tion in? >> senator, what i can tell you is the reasonable time frame such as what illinois has, we have seen it abused. and so the idea that you would put in a specific deadline maybe, you know, within the most experiod cent time but in, you know, no suckers less than. -- circumstances less than. put some sort of a line there. as i said, it could be six months at which point your information is long gone. it has long been purchased on the black market, and who knows what has been done with it or damage has been done to you. so you need to have further discussion about how do you try to better define what the timeline is going to be for notification. >> anyone else? thank you. >> thank you, senator blunt. senator daips also exceeded his time allotment, but i also noticed senator klobuchar was very effective by putting me in my place by saying something like the new kid on the block. [laughter] ..

>> we are live this morning at georgetown university law center where we are waiting remarks on u.n. high commissioner for human rights zeid ra'ad al-hussein, the former jordanian ambassador speaking display at georgetown. he is expected to talk about the recent death of a jordanian pilot at the hands of isis.

live coverage on c-span2 should get underway in just a moment. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> good morning and thank you very much for coming. i would just like to introduce to you the u.n. high commissioner of human rights zeid ra'ad al-hussein. and i won't say anymore. >> good morning ladies and gentlemen, of the press. submit me if you will, to begin

my remarks by speaking as a jordanian and the u.n. human rights chief. i am filled, filled with anger and disgust at what they did in syria to my compatriot, moaz al-kasasbeh to the two japanese captives, to the british and american captive, to the disease men women and children, -- yazidis, men, women children, in the form of burning beheadings raping sometimes of children. the perpetrators who have committed these monstrous crimes, killing a defenseless in defense of what exactly? who would want to live in the

so-called state, state that crucifies, burns and various children alive? let us be clear. killing and torturing defenseless captives is a betrayal of the islamic tradition. it is forbidden in customary law. it is forbidden in international humanitarian law, in geneva convention and previously to that, prior to that the hague regulations. and human experience, it is forbidden period. what virtue or courage is there in beheading someone defenseless? raping a young girl? as a person who call themselves a fighter believe this is this

is the definition of courage? these people are of annihilated conscious, are so far outside the human experience. the young adherents seeking to join them must know what they purport to join is not some adventure. it is the road to a destroyed utterly criminal existence. if you are looking for some meaning in your life do good deeds. that will be your salvation. this is the first official trip for a high commissioner for human rights to washington in eight years. it has been important for me and my office to reengage with the administration and with members of congress, particularly during

these troubled, deeply troubled times. just as a first step i hope to be back for more visit of course to cover other issues, and this is a preliminary visit. not surprisingly, given what is going on in syria and iraq and nigeria, somalia and elsewhere the main focus of the discussion has been violent extremism. this was abroad into stark focus on tuesday with the appearance of the video showing the rent is killing of moaz al-kasasbeh. is a gruesome killing of top of the gruesome beheadings on top of the other hostages as i said over shattered virtually every one of my meetings, and i had a series discussions of this and related issues with many of the

senior state department officials, and i met as well with members of both the house and the senate from both parties. as you may be aware yesterday, an event, timely and very hosted by the holocaust memorial museum, i laid out some ideas about how we should and how we shouldn't, attempt to deal with the spread of extremism and violence carried out by the sectarian groups such as isil boko haram, al-shabaab and others, in addition to some government forces and shia militias in iraq and syria. and, of course it is not simply syria and iraq but also an increasing number of countries, especially in the middle east south asia and all across the

northern part of africa. libya is an extremely alarming state. yemen is deeply troubled. the central african republic and south sudan could easily plunge back into religious and ethnic violence. and boko haram is rampaging across parts of northern nigeria, and that increasingly in cameroon slaughtering and kidnapping people wherever they go and laying waste to towns and villages. i have suggested that a security response, an armed response is clearly not enough. we have been responding in that way for more than a decade now and yet these groups have simply spread and grown like some particularly virulent cancer, feeding off our efforts to contain them. i've also taken pains to point out that isil in particular, for

all its barbarity, is extremely quick and clever in the way that it extorts our reactions, our overreactions, our mistakes. we must be extremely careful not to allow them to drag us into betraying our own core principles, namely, a powerful system of human rights protection that we have built up after world war ii your and when we do it helps the recruitment exceeded the fiendish killing machine. if there's one small silver lining in all the horrors we have seen in recent weeks, it is that we are starting to understand this. later this month the united states will convene a summit on environmental extremism decide if i understand correctly to delve deeper into the complexities of dealing with

this increasingly lethal phenomenon. i hope and believe that we will develop more sophisticated ways to undermine isil and the other sectarian groups. simply bombing them and denouncing them as clearly not enough, and more and more people are i think starting to realize this. we have to fight their ideas with better ideas. stop undermining our own worldwide system of human rights because they pushed us to do so. tackle the hopelessness and disillusioned that is providing them with the apparent endless stream of young men, and even young women. by their apparent success in confronting the world that is in some way offering them to little hope. we are in a very grave period confronted by phenomenon we have failed to comprehend. how we handle or mishandled these issues may affect us

increasingly in unpredictable ways for many years to come. i thank you for your attention. i will be happy to answer any questions that you may have. >> we would be grateful if you could identify any organization you work for when you ask a question. [inaudible] >> as i said in my statement that i just read out, i think for all jordanians, the killing of moaz al-kasasbeh was so shocking but in one way no more shocking than everything else

the sectarian us have been doing that it has galvanized the jordanian public into realizing that these people must be resisted. the arguments that many of us are making when looking back over the many years that they have an operating across many parts of the world is that it would seem that armed action taken against them is simply not enough. there are a thames of course to seek out mechanisms that keep them going, but we also believe that there must be a new battle line in the form of an ideological battle line that responds to what it is that they say and they do. the letter issued by 126 muslim

scholars back in september is an initiative i think that is worthy of support. that if the muslim world and muslims take it upon themselves to answer back to the ideas that they hold that this will be the first step in terms of unwinding what it is that they seek to sort of promote in terms of their ideology. [inaudible] i wish to commend you for taking on this are amenable and very

important post. we know of course your office is concerned with universal declaration of human rights. is there a corresponding universal obligation for governance on all levels to foster the recognition of these rights? >> it's a very good point. a declaration was adopted by the general assembly soon after it was written up. and from the declaration drawing inspiration from it, a number of key treaties and conventions were developed whereby governments undertook upon themselves by accepting these treaties certain obligations. and our office is of course there to remind these governments that these obligations are not simply declaratory obligations but obligations that must be limited

at the world stages. and even with the passage of the years there should be no diminution in the support given to them. so we believe that this is absolutely the right way to proceed. and in particular when you look at certain treaties, such as the convention against torture for example, it's self-executing treaty. it's applicable in your law and it's a very clear convention, very clear convention. there are no exceptions, no exceptions that can be provided as grounds for breaching the treaty. and that is very clear and so when governments undertake these obligations we hope and expect that they will abide by them. what we are worried about is in

an effort to overturn extremist violence violence that we see that governments feel inclined at times too, and it would justify temporary measures to breach some of these treaties. and what we are saying is that these obligations relate to treaties that were developed as response to wars and torture that have been part of human experience for the past few millennia. the treaty a thames to distill this experience the experience as couched with human or through human wisdom, into a law that reflects that experience. and so there should be no grounds for justifying any

breach of them. and i hope this is something that we will continue to press upon them. [inaudible] >> i work in the health sector obviously and they're i bring the principles of rule of law and governance to assist ministries of health to implement their obligations. and it is my observation after being in this field for over 20 years that too often governments do not know how to actually operationalize their obligations under the law. i note your some of the materials i read about yourself in your thinking about the work you're setting up to do is that you're also looking at the

health sector and we could look at education, support system, any number of institutions within governments that are probably failing in a lot of places where terrorists are lining up. in recent years i've worked in afghanistan where just a few days ago i read about the taliban constructing court to actually hear cases disputes between people because the court system is failing. so i wonder if in your thinking and perhaps it's premature in your tenure if you've had some thoughts around how do operation allies and to assist countries to operationalize their obligations so that institutions can be rebuilt or build a new so that we can provide this level of support to citizens in countries? thank you. >> it's an excellent question. 6 million of our youngest

people, little people, people between the ages of one day old and five years of age, die every year from preventable preventable causes. and in many instances as you were so rightly pointing out it is because the authorities that are at least nominally responsible for their health are delinquent in the discharge of their duty. and 6 million is the equivalent of many average sized countries. it's quite amazing. if we were to say that i saw was killing 6 million people a year, you can imagine the reaction. so why is it that we are not as determined when we say 6 million people died as a result of regrettable causes, and they are very young, that we are not more determined to do better?

and i even said at one stage in some cases it must amount to criminal negligence. and there should be local authorities, more local authorities who were held to account for deaths in this regard. and you are absolutely all right. if people do not see governments stand up to their obligations in respect of health, and respected education, it creates spaces than for those more extreme ideological bent to exploit this. and that's what we have to integrate into the discussion on countering violent extremism, so i agree with you. >> any more questions, especially from the journalists?

[inaudible] >> in regards to getting society to stop pushing for exceptions during times of war or times of violent extremism how do you suggest that governments kind of encourage and foster these ideas at the most basic levels of society? >> it's important that governments, i think take a comprehensive view of this and understand that if society feel excluded if societies at the fringes are okay with allowing for any nation and are not determined to end it we will have adherents or we will have young people attach themselves to velocity, or website ideology of the more extreme, and human

experience as i said before, especially in the 20th century, is filled with violent drama which we really do not want to see replayed in the 21st century. we really did not want to go back through the horrors of the 20th century that just passed. and so we have to take stock and learn what it is that contributed to the tumult, to the spasms of violence that led to the deaths of millions of people. violently. and understand that we cannot put ourselves in a situation where we cannot arrest the trajectories from taking us to that sort of outcome. and so it is important for government to view, not just the people from or through a security prism to protect them in security terms, but that

security terms that security paradigm has to be seen with a big that is not just security in terms of physical protection, security in terms of food in terms of health, in terms of basic rights for all parts of the population. and if you can have that and surely again, as you immunize yourself better against the forces of extremism. there is something else i think that we have to be clear about that societies that are open to scrutiny, not a willing to accept the scrutiny are better positioned for the long-term. societies that shun scrutiny are more prone to sudden shifts and instability long-term. and so we ask the human rights

office will remind governments, and they will be uncomfortable when we do this that they have obligations that they need to uphold. but we also believe that we are not, we are not doing them a disservice to we are actually doing them a service. they may be sometimes uncomfortable with what we say but all of us are pushing in the same direction, and that is for the betterment of the people of the country concerned. and we are looking for them to enjoy a better standard of life and the full protections of the law provides for them. thank you. >> time for i think one last question. [inaudible] >> i wonder what is your concern on the ongoing conflict in ukraine right now? could you talk about this issue

-- [inaudible] and what do you think the united states and russia and those sites should due to the escalating tension? >> thank you very much for that question. the office which i believe has a monitoring mission in ukraine that has been in place really almost ever since the crisis began in the eastern part of the country. we have periodic reports that we make available to the international community, and yes we discussed the ukraine with a large number of countries. that's of great concern to the international community, writ large. this is a very serious crisis, and we have seen of course,

even though we have all of us have called for full compliance with the accord, we have seen the cease-fire unraveled. the other day i issued a statement, and i made clear that now what we see is bus stops public transport marketplaces schools, kindergartens, hospitals and residential areas have all become battlegrounds. and that risk by .2 million people in the eastern parts are now affordable. i mean surely i think all of us share this surely no one wants to see this crisis deepened and expand. and certainly the 5358 people who have been killed our 5358

people too many. we appeal of course to all sides to deescalate this crisis. the world can ill afford to have a crisis of this sort given everything else that we have to deal with. and so we will continue to make this appeal, along with all the other u.n. agencies and our partners across the international community. i do expect in early march to be discussing ukraine with a number of key officials when they come to geneva and at that stage i will address members of the press on the outcome of those discussions. thank you. >> we can probably take more questions.

