where just war theory entails that the use of military force was legitimate. >> we are the only national television network devoted exclusively to nonfiction books every weekend throughout the fall we are marking 15 years of booktv on c-span2. .. >>

c-span, created by america's cae companies in 1979, brought to you as a public service by your television provider. >> host: steven ran roque l, what is a u.s. chief information officer do? >> guest: well, the u.s. chief information officer wears a few hats. one is sets the budget for the technology span of the executive branch, so it covers all the agencies of government and the department of defense to think about and form late the president's budget every year and do that. the second thing is through the e-government act that we have in the u.s., the u.s. chief information officer has the ability to set policy, statutory authority to set policy government wide with. so thinking about, you know, visionary view of technology use in government and driving that forward as part of the, part of the, what we do. and then the third is -- and this is really under this administration -- the u.s. chief

information officer, a title and role created by president obama acts as an adviser to the president and the administration on the use of technology, the smart spend on technology driving both efficiency and effectiveness of technology in a 21st century government. >> host: how big is the technology budget for the u.s. government? >> guest: it's around $80 billion a year, and that ebbs and flows depending on the day, but it's roughly stayed the same. prior to 2009 that budget was growing about 7% a year. in this administration we flatlined the spend and have been able to innovate with less and drive technology forward on a flatter, in some cases, declining budget. >> host: how coordinated is the technology amongst the various agencies and cabinets? >> guest: it's coordinated in some ways, many some ways it's not coordinated, and that's part of the work we bring. i think if you look at our use

of cybersecurity technology and how we share information around threats and things that are happening both inside and outside of government, that's something we are highly coordinated on. where you tend to not see coordination is really where technology has grown up, and you see this as well in the private sector where agencies will, because of the nature of both appropriations and just history, have deployed technology in disparate ways, in duplicate ways where, you know, a single agency will be running more than one e-mail system, something that's now unthinkable in the private sector. they'll do things in a very disconnected way. so part of what we do and we bring both on the budget front and the ideology we bring to federal i.t., it's about let's do things once and often. let's drive efficiency into every corner, fully taking advantage of what technology can bring to the game. >> host: how did you get into this position?

>> guest: well, i have a long history in the private sector. when i left college in the early '90s, i joined what was then sort of a scrappy start-up called microsoft and spent my entire private sector career there. nearly 20 years there and some other jobs that i did in college. >> host: doing what? >> guest: i started in, kind of on the corporate support side thinking about how do you support large corporations and their use of technology. back then there weren't a lot of products to support. there was windows, and office was just starting to emerge as a product. i eventually spent quite a bit of time as bill gates' assistant doing some speech writing more him, some strategy work and other things. then i went on to lead an effort to think about internet technologies across, across the industry. some of that now what we take for granted as we use the internet and use a lot of modern e-commerce systems and things.

and then i, the last job i had was a part of the servant tools division at microsoft which is now the second largest division within the company. >> host: and goth service? >> guest: joined the obama administration in 2009, first as managing director of the federal communications commission. did that for two years. i then spent a her while i was with transitioning into the executive branch at the u.s. agency for international development helping administrator shaw think about technology and global development and the overlap of those two things, which there's a very important overlap. and then in august of 2011, joined the team at the white house as u.s. chief information officer, the second u.s. chief information officer in the history of the country. >> host: well, joining us to talk about some of the issues that the chief information officer faces is jessica meyers of politico. >> and you've been a devoted advocate of open data, the desire to make information transparent and accessible, and you've discussed its ability to

decrease cost and inefficiencies, but what benefit does this have for the vast majority of americans? how is this helpful for more than a few people that want to know how health care is cheaper in missouri than kansas? >> guest: right. the example i love to contemplate is the most, for most americans what is their most expensive purchase of their life, which is their first home. if you think about what is society, what do the internet and systems today give us on the purchase of your first home, and you can certainly know from the multiple listing service where is the location of the home, how many bathrooms, how many bedrooms, what's the rooftop position, those sort of things. and if you think about that set of information for this very important decision you have to make in this life and then think about what government could bring to that, interesting notions start to emerge which is, you know, if i was buying my first home understood and is

there an organic farm within 25 miles of this home, or is it in a food desert, what's the air quality, what's the water quality, what do crime statistics look like, what's the quality of education, mass transportation, what investments have been made in this area, what is the quality of health care, things like that, what are the broadband capabilities at this home? all of the things i just mentioned are data that the government holds that belong to the people. and if you unlock that data, if you are able to bring that to that equation, you could fundamentally not only change the valuation of homes, but really enrich the experience, i think, for people to make very, very important decisions about their future and what it holds. i would pick a house based on broadband capabilities over rooftop position any day of the week. i think we could bring this to bear in an important way. there are other examples that extend into all of those areas, energy, health, the sky's the

