heralded the first direct negotiations between the parties in nearly two years.
  Whether both sides can overcome a history of failed negotiations and dashed hopes will depend in large part on
  the individual leaders making difficult concessions, Clinton said.
  "We cannot and will not impose a solution. Only you can make the decisions necessary to reach an agreement
  and secure a peaceful future for the Israeli and Palestinian people," she said.
  Clinton appeared to embrace the opportunity and the symbolism of the moment 0 speaking slowly and
  authoritatively, embracing her partners on both sides, and reminding the world of the difficulties to be expected
  on the road ahead.
  "Those who oppose the cause of peace will try in every way possible to sabotage this process, as we have
  already seen this week," she said, referring to the killing Tuesday of four Israeli civilians by Hamas.
  But "the core issues at the center of these negotiations -- territory, security, Jerusalem, refugees, settlements and
  others -- will get no easier if we wait, nor will they resolve themselves."
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771226 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771226 Date: 08/31/2015
  The talks, which also included Jordan's King Abdullah II and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, represent a
  formidable challenge for Clinton, who has spent months coaxing both sides back to the negotiating table.
  They also raise the stakes for President Obama, who has set a goal of creating a two-state solution. He met with
  Netanyahu and Abbas in private sessions at the White House Wednesday and said he was "cautiously hopeful" a
  deal could be reached one year from now.
  But experts say success in the months ahead will also depend on Clinton's skill as a diplomat and mediator.
  "I think she has credibility. Now whether that translates into diplomatic skills, I don't know," said Shibley
  Telhami, the Anwar Sadat professor for peace and development at the University of Maryland. "Frankly, she's
  untested as a mediator."
  Other observers see Clinton's experience as a politician as an asset because she will be able to not only discuss
  the policies but understand the politics of how Palestinian and Israeli leaders "sell" the negotiations to their
  peoples at home.
  In an ABC News exclusive interview, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair said Clinton has the best type
  of political mind. "[It] knows where you meet the point of principle and knows where you need the subtlety and
  the compromise," he said.
  1979 Camp David Accords: the Gold Standard
  Ahead of the talks, Clinton had requested historical background materials concerning past efforts at peace in the
  region, the ultimately unsuccessful one led by her husband, a source close to the secretary of state said.
  "She has this relationship with this fellow who has spent some time talking to leaders -- you know President
  Clinton -- and she has benefitted from his direct experience," said State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley.
  Clinton regards President Jimmy Carter's 1979 Camp David Accords brokered between Israel and Egypt as the
  gold standard for negotiations, the Clinton source said.
  When then-Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin refused to authorize the dismantling of any Israeli
  settlements, Carter's team suggested having the Israeli Parliament make the decision -- and it did. Carter has
  credited thinking outside of the box and being innovative as the key.
  "You have to be innovative and get a lot of outside help to find some alternative route that might bring you to
  the same goals," Carter told interviewer Don Richardson in "Conversations With Carter."
  "You really need to look at life or the negotiation as if it were a chessboard. Anticipating what the next move is
  and what the next move is after that," said Aaron David Miller, an adviser on the region to six secretaries of
  state.
  Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who negotiated an end to the 1973 Arab-Israeli war, said that
  audaciousness was part of testing the limits.
  "The art of statesmanship is to find a position between stagnation and overextension, hopefully at the outer limit
  of what is possible," he said during a June 2008 interview on CNN.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771226 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771226 Date: 08/31/2015
  Former President Clinton once suggested that willpower also comes in handy. In his autobiography, "My Life,"
  he described one very late night at Wye River -- where he conducted his own Mideast peace talks -- where his
  "strategy for success had now boiled down to endurance; I was determined to be the last man standing."
  What the negotiators are doing when they're not negotiating might also play a role, Carter has said. By holding
  peace talks at Camp David, "it was a harmonious environment because Egyptians and Israelis who had been
  devoting their adult life to killing each other were required to swim in the same swimming pool, watch the same
  movies, play on the same tennis courts, throw horseshoes together, sit on the same rock and talks. That was all
  part of it."
  ABC News' Kirit Radia, Enjoli Francis and Devin Dwyer contributed to this report.
