ured term loan facility because of weakness in credit market conditions. The company said in a statement it had received commitments from a syndicate of banks for a US$500 million three-year senior unsecured revolving credit facility, with documentation expected to be completed by early next month. Fortescue said it held "significant" cash on hand and the decision reaffirmed the importance of beginning the transition to Afghan lead for security this year and completing that transition by 2014. We discussed the opportunity that exists for promoting reconciliation and a political settlement, which must be an Afghan-led process. President Karzai has made it clear that he will talk to anyone who is willing to end the violence, split with al-Qaida, and accept the Afghan constitution. And we welcome the positive cooperation between Afghanistan and Pakistan on that front. At the same time, the prime minister and I both agree that our nations have a long-term interest in ensuring that Afghanistan never again becomes a launching pad for attacks against our people. So alongside our NATO allies and partners, we're committed to a strong and enduring partnership with the people of Afghanistan. As historic change unfolds across the Middle East and North Africa, we agree that the pursuit of self-determination must be driven by the peoples of the region and not imposed from the outside. But we are both committed to doing everything that we can to support peoples who reach for democracy and leaders who implement democratic reform. Tomorrow, we'll discuss with our G-8 partners how those of us in the wider international community can best support nations that make the reforms necessary to build a framework for democracy, freedom and prosperity for their people. At the same time, we will continue to strongly oppose the use of violence against protesters and any efforts to silence those who yearn for freedom and dignity and basic human rights. And that's one of the reasons that we are working together in Libya, alongside with our NATO allies and partners, to protect the Libyan people. And we will continue those operations until Gadhafi's attacks on civilians cease. Time is working against Gadhafi and he must step down from power and leave Libya to the Libyan people. We also discussed the situation in Syria, where the Syrian people have shown great courage in their demands for a democratic transition. The United States welcomes the EU's decision to impose sanctions on President Assad, and we're increasing pressure on him and his regime in order to end his policy of oppression and begin the change that people seek. We discussed Yemen, where the Yemeni people call for greater opportunity and prosperity and a nation that is more unified and more secure, and we expressed our joint concern of the deteriorating situation on the ground there. We applauded the leadership of the Gulf Cooperation Council in seeking an orderly and peaceful resolution to the crisis, and we call on President Saleh to move immediately on his commitment to transfer power. And at a time when so many in the region are casting off the burdens of the past, we agree that the push for a lasting peace that ends the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and resolves all claims is more urgent than ever. I appreciate the prime minister's support for the principles that I laid out last week on borders and security, which can provide a sound basis from which the two sides can negotiate. As increasing tensions in the Abyei region threaten to derail Sudan's comprehensive peace agreement, we're working closely together to encourage the parties to recommit to a peaceful resolution to the crisis, and calling on the rapid reinforcement of the U.N.'s peacekeeping presence in the region. We also reviewed our close cooperation when it comes to countering terrorist threats, preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the means of their delivery to states like Iran, and our unrelenting efforts to keep our people safe. And finally, we launched a joint initiative to exchange the best ideas and practices when it comes to supporting our veterans and our military families. Today, before we came here, Michelle and I joined David and Samantha for an outstanding barbecue at No. 10 for active-duty members of our militaries, along with their spouses, who make extraordinary sacrifices as well. It was a wonderful event and a moving reminder of the long line of American and British service members who've made heavy and heroic sacrifices in the joint defense of our shared values that our people hold so dear. So, Mr. Prime Minister, thank you not only for the barbecue but for the opportunity to spend this very productive time at No. 10 with you and your team. I enjoy my visits here, as always, and I have confidence that our special relationship will continue to grow even stronger in the months and years ahead. Thank you very much. CAMERON: Thank you, Barack. Thank you very much. Nick Robinson from the BBC. Q: Thank you very much indeed. Prime minister, can you confirm that you plan to escalate the war in Libya by sending ground attack helicopters? And, Mr. President, can you confirm that United States will sit that particular mission out? And a general question for you, if I could. You've talked about an old war in Afghanistan and a new one in Libya. Is your partnership really that different than the one between Bush and Blair? CAMERON: Well, thank you for that. Lots of questions in there. First of all, the president and I agree that we should be turning up the heat in Libya. I believe the pressure is on that regime. You see it in the fact that the rebels have successfully liberated much of Misrata. You see it in the success in other parts