limit on what the value, i think, government data could bring to the average american. the other part of this is that by unlocking this data, by creating and opening this data, you suddenly create opportunity for private sector innovators and entrepreneurs to create new business models based on the data. so jobs of the future. you know, steel factories are going to convert into day factories as we think about the future of this country and where jobs get created, the value that can be created for the average american can extend into creating jobs and economic value. >> how do you reconcile this, these opportunities for all of this open, transparent data and allegations that the government is too secretive with some of the data it collects? >> guest: well, you know, the key tenet of all of our work here is really two major things. one is the administration is very much, you know, very focused on protecting americans and the american way of life, and there are certain, you know,

certain aspects of that that are about confidentiality, privacy and other things. the second part of it is as we move forward and if you were to read our open data executive order, the open data policy that i issued in may and other things, that policy begins and ends talking about privacy, confidentiality and the importance of making sure that we not only protect, you know, national information, but also and more importantly protect the private and confidential information of the american. and so insuring that we are keeping people's information safe and secure is of utmost importance. and so part of the motion in this policy is that as we have ordered agencies to make data open and machine readable and interoperable, it doesn't always imply public, but we want them to take these 21st century

approaches to the way we treat data. we've ordered modified existing investments. part of the challenge you may have on certain information, we have tax information or health information or other things that the goth may hold -- the government may hold is that the way we collected that in the past by its inherent collection was secure and kept confidential, just the fact that you filled out a paper form can that form's inside a building behind layers of physical security, in the 21st century that changes because of electronic transfer. so making sure we are cognizant of safety and security is key here. >> and when we're talking about funding for all of these efforts, talk about sequestration. how -- what does sequestration mean for the i.t. budget? the government has done a lot to try to squeeze savings with data consolidation centers and migrations to the cloud, but what is the future for i.t. spending, and how is this going to work with the adoption of new

technologies given our fiscal constraints? >> guest: well, sequestration makes everything more difficult. just the blunt instrument nature of the cuts are not a way you would run a private sector company effectively even though, you know, when i was in the server division and we were growing that division, you know, in double-digit percentages quarter after quarter for 26 consecutive quarters, we never raised the budget. we kept things on a flat or declining. and the notion of the private sector is keep costs low, keep profits high, and the way you run government should be similar. how do we contain costs, how do we live within a flatter, declining budget, and you cut and invest. you think about where do you find savings and how do you reinvest those savings. an argument can be made that we need to do across-the-board cuts, we need to look at declining budgets and drive that forward. technology's a little bit different in that in an investment in technology often

gives you efficiencies that go beyond the actual investment in the technology. if you go and look at the history of this country, over 50% of the fortune 500 were founded in the worse economic times in our country's history, and if you trace those back, my alma mater of microsoft, ibm, procter & gamble, the list goes on of great american companies, often times you can directly tie it to inflections in technology. those companies took advantage of some technology at some certain time in our history to do things better, faster and cheaper. and i think we as a government have an opportunity, if we invest in technology in smart ways and effective ways, that we can drive both efficiency and effectiveness into the equation of what, how we run the government. and we're definitely seeing that. >> so it's a little counterintuitive. while we're cutting, we need to invest. >> guest: that's right. >> host: steven vanroekel, when people visit government web sites, are they tracks as we often are on private web sites?

>> guest: not at the individual level. so something we do, we do get analytics from people that visit government web sites to know what part of the country are they coming from. we can't tie it to individual houses or anything like that. but it might be interesting to know that, you know, some issue is emerging in some part of the country where people are navigating the web or to know that when certain people come online, when they're looking for something, that there's other information that they are maybe looking for. and from a customer service standpoint, you know, we need to take, i think, a one-government approach to think about how would we run government like a private sector company to best serve our citizens. so we're looking at technology using the data that we get that's abstracted out so we can't tell actually who individually is doing anything. taking that information and then really tying it to our customer service motions. if you're an american that's maybe going up and changing your

name for some reason, you're married or some life circumstances come along that you're changing your name, you will want to do that on the social security web site. well, the government web should be aware that you're there visiting that page and present to you the passport page to go change your name or the tax page to change your name and things like that and start to look at government as a service center. so we've kicked off initiatives like the presidential innovation fellows to bring in private sector entrepreneurs and innovators to work within the goth to think about 21st century ways for things like that. one of the things they've worked on is my usa which is aimed directly at doing what i just described, thinking about the overlay of how government information relates to each other. so it's important for us to get data to understand how people are using the web to best serve the americans. >> host: how much of the information that the federal government maintains is in the cloud now? >> guest: that's a -- we have a