  Copyright © 2010 ABC News Internet Ventures
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771226 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771227
MetadataSubject: (REUTERS) ARAB LEAGUE CHIEF: TALKS NO USE IF SETTLEMENTS BUILT
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-16T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0097/DOC_0C05771227/C05771227.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: O-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: (Reuters) Arab League chief: talks no use if settlements built
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: SES-O_Shift-III
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 5:47 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771227
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771227 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 5:47 PM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: (Reuters) Arab League chief: talks no use if settlements built
  From: Rudnitski, Jennine R
  To: NEWS-NEA; NEWS-Mahogany
  Cc: SES-O_Shift-III
  Sent: Thu Sep 16 16:54:35 2010
  Subject: (Reuters) Arab League chief: talks no use if settlements built
  CAIRO (Reuters) - The Arab League backs the Palestinians' refusal to continue direct peace talks if Israel resumes building
  settlements, the organization's chief said September 16. "If settlement construction does not stop, then there is no use
  for continuing negotiations," Amr Moussa told a press conference, saying this was the opinion of the Arabs and
  Palestinian President Abbas. "Negotiating with occupation is simply a waste of time."
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771227 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771228
MetadataSubject: SEPTEMBER 14 & 15
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771228/C05771228.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: FW: September 14 & 15
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Sullivan, Jacob 3; Reines, Philippe I
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, September 2, 2010 5:23 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771228
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: Gotta love him
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771228 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2010 5:23 PM
  To:
  Subject: FW: September 14 & 15
  Gotta love him
  From: Crowley, Philip 3
  Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 4:46 PM
  To: Abedin, Huma; Mills, Cheryl D
  Cc: Sullivan, Jacob 3; Reines, Philippe I
  Subject: September 14 & 15
  A quick note as I head for an interview with Israeli Channel 10. Have done intensive work today with regional media,
  including CNN-I, Al and AJE, about 10 in all when the evening winds down. We have had a good day in shaping the
  outcome of today's activity. Coverage has been broadly supportive. The Palestinians went somewhat negative on
  Andrea Mitchell's show, but I appeared as did Michael Oren and we balanced that out fairly well
  Let me know.
  PJ
  B5
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771228 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771229
MetadataSubject: JOINT INTERVIEW
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: PIR
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771229/C05771229.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771229
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  PIR <preines
  Thursday, September 2, 2010 6:33 PM
  H
  CDM; Huma Abedin; Lona Valmoro; Jake Sullivan
  Joint Interview
  MS —
  Jake just relayed yoLir desire to cancel tomorrow's interview. But I want to make sure you are aware of a few things that
  he was not in a position to share:
  1) The Israeli & Palestinian interviewers and their teams skipped returning home today with their principals at great
  cost and energy in order to stay the extra day to you. One skipped traveling onward with Abbas.
  2) Both the Israeli & Palestinian media outlets involved immediately announced their joint interview and are hyping its
  unprecedented nature
  3) Because of #2, U.S. media is fully aware that this interview is scheduled for tomorrow morning.
  So three points:
  1) There is an incredibly high expectation for this interview occurring and canceling, no matter the reason cited, will be
  taken to mean something negative2) The point of this interview was to shape the narrative coming out of today, and
  canceling will only contribute to a negative narrative in that we will be canceling on the most important figure in Israeli
  media, and I do not see Channel 2 taking that well3) As positive as the symbolism of this interview was meant to be,
  we run the risk of the negative symbolism by canceling.
  Typically when you want to cancel something I roll with it. But I want to strenuously object to doing so in this case. I
  understand you told the participants they should refrain from public comment, but first, that doesn't mean you have to
  and second, you know they won't really refrain. And I am certain they will appreciate the effusive things you have to say
  about them during this interview. Not to mention that the reason for canceling is something we ourselves could have
  foreseen before going so far down the road, and should have - which I don't think is fair or reflects well on you.
  Lastly, on a much more practical note: to get you out of this I am going to have to bribe Channel 2 with a significant and
  exclusive interview when we are in Jerusalem in two weeks, and I guarantee you that will be far more painful than
  tomorrow's relative short and peaceful format.