[inaudible] >> i won't comment about the actions taken by individual states, because of course on monitoring mission is monitoring the situation there on the ground. we are not monitoring the performance of other states with respect to ukraine as such. and what concerns us of course is that unless there is determined action to restore the minsk of course and have a cease-fire -- accord him and have a cease-fire go back in place that the unraveling will continue and again surely this is not to the vantage of anyone in the international community. >> very last question.

>> you have remained neutral that you couldn't have a list of like the top 10 worst offenders of human rights? and if so, how would america appear on that list? what is the tide in your for you to calm to georgetown law for this venue? >> top 10 list you just given me an idea. we haven't had a top 10 list. we remind all states i think just a review of all the comments that my predecessors and not myself have made in respect to many, many countries around world. we don't pick on any one country or one region. we continuously review and study the conference that states

themselves make when they come to geneva, and especially under the so-called universal -- i should go so-called, universal where all states submit human rights performance to the scrutiny of the human rights council. they all of course will point out that they've been able to accomplish x y and z but some issues are outstanding. and they should do this and that, then it looks at those recommendations or not. we remind them of their recommendations that excepted. and we hope that they then do so. there is no ranking as such but maybe one day there should be. but this was the first press conference i've been to were the press is not just asking questions and making suggestions. so thank you. [inaudible]

>> i met prior to the press conference with members of the faculty and students at the law school. very enjoyable discussion. at times of course somber as well given the state of the world. thank you. >> thank you very much indeed. >> thank you very much, thank you. [inaudible conversations] >> as this event comes to a close, if you missed any of it you can watch it online at c-span.org, check the c-span video library. we will have more on the fight against isis and the role of iran and syria as bashar al-assad are playing to live this afternoon experts and forming army girls who serve in iraq will take part at the washington institute for near east studies again at 1 p.m. eastern here on c-span2.

later a look at you as a drug policy at home and abroad with acting director at the white house office of national drug control policy and this is a secretary of state for international narcotics and law enforcement affairs, live at 3 p.m. eastern on c-span2. last month jobs numbers were released this morning, 257,000 jobs were added in january and the unemployment rate went up to 5.7% from 5.6. the new york times writing today that new figures on the last two months of the year 2014, turned out to be the strongest year for job gains since 1999. also average hourly earnings rose .5% in january. that story from "the new york times" today. earlier this week the house foreign affairs subcommittee held a hearing examining the state of human rights in cuba. witnesses testified include several human rights activists

and former political prisoner who outline outlined human rights violations and the need for political change in cuba. congressman chris smith of new jersey is the chair of the subcommittee. it is just over two and a half hours. >> good morning to everyone and welcome to this very timely and important hearing on human rights in cuba. we are here to examine the state of human rights which is a very timely topic indeed given the obama administration's sea change in policy towards cuba announced at the end of last year. we are here to ask whether in undertaking this change in policy the obama administration's use of considerable leverage that it wields to seek a better condition of the cuban people or whether as a fear as an opportunity that was squandered in its haste to achieve a

diplomatic breakthrough and even create a legacy for the president. this hearing is not only about castro regime accountability but also the obama administration's accountability with congress exercising its role of both oversight and as a bully pulpit for reminding the world that cuba remains a time in his dictatorship which continues to arrest political dissidents, and i would underscore an estimated 178 local dissidents in the last month alone, and one raul castro would declare such a given response to the obama administration's confession. this castro regime continues to harbor fugitives from justice such as joann who was convicted in the 1973 murder of a state trooper in my own home state of new jersey the officer forrester was gunned down gangland style after she escaped from prison.

indeed, just yesterday we had the assistant secretaries for state for the western hemisphere roberta jacobson acted before the full committee of foreign affairs. i asked her what is the response of the cuban government was when she raised the issue of the return of joann to justice? she replied that the cuban government stated that it was quote not interested in discussing her return closed quote. that is absolutely unacceptable. i have in my hand a state which asked to submit for the record from christopher the president of the state troopers fraternal organization of new jersey where n. is states on behalf of our jersey state troopers that quote we are shocked and very disappointed that returning a convicted killer of a state trooper was not already demanded and accomplished in the context of the steps announced by the white house regarding this dictatorship but i would also point out that as an aside that

both president burgers and new jersey state police both very much wanted want to be here and we'll have another hearing to hear from them and i look forward to that follow appearing. but, unfortunately, we do have with us, fortunately and it is a tremendous honor and privilege to have with us today three extraordinarily great and uniquely qualified witnesses to the brutality of the cuban dictatorship. three human rights activist who at great personal cost to themselves and their families have and continue to stand up for human dignity. we will hear about the deparle state of human rights in cuba. just redid the state department report on human rights as well as other reporting that has been done by other ngos. and it couldn't be more clear that human rights are violated with impunity by the castro brothers and their regime. i would note parenthetically

that years ago during the reagan administration i met with a man who spent almost two decades in the cuban gulags system. and i will never forget when i went and read his book. action led a delegation to the united nations u.n. commission. we went time and time again to the commission asking them to look at the chip level state of human rights in the hugo. i was in all of his courage as well. he was able to get the u.n. to look at pass a resolution condemning the deplorable situation in cuba and to deploy a team, go to the present and investigate these terrible abuses of human rights. there were promises made by fidel castro at the would be no retaliation whatsoever against those who spoke in prison and the family members who came forward and friends to bear witness to a terrible truth,

instead of truth. everybody was retaliated against. the people in the prisons as well as their families, and regrettably the u.n. was unable, perhaps unwilling but certainly unable to mitigate or stop that retaliation. i have pushed for years to go to cuba, i've been denied a visa for two decades or so but i want to go to the prisons. of course, i will meet with fidel. we can't get a visa. both frank wolf and i tried a number of times and got so bad that at one point and a castro said that we are provocateurs i want to go meet with the dissidents. frank wolf and i got into prisons in the soviet union the infamous term camp 35 where people suffered and were tortured by that communist dictatorship. when he became president of east timor, i went and saw him when he was in jakarta and went to

prison all of the world. we can't get into cuba. we even got into beijing prison number two where 40 tiananmen square activists were being forced to do gulotta labor heads shaved, looked like a concentration camp victims. and yet mr. woolf and i could not and continue, and i can't get into those prisons. so i will be asking the government again come at our the as and our the as an address our government to facilitate it, to go to the present and even on the icrc yesterday the red cross, i secretary jacobson and i said, much has been made that the icrc might be put into the country. that's unacceptable yet it into the prison. and again there has to be obsolete no retaliation for those who speak out. i would point out that after testifying here today in public, and i think c-span especially,

and the journalists are taking this story and making americans aware of what is actually happening in cuba right now as we meet they will be returning to cuba. and this committee and under the entire congress will be watching to which without the safety and well being and health is not further jeopardize. but the courage to come forward to a congressional hearing hearings to our friends on the senate side received compelling testimony as well, and to bear witness to an ugly truth of torture. i would ask everyone to go back and reread against all hope the famous book. he talked about tortures that i don't even want to mention in public. they are so despicable of putting dissidents in vats of excrement so bad that went into that used the nose and they got infactions. he told me that when he and his wife and if i got to the united states and got asylum, that when

he couldn't even change his children's diapers because the smell of excrement brought back instantaneously like ptsd remembrances of that kind of degrading and cruelty imposed upon them. the castro brothers and many in this regime ought to be at the hague for crimes against humanity. that's how bad it is. these are among the worst abuses of human rights in the entire world. so can't want to welcome our brave and -- again i want to welcome our brave and courageous witnesses. i want to welcome elian a loss right now. has been sexually for so long in raising the truth of what is going on in the school on the island. i have much more to say but i will put the rest of it into the record i do want to thank our witnesses again and i look forward to being your testimony. i yield to my good friend and

colleague, his bass. >> thank you, mr. chairman. -- ms. bass. [inaudible] >> mr. chairman i want to take a brief moment before turned to the various or stop of human rights in cuba to respond to the statement from the subcommittees lasting that troubling interpretation. while discussing your position on marriage equality you you know, and engage in the line of questioning that some understood as suggesting that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people deny basic human rights. after exchanging letters with you i think it's important to note that while we do have very different opinions on marriage equality, you strongly oppose it i strong support it, we both agree that unequivocally lgbt people have the same rights as all of the people to live lives free from violence and persecution. in your letter and your published state you said you quote unequivocally oppose acts of violence against anyone, and believe that human rights apply to all.

and that adequate again all individuals including lgbt person should be treated with respect and compassion. i want to thank you for the opportunity to clear up the confusion over your statement and to reaffirm our shared passion for protecting the human rights of all people. the pulse of the united states is clear lgbt rights are human rights and lgbt people are entitled to live lives free from violence intimidation discrimination and harm. i thank you, mr. chairman and yield back. >> thank you mr. cicilline. i would say can we do have a fundamental difference. i don't support homosexual marriage. i know you'd and i certainly respect your views. and i do want to point out that i'm for universally recognized human rights for all and there is a treaty that recognizes the rights of marriage again i'm glad we're able to work together and -- okay why don't you go?

okay. >> okay, thank you, mr. chair, i do appreciate the classification of that because i know with your long record on human rights that you would never be okay with the egregious human rights violations that are taking place around the world in the lgbt community, and that there is a fundamental difference between marriage which many people have a difference around, but i know that there is no difference around the lgbt rights and violence, and oppose the violence against lgbt people, so thank you for that. today's hearing on human rights in cuba in the context of president obama's recent announcement i said yesterday in our foreign affairs committee that sometimes in talking about cuba, it's difficult because my colleagues, and two of my colleagues that are on the other side of the aisle right now in

this hearing have a family history and personal situations that make it very difficult if one does have a difference of opinion, i want to come one, respect and acknowledge what my colleagues have been through and what their families have been through, and with no disrespect or disregard for those histories, want to take a few minutes and proposed a different viewpoint. you know the president's policy of opening up relations with cuba, i actually think is a very good thing, especially for people who are concerned about human rights. during the five decades that we have not had relations with the cuban government and cuban people, the cuban economy did expect multiple economic shock which really produced hardships for the people but none of it really produced the kind of

popular uprising or intifada assistance that might have led to a change in government. i also think that the embargo prohibited diplomatic and economic engagement between the u.s. and cuba. and i think that that many times is the ways in which societies become more open and accountable and democratic. and trade and cultural exchange becomes mutually beneficial. i think the embargo has impeded u.s. relations throughout the western hemisphere. as many latin american nations view the embargo itself as a human rights violation against the cuban people. i have to say that as a u.s. citizen, i definitely consider it my human right to be able to travel to any nation on earth. and i presented the fact that it has been difficult. i mean, americans can go to cuba and i've been to cuba but it's a very, very difficult to go there. i don't believe, and i might be wrong but i don't believe that we have that restriction against any other nation in the world,

including iran, north korea and saudi arabia, all of which have extremely troubling human rights records. such travel restrictions as well as those of trade also violate the freedom of you citizens in recent polling by cbs abc news and the "washington post" revealed that a majority of americans are supportive of moving away from the policy of disengagement and toward reception ties with cuba. i also think that engagement would be good for the cuban people as people to people exchanges and the cuban-american families travel would increase total engagement, assistance family reunification. and the opening of space will provide improved access to cuba for nongovernmental organizations that are focused on governance and human rights, as well as facilitating technical assistance to cuban civil society groups concerned with improved standards of economic and personal freedoms. i do have to say mr. chairman, you mentioned about visiting

prisons in cuba. when i did go i did visit alan gross, and i visited him in prison. and i think that it was important that during the time that mr. gross was incarcerated that a number of members of congress went over and visited him and pushed for his release. i think that that was a conceding factor. i can i just feel that you really can't change people and governments whom you refuse to engage with. and so increase engagement to me seems like it would be a contributing factor to improving the human rights situation on the island of cuba and i look forward to the testimony from our witnesses today. thank you. >> i would like to know you'll to the chairwoman emeritus of the full committee on foreign affairs. >> thank you very much. i also am glad that mr. gross is

home but by visiting mr. gross he believed that you have been to a cuban jail maybe these dissidents you could tell he wanted to put in jail israel like. but we are thankful that he is home. we could ask someone like -- he served 22 years in castro's prison and mr. smith, i would like to request unanimous consent to submit into the record a letter from the international committee of former cuban political prisoners based in union city new jersey document a list of the many cubans who are still in wishing in castro's blog. and thank you for pointing that out. >> without objection, so ordered ordered. >> thank you. mr. smith, i want to thank you so very much for convening this important hearing, for your unyielding and passionate commitment to human rights to freedom. not just for the oppressed people of cuba but for all people everywhere who suffer

under oppressive regimes and to continue to seek the most basic and fundamental rights for many people that they take for granted. everywhere there has been an oppressed person, a political prisoner there you will find mr. smith. so we thank you for that but i also want to welcome our wonderful witnesses, berta soler fernandez, sara martha fonseca quevedo, all champions of freedom on the island and the face of what the democratic future of cuba will look like. look at those faces. that is the cuba now. that is a free cuba of tomorrow. these are brave pro-democracy activists who have seen firsthand the brutality of the regime i that constant arrest and beatings that they have had to endure, the isolation that they've had to endure while in jail. they did not have food prepared especially for them.