broad perspective on that. there is no direct way that we track the cloud computing infrastructure. cloud computing providers in the united states are well over 60-80% of the capability for the entire world. and so we know, you know, as an american motion this is something we do. we know that when investing in new technology, we've order toed government agencies to consider cloud computing first. we tend to find cloud computing as much as 30-50% cheaper, it also shifts you into a mode of spending not in an asset-based way, but more of a subscription-type way where you're spreading your payments out which is a more palatable way to pay for things in the context of federal budgeting. so we're encouraging people to make this motion and doing mechanisms and programs to make sure that information that goes to the cloud is safe and secure, something that i launched call

fed ramp, the federal risk authorization and management program that has now fined the cloud computing for -- defined cloud computing for our country at lower costs with higher levels of security and predictability. so we're excited about cloud computing and where that's going. >> how fast are hose cloud computing contracts growing? >> the federal program is a rigorous process by which we can ask, we set out a long list of security requirements for the, for private sector providers to satisfy. once they've satisfied those and they go through an authorization board to do so, they're then put on a list, and those are -- the door for that opened up just this summer. and i think we're at about six or eight contracts that have made it through right now. and these are major providers, hp, amazon.com, others are now

in the fedram pipeline and able to provide cloud computing services. so by a lot of these providers, we're covering a lot of the water front as far as the marketplace, and that's only going to grow. it's every few weeks to a month or so we're starting to get more providers in, and we have a long pipeline that's waiting to make it through the process. we're excited about that. >> on the topic of clouds, will the news about the nsa's involvement with tech companies' collection of data, will that hurt u.s. businesses that want to sell their cloud computing services to european companies and the government? >> guest: i think, you know, the way that we approach cloud computing and, you know, my focus is much more on the federal network, how we're running the federal computing inside the executive branch and all of that, so i'm not the resident expert on the overlay -- >> you do have some experience. >> guest: for sure, i do. but it's not my wheelhouse from a statutory standpoint. i think the, you know, we have to have safeguards in place as

we work with these private sector companies to define the way they do cloud computing. what we've done is largely defined a spectrum of type of scenarios that go into cloud computing, everything from things like web sites that we find being replicated around the world to the most secure information that should run on u.s. soil with the employees of the cloud computing provider having background checks and things like that. and there's a range in between there. and what we're doing is the state department and others are working with the international community to think about the similar types of scenarios for providers to provide services to foreign countries as well as our, you know, great american companies having their cloud computing services available in foreign countries. and so there's more work to be done, i think, on defining this largely because cloud computing is still not fully defined on how cloud computing actually works. but we're getting, i think we're

getting to a place where we're starting to land with the international community to both promote american interests abroad as well as make, you know, federal information safe and secure here. >> and will the edward snowden saga, so to speak, will that be a setback? >> guest: i don't think so. i've heard no anecdotal information from providers that i've talked to that that's a setback for them. i think it's largely people are taking a practical look at what can cloud computing provide, what cost level. everything you make, every decision you make in i.t. and in technology and in business is a risk-based decision. you look at a spectrum of risk, where will my information, you know, how's my information handled, what's the risk associated with that. you make that both on the investment side as well as information and i.t. management side. and i think deciding, you know, on that spectrum where am i, where's my comfort level, you know, it's a false notion for a lot of people to think if i run

my own information be, if i run it internally, then i will be more secure than if i let a private sector provider run my information lance largely becauu know, one, there's the threat all the time, two is that whatever you're running inside your agency, the best way to secure it is unplug it from the network which isn't practical. everything's connected nowadays, and the fact that you're just plugged in means that your information needs to be managed properly, and you need to think about risk associated with that. and then third is in how you think about this, the information dissemination. a lot of times there's skills gaps because of the evolving threats where the private sector can keep up with cybersecurity professionals and can hire people that can be on the cutting edge of technology and others to keep up. and so we're coaching, you know, we as a federal community in the cio council and other roles that i fill are coaching agencies to think about that risk in a very

broad sense beyond just, like, who's running the information. you've got to think about a lot of different factors in that risk taking. >> host: steven vanroekel, to follow up on jessica's question, what percentage of the work, technology work that's done by the federal government is contracted out, what percentage is done by federal employees? >> guest: it varies agency by agency. what you tend to see, and we've seen some motions recently where for cost-cutting reasons there's been motions to do more insourcing. and so that percentage is moving around quite a lot. in agencies like the federal communications commission that i ran, it was a pretty even split between the on-premise people and the contractors. and, you know, much like anything, it depends on what mode your department is in. if you're in a growth mode, you're building out new capability, you're going to hire more contractors because you've got, you know, programs more things you're going to stand up.