  If you'd like to discuss I'm at my desk and available or can call you through Ops.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771229 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Cc:
  Subject:
  PIR <preines
  Thursday, September 2, 2010 6:33 PM
  H
  CDM; Huma Abedin; Lona Valmoro; Jake Sullivan
  Joint Interview
  MS —
  Jake just relayed yoLir desire to cancel tomorrow's interview. But I want to make sure you are aware of a few things that
  he was not in a position to share:
  1) The Israeli & Palestinian interviewers and their teams skipped returning home today with their principals at great
  cost and energy in order to stay the extra day to you. One skipped traveling onward with Abbas.
  2) Both the Israeli & Palestinian media outlets involved immediately announced their joint interview and are hyping its
  unprecedented nature
  3) Because of #2, U.S. media is fully aware that this interview is scheduled for tomorrow morning.
  So three points:
  1) There is an incredibly high expectation for this interview occurring and canceling, no matter the reason cited, will be
  taken to mean something negative2) The point of this interview was to shape the narrative coming out of today, and
  canceling will only contribute to a negative narrative in that we will be canceling on the most important figure in Israeli
  media, and I do not see Channel 2 taking that well3) As positive as the symbolism of this interview was meant to be,
  we run the risk of the negative symbolism by canceling.
  Typically when you want to cancel something I roll with it. But I want to strenuously object to doing so in this case. I
  understand you told the participants they should refrain from public comment, but first, that doesn't mean you have to
  and second, you know they won't really refrain. And I am certain they will appreciate the effusive things you have to say
  about them during this interview. Not to mention that the reason for canceling is something we ourselves could have
  foreseen before going so far down the road, and should have - which I don't think is fair or reflects well on you.
  Lastly, on a much more practical note: to get you out of this I am going to have to bribe Channel 2 with a significant and
  exclusive interview when we are in Jerusalem in two weeks, and I guarantee you that will be far more painful than
  tomorrow's relative short and peaceful format.
  If you'd like to discuss I'm at my desk and available or can call you through Ops.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771229 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771232
MetadataSubject: JOINT INTERVIEW
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: PIR
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771232/C05771232.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771232
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  PIR <preines
  Thursday, September 2, 2010 6:48 PM
  H
  CDM; Huma Abedin; Lona Valmoro; Jake Sullivan
  Re: Joint Interview
  Before I call Udi Segal of Channel 2 I would like your ok to commit you to an interview while in Jerusalem on the next
  trip.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771232 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN
  PART B5,B6
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Cc:
  Subject:
  PIR <preines
  Thursday, September 2, 2010 6:48 PM
  H
  CDM; Huma Abedin; Lona Valmoro; Jake Sullivan
  Re: Joint Interview
  Before I call Udi Segal of Channel 2 I would like your ok to commit you to an interview while in Jerusalem on the next
  trip.
  Original Message
  From: "PIR" <preines_
  Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 22:32:54
  To: Evergreen<HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  Reply-To: preines
  Cc: CDM<chervl.mills Huma Abedin<Huma@clintonemail.com>; Lona Valmoro'
  Jake Sullivan
  Subject: Joint Interview
  MS—
  Jake just relayed your desire to cancel tomorrow's interview. But I want to make sure you are aware of a few things that
  he was not in a position to share:
  1) The Israeli & Palestinian interviewers and their teams skipped returning home today with their principals at great
  cost and energy in order to stay the extra day to you. One skipped traveling onward with Abbas.
  2) Both the Israeli & Palestinian media outlets involved immediately announced their joint interview and are hyping its
  unprecedented nature
  3) Because of #2, U.S. media is fully aware that this interview is scheduled for tomorrow morning.
  So three points:
  1) There is an incredibly high expectation for this interview occurring and canceling, no matter the reason cited, will be
  taken to mean something negative2) The point of this interview was to shape the narrative coming out of today, and
  canceling will only contribute to a negative narrative in that we will be canceling on the most important figure in Israeli
  media, and I do not see Channel 2 taking that well3) As positive as the symbolism of this interview was meant to be,
  we run the risk of the negative symbolism by canceling.