they were starved. and out of this hearing they would be going back to cuba. amazingly enough as you pointed out, mr. smith to continue to fight for freedom and democracy. bert acosta medevac will be marching with her sisters, the ladies in white than those galago -- damnest of local. if you think everything is rosy and bright hundred and all wonderful, just ask these three dissidents what life is like for them. very unlike what we hear from others. our witnesses are just three of the countless faces of cuba who represent the future, the administration has shut out of the negotiation. and rarely are they invited to meet with visiting dignitaries. we are glad that they get the chance to go to cuba.

rarely do they invite dissidents who disagree with this administration. these other people who have to suffer the consequences of the administration's decision. it's easy for the president to change his policy in his ivory tower. these are the faces who must now suffer under a castro regime, reenergized. the regime is reenergized by president obama's policies, but it's injections of cash. the presidents december 17 announcement serves to both emboldened the regime by implying that it can continue its repressive machinery with impunity. raul castro said we will not change and we look the other way. it undercut and to demoralize his the brave freedom fighters in cuba who rightfully believe that the u.s. has turned its back on them. but token -- don't confuse the u.s. people with the administration just like we

don't confuse the castro regime with the people of cuba. and for what are these negotiations? so that more americans can travel to cuba and see what the regime wants them to see. all the while the regime feels its copper and we ignore the truth. because who owns the hotel's? the castro regime. who runs the hotel's? a castro military, the truth about the cuban regime is that it is regime that severely punishes dissidents can't even to this day. a young rapper, a rapper is a threat to the regime. did he commit a crime? no. his charge was dangerous in this which could lead to a crime. it's the pre-cause of that movie. they predict you're going to commit a crime so they arrest you before you commit it. this regime forbids reform and will do anything to maintain its grip on power. the censorship apparatus, one of the most comprehensive in the

world it forbids cubans from listening to independent private or foreign broadcasts, given such as the signal of its own allies televised propaganda. it is important, mr. chairman, and we understand exactly the kind of murderous regime we're dealing with in cuba and the president obama wants to normalize relations with. on november 4, 1999 the house committee on international relations convened a congressional hearing entitled the cuban program torture of american prisoners by cuban agents. at the tailoring you remember, mr. chairman, we heard testimony from american pows, prisoners of war who were tortured at a prison camp in north vietnam known as the zoo during the third of august 67 to august 68. according to reports 19 of those courageous servicemen were psychologically tortured and beaten by cuban agents working under orders from hanoi. and while state department led the negotiations last month in

havana it's very own country ports on human rights practices for 2013 states this the following additional abuses continue to harsh prison conditions arbitrary arrest, selective prosecution denial a free trial. this is from the state department, our state department. they are still negotiate with castro while this is going on. authorities interfere with privacy coming taking a pervasive monitoring of private conversations. the government did not respect the speech and press comes a very restricted internet access and maintain a monopoly on media outlets, circumscribed academic freedom and maintain significant restrictions on the ability of religious groups to meet and worship. our own state department. the government refused to recognize any been human rights groups or permit them to vote illegally. they can tell you about that. in addition to continued the government continued to prevent workers from forming independent

unions. where are these voices who are so much for independent unions here in the united states? but not for you, you are not good enough. i'm sorry. no union for you. about human rights abuses for official acts committed at the direction of the government. our own state department says this. impunity for the perpetrators remain widespread come into court. because i could continue. mr. chairman, we cannot be the land of the free across the world if this administration doesn't defend democracy right here in our own hemisphere. we cannot call for democratic reform and values throughout the world if we abandon them 90 miles per hour shores. thank you, mr. chairman, for this time. welcome to our panel. >> chairwoman, thank you for that extraordinary powerful statement and for your continued support, get not only of the cuban people but people who are dealing with tyranny all of the world. >> i hope you get your visa.

>> don't hold your breath. >> i would like to know yield to my friend and colleague, mr. cicilline. >> i want to thank you and treachery are calling today's hearing on this very important issue. i did want to thank the witnesses were here today, and thank you in advance for sharing your insight and your expenses. i know that some of you are bravely joining us today to share their personal stories of her difficult and painful experiences, and we are really intended to you or your will is to do that. as i i discussed yesterday which administers witnesses during our full committee hearing i like many continue to the concerns about the cuban government treats its citizens. but it's clear the united states policy and cuba over the past several decades has not worked either. i am hopeful that president obama's effort to engage in real substantive negotiations to a more honest cultural exchange, economic trade and diplomatic ties with cuba will ultimately benefit the united states and more importantly, the cuban

people. i hope the cuban government will come to the negotiating table with a real desire to work with the united states toward a more free, open and tolerant society for the cuban people. it's important for us to pay close attention to the ongoing negotiations to make sure any changes are implement in a way that maintains our commitment for basic values in human rights. so i thank the witnesses against for being here and look forward to your perspective and relationship between the united states and cuba begins to change. without i yield back. >> i yield to my good friend and colleague who's been a very powerful -- and thank him for joining us. is a member of the appropriations committee and he does us the honor of being here. ..

just want to make a couple of comments in the ranking member was very kind in her instruction to mention how some of us might have family history. at issue of human rights has nothing to do with family history. because i for one m. opposed to oppression in communist china, in north korea in vietnam and i don't know i was a very young man when we had sanctions against south africa and i supported the sanctions in south africa. i'm assuming that the ranking member was also opposed to

sanctions and south africa because i'm assuming obviously that she is also as consistent as the chairman is on these issues. i supported it as a young man those sanctions against south africa. doing business with the apartheid regime was not to help the struggling freedom of the folks who were struggling for freedom in south africa. all it does was help prop up that regime in south africa. so mr. chairman i couldn't let this time slide by without being here. >> would the gentleman yield? i really was only trying to acknowledge the fact that i realize people have personal situations and i wasn't trying to say that you know that's the only reason you are concerned about cuba. it's just hard if you have a different opinion. i just wanted to respect what i knew you and iliana's family had been through. that was all. >> i think the ranking woman as i said for your kind statements

and i took it as a kind statement. i'm just saying the issue of human rights and the consistency of that is important. when we look at the folks that i here today, i mentioned south africa. in front of us today are the mandela's, are the future leaders of a free and democratic cuba. when folks talk about cuba they sometimes confuse the regime with cuba. no, this is cuba in front of us today. they who have spent years in prison. jorge luis garcia perez antúnez 17 years in prison. i would ask him about the conditions of the prisons. ask how well the cuban people are treated.

ask sarah fonseca and go to youtube and look at her videos to find out how respected and how well the cuban people who dared just speak out for freedom are treated. ask burda soler about what happens when you just walk peacefully with a flower in your hand going to church and asking for freedom of their relatives. ask her how the cuban people are treated. so at a time win when during the state of the union our president spoke about cuba about the first time in my recollection that i see a president speak in the state of the union about cuba and not even mention, not even mention human rights. not even mention democracy, not even mention, not even give lip service to elections in cuba. i am grateful to you

mr. chairman for bringing these heroes the future leaders, and others, the future leaders of cuba to this united states congress to testify. because again at a time when the president, and when our president has decided to ignore the repression, the arrest even sending up arms to north korea for the castro regime, this house as it always has will continue to stand with you, with the future leaders of cuba, with the people of cuba and not for the regime. i'm grateful for the opportunity mr. chairman to be able to sit here for a few minutes. thank you. >> mr. diaz-balart thank you for your very powerful statement. i would like to now recognize the chairman. >> well thank you mr. chair.

it's difficult to follow that from a new colleague so i won't. i won't try to follow that. all i will do is say thank you for this hearing mr. chairman and especially in light of the president's decision to somehow restart diplomacy with the regime currently in charge in cuba. they talk and there are still concerns for some of us about why the president would have the used the process he used sidestepping the state department having over a year of secret meetings that didn't involve the normal process but that part aside it really is all about the human rights cuban people why it's so interesting to me the discussion about normalization of the relationship is really what we are here about today and i appreciate that you and the ranking member have decided that we are going to bring in some people to talk about some basic freedoms and the situation,

exercise the oversight that is the jurisdiction of this committee. because thankfully the president has acknowledged that he does not have the authority to dismantle as he suggested, the embargo and start to normalize relationships with cuba. that's up to congress and hopefully it starts here today and we can talk about how people can have basic fundamental rights to assemble with people that they want, to speak freely on their own behalf and god for bid even against their government and the people can actually practice their faith in public and be proud of it. i am looking forward to being part of the process and i thank you again for holding this hearing and for the witnesses, i look forward to your testimony today and i yield back. >> thank you very much. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> a leader in this congress. >> thank you mr. chairman and i

deeply appreciate being here. forgive me for being late but i wanted to be here to pay tremendous respect for those who have come to testify today. each of us are still searching on the merits of wide the president would make the unilateral decision that he made to provide diplomatic relationships with cuba against the wisdom of a dozen previous presidents. what he has done is elevate a terrorist state along with cuba is syria, sudan, iran. they are terrorist states and now they have used the credit of the world at this stage is acceptable to the united states. it's a very sad day. i have worked for the last 30 years with missionaries in cuba. they tell me their plight of the

religious inequities and the challenges that they face with people living, trying to live out their faith. so i am deeply concerned over the impact of what will happen. the elevation we have given to the marxist doctrine that will be encouraged throughout the world. we have dealt with cuba on an ongoing basis in the united nations. they sought to engage those who opposed the united states and those of our closest allies including israel. so i'm here to pay respect to you and to thank you for your commitment and to clearly say to you that we stand with you fully engaged on behalf of the wonderful people of cuba. thank you and god bless you. >> thank you very much mr. pittenger. it's a distinct honor and

privilege to welcome our distinguished witnesses. they are doing here in washington what they would not be able to do in cuba especially the four that rogue congress where there is really no real free and fair elections. let me begin first with mr. jorge luis garcia perez antúnez who is a leader in cuban democratic movement. he was inspired early in life by reading the universal declaration of human rights rejecting the communist indoctrination that he was hearing in the schools. antúnez as he is known to us all is the leader of a nonviolent movement to promote human rights and democracy. he was arrested in 1990 for peacefully protesting the castro brothers oppressive regime and spend the next 17 years 17 years in jail as a political prisoner. he endured horrific torture beatings, solitary confinement and denial of needed medical care that almost cost him his

life. since his release in 2007 antúnez has continued to advance the cause of human rights in cuba. he also knows first-hand the discrimination suffered by afro-cuban's on a daily basis and a focus upon aggressive racism implored by the castro regime. we will then hear from ms. berta soler who is the leader following the death of the founder. it now has evolved into a powerful human rights group opens while cuban women. ms. soler and four members of the ladies in white received a sakharov freedom for thought by the european parliament in 2006. the castro brothers barred them from attending the awards ceremony. she and her husband have remained in cuba since his release, rejecting, rejecting an

offer of immigration from spain to continue their struggle for human rights and democracy in cuba. i would also note the ladies in white have dominated with others in a joint request to the nobel peace prize committee along with dr. baschet another afro-cuban and medical doctor who has been tortured horrifically as well. he testified here as you know by way of a phone hookup and told us do not do not and the embargo. get the conditions first. get human rights and durable human rights at that before that embargo is lifted. he said that even though there is great risk to himself in articulating that. he pointed out as many others have pointed out that the europeans have been trading with cuba for decades with no and daily ration whatsoever and has been a lifeline frankly to a dictatorship which russia first provided in that venezuela and

unfortunately trade coming in from europe and canada. then we will hear from ms. sarah fonseca who grew up in a household that opposed the communist system based on the principles and their religious beliefs. dude her family's faith she was denied the right to complete her studies. in 2004 she became a member of the personal rights party affiliated with this andrei sakharov foundation. in 2000 she joined the rosa parks civil rights women's movement for which became the delegate in the city of havana. that same year she also began participating with the ladies in white as a lady of support. she and her family have experienced numerous organized mob attacks and her house has been vandalized and search by government agents. as a result she has sought refugee status in the united states. and we will hear from mr. jeff thale who oversees the washington office of latin america's research and advocacy of latin american policy.