of the country. You see it in the strength of the coalition. You see it in the growth of the National Transitional Council. So I believe we should be turning up that pressure. And on Britain's part, we will be looking at all of the options for turning up that pressure, obviously within the terms of U.N. Resolution 1973, because we believe we need to keep enforcing that resolution, protecting civilians, pressurizing that regime so that the Libyan people have a chance to decide their own future. And within that, those are the options we'll look at. You asked the question about this relationship and past relationships. I think every relationship between a president and a prime minister is different. I would say both of us strongly believe in the special relationship. We both called it an essential relationship. But we believe we have — as I said in my speech — we have to learn the lessons of history, about how best we promote the values that we share. And that means, yes, going with the grain of other cultures; it means, yes, having a patient understanding that building democracy takes time and you have to work on the building blocks of democracy, and not believe this all can be done in an instant. But I believe in that partnership we're extremely strong together in wanting to see the same outcomes, whether that's in Afghanistan, where we want to see a peaceful and stable Afghanistan that no longer requires the presence of foreign troops to keep it free from terrorism, and we want to see a Libya where people have the chance to decide their own future. But we are doing things in a different way. We have ruled out occupying forces, invading armies. We are doing what we can to enforce Resolution 1973 and allowing the Libyan people to choose their own future. And we're very committed to doing that work together. OBAMA: Well, first of all, I do think that we've made enormous progress in Libya. We have saved lives as a consequence of our concerted actions. I think it is important to note that we did so under a U.N. mandate and as part of a broad-based international coalition that includes Arab countries. And I absolutely agree that given the progress that has been made over the last several weeks, that Gadhafi and his regime need to understand that there will not be a letup in the pressure that we are applying. And the United Kingdom, the United States, and our other partners are putting a wide range of resources within — consistent with the U.N. mandate — in order to achieve that pressure. And I think we will ultimately be successful. The goal is to make sure that the Libyan people can make a determination about how they want to proceed, and that they'll be finally free of 40 years of tyranny and they can start creating the institutions required for self-determination. So in terms of historical analogies, I just want to underscore this is not the United Kingdom and the United States alone. We have a broad range of partners under an international mandate designed to save lives and ensure that we did not have the sort of massacre that would lead us then to look back and say to ourselves, why did we stand by and do nothing. With respect to Afghanistan, similarly, we have a broad-based international mandate and a broad-based international coalition designed to make sure that Afghanistan does not serve as a base for attacks against our people. We've discussed, consistent with what we said in Lisbon during our NATO summit, that this will be a year of transition because of the work that we've done and the enormous sacrifices that both our militaries have given. We are in a position now to transition, to start transitioning to an Afghan-led security process. And at the same time, we're going to be engaging in the sort of diplomatic work that is required for an ultimate political solution to the problems there. And I'm confident that we can achieve it. I think that there's no doubt that the United States and the United Kingdom have a unique relationship. And that is going to be consistent regardless of who the president and the prime minister is, and it's going to be consistent regardless of what parties we come from. There's so much that binds us together that it is not surprising that we are typically, on the international stage, going to be working together as opposed to at cross purposes. But as David mentioned, I think that the one thing that we have learned is that even as we promote the values and ideals that we care about, even as we make sure that our security interests are met, that we are using military power in a strategic and careful way; that we are making sure that as we promote democracy and human rights, that we understand the limits of what the military alone can achieve; and that we're mindful that ultimately these regions are going to be — that the fate of these regions are going to be determined by the people there themselves, and that we're going to have to work in partnership with them. And that I think is the best example of alliance leadership and it's something that I'm very proud to be a part of. Julie Pace. Q: Thank you, Mr. President. You've said that Moammar Gadhafi's exit from Libya is inevitable and that the U.S. will continue with the campaign until his attacks stop. Does that also mean that you will commit the U.S. to that campaign until Gadhafi is removed from power? And would you be willing to commit additional U.S. resources if that meant speeding up Gadhafi's exit? And, Prime Minister Cameron, do you believe that the U.S. and other NATO allies should increase their role in the Libya campaign, as other British lawmakers have suggested? Thank you. OBAMA: I have said from the outset that our goal, the reason that we intervened in Libya, was to protect the