  Typically when you want to cancel something I roll with it. But I want to strenuously object to doing so in this case. I
  understand you told the participants they should refrain from public comment, but first, that doesn't mean you have to
  and second, you know they won't really refrain. And I am certain they will appreciate the effusive things you have to say
  about them during this interview. Not to mention that the reason for canceling is something we ourselves could have
  foreseen before going so far down the road, and should have - which I don't think is fair or reflects well on you.
  Lastly, on a much more practical note: to get you out of this I am going to have to bribe Channel 2 with a significant and
  exclusive interview when we are in Jerusalem in two weeks, and I guarantee you that will be far more painful than
  tomorrow's relative short and peaceful format.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771232 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771232 Date: 08/31/2015
  If you'd like to discuss I'm at my desk and available or can call you through Ops.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771232 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771236
MetadataSubject: INTERVIEW
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: PIR
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771236/C05771236.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Interview
ExtractedFrom: PIR <preines
ExtractedCc: reinesp@state.gov; sullivanjj@state.gov
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, September 2, 2010 9:03 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771236
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  and which you could do
  Otheriwse it would be Channel 2 solo,
  IN Israel
  Sent from my iPad
  On Sep 2, 2010, at 9:00 PM, H <HDR22@clintonemail.com> wrote:
  > What did you decide? I'm assuming you got my earlier email saying I'm willing to do if we have answer on moratorium.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771236 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN
  PART B5, B6
  From: PIR <preines
  Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2010 9:03 PM
  To:
  Cc: reinesp@state.gov; sullivanjj@state.gov
  Subject: Re: Interview
  and which you could do
  Otheriwse it would be Channel 2 solo,
  IN Israel
  Sent from my iPad
  On Sep 2, 2010, at 9:00 PM, H <HDR22@clintonemail.com> wrote:
  > What did you decide? I'm assuming you got my earlier email saying I'm willing to do if we have answer on moratorium.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771236 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771237
MetadataSubject: INTERVIEW
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: PIR
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771237/C05771237.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCc: reinesp@state.gov <reinesp@state.gov>; sullivanjj@state.gov <sullivanjj@state.gov>
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771237
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  PIR <preines
  Thursday, September 2, 2010 9:11 PM
  H
  Re: Interview
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5, B6
  B5

RawText:
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Subject:
  PIR <preines
  Thursday, September 2, 2010 9:11 PM
  H
  Re: Interview
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771237 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5, B6
  B5
  Original Message
  From: Evergreen
  To: PIR
  Subject: Re: Interview
  Sent: Sep 2, 2010 9:07 PM
  Ok either way but need to do both or none.
  Original Messa e
  From: PIR <preine
  To: H
  Cc: reinesp@state.gov <reinesp@state.gov>; sullivanjj@state.gov <sullivanjj@state.gov>
  Sent: Thu Sep 02 21:03:29 2010
  Subject: Re: Interview
  Otheriwse it would be Channel 2 solo, and which you could do
  IN Israel
  Sent from my iPad
  On Sep 2, 2010, at 9:00 PM, H <HDR22@clintonemail.com> wrote:
  > What did you decide? I'm assuming you got my earlier email
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771237 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771238
MetadataSubject: INTERVIEW
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: PIR
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771238/C05771238.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Interview
ExtractedTo: H
ExtractedFrom: PIR <preines
ExtractedCc: reinesp@state.gov <reinesp@state.gov>; sullivanjj@state.gov <sullivanjj@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, September 2, 2010 9:18 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771238
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: Aye aye
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771238 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5,B6
  From: PIR <preines
  Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2010 9:18 PM
  To: H
  Subject: Re: Interview
  Aye aye
  Original Message B6
  From: Evergreen
  To: PIR
  Subject: Re: Interview
  Sent: Sep 2, 2010 9:17 PM
  So, I'll assume it's off unless you tell me otherwise before tomorrow am.
  Original Message
  From: PIR <preines
  To: H
  Sent: Thu Sep 02 21:11:09 2010
  Subject: Re: Interview
  Original Message
  From: Evergreen
  To: PIR
  Subject: Re: Interview
  Sent: Sep 2, 2010 9:07 PM
  Ok either way but need to do both or none.