along with a focus on specific countries mr. thale led the team that offered 14 new ties as well as recommendations from directions in u.s. policy toward latin america. mr. thale has studied cuba issue since the mid-1990s and has traveled to cuba more than a dozen times. i wish i could get that these up. including organizing delegations for academics and members of congress and coordinated advocacy of this issue with coalition of business agricultural groups who favor lifting the general travel ban on cuba. i would like to now yield the floor to antúnez. [speaking spanish] >> translator: honorable congressman christopher smith good morning to all participating members. [speaking spanish] >> translator: my name is jorge luis garcia perez antúnez.

i am a former political prisoner who has spent 17 continuous years of political imprisonment. [speaking spanish] >> translator: with the sole crime of calling out in a public square in my hometown. [speaking spanish] >> translator: for the reforms such as those that were taking place back then in communist europe. [speaking spanish] >> translator: within the prisons i remain steadfast in my condition is a political prisoner. [speaking spanish] >> translator: into to my constant struggle to denounce human rights violations from within prison walls. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i was subjected to the most refined forms of torture and cruel punishment. [speaking spanish] >> translator: for example on

the morning of 14 october 1994 high-ranking officers from the political police in spite of the fact that my hands were handcuffed behind my back six dogs on me. [speaking spanish] >> translator: because i did not accept the regime's indoctrination program within prison walls. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i was sent to the most inhospitable and rigorous prison. [speaking spanish] >> translator: later with very courageous brothers from the prison we founded the political prisoners organization. [speaking spanish] >> translator: which in spite of repression managed to unify hundreds of political prisoners in order to carry out civic

resistance within the prison walls. [speaking spanish] >> translator: after i was released in 2007 i have continued with the struggle inside cuba where i think it is the most important. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i am currently active in the orlando's national civic resistance front. [speaking spanish] >> translator: this is a national organization which carries out protests in the defense of human rights throughout cuba. [speaking spanish] >> translator: today i am here in the name of my brothers and sisters of the resistance. [speaking spanish] >> translator: and most especially in the name of those who are imprisoned for their ideas which there are dozens of. [speaking spanish]

>> translator: they have remained in prison in spite of the process of release agreed upon by president barack obama and dictator raul castro. [speaking spanish] >> translator: among my imprisoned brothers i want to mention armando among others. [speaking spanish] >> translator: these men are part of a long list of heroes whose only crime has been first of all to oppose the dictatorship and second of all to continue resisting within

prison walls. [speaking spanish] >> translator: a few days ago we learned that the president of this great inhospitable nation raul castro had agreed to reestablish diplomatic relations. [speaking spanish] >> translator: as well as the elimination of the embargo. and as if this were not enough -- who participated in the murder of four u.s. citizens were exchanged for innocent contractor allen gross. [speaking spanish] >> translator: these agreements which are considered

by an important part of the cuban resistance as a betrayal of the hopes for freedom of the cuban people. [speaking spanish] >> translator: are unacceptable. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the principles and the freedom of the country do not belong to any government no matter how powerful or influential the government may be. [speaking spanish] >> translator: there is underway in international efforts expressed by the obama castro accords to promote a suppose of evolution within the castro regime. [speaking spanish] >> translator: this is the fraudulent change promoted by the castro regime in order to perpetuate self empowerment. [speaking spanish]

>> translator: this delusion is manipulated by the dictatorship in order to perpetuate sovereign power. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the castro dictatorship cannot be reformed. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the castro dictatorship is based on the negation of democratic society and everything this represents. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the castro dictatorship not only seeks to control its own people it also seeks to exploit this repression. [speaking spanish] >> translator: it seeks to support other countries. what does does real change changing cuba main? [speaking spanish] >> translator: it means the restitution of all civil rights. it means general amnesty for all political prisoners.

[speaking spanish] >> translator: it means the right to organize political parties and independent labor unions. [speaking spanish] >> translator: real change in cuba means free real elections internationally supervised free elections. [speaking spanish] >> translator: it means the separation from power of the castro brothers. [speaking spanish] >> translator: this is recognizing current u.s. policy towards cuba and it should remain so. [speaking spanish] >> translator: because it constitutes the best possible support for the cuban resistance. [speaking spanish] >> translator: and majority the cuban resistance has signed on to the agreement for democracy in cuba. [speaking spanish] >> translator: this is a roadmap of 10 elemental points

towards democracy in cuba. [speaking spanish] >> translator: we ask recognition from the congress and the united states government and for what it represents as a clear path towards democracy in cuba. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i ask the american people and it's freely elected congress that it maintained its support for the right of the cuban people to be free. we may be close to true changing cuba. [speaking spanish] >> translator: a drop in the international price of oil, the instability in venezuela which has been the main supporter of the castro regime. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the civic resistance which is widespread throughout the island.

and how this resistance is increasingly coordinating itself. [speaking spanish] >> translator: as is taking place with the forum for freedoms and rights all indicate this. [speaking spanish] >> translator: this is a moment to demand real concession from the castro regime. [speaking spanish] >> translator: only this can mean normal relations between the united states and cuba. cubans can be as successful on the island as they have been abroad. what we need is freedom. the cuban resistance struggles for this freedom. we need your understanding and your support. thank you. >> antúnez thank you very much for that powerful testimony.

we do have a series of votes on the house floor. we will have to take a short recess so ms. soler if you wouldn't mind we will wait and come back for questions and i do hope members of the press and our audience will stay because we have some very powerful testimony so we stand in short recess. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> the subcommittee will present a hearing and get to our -- apologize to the distinguished witnesses.

we did have a vote on the house floor. we will begin with their begin with her second witness ms. berta soler if you could proceed. [speaking spanish] >> translator: distinguished members of the subcommittee above all i want to thank you for this meeting. [speaking spanish] >> translator: and also to thank you thank all of the people and organizations who have made it possible for me to testify in the human rights situation in my country, cuba. [speaking spanish] >> translator: we are

presently living. particularly defining moment for the future of our country. [speaking spanish] >> translator: in the wake of the recent announced reestablishment of diplomatic relations between cuba and the united states. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i am appearing here as the leader of the ladies in white. [speaking spanish] >> translator: a group of women activists who support change towards democracy and our country through nonviolent means. [speaking spanish] >> translator: inspired by the example of women such as rosa parks and karen mccain among others. [speaking spanish] >> translator: do with courage

and determination for full enjoyment of civil rights in this great nation. [speaking spanish] >> translator: now 50 years after the events in selma alabama and testifying before the subcommittee whose mandate includes global human rights. [speaking spanish] >> translator: it is a great honor and historic opportunity for me to appear before you. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i also speak on

behalf of numerous leaders and activists from cuban civil society who have entrusted me with speaking for them before you. [speaking spanish] >> translator: it is a civil society that is particularly repressed by the intolerance of the government whose exercise of power consists of the systematic violation of its human rights of the cuban people. [speaking spanish] >> translator: just before he left cuba to be here last january 28 of the day we celebrate the birth of our founding father. [speaking spanish] >> translator: dozens of

activists were arrested in havana for attempting to place offering flowers at his statue. [speaking spanish] >> translator: in its totalitarian vision the dictatorship seeks a monopoly. on her national identity for use of force against all independent activists. [speaking spanish] >> translator: those respected international human rights organizations documented by human rights in cuba. [speaking spanish]

>> translator: on october 28 2013 the commission on human rights issued an injunction on behalf of members of the ladies in white to report protection in the state of systemic repression by the cuban authority. [speaking spanish] >> translator: to afford protection in the face of the repression by cuban authorities. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i submit precautionary measures for these purposes. [speaking spanish] >> translator: as well as the report initiated in the case before the commission. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i request these

reports be made part of the record of this hearing is documentary evidence for our testimony. [speaking spanish] >> translator: as proof of our testimony today. [speaking spanish] >> translator: these documents demonstrate political prisoners continues to be one of the most sensitive issues in cuba today. [speaking spanish] >> translator: reaching far beyond the periodical release of -- [speaking spanish]

>> translator: resolving this matter requires a unconditional agreement of everyone who has been jailed for political reasons on the island. ..

[speaking spanish] >> translator: separation of powers does not exist in cuba. freedom of expression and association continued to be repressed and constitution establishes the communist party as the driving force of society. >> translator: [speaking spanish] >> translator: the rights to strike is regarded as a crime of workers on and off the island are subject to conditions of labor, which has been denounced by international organizations. [speaking spanish] >> translator: at the international level. [speaking spanish]

>> translator: while these conditions prevail it is not possible to speak of links to change a part of the castro regime. [speaking spanish] >> translator: that same january 28, during his appearance before the third summit of -- the dictator raoul castro stated that you will not give up one millimeter. [speaking spanish] >> translator: for us this signals the continuation of

beatings, j. lincoln forced exiles can this commission against children in school. [speaking spanish] >> translator: and all matter of patterns intimidation and abuse with updating, for wanting to see a pluralistic democratic and inclusive cuba. [speaking spanish] >> translator: our aspirations are legitimate because they are under guided by the present declaration of human rights, to which cuba is a party and assigned international path of civil and political rights which have not been ratified by the dictatorship.

[speaking spanish] >> translator: our demands are quite concrete. [speaking spanish] >> translator: freedom for political prisoners. [speaking spanish] >> translator: recognition of civil society. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the elimination of all criminal decisions that criminalize freedom of speech and association. [speaking spanish] >> translator: and the right of the cuban people to choose their future for free oral elections. [speaking spanish] >> translator: we believe these demands are just and valid. [speaking spanish] >> translator: even more

importantly, for us to represent the most concrete exercise the politics. [speaking spanish] >> translator: a step in the direction of democratic coexistence. [speaking spanish] >> translator: cuba will change when the laws that enable and protect the criminal behavior of the forces of repression and corrupt elements assisting the regime change your. [speaking spanish] >> translator: in the name of those who have been executed. [speaking spanish] >> translator: in the name of cuban political prisoners. [speaking spanish] >> translator: in the name of the pilot from a mentoring organization brothers to the rescue murdered on the orders of fidel castro. [speaking spanish]

>> translator: in the name of the victim from the march 13 tug boat. [speaking spanish] >> translator: in the name of the victim of cuba's communist regime. [speaking spanish] >> translator: cuba yes, castro know. [speaking spanish] >> translator: thank you very much. >> i think very much for the powerful testimony and for providing very specific benchmarks that the cuban dictatorship needs to follow if cuba is to really be free. thank you so very very much. and that would like to know yield the floor to this consequent -- [speaking spanish] >> translator: good morning. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i was born in

1970 into a cuban family that since 1959 have been branded as nonexistent from the state's. [speaking spanish] >> translator: we were classified as contribution there is because we were opposed to the castro regime. [speaking spanish] >> translator: for over half a century, cuba, the castro regime has violated and violates human rights. [speaking spanish] >> translator: from the beginning there have been crimes, murders, political prisoners and people discriminated. [speaking spanish] >> translator: all those who speak out against the regime are brutally repressed him imprisoned or murdered.