if you're in more of a sustained mode, you've got some function that you're just going to run oaf time, then you tend to have fewer contractors pause you're not doing -- because you're not doing new work that can be capable there. but it tends to be blended across the different landscape, and there's no hard and fast numbers as far as -- it would be a false notion to give government wide because of the variations in the capabilities and requirements there. >> host: is it inefficient that each agency has its own technology budget rather than an overall federal budget? >> guest: i've thought a lot about that, you know? if you look at the government of canada, they i think a year and a half ago or so stood up a new agency of government called shared service ises canada -- services canada, that is one e-mail system for the entire government, it's one procurement motion for buying computers and things like that. and i've contemplated would that be a smart move for agencies. i think we have a lot of work to do as a government just to

get -- and we're making incredible progress getting just the departments of government to do things in one motion. i mean, when i joined the federal government in 2009, the department of agriculture was running 21 e-mail systems, you know, they had about a thousand ways of buying mobile devices, blackberries and things like that. that's not only a thousand different prices, but also a thousand contracting officers, you know, executing those contracts. now there's sort of one way to buy. there's three blanket purchase depending on your carrier, but one way to buy mobile devices, there's one e-mail system in the department of agriculture, and these are tens of millions of dollars in savings. so it's an incredible notion to do that thing. but what i contemplate relative to the federal government is the canadian government's about a tenth of the size of the u.s. government. we have departments inside the u.s. government that are larger than the canadian governments spends all up. and we have, you know, incredible companies in this country that provide technology services to the world, and i

kind of scratch my head on would picking a winner, would picking one of them to serve the u.s. government send the right message to the business community and to, you know, what really what makes america great which is our body of innovation and exceptionalism in technology. and i think getting each department to consolidate and to one, now, i do think there are unherntly governmental things like payroll or the way we do payroll inside goth, some of our hr functions, financial functions where we could do a lot to consolidate those, so we're definitely driving to look at consolidation. we're down to four payroll systems across the federal government, and i think there's even more we could do there. so there's some good things happening on that front. >> host: jessica meyers. >> jumping back to security because that's top of mind right now for many people, there's been a number of cyber attacks on federal agencies. how do we know that our information is being held securely? >> guest: well, we -- probably

the biggest part of my job is looking at and thinking about cybersecurity at the federal level, how are we protecting these federal agencies and insuring that. and the way i've transformed it is a few ways, and i know michael daniel was a guest on your show a little while ago. and in close partnership with the national security staff and others thinking about cybersecurity in the government, we set a series of goals for the departments and agencies to do a few things. one is the use of these smart cards, the personal identification verification cards that you put in your computer to insure that employees of the government are logging in and sending information back and forth from government to government. just simply e-mail and things like that, that we're doing that in a very safe and secure way. things like phishing attacks and

other things that we want to insure don't happen aren't happening inside government. it's a key capability that we do there. two is what we call trusted internet connection. so network traffic that's coming and going from federal agencies go through certain pieces of of the ware that can check for ma pa lishes -- software that can check for malicious code and see if code is coming from foreign places that we know are bad placeses and can stop that traffic from coming and going into the government. and then the third is probably the thing i'm most proud of which is the implementation of continuous monitoring technology that does monitoring and diagnostics of your network. and so what this does is it basically says, it looks out on the federal network. this isn't the public network, it doesn't go out into outside of government, but within the government in a given department or agency if someone, say, takes a thumb drive and plugs it into a computer and that thumb drive has a virus that's going to

attack the network, the system will detect that and quarantine that machine and keep it off the network from information and bad actors being able to get access to things. it's often not just a virus, but when someone gets a bad actor gets access to a network, it's the lateral movement. it's they will take over one machine, and then by having control of that one mama chien, can then reach in with the authority of the person that sits at that desk into the systems they have access to. so that's what you want to prevent. where we've seen this continuous monitoring technology deployed, we've literally gone from, you know, what would be weeks or months of detecting some, you know, malicious code trying to access the network to rurally seconds -- literally seconds where we can now detect those things. the other beauty of continuous monitoring is it will tell you where are the holes, where are the things that aren't protected even if there isn't a virus that exists there. so we proposed in the