  Original Message
  From: PIR <preines
  To: H
  Cc: reinesp@state.gov <reinesp@state.gov>; sullivanjj@state.gov <sullivanjj@state.gov>
  Sent: Thu Sep 02 21:03:29 2010
  Subject: Re: Interview
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771238 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771238 Date: 08/31/2015
  Otheriwse it would be Channel 2 solo, and which you could do
  IN Israel
  Sent from my iPad
  On Sep 2, 2010, at 9:00 PM, H <HDR22@clintonemail.com> wrote:
  > What did you decide? I'm assuming you got my earlier email
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771238 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771240
MetadataSubject: CNN INTERVIEW WITH YBA
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-17T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0098/DOC_0C05771240/C05771240.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: CNN Interview with YbA
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <Sullivan.11@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Abedin, Huma
ExtractedDateSent: Friday, September 17, 2010 7:38 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771240
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Importance: High
  Fyi

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771240 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <Sullivan.11@state.gov>
  Sent: Friday, September 17, 2010 7:38 AM
  To:
  Cc: Abedin, Huma
  Subject: Fw: CNN Interview with YbA
  Importance: High
  Fyi
  Original Message
  From: Sanderson, Janet A
  To: Sullivan, Jacob
  Cc: Schlicher, Ronald L; Dibble, Philo L
  Sent: Fri Sep 17 07:34:23 2010
  Subject: FW: CNN Interview with YbA
  Jake, we understand that S will talk to the Sultan this morning. Jeff wanted you to have this readout of bin Allawi's CNN
  interview before that call. It is, as Amb Schmierer said, unhelpful.
  Janet
  SBU
  This email is UNCLASSIFIED
  Janet A. Sanderson
  Deputy Assistant Secretary
  Bureau of Near East Affairs
  Department of State
  Tel: 202-647-7166
  Original Message
  From: Schmierer, Richard J
  Sent: Friday, September 17, 2010 6:59 AM
  To: Schlicher, Ronald L; Sanderson, Janet A; Holtz, Greta C (NEA); Pelton, Erin; Vasquez, Edgar 1; Talwar, Puneet (OVP);
  Dibble, Philo L; Jensen, Robert R.
  Cc: Hurtado, L Victor (Muscat); Pattarini, Daniel M; Attkisson, Patricia 0; Bondy, Steven C; Specht, Linda; Fischer, Patrick
  Subject: RE: CNN Interview with YbA
  Importance: High
  Colleagues,
  We wanted to alert you to the CNN interview helaw with Omani FM Ylicef hinAlawi which we came across earlier
  today; it is unexpected, and unhelpful.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771240 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771240 Date: 08/31/2015
  Richard J. Schmierer
  Ambassador
  Embassy of the United States of America
  Muscat, Sultanate of Oman
  Omani minister discusses talks to release hiker From Nic Robertson, CNN
  STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  Negotiators had easy access to Obama, Ahmadinejad The talks stalled after five months An Iranian nuclear scientist
  caused "disturbance" in July The hikers have been held more than a year
  (CNN) -- President Barack Obama had a key role during negotiations between the Omanis and Iranians that led to the
  release of an American hiker detained after she and two companions allegedly strayed across an unmarked border
  between Iraq and Iran.
  Yusuf bin Alawai bin Abdullah, Oman's minister responsible for foreign affairs, told CNN that "indecision and confusion"
  at the White House at times delayed the talks -- which began eight months ago when the United States requested
  assistance securing the release of Sarah Shourd, Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal.
  "The White House was confused because it was working on several different tracks at the same time," he said in a
  telephone interview. There were delays "due to the White House administration."
  But it was Obama who cleared up any problems, bin Alawai said. It was "easy for us to talk directly to the president," he
  said.
  The Omanis also dealt with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, saying that negotiators enjoyed good access to
  both leaders.
  The talks "stalled" after only three months. But Omanis helped facilitate a visit from the hikers' families to Tehran.
  Talks began again only because of concerns about Shourd's health, the minister said. A spokeswoman for the hikers'
  families told CNN that Shourd told her mother during their only visit together that she had found a lump in her breast.