[speaking spanish] >> translator: in spite of having been raised within communism, they were never able to convince us that that is a right way to live. [speaking spanish] >> translator: as a human rights activist, i participate in organizing demonstrations in havana spends a -- [speaking spanish] >> translator: among them, a historic demonstration in 2011 in the old capitol building in the central havana. [speaking spanish] >> translator: on that day, for women, in spite of repression, opened a banner displaying a slogan calling for

the release of all political prisoners. [speaking spanish] >> translator: hundreds of cubans witnesses attest. [speaking spanish] >> translator: we inspired many cubans to begin to shout along with us for freedom. [speaking spanish] >> translator: others carried out their own protests. [speaking spanish] at all times we felt the support of the people. [speaking spanish] >> translator: this protest was well worth a repression that we later suffered. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i have been repeatedly arrested. [speaking spanish] >> translator: they have beaten me senselessly in police stations to the point that they thought they had killed me. [speaking spanish] >> translator: on one

occasion, three do know police officers dragged me by my hair from one cell to another. [speaking spanish] >> translator: while they direct me by my hair from one cell to the other, they kicked me in my back and in my head. [speaking spanish] >> translator: once i was in the sale they were taking me too, and while i was still handcuffed behind my back a male police officer kicked me with all his strength in my head. [speaking spanish] >> translator: as a result of it i suffered permanent damage to my right kidney and with a series of damage to my spinal column. [speaking spanish] >> translator: to this day as a result of this beating i still

suffer him dizzy spells. [speaking spanish] ms. fonseca it is with this brutality and much worse -- [speaking spanish] >> translator: that the castro regime controlled the cuban people. [speaking spanish] >> translator: they do this to constantly show the people what the cost of rebellion is. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i want to emphasize that this type of repression continues today right now in cuba. [speaking spanish] >> translator: cubans cannot elect their leaders. [speaking spanish] >> translator: children are indoctrinated into schools and those who do not follow the brainwashing cannot finish their study a. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the people have

been condemned to sparsity hungry and misery by the regime. [speaking spanish] >> translator: a people without freedom of expression with all the media controlled by the government and hungry or easy to manipulate. [speaking spanish] >> translator: people think only about how to feed their family and although they do not like the way they're living they can only think about survival. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the cuban people are tired of imposition and dictatorship. [speaking spanish] >> translator: in order to escape, they venture out to the sea on makeshift rafts. [speaking spanish] >> translator: it is for these

reasons that we do not agree with the negotiations between the president of the united states barack obama and dictator raul castro. [speaking spanish] >> translator: why negotiate with the dictatorship without taking into account the people and their resistance? [speaking spanish] >> translator: what about all the use of suffering of beatings from the political police to the opposition of the people when they demanded freedom and democracy? [speaking spanish] >> translator: what about the political prisoners, the murderers who disappeared? [speaking spanish] >> translator: what has raul castro given in exchange? [speaking spanish] >> translator: only when all

political prisoners are released a. [speaking spanish] >> translator: only when all independent political parties and labor unions are legalized. [speaking spanish] >> translator: only went for a multiparty democratic elections are carried out. [speaking spanish] >> translator: only when human rights are respected, only then should the embargo be lifted. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i thank god for having been raised by a family which taught me truth. [speaking spanish] >> translator: for saying what was on my mind, for stating what was on my mind i wasn't able to finish my studies, and neither were my sons. [speaking spanish] >> translator: my family and i have been repressed, beaten. we been thrown into cells.

[speaking spanish] >> translator: my house was destroyed by those using sticks stones. [speaking spanish] >> translator: who hurled all types of power waste. [speaking spanish] >> translator: excrement, liquid chemicals. [speaking spanish] >> translator: this protect against my house was carried out by paramilitary thugs hired by the political police. [speaking spanish] >> translator: who -- to lift the embargo means to legitimize dictatorship. [speaking spanish] >> translator: to provide them with oxygen so they stay in power while repressing, jailing and murdering. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the cuban

people will not benefit from lifting the embargo for only the regime will benefit. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the castro dictatorship owns every company that exists in cuba. [speaking spanish] >> translator: note you couldn't get own their own business. a castro family owns cuba. [speaking spanish] >> translator: we have faith in the future of cuba because we have faith in the struggle of the cuban resistance. [speaking spanish] >> translator: there is only one resistance inside and outside cuba. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the agreement for democracy a historic document signed by a majority of the cuban resistance lays out a clear roadmap towards democracy. [speaking spanish]

>> translator: we want freedom, justice, and democracy for cuba now. [speaking spanish] >> translator: god bless cuba and the united states. [speaking spanish] >> translator: thank you. >> thank you for reminding us that the atrocities continue to this day. again underscoring the appalling lack of respect for fundamental human rights by the dictatorship dictatorship. so thank you for the great testament. >> thank you. i'm with the -- were to thank chairman smith and ranking member bass for convenient carrying on the issues of cuba. we are in nongovernmental weatherization. we've done research and advocacy on human rights issues in the americas. i have followed latin american human rights issue since the mid 1980s that i directed

w.o.l.a. to the program since 1995. i travel there regularly. i try to meet with a wide range of cubans, academics, catholic and protestant church leaders, government officials and government critics, contemplates the people who small business sector. i readily meet and have met with activists to cover the pleasure of meeting here with visiting cuban dissidents including miriam and manuel who spoke on a panel the other day in the senate. so the question before today really is and has the united states squandered an opportunity to vote human rights in cuba following the december 17 announcement? i think our basic position is that far from squandered an opportunity, our new posture towards cuba will open new paths to improve the human rights situation in the living conditions of cubans but it will provide opportunities to advance u.s. values interest in opening

new avenues of engagement through travel and trade for u.s. citizens, churches, academic and cultural institutions and businesses. over all will enhance the prospects for freedom of expression and for reform on the island. i want to very briefly comment on three issues. one is the human rights situation general situation in the country. the second what they see is the failed policy of isolation, and the third quickly, the opportunities for the ways in which engagement and advance the human rights situation and our interests. so on the first question of israel little doubt and my colleagues have talked about that there are serious to address problems in cuba. no one is unrealistic about that and no one has a rosy view of the situation. in addition to the human rights situation i think it's clear the cuban economy is overall fairly stagnant. many people especially young people are yearning for real opportunities. and the fact a modest economic

growth in cuba the last few years has led to increases in inequality. one group that is not benefited from some modest economic growth is afro-cuban families and youth but at the same time i want to be clear on the other side the pitch in cuba isn't uniformly grim. life expectancy is about what is in the united states because of public health measures and medical care. literacy levels in cuba are very high, as high as in the united states over all. reflecting universal public education. cuba just passed legislation this past summer to prevent discrimination based on sexual orientation. so very serious problems but for all its very series and its problems cuban spy don't face the kind of issues facing the country like saudi arabia or other oppressive regimes. so over all the question isn't whether there's a real human rights in cuba ever degrees that is but the question is what can

the united states do to improve it? for the last 85 years we have pursued a policy of isolation. i think it's fairly clear if you're of the testimony of the other panelists, that policy has failed to do anything to improve the human rights situation on the island. it has greater hardship for cuban citizens for normal cubans but it does not force the cuban government to change its policies or correct anything. in many ways it's offered the government a rationale to crack down. so the policy hasn't succeeded in bringing change in cuban government. at the same time it has relegated the united states both the u.s. government and u.s. society to the sidelines. and so the policy of isolation has failed i think it's pretty clear he has, the question is what about a policy engagement? no one thinks the policy of engagement is a magic solution

to the human rights problem in cuba but it's clear that historically series of engage with cuba our peers in which we have seen little relaxation, particularly the release of prisoners. under president carter during the time pope john paul ii visited, during the 2012 caucus with the church and the spanish government, all three of them sought significant relief. and the past month following extensive talks been cuba and the u.s. government, 53 political prisoners were released, something the release of a but on amnesty international's list. so other international actors as well the government of spain, canada, norway, number of international groups including european churches have seen specific benefits to efforts they have made for engagement with the cuban government rather than policies of isolationism. i think beyond the dialogue with cuban officials i think it's for things engagement with the. it will help reform inside the

human system and provide them more space and opportunity but it will benefit cuban families and the cuban to interact with people to people travelers. it's going to benefit religious interaction expand content between u.s. and cuban churches. telecommunications is going to offer new opportunities or internet access and information on the island. so overall i think it's pretty clear the policy of engagement is likely to expand, assist the small but growing private sector, increase cultural and religious context don't cubans connect to the outside world. if the united states is interest in helping ordinary cubans are moaning democratic values, that's the path we ought to pursue. we shouldn't be naïve and expectations about cuba's political leadership. this is the beginning of a long-term process to reduce tensions between the government and build bridges between the american cuban people. over time it will help open political space on the island. thank you. >> thank you for your testimony.

we're joined a member of the subcommittee what a previous engagement at the opening part of this hearing mr. coffin from florida. ideal time to him for an opening statement. >> thank you for coming today. mr. thale, i want to start by thanking you for coming. i just want to say for the record i'm a bit of a disagreement here. i think foreign direct investment was a good way to get these folks to come around we would be in a better place right now. the spaniards have had nice hotels for a long time and it just hasn't had enough of an impact. so i'm worried that we are just casting a lifeline to folks, two murders folks who were really about to go under. for mr. garcia, ms. soler, ms. fonseca, bienvenidos.

[speaking spanish] [speaking spanish] you have my full admiration, my

full respect for what you're doing in the fight that you were waging. an example, not only for your country but for my countrymen as well. and 80 that i can do to help you in this sacred fight, i am willing and enthusiastic to do so. i'm so sad sometimes brokenhearted for your suffering and your injuries. and i can't imagine what it would be like. [speaking spanish] and so i want to tell you whole heartedly how much i support what you are doing. [speaking spanish] >> mr. clawson, thank you so very, very much.

if you would like to respond, ms. bass does have a plane to catch and ask if she could -- >> yes, thinking mr. chair. and thank the witnesses for the testimony. i have a couple of questions. i sit on the board of the national endowment for democracy come and there's about 27 organizations that are funded to help with activists in cuba. some of the organizations are funded in cuba, some are funded in miami. and i just wondered one if you thought that the funding was helpful? and then also the three of you are here today, and i just wondered how you were able to come? are you here for a long time, or how you were able to get out of cuba? do you travel back and forth? those are the questions i wanted to ask the three of you and that like to ask a question of the other witness.

[speaking spanish] >> translator: yes. all types of aid received by the opposition in cuba is very important. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i can tell you that thanks to the aid we've received in cuba we been able to save at least one life. [speaking spanish] and 50 and i will give you an example. [speaking spanish] >> translator: when you have a cell phone in your hand you have a weapon with which to defend yourself. [speaking spanish] >> translator: without the aid

we get from abroad we couldn't pay for that cell phone. [speaking spanish] >> translator: on many occasions we've been able to transmit from one corner of the island to the other about an activist who disappeared or was arrested or otherwise there would be no news about. [speaking spanish] >> translator: and thanks to that kind of communication we are able to go out into the streets and demand freedom for those who have been arrested. >> you know i'm relatively new on the board so i was just learning about the funding, but given that we don't even have mail exchange not much i don't think, between our two countries, i was surprised that you're even able to get any aid

from the united states. [speaking spanish] >> translator: yes it is very clear that you can receive aid from one family member to another. [speaking spanish] >> translator: that's why the cuban community is so important. >> and then also about to travel. are you able to go back and forth between -- i know you're here today for this. i don't know if you've been there for a while but you're able to go back and forth? [speaking spanish] >> translator: in my case i'm a refugee in the united states. >> okay. but you guys are going back, right? didn't you mention that you were -- [speaking spanish]