president's budget two years ago the funding for continuous monitoring all up in government. we've been steadily executing against that, and we've reached a point now where government agencies are deploying this technology. we're taking it out very broadly and really safeguarding the information of the, of americans that are o now, our most sensitive information is, runs on a classified network in a way that has had these safeguards for some time as well. >> host: and quick follow up and then we're out of time. >> oh, well, what is the next big technology the government is looking at in i mean -- at? i mean, your office has looked at the cloud, ap littic, mobilization, what's next in 2014? >> guest: i think when i hearken back to my youth, you know, i remember the first time i turned on a gps. didn't know fors a government -- it was of a government service, but it gave me my location. i remember in the late '70s

and '80s, you know, government really kind of leading the way on presenting technology that suddenly became massly adopted, that industry, the banking industry and private sector would follow the government in its implementation of technology. i think there's been a couple, a couple decades there where the government sort of stepped back and was more of a consumer than a leader, and i think what we're now seeing is we're starting to transform into being a leader. cloud computing is a prime one. i think that if you go talk to private sector companies about their use of cloud computing, they will talk about fed ramp as their model now. the next big category in that space is mobile. i think the way we think about, you know, we treat in the government today the private sector on-premise computers, you know, your laptop, your desktop and mobile device are treated separately. we're on the edge of a phenomenon where those two things are the same thing, where you bring -- you pull your phone out of your pocket, you'll dock it in your desk, and it'll just

increase on screen. you fling it up onto a television, we're starting to see this already. and where those two worlds come together. and where we're leading the way i think, again, much like, you know, when i saw in my youth is really thinking about what kind of hardware should that be running on, what kind of technology should be running under the covers to make sure that that experience is safe and secure and is going to provide amazing service for the 21st century and beyond. >> host: and steven vanroekel is the u.s. chief information officer. jessica meyers covers technology for "politico." this has been "the communicators" on c-span. >> c-span, created by america's cable companies in 1979, brought to you as a public service by your television provider. >> coming up next, secretary of state john kerry and other representatives of the u.n. security council. they discuss the resolution

calling for the destruction of syria's chemical weapons. then we'll take you live to hear remarks by syria's deputy prime minister at the u.n. general assembly meeting. and later, the senate returns to take up the house spending bill to fund the government past tonight's midnight deadline as well as a pair of u.s. district court nominations. >> cowboys mean a great deal to montana. our largest industry in this state is agriculture. that, of course, livestock, raising of livestock being a huge part of that. still and to this day you still need a man or a woman or a young person that can get on a horse, take care of the livestock whether it's, you know, bringing 'em in to pull a calf or taking them to a new pasture, you know, raising them with great care,

dignity because what you sell in the fall is pounds of beef. and so the best way you can do that is to take great care of your cattle. when the cowboy culture began and this man, this man or woman or person was called cowboy had to live in all the elements. they lived and worked outdoors. and so they had to dress accordingly. and in the old days, today really just had animal skins to use much like the natives. there were no modern textiles to repel water on rain or snow. and so they would cover their bodies with leather apparel. these are called chaps, derived from the spanish word. >> more cowboys and cattle from big sky country as booktv and american history tv look at the

history and literary life of billings, montana, this weekend. saturday at noon eastern on c-span2 and sunday at five on c-span3. >> on friday the u.n. security council voted unanimously to adopt a draft resolution calling for the destruction of syria's chemical weapons. president obama said the binding resolution would insure that the assad regime must keep its commitments or face consequences. representatives of the 15-member council spoke during the 90-minute meeting including u.s. secretary of state john kerry. also addressing the council is u.n. secretary-general ban ki-moon. >> the 7,038th meeting of the security council is called to order. the provisional agenda for this meeting is the situation in the middle east. the agenda is adopted.

i warmly welcome the distinguished secretary general, the deputy prime minister of luxembourg, ministers of the security council members and other distinguished representatives present in the security council chamber tonight. the security council will now begin its consideration of item 2 of the agenda. members have before them document s, stroke 2013, stroke 575. the text of a draft resolution prepared in the course of the council's prior consultations. i note that this document contained an annex; one which is the text of a decision by the executive council of the organization for the prohibition of chemical weapons on 27, september. entitled, and i quote:

destruction of syrian chemical weapons. it's my understanding that the council is ready to proceed to the vote on the draft resolution before it. i'd like to thank all council members for can cosponsoring the draft resolution which is now a presidential text. i shall put the draft resolution to the vote now. will those in favor contained -- or resolution contained in document s, stroke 2013, stroke 575 please raise their hand. the result of the voting is as follows: the draft resolution received 15 votes in favor, so

