so helpful in the way for us we didn't have any humanitarian support. now we have at least a few trucks, not enough trucks, but also from the other understanding. and this is why i totally agree with the security guarantees for each really, you cannot just say we need a ceasefire and the ease riley government. the idea of has to stop. and then we just wait and see what happens to the regrouping or from us. no, we have to give an answer to both the judgment security concerns. so all part of the discussion is, for example, in the noise. yeah. if people go back to the nose, how do we as an international community, secure that how mazda is not through regrouping? they're using mist using against civilians as human protective shields. and this is also part of our common international security response. and the 3rd what, what is the view from uh, from india? what would you, if you had some advice for your colleagues, what would you be?

what would you tell them? well, i don't have advice from a colleagues, so i particularly, i think over the past the follow the and almost have thoughts which tony's putting in right now. uh, but uh, look the way we look at it. the different dimensions, different elements to this. number one, we must make clear of what happened on the 7th. whatever's no caveats, no justification, no explanation. they plus starters number 2. so as israel response, it is important that isabel should be, should have been very mindful of civilian casualties. dot, it has an obligation to the content actually some edited in the loan. number 3, the on off hostages is today imperative. a number for

that is a need for the humanitarian quoted or a sustainable commodity and quote, in order to provide relief. and eventually that has to, we a permanent fix, a long term fix. otherwise we're going to see other gardens. and i think today suddenly india has long a believed in a 2 state solution. we have maintained that position for many tickets. and i think today many more countries in the world today feels not just for the 2 state solution is necessary, but it is more urgent than it was by me. take a couple of questions. i think there's a film in there and then there and there. okay. so let's take, let's fix the all 3 questions. actually will take 4 questions very quickly. yes, for is there not to be taught she room a question for both to section the opening cannot a 4 minutes to bed. um,

i mean the logic of the argument of beings, some of the medicine from pushing for a ceasefire, as far as i understand is basically that's i'm saying, well, when needs to make sure that won't happen in the 2nd talk to. but this won't happen again. and so the question that i ask you is, do you think that what is happening now? what has happened during the last 4 months will actually reduce the chances of what happened on the 2nd to the happening get when didn't actually make israel more secure or not of the. okay, so there's so okay, and i, i had that question was that that side but okay, yeah, thank you very much. so thanks again to member of the problem into a few grades. so if 0 being can you said those who are not at the table are in the menu? ukraine was at the table in budapest when we voluntarily gave up our nuclear weaponry nowhere in the menu. so the question is, what is the way for us?

we are confronted with a nuclear power, you know, either we will become member of nato, a allowance with a nuclear power. oh, should restore our nuclear status. i don't see any other option. what option do you prefer and what you will on some of these. thank you very much. that's a question here. question there and then we'll do one round. would that be okay? yes. i mean i'm here we go. you. my name is chevy, govern from egypt. my question is the secretary lincoln. you've invested an incredible amount of time trying to bring a settlement in the issue of guys and the very side type. we all feel in the region that things can spill over in a very dramatic way. especially there are many excuses of why not to have

a solution with losing step that is not going to work. so my question to you is, sir, why with all the countries, including the united states, including the u. k just government has just said, proclaiming 2 states is not something the united states puts on the floor now and be able to achieve. thank you. thank you. oh fine. and if there's a question there, and then i'm afraid, loud voice, i didn't, i don't need a microphone. hello, my name is mess the. hi dana john, i'm any, ron in trouble making form on us. and i have a simple question. we can not talk about global security by forgetting about iran, like varying the human rights of use under the carpet. i'm here today with a woman who was in the front line of last year uprising he was, she was shot in her eye. she lost her eyes because of the revolutionary guards. so my question is very clear, how we can reach to peace and security in the words,

without designating the revolution regards of the terrorist organizations, which the united states of america did that. thanks a but why the allies are not following the united states. the democratic countries are not as united as autocracy because it's, i mean, the public is helping 14 is housing uh, almost all the proxies in yemen. so as we see unfortunately, dictators are more united done democratic countries. do you have any comment instructed you to isolate? does that make it public and addressed comedy and his gang of the way that you enjoy everything. thank you so much both to all 3 of you, you can pick the question you want to answer though one was directed a couple was directed that secretary blank, and so maybe let me just start to. yeah. so to the question, is israel more secure now? after 4 months after october? 7th?