  Shourd, 32, was released from Tehran's Evin Prison and traveled to Oman on Tuesday. Omani sources paid a $500,000
  bail, a senior U.S. administration official said.
  Bin Alawai said that Shourd is "in good form and good health" in Oman. There is nothing to stop her "enjoying her life in
  the U.S.," he said, but she is welcome to stay in Oman as long as she likes.
  "There is no pressure on her to leave," he said.
  Bin Alawai would not say who paid Shourd's bail.
  "I don't want to talk about that" because it might be of "help in the future," he said. He did say, however, that it was a
  "legal process" that had some "small" problems that were quickly overcome but led to a short delay in the announced
  release.
  Administration officials were somewhat confused over how to deal with the Iranians on some of the issues that came
  up, the minister said, particularly in July when Iranian nuclear scientist Shahram Amiri appeared at the Iranian interests
  section of the Pakistani Embassy in Washington demanding a ticket to Tehran.
  "It caused a disturbance at the White House," bin Alawai said.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771240 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771240 Date: 08/31/2015
  U.S. officials said Amiri defected to the United States in 2009 and provided information about Iran's alleged nuclear
  weapons program. Iran maintains he was abducted by U.S. agents in Saudi Arabia. Despite the "disturbance," bin Alawai
  said, the idea of an exchange of Amiri for the hikers surfaced.
  "The Iranians were ready to think about an exchange," he said, but at the White House "not everyone was on board at
  that time."
  Bin Alawai avoided saying that Shourd's release was part of an exchange, but allowed that "it may have helped" that
  Amiri eventually returned to Iran.
  Iran has accused the three hikers of spying, but no charges have been filed. Shourd's fiance, Bauer, and Fattal, both 28,
  remain at Evin Prison. They were detained on July 31, 2009.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771240 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771241
MetadataSubject: INTERVIEW IS ON
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: PIR
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771241/C05771241.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771241
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  PIR
  Thursday, September 2, 2010 9:47 PM
  H
  Jake Sullivan; Huma Abedin; Lona Valmoro
  Interview is ON
  RELEASE IN
  PART B5, B6
  Humpty Dumpty is back together again - so at 9:15 you will be jointly interviewed by Channel 2 and PTV

RawText:
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Cc:
  Subject:
  PIR
  Thursday, September 2, 2010 9:47 PM
  H
  Jake Sullivan; Huma Abedin; Lona Valmoro
  Interview is ON
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771241 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN
  PART B5, B6
  Humpty Dumpty is back together again - so at 9:15 you will be jointly interviewed by Channel 2 and PTV
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771241 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771242
MetadataSubject: DID YOU ASK FOR FRANK RUGGIERO TO BE ADDED TO LISBON? HE SEEMS TO THINK HE'S BEEN REQUESTED
MetadataTo: Abedin, Huma
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jake
MetadataDateSent: 2010-11-17T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0108/DOC_0C05771242/C05771242.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Did you ask for frank ruggiero to be added to lisbon? He seems to think he's been
ExtractedTo: Huma Abedin
ExtractedFrom: Jake Sullivan B6
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 7:33 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771242
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  requested
  Calling you.
  On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 7:13 PM, Huma Abedin <Huma@clintonemail.com> wrote:

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771242 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B6
  From: Jake Sullivan B6
  Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 7:33 PM
  To: Huma Abedin
  Cc:
  Subject: Re: Did you ask for frank ruggiero to be added to lisbon? He seems to think he's been
  requested
  Calling you.