people on the ground and to give the Libyan people the space that they needed in order to bring about a change toward democracy. And I also was very clear in terms of how we were going to participate. We moved very heavily on the front end, disabling their air defense systems, carrying the lion's share of the burden when it came to setting the stage for NATO operations; and then that — once the transfer took place to NATO command and control, that at that point our primary role would be a whole range of support that utilized America's unique capabilities. That's what we're doing. I also ruled out us putting any ground forces in Libya. We have proceeded consistent with that. There are times where, for example, with our Predator capabilities, we have a unique capacity that we've brought to bear, and we will continue to do that. And the prime minister and I consistently discuss on a regular basis what can we all do to make sure that that pressure continues to apply. I do think that is it going to be difficult to meet the U.N. mandate of security for the Libyan people as long as Gadhafi and his regime are still attacking them. And so we are strongly committed to seeing the job through, making sure that, at minimum, Gadhafi doesn't have the capacity to send in a bunch of thugs to murder innocent civilians and to threaten them. I believe that we have built enough momentum that as long as we sustain the course that we're on, that he is ultimately going to step down. And we will continue to work with our partners to achieve that. So we have not put forward any artificial timeline in terms of how long this will take. My belief is, is that the more resolute that we are now, the more effective the coalition is in rallying all the resources that are available to it, that we're going to be able to achieve our mission in a timely fashion. One last point, and this speaks to the issue of whether there are other additional U.S. capabilities that could be brought to bear. David and I both agree that we cannot put boots on the ground in Libya. Once you rule out ground forces, then there are going to be some inherent limitations to our air strike operations. It means that the opposition on the ground in Libya is going to have to carry out its responsibilities. And we're going to have to do effective coordination — and we are doing that — with the opposition on the ground. But I think that there may be a false perception that there are a whole bunch of secret super-effective air assets that are in a warehouse somewhere that could just be pulled out and that would somehow immediately solve the situation in Libya. That's not the case. The enormous sacrifices that are being made by the British, by the French, by ourselves, by the Danes and others — we are bringing to bear an array of air power that has made a huge difference. But ultimately this is going to be a slow, steady process in which we're able to wear down the regime forces and change the political calculations of the Gadhafi regime to the point where they finally realize that they're not going to control this country; the Libyan people are going to control this country. And as long as we remain resolute, I think we're going to be able to achieve that mission. But there's not a whole host of new and different assets that somehow could be applied, partly because we've been extraordinarily successful in avoiding significant civilian casualties. And that's been part of our goal, that's been part of our mission, is making sure that we are targeting regime forces in a way that does not result in enormous collateral damage. And that means we may have to sometimes be more patient than people would like. But ultimately I think it promises greater success, and it sustains our coalition and support for it, not just here but in the Arab world as well. CAMERON: Thank you. I so agree that the two key things here are patience and persistence. That is what the alliance is demonstrating and needs to go on demonstrating. Julie, I'd just make two points. First of all, I think the president and I completely agree on this point of, of course, the U.N. resolution is not about regime change; the U.N. resolution is about protecting civilians from attack and taking all necessary measures to do so. With that said, most political leaders, including the two here, have said it's hard to see how you implement U.N. Resolution 1973 with Gadhafi still in control of his country, which is why we've been so clear about Gadhafi needing to go and needing to leave Libya. In terms of the U.S. role, I would make this point, which I'm not sure is widely understood in Britain or in Europe — is already a huge number of the sorties and the support and the air assets that are actually bringing the pressure to bear are U.S. assets. There was this enormous effort at the beginning, as the president said, but also a sustained amount of assets that have been used. And as the president said, there are also the unique assets and capabilities that the U.S. has that others don't have that are so vital. And as he said, we all have to ask what is it that we can all do to make sure the pressure is really brought to bear. That is what the British are doing, the French are doing, the Americans are doing. And I know we'll discuss this in the margins of the G8. But I'd just make this point, as well. As well as the military pressure, don't underestimate the pressure of building up the opposition, the contacts we have with the National Transitional Council, the fact that they are opening offices and building support and strength from the allies. Don't underestimate the extent to which we're now cutting off oil products to the regime because they're using them in their tanks and their other military