>> translator: at this moment in time some activists are able to leave cuba and come back thanks to the aid that we receive from some ngos. [speaking spanish] >> translator: this doesn't mean that we are free because there many activist who are kept from leaving the regime from cuba. >> sure. i wish a surprise to anybody especially financially but the fact that you're able because they know what you are doing right? [speaking spanish] >> translator: i want to give you an example. there are former political prisoners -- [speaking spanish] >> translator: the are at

least 12 former political prisoner who are part of a larger group of 75 were released from prison that are still under house arrest and they can't leave cuba. [speaking spanish] >> translator: and i give you a more recent example. one of the ladies in white was released on a december night and when she went to request a passport, it was denied to her. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i label the change that raul castro did as a better reporter as long as they can determine who leads, interest there is no freedom to

travel. >> finally because i promise that you i would be quick, i want to ask mr. thale if you could talk about some of in the president's proposals, it's going to allow or economic exchange between our two countries. and i'm wondering what impact you think that might have, especially on the freedom or lack thereof of people who open up their own businesses? i mean i understand there's some businesses by people that have restaurants in their homes and stuff like that. i don't know to what extent there's extensive free enterprise, but do you think that is ultimately going to assist the development of the? >> thank you for the question. so cuba 10 years ago about 90% of the population of the cuban workforce worked for the state or state businesses. today that's probably down to about 70% of the number of people to work for themselves in small businesses have gone up

from about 150,000 four years ago to about half a million. has been a substantial increase. some of those businesses are quite successful and have a dozen, 15 employers to the vast majority of them are small vendors, small restaurant, people selling and dealing out of their home. i think that the opening we've offered to the private sector's going to take a while for that to work through but it is going that will strengthen the capacity of those businesses and the creation of a small private business sector. i think we'll see change in the area over time. >> thank you. i yield back my time. >> first of all and introduce a political prisoner for 22 years and was subjected to heinous torture, unbelievable acts of brutality. thank you for joining us at today's hearing. i would also like to introduce

-- who is the wife of -- and a leader in her own right. she founded the rosa parks civil rights movement and has spoken out bravely along with her husband. thank you for joining us at today's hearing as well. i'd like to ask a few open questions and if any of my other distinguished colleagues. first of all if you could, if you would mind speaking to the issue of mistreatment of afro-cubans. i've learned over the last supper years, and i've been working on human rights issues, i've been in congress 35 years, i've been working on human rights issues for 35 years. but there's been i think a lack of attention given to the additional mistreatment endured by afro-cubans. all people who aspire to freedom and democracy the full weight

of tyranny comes down upon the but there also seems be a further differentiation and focus, negative biased, prejudiced against afro-cubans. if you could speak to that. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i appreciate your concern and your interest at all of you have shown today. [speaking spanish] >> translator: for the cause of cuba. [speaking spanish] >> translator: and i appreciate that concerned even from those who are in agreement with the barack obama policies. [speaking spanish] >> translator: before i answer your question drug would like to request something. [speaking spanish] and with all due respect one of the panelists i feel great pain

of a few moments ago your. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i've felt ill at ease. [speaking spanish] >> translator: to listen from you the cuba situation is bad but not that bad. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the situation in cuba is bad but not that bad. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i really don't understand with all due respect what you mean by situation is bad but not that bad. [speaking spanish] >> translator: and when you say this about cuban mothers -- [speaking spanish] >> translator: to go to sleep crying because they have no food for the kids the next day. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i think of those young women who have had -- [speaking spanish]

>> translator: so they can feed their families. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i think of the fact that cubans can barely afford to live -- [speaking spanish] >> translator: i think about the gross inequality between the regime leaders and the people. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i think about the moral, spiritual and economic poverty of the people of cuba. [speaking spanish] >> translator: there may be some educational achievement in cuba. [speaking spanish] >> translator: but when we're talking about a system of education which consist of indoctrination -- [speaking spanish] >> translator: when all three of us were here were discriminate from pursuing higher education as youth because we have different

political ideas. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i think that invalidates with all due respect your argument. [speaking spanish] >> translator: it's true cuba is a medical our. [speaking spanish] >> translator: cuba is not a medical power -- [speaking spanish] >> translator: cuba as many specific hospitals and clinics which are -- [speaking spanish] >> translator: but those clinics are only for people who can pay with dollars. [speaking spanish] >> translator: they are only for tourists or for the elite. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i also heard you say that the human rights is not that grievous. [speaking spanish] >> translator: how hard it must be for someone like you to

listen to. [speaking spanish] >> translator: is it not that bad to be imprisoned merely for display a sign calling for freedom? [speaking spanish] >> translator: is it not that bad to be imprisoned like a nest of florida's? [speaking spanish] >> translator: and i want to emphasize his case. [speaking spanish] >> translator: mr. barack obama released three confessed spies to the u.s. who were conspiring against the civility of the cicada of the country. [speaking spanish] >> translator: however this young man was sentenced to 30 years in prison and. [speaking spanish] >> translator: and he spent 18 years in prison. [speaking spanish] >> translator: because he passed on information to the u.s. about 26 cuban spies who were being spent -- sent to the u.s. to spy. [speaking spanish]

>> translator: it's extremely bad. [speaking spanish] >> translator: and if you'll allow me to want to comment upon your reflection. [speaking spanish] >> translator: and and i want to address directly what you asked. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i want to ask what is it you can't go into cuba? what is it you can't travel to cuba? [speaking spanish] >> translator: because if you are allowed to go into the cuban prison, all you will see a black people, hundreds of black men and. [speaking spanish] >> translator: you will see men who would rather jump from a rooftop. [speaking spanish] >> translator: and commit suicide or you will see men being bitten by dogs. [speaking spanish] >> translator: you will see the beatings, the persecution. [speaking spanish] >> translator: you will see these very far-flung senses

these very high sentences. [speaking spanish] >> translator: you will see dozens and dozens of political prisoners that were not even mentioned in these negotiations. [speaking spanish] >> translator: if you want to go to cuba so we tell them you are not simply visit cubans and you just want to visit. [speaking spanish] >> translator: i think this addresses which asked about. >> mr. garcia, thank you very do much. the "washington post" has done several editorials very very critical of president obama's opening up are moving towards opening up diplomatic relations, for the relations. and they made a very very salient point that i would just like to underscore. and that is we are repeating

mistakes that have been made in the past. when bill clinton went to vietnam and opened up, opened the relations with vietnam which followed very quickly with the bilateral trade agreement under president bush, many others said it was a mistake not to get human rights reforms, durable reforms first and then move to the diplomatic recognition followed by an economic relationship. the post points out that it is the way mr. obama has gone about this it is a mistake, not reform first but moving in to provide a lifeline as one of their editors pointed out, a lifeline to addicted or should at a time when venezuela is less capable to provide funding. we know several years ago that funding from what was in the soviet union ceased to exist. a very opportune time to press the case for human rights and we blew it when it came to vietnam. i have had passed in this

congress three congresses and counting the vietnam human rights act. the majority leader, minority leader harry reid would not put it up for a vote by three times bipartisan legislation with clear benchmarks towards vietnam because they are in a race to the bottom with china and north korea. cuba is already there. and yet we are moving having not learned a single lesson from those failed openings where they get stronger, the dictatorship becomes further empowered. i firmly disagree with your comments about isolation but we're talking about an angel enabling a lifeline to quote the "washington post." and one of their editors was president obama's the trail of cuban democrats -- betrayal. many have been rearrested that were let out and, of course, i pointed out we're just under 200 we know of that have been arrested in the last several weeks alone.

so that has been again that fidel castro plays. he lets people in and out but always -- the entirety of this dictatorship but i do question if i could on an issue in a way you'll to my good friend and colleague, ileana ros-lehtinen. i've been working come as a leader in the area of combating human trafficking. no prime author. it is our landmark law to combat modern-day slavery. the state department -- they put an annual listing of countries using what we contain in the law called minimum standards. the worst designation is tier three. cuba again is a tier three country, and egregious violator of trafficking with full complicity of the castro brothers and the rest of the government making money hand

over fist by forcible prostitution, and by child prostitution. in 2004 frank calzone had documentation and was working the human rights commission in geneva. he had documentation of the complicity of this dictatorship with child prostitution and child explication. he was knocked out cold, hit in the face by cuba and so-called diplomats, thugs. freedom house came to defense and and made a very strong statement against it because he was bearing witness to the ugly truth of child prostitution. and again the state department chronicles of this. cuban citizens have been subject to force kashmir forced prostitution of their cuba as well. in hotels that were mentioned by mr. clawson and in other places

renting children are dead israeli of what this barbaric regime is all about. they make money by child sex tourism. and again is not an open society. i would love for investigators to be able to go there and of course, look to bring charges against those including higher ups in the government. tier three country. i would like to any of our witnesses if they would like to speak to the despicable record of cuba when it comes to the modern-day slave trade? [speaking spanish] >> translator: it is very

important for you to know that the cuban government promotes child prostitution in cuba. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the cuban government knows that there are many youth who don't go to school who are on the streets looking for ways to make money to feed their family. [speaking spanish] >> translator: it is shameful to say but i must say -- [speaking spanish] >> translator: just last week there was a group of young women saying they were organizing themselves and save themselves for american dream so they could sell themselves to american tourists. [speaking spanish] >> translator: if we call the

prostitution of hundreds of cuban youth empowerment -- [speaking spanish] >> translator: if we call cubans who are going to try and steal and take the place of work nor do you do their families, if we call this empowerment -- [speaking spanish] >> translator: if we call the apartment that women like the ladies in white who demand freedom and are beaten, if we call this empowerment -- [speaking spanish] >> translator: if we call empower but the castro regime bills teachers who are poorly

trained -- [speaking spanish] >> translator: the children of human rights activists are failing their tests and they are damaged or harmed in their study because their parents are involved in human rights activities. [speaking spanish] >> translator: this is not what we want for cuba. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the cuban government destroyed to build a chinese model into cuba. [speaking spanish] and 50 the cuban government is looking for -- [speaking spanish] >> translator: the cuban regime wants needs oxygen. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the cuban government wants a capitalist economic system. [speaking spanish] >> translator: anti-communist political system. [speaking spanish]

>> translator: we can't tolerate this over half a century. [speaking spanish] >> translator: human rights first, economy second. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the cuban people are suffering hungry not because of the american government. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the cuban people are hungry because the communist system doesn't work. [speaking spanish] >> translator: we don't want a succession in cuba. we don't want a continuation of the reaching. [speaking spanish] >> translator: we don't want a dynasty in power. [speaking spanish] >> translator: we want free elections. [speaking spanish] >> translator: the resources that are for the people of cuba -- [speaking spanish] >> translator: the resources

that are meant for the cuban people raul castro will take to strengthened the oppression apparatus. thank you. >> thank you so much, mr. smith. thank you for calling this important hearing. thank you to our witnesses who are victims of the castro regime for being here today. [speaking spanish] i'm humbled to be in your presence. some of you live in cuba, others are here now but have family in cuba so i know that you are very brave for being here today. this is sort of an insurance policy that you have offered of them, mr. smith. because by being here today or have still have some degree of protection that those are the figures, as brave as you are

will not have. so i know you worry about them. thank you for holding up their photos. thank you for describing the current dismal human rights situation in my native homeland of cuba. and i wanted to just give this statement and ask you some questions. how has the regime's treatment of its critics changed since december 17? do you think this announcement will force changes? i will ask you to respond in a minute. how does the regime manipulate the press here in the united states and elsewhere and visitors and tourists on the island that may come back here with a distorted picture of what's going on? this morning i did a radio interview, and the reporter says, i know cuba, i was there for a week.