  On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 7:13 PM, Huma Abedin <Huma@clintonemail.com> wrote:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771242 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771243
MetadataSubject: INTERVIEW IS ON
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: PIR
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771243/C05771243.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771243
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  PIR <preines
  Thursday, September 2, 2010 10:09 PM
  H
  Jake Sullivan; Huma Abedin; Lona Valmoro
  Re: Interview is ON
  And don't pretend you're not seeing this! We know your tricks

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771243 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5,B6
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Cc:
  Subject:
  PIR <preines
  Thursday, September 2, 2010 10:09 PM
  H
  Jake Sullivan; Huma Abedin; Lona Valmoro
  Re: Interview is ON
  And don't pretend you're not seeing this! We know your tricks
  Original Message
  B6
  From: "PIR" <preines
  Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2010 01:47:06
  To: Evergreen<HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  Reply-To: preines
  Cc: Jake Sullivan
  Valmoro
  Huma Abedin<Huma@clintonemail.com>; Lona
  Subject: Interview is ON
  Humpty Dumpty is back together again - so at 9:15 you will be jointly interviewed by Channel 2 and PTV
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771243 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771244
MetadataSubject: GOOD LUCK - RE MIDDLE EAST
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: PVerveer
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-02T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771244/C05771244.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771244
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  PVerveer
  Thursday, September 2, 2010 10:30 PM
  H
  Fwd: good luck- re middle east
  from Inez McCormack in Belfast
  B6

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771244 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Subject:
  PVerveer
  Thursday, September 2, 2010 10:30 PM
  H
  Fwd: good luck- re middle east
  from Inez McCormack in Belfast
  B6
  From: vinezmcc
  To: PVerveer
  Sent: 9/2/2010 1:07:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time
  Subj: good luck- re middle east
  melanne
  please pass my love and best wishes to secretary clinton - know this
  is like pushing a boulder uphill but also know that trying the
  impossible is what got northern ireland out of the mire of the past
  and she was and is part of that 'pushing all participants to be 'more
  than they think they can be'
  love and best wishes to her and to you and all involved
  inez
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771244 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771245
MetadataSubject: INTERVIEW
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: PIR
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-03T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0095/DOC_0C05771245/C05771245.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Interview
ExtractedTo: H; PIR; Jake Sullivan
ExtractedFrom: PIR <preines
ExtractedDateSent: Friday, September 3, 2010 7:36 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771245
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Dan who?
  No, they are on

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771245 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: PIR <preines
  Sent: Friday, September 3, 2010 7:36 AM
  To: H; PIR; Jake Sullivan
  Subject: Re: Interview
  Dan who?
  No, they are on
  Original Message
  From: Evergreen
  To: PIR
  To: PIR
  To: Jake Sullivan
  Subject: Interview
  Sent: Sep 3, 2010 7:35 AM
  I just got the overnight delivery and there's a note from Dan saying it is nowq cancelled. Is that right?
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771245 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05771249
MetadataSubject: PEPSI'S INDRA NOOYI
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C
MetadataDateSent: 2010-09-17T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0098/DOC_0C05771249/C05771249.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: RE: Pepsi's Indra Nooyi
ExtractedFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Jiloty, Lauren C; 'Laurenjilot
ExtractedDateSent: Friday, September 17, 2010 8:29 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05771249
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: Yes, I will set something up for her.
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771249 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
  Sent: Friday, September 17, 2010 8:29 AM
  To:
  Subject: RE: Pepsi's Indra Nooyi
  Yes, I will set something up for her.
  Original Message
  From: H [mailto:HDR22@clintonemail.com]
  Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 6:31 PM
  To: Ildavi;
  Cc: Jiloty, Lauren C; 'Laurenjilot
  Subject: Re: Pepsi's Indra Nooyi
  Isn't Indra terrific? I would love to take a photo w her daughter anytime. Can you work w Lauren, whom I'm copying, to
  set up? Thx so much.
  Original Message
  From: Lanny J. Davis
  To: H
  Sent: Wed Sep 15 20:05:35 2010
  Subject: Pepsi's Indra Nooyi
  Hi Hillary -
  Met Indra today for the first time. Spent the entire time not talking about me and my new law firm (!) but about you and
  why we both admired and supported you so. And still do.
  She is a most remarkable person. And quite devoted to you.
  Her daughter Preetha, as you may know, started in Iowa and stayed on in campaign as volunteer all the way through
  South Dakota and Montana.
  And in all that time she never personally met you -- and "still grieves" (her mon's words) your loss. (Joining a big club!!!)
  Can I call Cheryl and arrange a quick stop-by and handshake and photo any time--no rush--at your convenience?
  Hope you are well - you look better than ever--as does President Clinton! And we are not getting any younger!!!
  Warmest regards,
  Lanny
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05771249 Date: 08/31/2015