equipment — and also the other steps that I know Americans and others are taking to try and release Libyan assets back into the hands of the National Transitional Council and recognizing them as the right interlocutor for us to speak to. So in all those ways, we can keep this pressure up over the coming period while showing patience and persistence at the same time. Tom Bradby from ITV. Q: Mr. President, you've talked about the need for robust action on your country's deficit and debt positions. Do you agree with the prime minister's supporters that he led the way on the issue, or do you feel that in fact he has traveled too far and too fast? And could I just ask you both, as a sidebar, this time last year we talked about the case of computer hacker Gary McKinnon, on which the prime minister has expressed very clear views. You said you would work together to find a solution. So have you found one? OBAMA: Well, on your second question, Mr. McKinnon, we have proceeded through all the processes required under our extradition agreements. It is now in the hands of the British legal system. We have confidence in the British legal system coming to a just conclusion. And so we await resolution and will be respectful of that process. With respect to how we deal with debt and deficits, I said two years ago, the first time I came here, in April of 2009, the first G-20 summit that I attended, that each country is different and each country is going to have to make a range of decisions about how to — at that time — dig our way out of the worst recession that we'd experienced since the 1930s, at the same time that we put our countries on a path of sustainable growth that ultimately results in jobs and prosperity for our people and a growing middle class across the board. And we've succeeded in the first part, which is to yank the world economy out of recession, and that was in large part due to concerted action between the United States, the United Kingdom, and other countries. Now we've got that other challenge, which is how do we sustain growth in a way that's responsible and responsive to the needs of our people. That requires us to continue to make investments in education, science, technology, infrastructure — things that help our economies grow. But it also means governments that live within their means. And obviously the nature and role of the public sector in the United Kingdom is different than it has been in the United States. The pressures that each country are under from world capital markets are different. The nature of the debt and deficits are different. And as a consequence, the sequencing or pace may end up being different. But the one thing that I'm absolutely clear about is David and I want to arrive at the same point; a point in which we're making sure that our governments are doing what they need to do to ensure broad-based prosperity, but doing so in a responsible way that doesn't mortgage our futures and leave a mountain of debt to future generations. And the other point I think David and I would agree on is that this is going to be a constant process of trying some things, making adjustments. There are going to be opportunities for us to make investments. There are going to be other areas where we think those were good ideas at the time, programs that were started with the best of intentions and it turns out they're not working as well as they should. If a program is not working well, we should get rid of it and put that money into programs that are working well. It means that we've got to make sure that we take a balanced approach and that there's a mix of cuts, but also thinking about how do we generate revenue so that there's a match between money going out and money coming in. And each country is going to have to go through what is a difficult and painful process. What I'm confident about is that we're going to be able to come out of this stronger than we were before. And I think that both the people of the United Kingdom and the people of the United States want to see a government that's reflective of their values — the fact that they take their responsibilities seriously, they pay their bills, they make sure that their families are cared for, they make sacrifices where necessary in order to ensure that their children and their grandchildren are succeeding. And they want those same values reflected in their government, and I think that both our countries are going to be able to achieve that. CAMERON: Thank you. First of all, in the case of Gary McKinnon, I understand the widespread concern about this case, and it's not so much about the alleged offense, which everyone knows is a very serious offense; it's about the issue of the individual and the way they're treated and the operation of the legal system, and as the president said, making sure that legal system operates properly and carefully. The case is currently in front of the home secretary, who has to consider reports about Gary's health and his well-being, and it's right that she does that in a proper and effectively quasi-judicial way. I totally understand the anguish of his mother and his family about this issue. We must follow the proper processes and make sure this case is dealt with in the proper way. And I'm sure that that is the case. On the issue of deficit reduction, I mean, I remember when we also spoke about this at the G-20, but even before that, when you first came here when you were running as candidate. And I completely agree with Barack that each country is different and has different circumstances. I mean, Britain does not have a reserve currency. We're not in the same position as the U.S. with the dollar. And I think it was necessary for us to set out on the path of deficit reduction wit