you have heard from some today that castro's cuba is a picture of a quality, that the regime supports everyone's rights, including the rights of afro-cubans. thank you for pointing out the kind of apartheid government that exists there, especially the medical apartheid and the present apartheid. -- present apartheid. thank you for pointing out the mistreatment of afro-cubans. and mr. thale, you testified that picture in cuba is not a uniformly grim one. the fact that you essentially say hey, look, it could be worse, i suppose so it could always be worse. and it's particularly disgusting and it's an affront to the panelists who sit beside you and the countless number of people who have been jailed for expressing their god-given and

fundamental human rights to thousands who have died trying desperately to flee cuba. this is such a workers paradise where the situation is not that bad, that i have people i see people in my district. they washed ashore trying to flee castro's cuba. even now as all of these negotiations have taken place, 40% increase in the number of the cubans fleeing the situation that is not that bad. people who live in constant fear because of the regime is watching them closely, for the millions more who have managed to flee over the years. you are repeating the castro propaganda about good public health care. is of the constituents i represent now. they fled cuba. you should come to miami and

meet with my constituents and have him tell you about this great medical care. i've seen in a michael moore documentary, sicko. where does that exist? where is that medical care for these folks? i know that if you're a tourist you will certainly treated well. it's a propaganda. public education, advancement of lgbt rights. the real truth is that the good medical care is just a show for the castro regime reserved only for the regime officials and the tourist. i know because i represent that community. my district is overwhelmingly cuban americans. i don't know how i got elected. it's just a fluke i guess. but these are the folks, a vote for me and a vote for mario and a vote for carlos, a vote for marco rubio bob menendez. but we know that the system of medical care in cuba for all

vast majority of cubans, they have access to this system. please come into to the people as they get off the planes from cuba. thrown in jail for disclosing the truth about abortions being committed, and the poor hospital conditions. and mr. smith has brought that out time and time again. life expectancy rates and other health care statistics in cuba where do we get those from? you're doing a survey in cuba? they are manipulated by the regime. it is unbelievable that we swallow this. and you have fallen into the trap, mr. thale, that castro set for you, willing to swallow the regime -- cuba and regime, to give legitimacy. they are utter falsehoods and repeated over and over again to the testament of the truth, of the public, especially the cuban

people. it's such a great system, the public education system. as these witnesses have pointed out it's a public indoctrination program. have you seen the textbooks meant to stymie free thinking and free will? progress on sexual this commission? please. i have met with prominent given lgbt advocates. they have a big -- vigorously dismissed the claims of progress on lgbt they've condemned the continued denial of human rights for everyone. ..

they have had to endure, isn't particularly grim. ire 17 years in prison, not particularly grim. not that bad. the beatings including 13 who were detained, who were detained on sunday but the press doesn't cover that anymore because they want their bureau in havana. you talk about how the engagement has led to the release of political prisoners. you point to this false list of 53 as part of the december 11th announcement. but what happens the next day? when we're not looking? when people aren't looking for cuba? when the press has done their stand-ups and they have got their bureau, they don't want to lose that bureau oh, no. how many more of dissidents are

rearrested? how many more are detained? how many of the 53 had been released prior to the agreement. or are you under the fallacy that that 53 list authentic? haven't some have been rearrested? what about the other one who is never made it to the list. why 53? there were 9,000 imprisoned last year according to reports. how about those individual that mr. anunes held up, what happened to them? the modus operandi of the regime is do a bait and switch. release some prisoners out of expediency. to promulgate the propaganda. when the spotlight is off, rearrest the people or find new ones to throw in jail. now they don't want to wait until press attention is out. like i said, just on monday a young rapper was put in jail for a year, for dangerousness which could lead to a crime. how can you justify that? how can you say we have

liberated these 53 and it is not that bad? i want to ask you, to our panelists here, mr. antunas has it not been that bad for you? when you were in jail, not that bad? not that grim? [speaking spanish] >> translator: i think the situation with the violation of human rights in cuba is much worse than we can describe. it has been written about some documentaries have been made. but none of them capture the full reality.

they can't capture the brutal reality of imprisonment in cuba. maybe those who don't have a very good idea or don't have all the information but what a cues ban prison is like. could come to think that a prisoner in cuba is merely deprived of their freedom. they could they could ignore the, they could ignore the prisoners are injected with water and told they're being injected with some kind of sedative. there have been cells through all cuban prisons where murders and beatings have taken place. there have been clinically-induced suicide which have taken place in cuban prisons. i will never forget i will

never forget samuel simpson gonzalez. when he was manipulated by prison authorities to jump off a third-story rooftop. i will never forget the use of shakira, a device for torturing in cuba. i don't want to consume too much your time telling you about all the horrors of the prisons. because i have so many examples of torture. that we wouldn't have enough time for me to go over all of them. if you asked me how i could describe political imprisonment in cuba? i would ask you to ask dante. and find it in his great work.

you can't talk about process of engagement of dialogue of understanding, if you ignore a something as important as crucial as, as essential as political prisoners. we often talk about the embargo. and we hear mentioned in different forms. eloquent voices speak out against the embargo. however one of members of congress who is not present right now, blames the embargo for not being able to go to cuba. but it should be mentioned perhaps they should mention the only real, the only real embargo, only real blockade that

the cubans face, in the cruel, criminal castro dictatorship. that does not limit itself on a weekly basis beats women on the streets. a regime who murdered in the hospital a courageous woman like ladies of white founder. or who murdered orlando mayo by not letting him drink water for 18 days. yeah, there will be changes. there will be improvements. but not for the people. it will be for that regime, that has imprisoned so many cubans that has repressed cubans and that is frankly carrying the lead in these negotiations or

taking the lead in these negotiations. those of us sitting here, are not extremists. we're not backward-looking people. we're not against policies of engagement and understanding. and we think that the best way to solve a conflict is by approachment. but what we can't accept but we can't accept that you confuse cuba with the regime that oppresses cuba. what we will not accept, and we have no reason to accept is that the cuban opposition be ignored in these negotiations. the castro regime has found in

barack obama's engagement policy part of the incentives it need in order to continue repressing and in order to maintain itself in power, as well as to legitimatize itself internationally these accord have been. the cuban resistance is not recognized. the, these accords. and we do not count for moral authority or executive authority. no matter how powerful they may be. we are appreciative of international solidarity and we accept it. we respect those who think that president obama's policies will benefit cuba.

but all that we ask, please, is that you ren us and that you take us -- recognize us and take us into account. >> [speaking spanish night. >> >> translator: very important for you to know that the cuban government, it is very important for you to know that the cuban government uses state terrorism against defenseless women. the cuban government, is not a sovereign government. the cuban government has not been elected therefore therefore, we cubans are the sovereignty of cuba. we have the right to express our opinion. it is very important that you

know we have no problem we have no problem with the government of the united states. because they have always tried to support the people of cuba. what we are against is the way in which these negotiations are being conducted. because we are the sovereignty of the people of cuba. the secrecy surrounding the list of political prisoners who are going to be released, was another, another deceit of the cuban government. 14 prisoners had already been released.

but these these 14 were not free men like those three spies that president obama unconley handed over to the castro regime. these political prisoners that were released by castro regime have been released on parole. you must take this into account. we can help and how the u.s. government deals with the cuban government. you can't do business with criminals and if you do, you must have conditions. you can see how raul castro

himself is already setting conditions but which are the conditions we're demanding from the cuban government? how can it be possible with so much violence is exerted against women simply because they're trying to practice their religious freedom? how can it be possible possible peacefully walking on sidewalk in your country and regime hurls, pro-government thugs

military thugs against you? how can it be possible that the police take us to faraway parts of the city and that they fracture our wrists with therapist toll butts? it is a suffering people. it's a people that needs freedom. freedom depend on us cubans. but we need material and spiritual support of other governments. i will go further back. in 1980 100,000 cubans left cuba. teachers engineers physicians

castro politicians, castro called them scum and leaving due to economic reasons. >> i will interrupt you a second. because i know you have a flight to catch. i just want to say something before, before you leave. this is the news of today. dissidents arrested for protests near cuban national assembly. this morning so much as changed. a group of 12 dissidents were arrested as they tried to stage a protest near the havana headquarters of the cuban regime's national assembly. the dissidents, part of the orlando zapata civil resistance front, took out a sign demanding the elimination of castro's draconian laws that ever wonderful social dangerousness and the ratification of the u.n. human rights covenants. their whereabouts remain unknown

in stark contrast this release says cuban democracy activist, jorge perez and sara, both leaders of this group are freely and opening testifying before the u.s. house of rest in washington, d.c. this morning. what a contrast. you've got to hop on a plane and i know that you will be marching with the ladies in white on sunday. we will pray for you. we will pray for all of the people of cuba. you make us proud. you make freedom and liberty shine. [speaking spanish]

>> thank you so much. thank you. now move your butt over to the airport because that is is free commerce in action. they won't hold that plane. only in the castro's cuba will they hold it. [speaking spanish] sara, i don't know if mr. castillo could speak as well. [speaking spanish] >> translator: if you allow me i would like to, i would like to speak about the private sector in cuba. there is no private sector in cuba. where there is no freedom to negotiate.

the so-called self-entrepreneurs, who are very tiny minority, are constantly blackmailed and manipulated by the regime. they must respond to the interests of the regime in order to keep their businesses running. they can't have their own unions. they can't defend their rights. that's why i insist no type of commerce with cuba benefits the people. whatever enters cuba remains in the hand of the regime.

whatever money reenters cuba remains in the hand of the regime. i also want to say i feel a deep sadness every time i think of political prisoners. it is very hard in the 21st century that in the 21st century there are still people in my country who are imprisoned for their ideas. that there are so many marginalized people who can't even finish their studies because of their ideas. but it is not only this. many youth who are not directly involved in opposition activity, also suffer from persecution and

also suffer from discrimination because they are the children of opposition activists. it is a crime that youth can not pursue their studies. and that they desperately seek in prostitution a means through which to maintain their families . we condemn the castro regime. we demand that there be no impune at this for the regime. we want, we want a free, just and democratic country. >> thank you so much. mr. chairman, i regret that i have a plane to catch as well. i did not give mr. thiele a chance to respond. i don't know if he will be able

to. i will hear it on cnn radio. i mean c-span radio. thank you so much. >> thank you so much. >> thank you. i'm on her flight. i just remembered. it will not wait for me either. thank you sir. >> only briefly. thank you for the series of questions and comments. without wanting to enter a whole debate exactly how you characterize the human rights situation in cuba i don't find particularly profitable, no one denies there are serious human rights problems on the island. the question is how to address them and what the united states government can do and i think policy of engagement that was announced on the 17th, the policy has been supported by others in the cuban dissident community, some who testified before the senate the other day that supported by the catholic church in cuba, supported by the u.s. cath like conference was endorsed by the pope. a number of republican as well as democrats in congress have endorsed. that freedom house endorsed.

that the message is there is a very strong view that the best way to address the human rights situation in cuba is engagement. >> thank you, mr. thiele. let me just, i will give, if any of you want to make final comments as we conclude the hearing, i would respectfully disagree mr. thiele and i appreciate your candor. we tried that before. seems to me not about isolation it is about meaningful engagement where steps we take are predicated on just observing universally recognized human rights. we're only asking universal declaration of human rights treaties that have been enacted, for wont of a better word with concurrence and full, all-in by the countries of the world, be followed and certainly the contention against torture -- convention against torture violated with impunity by castro

and one of the mow egregious violations torturing people is one of the most heinous acts one human being can conduct against another, have you ever met with a political prisoner in prison? no. i hope you would. i think that, you know, i think, i have made it my business, 35 years as a member of congress to meet with dissidents everywhere and, anywhere i go where there is a repressive regime but i always seek to go to the prisons, to try to show some solidarity, some empathy with those who are suffering. the daily acts of torture and brutal mistreatment that mr. artunas articulated and, you know, the book that got me into fighting for religious freedom frankly in 1981 was, tortured for christ who talked about the security and just like in the

in prisons of cuba where torture is commonplace. then when i met the valdari book, i mentioned earlier, talks about the torture that never ended. he talked about h ho chi minh poll that were jabbed in. talk about sleep deprivation. there is no sleep. you don't know whether you get a shot in the nose, solar plexus the groin area as garths shifted from one garth shift to the other, they would use the ho chi minh polls. some of the things, mr. artunez talked about designed by sadists to extract the worst possible pain on women and men. of course sexual abuses visited upon people as well. dr. business set -- bisset talked about punched his teeth. major, major problems beatings

and more beatings. i honestly believe castro and those who have committed these atrocities ought to be held to account by the world for crimes against humanity. rather than, invited in as partners. yes you've got to deal with dictators as a country. ours does as do many others but to have human rights as you know, an issue, maybe an issue, not the issue, is a serious mistake. and, again the embargo i would just say for the record and perhaps, some of our witnesses want to speak to this, there has been robust trade with the european union canada and other countries of the world with cuba for decade. and there has been no diminution whatsoever in torture child sex trafficking. if anything, the trade has facilitated, particularly with