the draft resolution has been adopted unanimously as resolution 2118 of 2013. i now give the floor to the secretary general, his excellency, mr. ban ki-moon. secretary general. >> mr. president, honorable ministers, distinguished members of the council, excellencies, today's historic resolution is the first hopeful news on syria in a long time. for many months i have said that the confirmed use of chemical weapons in syria would require a firm, united response. tonight the international community has delivered. i commend the members of the council, and i'm especially grateful for the efforts of

russia's foreign minister sergey lavrov and u.s. secretary of state john kerry. mr. president, as -- [inaudible] sent to investigate the allegations confirmed, chemical weapons were used in syria. the perpetrators of this crime must be brought to justice. in this way, the mission under -- [inaudible] returned to syria to complete its investigations including of the incident. i expect the team to complete its fact-finding activities by next week. i will promptly transmit its final report to you and all member states. at the same time, the international community has a responsibility to insure that these weapons of mass destruction never reemerge as an instrument of war or terror. at the depository of the

chemical weapons -- [inaudible] its declarations to implement it on a provisional basis. today's vital decision by the executive council of the organization for the prohibition of chemical weapons establishes ambitious but realistic deadlines for the verified elimination of the syrian program. given the scope of this task and the continuing conflict in syria, the united nations and the -- [inaudible] have a preliminary agreement that will be fully developed based on this resolution and will be the but a sis for my proposal -- the basis for my proposal to the council. i think the director general -- i thank the director general for his collaborative spirit. we will be dispatching to damascus on tuesday.

the inspection teams will have full support from all relevant united nations departments and offices. today's resolution will insure that the elimination of the syrian chemical weapons program happens as soon as possible and with the utmost transparency and accountability. insuring the verified destruction of chemical weapons is a difficult task in any circumstance. in syria the inspectors who are scientists and technical experts will have to contend with the realities of the continuing conflict. the success of this mission will depend on the syrian government implementing its obligations faithfully and without delay. this includes insuring the safety and security of opcw and u.n. personnel. the cooperation of opposition

forces will also be important. all sides share a common interest in the permanent destruction of these weapons. this process will also require the active engagement of the international community. i'm grateful for the pledges of support for u.n. and opcw activities received to date. in the days ahead, the two organizations will further explore how to facilitate the elimination of syria's chemical weapons program. i will provide the recommendations to the security council in due course. mr. president, distinguished members of the council, as we mark this important step, we must never forget that the catalog of horrors in syria continues with the bombs and tanks, grenades and guns.

a red light for one form of weapons does not mean a green light for others. this is not a license to kill with conventional weapons. all the violence must end. all the guns must fall silent. we must capitalize upon the newfound unity of the council by focusing on two other equally crucial dimensions of the conflict; the dire humanitarian situation and the political crisis. we expect council members to firmly demand that the syrian government and the opposition uphold their obligations under international humanitarian law including the lifting of all obstacles to humanitarian access. some communities have received no assistance in more than ten months. the council has agreed that the only way to bring peace to syria

is an inclusive and syrian-led political process based on the geneva communique of 30, june, 2012. today's resolution calls for convening an international conference on syria to implement the geneva communique as soon as possible. excellencies, it is time to make this happen as soon as possible. the united nations has completed all the preparatory work. president assad has stated that he is prepared to send a delegation to geneva and the syrian national coalition has expressed its willingness to engage. our conversations over the last week have focused on launching geneva ii. on wednesday at my working lunch with the ministers of the five permanent members of the council, we agreed to make sure

that the syrian participants come to the conference to negotiate in good faith. today arab league and the united nations join special representative brahimi and i continued these discussions with the member states. we are aiming for a conference in mid november. in the meantime, mr. brahimi will launch all the necessary preparations to insure success. distinguished members of the council, no one is naive to the challenges of ending this conflict peacefully. the syrian side must engage constructively towards the creation of democratic state. that guarantees the human rights of all in syria. the regional actors have a responsibility to challenge those who will actively undermine the process and those who do not fully respect syria's

sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity. and the security council members individually and collectively have a key role in ushering the geneva process forward towards a lasting, peaceful solution. i thank you. >> thank you, his excellency, the secretary general, for his statement. and i now give the floor to his excellency, mr. sergey lavrov, minister of affairs for the russian federation. [speaking russian] >> translator: thank you so much -- fully in keeping with the russia shah/american agreement. this was a result of coordinated efforts by the russian federation and the united states of america backed by all the members of the security council of the united nations as well as a majority of all the other states. the resolution, the leading role in the upcoming work lies with the opcw. the u.n. will provide it with

assistance. we believe that the experts of the o -- will act in an impartial way. needs to do everything possible to insure that the syrian chemical arsenals which are taken under control pursuant to the executive council in a timely and effect f way, in a way which would respect all safety norms. ..

