The U.S. and Japanese sides have met several times to discuss the still unresolved dispute over moving a Marine Corps base from one part of Okinawa from the other.

No progress was reported, but insiders say that the Obama administration is waiting to allow the new Tokyo government time to sort out its internal and domestic problems and present its views before deciding whether to apply more pressure on the ruling Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ).

Meanwhile, Virginia Sen. Jim Webb, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee on Asia, isn't waiting for anybody and plans to travel to Tokyo, Okinawa, and Guam on a week-long trip starting Saturday. 

The aim of Webb's tour is to "listen carefully to the views of the current Japanese government, the leaders and citizens of Okinawa and Guam, and U.S. military leaders and personnel stationed in the Pacific region," his office said in a statement.

Webb's trip to Japan was his own idea and not part of any coordinated administration diplomatic effort with Japan. As with his other Asia diplomacy, Webb is expected to express his own views, which may or may not line up with those of the Obama administration.

"Given his history of taking independent stances on certain issues, like Burma, officials at both State and DOD are probably going to warily watch his discussions with Tokyo," said Michael Auslin, scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, "If he concludes that the Obama administration's position is the right one, however, that will likely put more pressure on Prime Minister Hatoyama to accede to the 2006 agreement."

Webb's trip is also another step in his drive to increase the congressional role in Asia policymaking, which was not a priority for the previous subcommittee chair, Barbara Boxer (D-CA). Webb's travel to Burma last summer drew fire from some, but his call for engaging the Burmese junta was later largely adopted by the Obama administration.

It remains to be seen whether his new trip will help resolve the U.S.-Japan basing dispute.

"Our alliance with Japan is a cornerstone of our strategic engagement in Asia," Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell said in testimony before Webb's committee last month. Campbell reiterated the U.S. policy that the 2006 agreement over the base was the best way forward, but also indicated that the U.S. side wanted to show patience and flexibility toward the DPJ.

"As we approach the 50th anniversary of the alliance, we will work closely with our friends in Japan to think creatively and strategically about the alliance," said Campbell, who was traveling in the region last week.

Webb has a long personal history with Japan, dating back to his military service and his time as a journalist. Most of his book The Emperor's General, a historical novel focusing on Gen. Douglas McArthur, is set in postwar Japan

Richard Holbrooke, the special representative for the issue formerly known as Af-Pak, will visit Georgia "shortly," with plans to finalize the deployment of Georgian troops to Afghanistan.

Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg revealed that Holbrooke will go to Georgia while traveling in Tbilisi Friday. Sources said the current thinking is that the visit will occur toward the end of February.

So what will Holbrooke be doing there? Well, in addition to possibly discussing Georgia President Mikheil Saakashvili's offer to allow his country to become a supply route to Afghanistan, which Steinberg reportedly said was a Pentagon matter, Georgian sources tell The Cable that Holbrooke will be putting the final touches on the plan to deploy Georgian troops to Afghanistan in March.

In Georgia, they are calling it the "Holbrooke Brigade," according to a source close to the Georgian government. The plan is for 750 Georgian troops to be deployed in Helmand province at the personal request of Gen. David Petraeus, the source said, who was impressed with their effectiveness along the Iranian border during operations in Iraq. According to the current plan, they will be under U.S. command and supplementing 350 Georgian troops already in country as part of the International Security Assistance Force.

It will be the largest per-capita contribution of any country in Afghanistan other than the U.S.  One lingering question that the Georgians plan to raise with Holbrooke is whether the U.S. will offer them any military aid for the mission. The U.S. has not provided any lethal military aid to Georgia since their war with Russian in 2008, but the Georgians may need some items, such as parts for the U.S.-made M4 rifles they will be using in the Afghanistan mission.

In a December report, Senate Foreign Relations ranking Republican Richard Lugar, R-IN, argued for an end to the unofficial ban of U.S. lethal military aid to Georgia, arguing that the increase of Russian arms near there was dangerously tipping the balance.

"The United States, under substantial Russian diplomatic pressure, has paused the transfer of lethal military articles to Georgia, and no U.S. assistance since the war has been directly provided to the Georgian Ministry of Defense," the report stated. "Consequently, Georgia lacks basic capacity for territorial defense."

Montenegro's Prime Minister Milo Djukanovic is a fascinating man. After rising to prominence at an early age as an ally of Slobodan Milosevic, Djukanovic turned against the Serbian leader in 1996 and became the key figure in Montenegro's push for sovereignty and independence from the former Yugoslavian states.