i think the answer is in the, in the near term. in the immediate yes it is in terms of dealing with the immediate threat the horrific terrace group that attacked it in the most unimaginable ways on october 7th. or is it more secure for the long term? that's a different question. because the fundamental question we have to ask ourselves is, and dr mentioned is, how do we make sure that the cycle one way or another doesn't repeat itself, whether it's a year from now, 5 years from now, or 10 years from now? i think there's an extraordinary opportunity for israel in the months ahead to actually once and for all and that cycle. and it's because there's some new facts that didn't exist before when there were efforts to make peace between israelis and palestinians, starting with the fact that virtually every our country now generally wants to

integrate israel into the region to normalize relations if they haven't already done so to provide security assurances and commitments. so that is real, can feel more safe and more secure. at the same time, there are genuine efforts underway, led by our countries to reform revitalize, revamp the palestinian authority so that it can be more effective in representing the interest of the policy and people and could be a better partner for his real in the future. and there is also, i think the imperative that the dry mention this more urgent than ever to proceed to a palestinian state one that also ensures the security of israel and makes the necessary commitments to do so. if you put all of that together, you have an integrated region where people are actually working together for the

common good region in which israel is secure in ways that it's never been before. and where the number one threats to its security as well as the security of many of us just alluded to in the last question, ron is isolated along with all of its proxies that, that future, that pass is there. it's clear that it's hard, it's complicated, but it's really the alternative is an endless repetition of the cycle that we seen year after year, decade after decade. generation after generation is incumbent upon all of us who have relationships with and responsibility for different countries in the, in the region. things that we bring to the table ourselves to make the hard decisions

may do the difficult things to actually make that past clear. the real and one that was the attraction is overwhelmingly powerful. i think the more we're able to do that. and the more we distinguish between that past and the alternative, the greater the chance we'll actually see moving in that direction. i'll say just very quickly on a new frame. i think you've heard throughout this conference, including by the fact that we have a, an extraordinary delegation from the united states congress here. republicans, democrats, senate house that there is enduring support for ukraine. and that's not just from united states is from country after country in europe and well beyond for a whole variety of reasons. starting of course, with the aggression of ukrainians have suffered. but also because that aggression has gone to the very principles at the heart of the international system that each

of us has a stake in preserving. and that's not going away. so there's a tremendous determination on the part of dozens of countries to do 2 things. first, to make sure that you train has what it needs to deal in the immediate, with the ongoing russian aggression. but 2nd, to put ukraine on a path where increasingly in the months and years to come, it's able to stand strongly on his own 2 feet. militarily, economically different, but and democratically that is the strongest possible rebuke to put in. it's the strongest possible review to all those who would seek to undermine ukraine. and also, i'll just conclude with this, the realistic to be drawn from what we see, including, as you rightly said, russia tearing up and then spitting on the budapest minarette memorandum among many,

many other agreements. is that this aggression against ukraine has been an absolute strategic debacle. for vladimir putin and for russia of russia is weaker militarily it's weaker economically. it's weaker diplomatically. europe is ended as energy dependence on russia in the space of 2 years. ukrainians are more united that they've ever been, including against russia, which was not the case. certainly in, in 2014, not desirable, but it's a result of russia's actions. and certainly, since the 2022, we have the nato alliance, a defensive alliance, with no intent of ever attacking russia only there to defend its members that is now stronger and larger. all of this result of actions that brushes take precipitating the very things that said it want it to prevent. so i think as those lessons are digested, not to mention the horrific laws that russia has suffered as

a result of let them are put in throwing it's a young man into a meat grinder of his own making. i think the more of those lessons readjusted, the more you're going to see that this is not repeated, but that requires all of us to maintain the solidarity that we've demonstrated with you create a solidarity that is important, not just for you frame. but for all of us, the stakes could be higher. uh, so my belief, again, listening to everyone here over the last couple of days talking to our members of congress who are with us is that not only is that support there, it will be sustain, and ukraine will succeed. thank you so i can create the server, but i guess a, the questionnaire from me around was for us. so the question was, why do you not you follow the example and list of them is saw a terrorist in

a terrorist sanction received the revolutionary god. we have discussed it quite often, but the quick answer is because i'm defending rule of law trying without any double stand of us and our legal situation in the european union. and you could like it or not. but this is the whole un, which context we are working in our european legal system. we have a sanction system for listing on the terrorism. if terrorism occurs in another country, especially in the european union, it was up to the it takes on the us on the 9th of september. so we need a legal ground to list them. so far we do not have the evidence and prove that there has been this terrorist attacks in the european union den with different cases. it's a different legal system in the body. and this is important for me because i hear this argument again. and again, this is not because we shy away with regard to the revolutionary god of the crimes against the women. use civil society, its own population. no,

we use the instruments, we are having as european union to defend human rights. and we set up for the 1st time in history, or if you opinion, a sanction systems because of human rights violations. and for me, this is even stronger in the pause. it was the same with dies and the crimes against ged women. yeah. this and brought to court not slaughtering women. not saying these are the worst sexual violence crimes to commit. but under terrorism, i think this is wrong. we have to name the crimes and the crime is targeted directly to women directly to human rights. we certainly sanction youth, the cost of what you've done to use, shooting in your eyes, killing your friends, killing your your sisters, and it's the same you fix. and this have come whole down to me for me politics. it's not about symbolic action.