continue to in good faith and constructively called for the international inspectors. the responsibility for this lies not only with the government of severe but the demands of the security council, international experts will also to ensure the cooperation of the syrian opposition. in this, respect reports which will be submitted for the consideration of security counsel regarding the implementation of the opcw decision and the resolution left the cupboard regarding all parties of conflict. it does not fall on chapter seven of the u.n. charter and does not allow for any automatic use of course, measures of enforcement.

the agreement was reached at the russian-american meeting in geneva regarding the fact that violations of this requirement as was the use of chemical weapons by anyone will have to be carefully investigated by the security council, the united nations which will take action under chapter seven of the charter quite clearly. actions which are commensurate with the violations which will have to be proven by 100%. special responsibility lies with those the back and sponsor the opposition. that to ensure chemical weapons do not fall in the hands of extremists. we draw your attention to the fact within the resolution that are relevant requirements by the security council to all countries, especially syria's neighbors, but they must report to the security council any attempt by nonstate actors to obtain chemical weapons. what is even more unacceptable is that they should support such a tense. all similar cases will be considered by the security

council with an objective to take necessary measures. we believe the resolutions adopted will resolve the problem of syria's chemical weapons but will also prompt a decision of the creation in the middle east on a zone free of western and means of delivery. in accordance with decisions taken by the international community. one of the importance or is it sets out a framework for the diplomatic overcoming of this year unit prices. it adopts without any reservation the communiqué of 2004 as a platform for someone to get also backs rapid convening on the basis of international conference. in our assessment, one which is shared by the other permanent members of th of the student col as well as by secretary-general, this could take place as early as the middle of november. we expect that the increasingly diverse syrian opposition will

in the end be able to state their readiness to participate in the conference without any precondition. as the government is a has done. we call on the sponsors of the opposition to exert the necessary pressure on them to do this. the russian federation will in an active directly participate in implementing the chemical disarmament program and in preparing geneva ii. i thank you. >> think his excellency, mr. lavrov, for statement and a note to the fortress excellency, mr. john kerry, secretary of state for the united states of america. >> thank you very much, and thank you, mr. secretary-general, distinguished minister members of the security council. five weeks ago, the world's saw rows upon rows of murdered children lying on the hospital floor a loan or beside slain parents, all wrapped in a bloody to aerial shrouds.

and the world's conscience was shocked, but our collective resolve hardened. tonight, with a strong enforceable precedent-setting resolution requiring city together its chemical weapons, the u.n. security council has demonstrated that diplomacy can be so powerful it can peacefully diffused the worst weapons of war. and so tonight we are declaring, together for the first time, that the use of chemical weapons which the world long ago determined to be john the bounds of acceptable human behavior, are also a threat to international peace and security. anywhere they might be used, anytime they might be used under any circumstances. as a community of nations we reaffirm our responsibility to defend the defenseless, those whose lives remain at risk every day that anyone believes they

can use weapons of mass destruction with impunity. together, the world with a single voice for the first time is imposing binding obligations on the assad regime, requiring it to get rid of weapons that have been used to devastating effect as tools of terror. this important resolution reflects what president obama and president putin, and colleagues around the world, set out to do. i want to thank foreign minister lavrov for his personal efforts and cooperation beginning to forge in geneva and continuing through this week so that we could find common ground. i also want to thank my good friends, counterpart, foreign secretary haig, foreign minister obvious have been partners every step of the way. our original objective was to degrade and deter syria's chemical weapons capability.

and the option of military force that president obama has kept on the table could have achieved that, but tonight's resolution, in fact, accomplishes even more. through peaceful means it will for the first time seek to eliminate entirely a nation's chemical weapons capability, and in this case, specifically syria. on site inspections of places that these weapons are stored will begin by november, and under the terms of this agreement, those weapons will be removed and destroyed by the middle of next year. our aim was also to hold the assad regime publicly accountable for its horrific use of chemical weapons against its own people on august 21. this resolution makes clear that those responsible for this heinous act must be held accountable. in this resolution the council