He has been a controversial figure in European politics, facing charges of organized crime and extensive cigarette trafficking, but has always managed to come out of the fray unharmed. Now in his third stint as the head of government, Djukanovic is leading Montenegro's push for NATO membership.

His country has just been granted Membership Action Plan status for NATO membership, a step neither Georgia nor Ukraine has been afforded. That was the main issue on the agenda when Djukanovic came to Washington last month to meet with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Vice President Joseph Biden, and lawmakers.

Following his meetings, Dukanovic sat down for an exclusive interview with The Cable. Here are some excerpts:

JR: So, can you tell me about your meetings with Secretary of State Clinton and Vice President Biden? What was your message to them? And what was their message to you?

MD: My message to them was actually very simple. Montenegro is steadily moving towards its European and Euro-Atlantic goals. We are pleased that you have announced renewed and stronger presence in the Balkans from the United States and we stand ready to be your partners in dealing with the remaining outstanding issues in our region.

Their message was one of tribute to Montenegro for what it has done thus far, recognition for what we have done and also appreciation for Montenegro's readiness to participate in Afghanistan and other critical places where the support of the international community is needed. Their message was a readiness to continue to support Montenegro towards full membership in NATO. These messages were very encouraging for us.

JR: Montenegro has received MAP status for joining NATO. So many other countries have sought this status, but your country has advanced farther than them. What is the secret? Why is your country been more successful?

MD: Unlike others, Montenegro managed to preserve internal peace and to spare itself from war in its territory -- that was our first advantage. The second advantage was in the fact that we pursued realpolitik. This is something that should seem natural, but I will tell you that this is an advantage, especially in our region, which is so obsessed with history and false ideas of one's historic importance.... In short, we did not engage in any wrong topics. All this allowed us to focus on key tasks, this is why Montenegro's progress comes as no surprise.

JR: What have you heard from the U.S. government about the schedule for your country joining NATO? Do you expect this soon? What are the obstacles between here and there?

MD: So the most important message that I heard in yesterday's talks with Secretary Clinton and from Vice President Biden was that all countries of the Balkans ... should be part of NATO and the EU when they fulfill the conditions for that. Also, Vice President Biden said that ... they should become members when they continue to fulfill and have conducted the necessary reforms. At the same time, they feel very confident that Montenegrins have the capacity to fulfill these requirements.

JR: My understanding is that you will deploy troops to Afghanistan soon in what is a small contingent, but the first presence of Montenegrin troops. Please explain why you have made this decision to deploy troops to Afghanistan. Do you believe that this is in your country's security interest? Or is this more about building relationships with America and other Western countries?

MD: I do think that the threat of terrorism is global and this is something that, sooner or later, threatens everybody. I think that it makes more sense to support the fight against this scourge at a time when that seems to be a danger that is not so close to home. Besides, of course we feel we need to demonstrate to America and others our readiness to be a part of this democratic coalition. Because this indeed confirms our readiness not just to enjoy the privileges one has as a member of NATO, but also to fulfill obligations resulting from such a status.

JR: Regarding the institutions of your country: Did the officials or lawmakers raise issues of corruption and what did they ask of you regarding tackling corruption in your country? And how did you answer them?

MD: I brought up these issues ... Our most important task remains to enhance the quality of life of our citizens. This task is closely linked with the continued and further presence of foreign investments in Montenegro.... So, thinking what the next package of advantages we as a state need to offer to foreign investors or potential investors. Our conviction is that this is better legal security and enhanced rule of law and because of that, the rule of law and tackling corruption and crime efficiently remains an important priority for us.

JR: At one time, you were much more eastward looking, and now you are much more westward looking. As you look now at Russia, how would you describe the path they have taken on the same issues: corruption, human rights, and economic freedom?

MD: I would first like to say that an important part of the Montenegrin tradition is cooperation with Russia, cooperation between our countries. We recently spoke of three centuries of official relations between Montenegro and Russia. On the other hand, Montenegro, totally logically, is moving toward Europe to be part of Europe and of NATO. This, I think, is something that is very appropriate for the whole region in which we live. But we don't think we should abandon some traditional friends. One does not exclude the other.

JR: You mentioned that you've seen that the administration has announced increased engagement in the Balkans. Have you seen that increased engagement implemented and, if so, what are some example of that increase?

MD: I would say that this is best illustrated by the Bosnian example. As you know, America is together with Europe a co-author of this so-called Bosnia Peace Process, which should lead to a constitutional reform resulting in a viable Bosnia for the future. Also, it seems to me that there is a very visible interest in the United States strengthening the position of Kosovo. We also know that for some years know the United States has been demonstrating an interest that the dispute between Macedonia and Greece be overcome, thereby creating the full integration of Macedonia into NATO. As you know, these are precisely the three outstanding issues in our region which prevent us from being to say that the Balkans is definitely a stable place.

JR: What do you think of the effectiveness of the foreign policy of the Obama administration after one year?

MD: As a citizen of Europe, I feel (with my very frequent contact with various people in Europe starting with European statesmen) that American foreign policy indeed gives us great encouragement and hope in Europe. It is my opinion not only in Europe. I hope that President Obama and his administration will have enough time to implement their very highly set goals in terms of foreign policy, to implement them consistently and to contribute to something that the whole world will benefit from.

The State Department and the White House are busily working on a new request for supplemental funding to cover the near and immediate term costs for Haiti relief. But in the meantime, other countries funded by the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance are feeling the pinch and being forced to accept big budget cuts.

Consider this email sent to Somali teams working with OFDA funding that was sent to The Cable (emphasis added):

As a result of Haiti there have been some significant budget changes at OFDA that will have a major impact on the Somalia programs," it reads, "As you are probably well aware, OFDA is engaged in a multi-million dollar response in Haiti. As a result, we have had to make all available resources available for Haiti. What this means is that all regions within OFDA are being reduced by 40% resulting in subsequent reductions in planned programming at the country level."

State Department P.J. Crowley told The Cable that the redirection of funds from other countries' accounts was necessary but would not have consequences on the ground unless there is a long delay in receiving supplemental funding, which he said is unlikely.

"This temporary movment of money from the Somalia account to the Haiti account is going to have no impact on the ground in Somalia," Crowley said, "assuming that the supplemental occurs expeditiously."

In an exclusive interview with The Cable, Deputy Secretary of State Jack Lew said that although the administration couldn't include Haiti funding in this week's budget request because the crisis came too late, the administration plans to ask for more Haiti relief funding soon. "There will be additional requirements related to the Haiti earthquake," said Lew. "We're working with OMB to come up with both the requirements and a strategy for meeting those needs."

A senior Democratic Senate aide told The Cable that the administration is "expeditiously" preparing a Haiti supplemental that will be separate from the regular and supplemental budget requests given to Congress this week, although no final decisions have been made.

In the meantime, "those places where they have existing or ongoing humanitarian issues are the ones that are having to slash their budgets," the Senate aide said, "That's basically saying there's a hierarchy of humanitarian assistance and Haiti is the most important ... and the other places will have to make due at the moment."

"We've drawn down emergency funds substantially," Lew acknowledged.

The global health and humanitarian aid communities are pleased but not thrilled by the Obama administration's new budget request, which saw modest although lower-than-expected increases in a number of development accounts.

According to calculations by the U.S. Global Leadership Council, an umbrella NGO for the aid community, the overall international affairs budget will see an entire increase of 2.8 percent over fiscal 2010 in the fiscal 2011 budget request, including supplemental funding. And that's if Congress fulfills the request as is, which is by no means a certainty.

Overall operating accounts for USAID and topline funding for major programs like the Global Health initiative are set to rise significantly in the budget request. But the request signals a shift in priority within the international affairs budget away from longer-term programs and those that have gotten increases in recent years toward smaller, more focused accounts that could show short-term results.

"We are looking forward to Congress accepting this, supporting it in a bipartisan manner as we have seen throughout the last decade," said USGLC's executive director Liz Schrayer. "Particularly when at least 250 members of Congress sent a letter to the president last month calling for a robust international affairs budget."

The budget keeps Obama on track to double U.S. foreign assistance by 2015, said Larry Nowels, a USGLC consultant who worked previously for the Congressional Research Service. The baseline for that promise was a foreign assistance budget of $26 billion and this year's request falls short at about $41 billion. But even that number is somewhat misleading because a lot of the increase is earmarked just for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

"If you look at the 2011 request, it's more than what we anticipated and more than what Obama campaigned on for Pakistan and Afghanistan," he said. "What will be really challenging is getting the rest of the money.... The question is on getting Congress to appropriate the funds."

Larger operating budgets for both State and USAID are a positive step toward another administration pledge, to eventually increase the number of Foreign Service officers by 25 percent. But Deputy Secretary of State Jack Lew admitted yesterday that the timing on this goal has been stretched out in the new budget release.

"We have had to extend the period, but we haven't changed the goal," Lew said Monday. "We need to grow. And I think the budget gives us the ability to continue to grow. And the pace of hiring, you know, will only slow down slightly. It will not be a dramatic change."