has importantly endorsed the geneva in communiqué, which calls for a transfer of power delaying transitional governing body paving the way for democratic elections and a government that can be chosen by the people of syria to represent the people of syria. we sought a legally binding resolution, and that is what the security council has adopted. for the first time since serious civicivil war began, security council is spelling out in detail what syria must do to comply with its legal obligations. syria cannot select or reject the inspectors. syria must get those inspectors unfettered access to any and all sites, and to any and all people. we also wanted a resolution that would be enforced, and again, that is what the security council has adopted. we are here because actions have

consequences, and now should the regime failed to act, there will be consequences. progress will be reported back to the secure the council frequently, and in the event of noncompliance, the council will impose measures under chapter seven of the u.n. charter. just two weeks ago when the syrian regime would not even acknowledge the vast supply of chemical weapons, and say that they existed, this outcome, frankly, would have been utterly unimaginable. but thanks to the cooperation within the p5 of the united nations, and thanks to our friends and partners around the world, many of whom are here in this room, the security council has shown that when we put aside politics for the common good, we are still capable of doing big things. provided this resolution is fully implemented, we will have a lemonade one of the largest chemical weapons programs on

earth from one of the most volatile places on earth. the assad regime carries the burden of meeting the terms of this agreement. and when it comes to those who murder their own citizens, the world's patients need to be short. but make no mistake, the rest of the world still carries the burden of doing what we must do to end mass killing by other means. we must work together with the same determination and the same cooperation that has brought us here tonight in order to end the conflict that continues to tear syria apart, even this very day. we must continue to provide desperate -- desperate and needed humanitarian aid. and neither assad nor anyone else should stand between the aid and the people who need it. only when we do these things will we have fulfilled our responsibility to the syrian people, and to ourselves.

only then will we have advanced our own interest and own security and that of our allies in the region. only then will we have shown that the u.n. security council is meeting its responsibility to enforce international peace and security. so we are here united tonight in support of our belief that international institutions do matter, that international norms matter. we say with one voice that atrocities carried out with the world's most heinous weapons will not be tolerated. and when institutions like the security council stand up to defend the principles and values that we all share, when we put violent regimes on notice that the world's will unite against them, it will lead not only to a safer syria, but it will lead to a safer world. thank you. >> i think his excellency and mr. kerry for his statement, and i now give the floor to his

excellency, mr. william hague, second in state for foreign and commonwealth affairs of the united kingdom of great britain and northern ireland. >> thank you, mr. president. this 21st of august chemical weapons attack in syria while horrific in its nature and its scale, and the secretary-general is rightly described it as a war crime. so it is welcome that the security council has recognized the appalling nature of the act, and this come together to agree of the serious and far-reaching response to we're done so today in adopting first resolution council on syria in 17 months, and i pay particular tribute to my colleagues, secretary kerry and foreign minister lavrov, or all the work they've done to make this possible. and it is a groundbreaking resolution. first, it recognizes that any use of chemical weapons is a

threat to international peace and security. this establishes an important international norm which is essential in the wake of the syrian regimes appalling actions on the 21st of august. it upholds the principle of accountability, for its proven use of chemical weapons. it imposes legally binding and enforceable obligation on the syrian regime to comply with the opcw decision adopted earlier this evening. it makes clear that this council shall impose measures under chapter seven of the u.n. charter, if there is noncompliance. and it endorses the geneva communicating up -- communiqué. we should be no doubt -- but it probably implemented, and this council must ensure that it is, it will prevent a repeat of the atrocities committed on the 21st of august, or any of the

use of chemical weapons in syria. the united kingdom a play its full part in this. i can announce that the uk's make an initial contribution of $3 million to the opcw syria trust fund. i echo the executive council's call today that all states in a position to do so should provide voluntary cibutioand expertise to achieve what would be a challenging but vital task. let us not forget the council action today has come only after two and a half years of unchecked brutality and well over 100,000 dead, and millions displaced. the failure of the council to tackle the crimes committed on a daily basis has resulted in a culture of in punitive in which a brutal regime believes they can get away with murdering its own men, women and children. so it is vital that the council now builds on the consensus we reached today to make progress towards a sustainable resolution

of the crisis, with renewed purpose and resolve we need to achieve a political transition, and that is why i welcome the fact that where the secretary-general said earlier, agreed among the permanent members of the security council to aim for a mid-november date for the start of geneva ii. this will be a difficult process involving tough choices and compromises, but crucially we are all committed to making our best collective effort to make it work. the goal is something of which we all agree come and negotiate a transition in syria starting with the formation of a transitional governing body with full executive powers formed on the basis of mutual consent. but no political process can deliver results immediately. and tell it does, we must also make a greater effort on the humanitarian crisis. the scale of suffering is truly horrific, 100,000 dead, millions dispce