The request for the Global Health Initiative, a worldwide program targeting major disease epidemics, was viewed as a mixed picture. The overall account was increased from $7.8 billion to $8.5 billion requested, which is substantial. But within the subaccounts there were winners and losers.

"This budget will get you to about 38 percent of the $63 billion proposal," said Nowels, referring to the overall pledge for GHI funding. "So there is a lot of work ahead and a lot of assumptions at stake that in the next three years you can come up with the additional resources."

Maternal and child health funding is going from $550 million to $900 million, with a lot of the new funds focused on nutrition. Neglected tropical diseases accounts could go from $65 to $155 million, reflecting the priority of that issue in the minds of the administration.

Requests in other areas were more modest. Family planning accounts could receive a $65 million increase, which isn't much, and funding for HIV/AIDs would rise only 2.5 percent in the budget request, much less than previous years' increases.

The $1 billion request for the Global Fund, an international financing institution also focused on major disease epidemics, is actually less than the $1.05 billion Congress gave for that account in fiscal 2010 money.

Nevertheless, the $600 million or 25 percent increase in USAID's part of the GHI and the $460 million or 18 percent increase in what's known as the "development assistance" account show a huge commitment to expanding the development mission, said Sam Worthington, president and CEO of Interaction, a coalition of more than 150 aid organizations. But the modest 2 percent increase in humanitarian assistance is less encouraging.

Despite the rising need for refugee assistance and disaster relief, as evidenced by the Haiti crisis, funding for refugees was cut by 5 percent and USAID's Office of Transition Initiatives was cut by 13 percent. The request for contributions for international organizations would mean an 11 percent decrease or $43 million cut if Congress goes along.

"Interestingly, an administration committed to multilateral work may be looking to work more through the World Bank or other places," Worthington said.

But overall, the increases requests for operating expenses and staffing at both State and USAID are "clearly a signal of intent for building institutional capacity," he added. "They're saying in their request that they want to make a serious investment."

"For the programs that are accustomed to very steep increases, this is the slowing of the growth rate but it's still a growing trajectory," said J. Stephen Morrison, director of the Global Health Policy Center at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, "It's not going to make everyone happy, but it's a pretty robust proposal."

"The one message to take away from this is stay tuned."

As President Obama looks east, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is charged with the mission of ministering to a Europe feeling somewhat neglected by this administration.

The White House acknowledged Tuesday that Obama will not travel to Madrid for a major conference in May, apparently upsetting his Western European counterparts, who feel increasingly overlooked by a White House mired in so many international crises. But Clinton was in Paris over the weekend, seeking to reassure traditional allies that they still have priority in this administration and continuing the push to mend wounds inflicted during the Bush years.

"Let me address some questions raised in recent months about the depth of the United States commitment to European security," Clinton said in a speech Friday at L'École Militaire that got scant coverage in Washington. "Some wonder whether we understand the urgent need to improve security in Europe. Others have voiced concern that the Obama administration is so focused on foreign-policy challenges elsewhere in the world that Europe has receded in our list of priorities.... Well, in fact, European security remains an anchor of U.S. foreign and security policy. A strong Europe is critical to our security and our prosperity."

Several European diplomats have told The Cable that they are having trouble getting time and attention from the Obama White House. Although they abhorred the policies of the Bush team, they felt that on a bureaucratic level, the last administration often did a better job of handling day-to-day interactions with their European interlocutors.

Poor handling of some key issues, such as the announcement of the alteration of missile-defense sites in Poland and the Czech Republic, have called into question this White House's acumen in handling key allies, despite their personal affinity for the president himself. But Clinton highlighted U.S.-Europe cooperation on Afghanistan, Iran, and climate change, and referred to the shared values that bind the two powers. Clinton also said that a common mission was to defend the rights of small countries to determine their own destinies, a reference to Russia's recent moves to re-establish control of countries in its near abroad.

"We object to any spheres of influence claimed in Europe in which one country seeks to control another's future," she said. "Our security depends upon nations being able to choose their own destiny." But while affirming the U.S. policy to continue expansion of NATO, Clinton argued that Russia was a part of the security architecture in Europe and that its interests lie in participating in, not resisting U.S.-led regional mechanisms.

"Some have looked at the continent even now and seen Western and Eastern Europe, old and new Europe, NATO and non-NATO Europe, EU and non-EU Europe," she said, in a clear reference to 2003 remarks by then U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. "The reality is that there are not many Europes; there is only one Europe. And it is a Europe that includes the United States as its partner. And it is a Europe that includes Russia."

She did call for reform of the Conventional Forces in Europe treaty, which she noted the Russians have stopped observing. She also called for a strengthening of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which played a key role in mediating the Russia-Georgia war of 2008.

Specifics on how the U.S. would proceed with contentious European issues were scarce. In a response to an audience question about Russia's fervent objections to NATO enlargement, Clinton said only, "There are issues regarding Georgia and Ukraine's aspirations." She also said "we are serious" about working with Russia on missile defense, but declined to chart out a path for that cooperation.

The questioners also wanted to know about U.S.-China relations and here, Clinton previewed and defended a long-anticipated meeting between Obama and the Dalai Lama, expected this month.

"With China, we want the relationship to continue despite the disagreements. So ... if we arrange a meeting between our president and the Dalai Lama, that is a difference in perspective, a respect for his religious leadership, and we do not think it should derail the relationship."

AFP/Getty Images

The State Department was awarded a big slice of the foreign military assistance pie in the President's new fiscal 2011 budget request, $1.2 billion for Pakistani military training that was previously in the hands of the Pentagon.

The Cable has reported extensively on the turf wars between State and Defense over authorities for a range of foreign assistance funding, money that should logically go through State but has been controlled by the Pentagon for a variety of reasons. The movement of the Pakistani Counterinsurgency Capability Funding from DOD to State represents a test of the State Department's ability to manage these types of new, large scale foreign military assistance programs.

Some senior lawmakers have wanted the PCCF money to be given to State for a while. Appropriators wanted to make the change in the fiscal 2009 supplemental bill, but relented after Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton both testified that State wasn't ready to take on the mission at that time.

"I know there's been some concern here on the Hill about whether this money ought to be in the State Department or it ought to be in the Defense Department," Defense Secretary Robert Gates told the Senate Appropriations Committee last April, "Part of the problem is authorities and capacity in the State Department to be able to apply this money with the agility Secretary Clinton was talking about."

PCCF received $400 million in the first tranche of fiscal 2009 war funding. House Foreign Affairs chairman Howard Berman had directed in his bill that the money should go to State but he eventually relented after the administration made it clear that this wasn't wise.

This money is separate from the Kerry-Lugar Pakistan aid bill, which authorized $1.5 billion in varied assistance to Pakistan over 5 years.

As we reported earlier, the State Department did not receive the so-called "1206" money, which is also called "Global Train and Equip," but sources said that if State does well with the PCCF fund, 1206 will be back on the table for fiscal 2012.

As for the "1207" funds, that did transfer over to State. That $100 million will now be called the Complex Crises Fund, which is meant "to prevent or respond to emerging or unforeseen crises that address reconstruction, security, or stabilization needs."

The Obama administration has requested $52.8 billion for the State Department and USAID for fiscal 2011, the Office of Management and Budget announced as part of its budget rollout today.

That's $4.9 billion more than appropriated for the same accounts in fiscal 2010, a 10 percent increase, according to State Department officials. USAID would receive $1.7 billion under the request, about $50 million more than what they received for fiscal 2010. As part of the new fiscal 2010 supplemental funding request for fiscal 2010, the president is also asking for an additional $4.5 billion in State Department and related funding, for ongoing contingency operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and related to what was once known as the "global war on terror."

Inside the fiscal 2011 request, the administration is asking for $4 billion for Afghanistan and $3.1 billion for Pakistan that will go toward assisting those two governments and adding 500 new American staff.That's a significant increase from the $2.6 billion and $1.5 billion given by Congress toward these efforts for fiscal 2010, respectively.

$2.6 billion is requested in the regular budget for helping State take over missions in Iraq such as police training and to help State with security and logistics as it takes over responsibility there.

Another $8.5 billion is requested for the Global Health Initiative, 9 percent above fiscal 2010 levels. "By 2011, countries receiving health assistance will better address priority health needs of women and children, with progress measured by USG and UNICEF-collected data and indicators," the OMB materials state.

The administration asked for $1.6 billion for agricultural development and nutritional programs, $1.4 billion to help developing countries adapt to climate change, and $1.3 billion for new Millennium Challenge Corporation grants to countries like Indonesia and Zambia.

"It's a budget that reflects the serious challenges facing the country," President Obama said Monday morning. "We're at war.  Our economy has lost 7 million jobs over the last two years.  And our government is deeply in debt after what can only be described as a decade of profligacy."

Check back in throughout the day for more budget day updates.

NOTE: An earlier version of this story had the number at $56.8 billion, which was based on a summary issued by OMB before the actual budget materials were released.