convicted pedophiles and others who travel the world, to abuse little children to rent a boy or a girl when they go to cuba. i just had passed on the floor of the house of representatives for the third time the international megan's law so that convicted pedophiles, that we will know this country is destination when they are leaving to go on sex tourism trips. how horrific is it? that the government of cuba, actually benefits financially from that? and if that's not accurate, then allow a full-scale investigation because we have so many stories and so much information and again, i have to say this, and i would put this major parts of this into the record, the trafficking victims protection act has established will be called the tip report. comes out every year. and cuba again is been designated an egregious

violator. a tier three country when it comes to modern day slavery. the idea of trade and somehow there will be matriculation with more trade from the dictatorship with more democracy, didn't work in vietnam. they have gotten worse. has not worked in china. she think ping is indxi ping is taking the country down to torture as more trade occurs with the people's public of china. many learn if you don't respect human rights, intellectual property rights are another casualty of a dictatorship. when people talk about the internet being open, i held hearings in this room several times but one truly historic one with google yahoo! microsoft and cisco. yes it was in china. swore them all in. and they were part of the censorship. we know that the castro regime

has great capabilities as does belarus and other dictators to assure that internet whether it be emails or anything else will be very closely surveiled so that more of the best and bravest and brightest of cuba are found and apprehended and thrown into prisons. there is no open internet there. there isn't in any dictatorship in the world. china literally written the book how dictatorship can control the internet with the great firewall of china. we have a situation that will replicate itself over there. finally i say the testimony from unbelievably brave women and men who suffered at the hand of castro helped tear off the veil of secrecy and open secret if you will it has been out there but thankfully through c-span and media that is here and congressman and women who will see this record, you are bearing

truth, and bearing witness to a to a very ugly reality that is pervasive. again i do believe that the facade of legitimacy that castro craves and i just believe just got a helping hand, that is not just my view. "washington post" and some others already opined on that in their editorials. this was not the time to take that view. there should have been an effort to say, human rights first. as you said mr. artunas, then, economic issues and other kinds of engagements. but as we've seen, i've seen one statement after another come out of havana from high government officials that nothing is going to change. and if anything, with the rearrests of maybe five or more of the 53 and others who have been rounded up, which is the game this man plays or this regime plays in cuba, just shows that they are intent on doubling down and making even worse for the dissidents. . .

good to see you. we are here today for a policy for him against the militia in the coalition effort. to talk about the relief and

talk about the release of two new fascinating institute studies. if anyone had any doubts, the video released earlier this week of the burning of life of jordanian capture the pilot confirms the moral deprivation of isil. six months into the campaign against isil.com ends with the beheading of the journalist james foley says that the best that we have driven isil out of syria however they control more in iraq than they did six months ago when the war started. airpower alone is going to be insufficient to downgrade and ultimately to defeat i isil. it will have to be countered on the ground and we are witnessing right now the initial stages of this new phase in the campaign.

in syria they created the syrian opposition that remains a distant and realistic option. meanwhile though and syria, iran and the regime are deploying a series of militia to combat isil and across the border in iraq, baghdad in cooperation with washington is working to reconstitute the field and integrate the internal security force. discussed differing these approaches to isil today we had a great panel teacher in michael, philip smith and pj. michael knight is a fellow at the washington institute and the author of the just-released study "the long haul rebooting the cooperation in iraq." philip is a researcher at the university of maryland and the author of the blog has the has the -- hezbollah.

they've released his study of the shiite jihad and its effects. commenting on the presentation we are lucky to have pj who participated in standing up for the defense institutions in iraq and served as senior military adviser for the reconciliation advisor for the reconciliation to the forces in baghdad in 2008. before we start, just a quick reminder to your mobile phones on vibrate. we are live on c-span today apparently. so we will start with mike knight. >> thank you very much for coming today. the colleagues on the panel with

me it's an honor to be alongside them. i'm going to talk today about some of the things coming out about a new study about the long haul, rebooting the u.s. cooperation with iraq and i want to go through the study in detail. i'm going to do is maybe try to pick out some of the key issues and quandaries that come out of the security cooperation with the iraqi state and the kurdish customer back and coexistence of government alongside the popular mobilization units played a significant role in the war so far in iraq. to run through a couple graphics and a study that is available online in a pdf form to download. it is a brigade battle for the iraq he army and the minister of

interior and popular mobilization forces were presented and it demonstrates for one thing how much of the combat power is pulled around baghdad and how few of the iraqi military units are able to deploy over long distances to commence the operation in the second quarter of this year it's good to be very difficult to do that. and also the lack of combat effective in the army brigades with the strength of required to undertake a very complex costly operation and the brigade train and equip program to build oversized combat capable deployable units that can continue to operate after taking the casualties required in the urban combat.

that train and equip program is vital and indicates we are not looking at those old commencing until q4 2015 and some people are even more grumpy about it then that. so yes again on this slide we will see the graphic in the study the iraq he army and yellow, the minister of interior in black and popular mobilization units in red. if you're interested in looking looking into detail, likewise the have done the same for the passion or -- peshmerga. to see what it really looks like right now and how it is structured. now on this slide, we see even in the packet should be fairly visible, the blue is the kurdish is the security forces and the green is the area where the

federal government is contrasting. one of the interesting factors is that you can see a thin green line running from the border up to kirk -- kirkuk that supports the units that are gathering and building for the major observation just south of kirkuk i want to talk about the progress of the war against isil and we will do that and other forms in other forms in the written product. but i will say to reiterate i think the war against isil and iraq -- only is highly winnable and in fact slowly we are on that trajectory now. for many people, the philosophy will not be fast enough, but the direction is in the direction towards cutting them down to the stage that they are a serious insurgent terrorist movement.

unfortunately, today's best case scenario is 2013's worst-case sorry of that shifted over the last few years. so what we are hoping is that in the next year or so we can cut isis down onto what is our worst nightmare and then start again and start working on a way to cut them down to where they were in 2009 when the security operations were the most effective probably and then finally to get them down below that to the hopes that we had in 2009. what i'm going to talk about today more is what if we defeat isis would lose iraq in the process? what if there is another threat out there that is the posing threat by the allies that we are working alongside and i'm thinking here about some of the popular mobilization unit elements who are strongly linked to all of the movements that

philip is going to talk about in great detail. what if we defeat i suspect in that process we lose hezbollah in the iraq he security sector there's a lot going on at what point in that direction. is this the moment in iraq as some people look at a conference in 45 and they say the u.s. government has been realistic and the soviets are going to dominate eastern europe. nothing could stop that. others would have any emotional reaction and this is when we were confined to 50 years of communism left behind the iron curtain. where this is a momentous in the midst of a war the war isn't over yet, but it's time to start asking tough questions about how

it ends, why we are fighting this war to the end who our allies are and how they lacked towards us and other elements in iraq. in the old days afghanistan was the good war. since 2014, iraq seems to be the good war and a syria is the bad war. iraq is a bit more complex. i believe it is a war worth fighting involving the u.s., but it's not a complex or simple or. against isis and iraq is far more complex than many people would believe.

one thing that i've noticed since i started this study and researching and talking to a lot of people just in the data collection. we could win if we defeated isil and hand iraq over to a speed by than iraq he security structure. there's been a lot. i don't think that i've ever heard the arabs have so much featurette toward each other. analyze and iraq at the moment, isis's enemies are remarkably divided and reason for each other. it's sad to see because it hasn't even stopped yet. a lot will say to me what have you got against the popular mobilization units, they are

fighting isis and they are fighting and dying. are they really so bad and don't you hold them to a double standard? peshmerga did the same thing, would you criticize them as fiercely? you want to build up the awakening movements and they do all these things in the past and kill americans too. we need to think hard about these questions. we do have something of an emotional reaction against the popular mobilization units going forward. so let's look into that for a second. you know all these bad guys they are going to the front line and many of them are not trying to undertake the massacres they are just normal people. i had a similar feeling when meeting a hezbollah in southern lebanon in 1999.

but behind them often far behind them there was the islamic force that i never did meet and they had very different attitude. we became aware of them not being the there not being the target as it was in southern lebanon. there's something under the surface of the prominently shia mobilization units that we need to look at closely. again, to underline the point on the left-hand side we have the ones that look very skerry going forward and that we have these crisp pressed popular mobilization units backed by the iranians. i would argue for a number of reasons i will come to in a second that those on the left those on the right are not as

cuddly and trustworthy as they look into those on the left in some ways because they are cut off from the major state support because they are not and should -- intricately networked and because they pull in smaller increments because they are divided rather than having the potential to form into one large shadow defense institution that could threaten and overwhelm alternately a defense ministry of interior. i believe those on the right are a bigger threat. likewise look at the bottom. you have a western private security detail taken up by extraordinarily accurate and effective explosive projectile by the groups. there was a iud way back.

the cubs force based special groups as late as june of 2011 if you remember they killed 16 americans. they are much more dangerous than the sunni groups. of the mobilization units particularly in areas to the north like moz -- mosul where the moment they are being welcomed in piecemeal but they will wear out their welcome pretty soon.

overreliance will lengthen the war against isis. it's a lamp post in the allah (-left-paren by the massacre bottom left and this is not even the images from the most recent of 72. they might be depopulated but nonetheless. there's a bunch of young fighters opening up the flag. what could be wrong with that come in and of itself nothing wrong with that.

this is an smart isn't smart or helpful. it's an indicator even when they are not out. the military operations that have counterproductive elements and they are a source of constant friction in the places they are operating alongside. likewise, the second point of these iranian backed militias if not under some form of control but ultimately undermined the strategic independence of iraq. since deliberately they concealed the u.s. designated terrorist since i think 2009 who

has been pursued for the various offenses back to 1983 involving q. eight. at the front lines taking the senior leadership on the tour of the successes but carefully had been have been in this picture because it was recognized that it might be cost effective perhaps. likewise the former vice president meeting with the senior leadership in hezbollah and likewise even though it is a bit of a stunned they were attached to it. i wish the information operations were as good as these guys. when we achieve something what do we do we'd like to fall into the background and it is better that they can take credit for the things that they have achieved. while it is 100% wrong.

when the force guys have any involvement or even no involvement in the operation they get the most senior leadership right there across every media outlet and social media outlet that they can find. i think we need to be doing more to demonstrate what the u.s. and the international coalition is doing to stabilize iraq because we are really on a back foot when it comes to the operations. these guys are ambitious. they are not some kind of a minor small group of concerned citizens etc.. they never disbanded. they never get a did a biometrics and most of the movements came in and signed a little piece of paper and it biometrics which the government now holds on them. they never did that stuff.

they just said we might stop fighting you and when they will fight again. but for now we are willing to take the paycheck. they are not from the minority like the sunni. they have a serious state sponsor in charge of mechanized unit capabilities. it's a regular supply. they have the force within the headquarters that are linking them to the drone operations overhead into the air support potentially that's been facilitated in some ways. they are a powerful entity. they are networked into the ministry of interior and of some of the other key iraqi security

headquarters. they are transnational and they meet the link to other aspects of the resistance in the cards -- quds force. they will undermine the strategic independence going forward in the luckily bringing us to the solution at the end. i think a lot of the leadership in iraq are recognized whether they are in the political sphere, military men or in the religious. iraq he military doesn't like my militia. they don't like having to operate alongside even though they don't recognize that they have not contributed blood sweat and tears to stopping isil's advance. i have to give them back. they deserve the respect and many of them deserve the full respect as fighting men because they've given everything including their lives to bring to a halt that the institution that they are part of into the forces that sit behind these

often times we need to look extremely closely. luckily they vote for iraq rather than be sectarian as an antidote for iran. for instance the iran iraq war is an uprising against the iraqi state. hundreds of thousands serving the front lines. they could become abu dhabi if they wanted to but they believe in the iraq east date even though they've had a pretty shocking bill from its particularly over the last decade. he recognized even though he did it for his own political benefit that he needed to cut the legs out from underneath before they took the crown jewel.

it is being pushed through now and the iraqis understand they need to do something about this. they need to come find them and demobilize them to say we don't need the national guard division brigade for this in the way of reducing the militia takeover in the key provinces. under the ministry of defense the administrative control under the prime investor office of the operational control. all these things are built into the national guard law and they need to be. the struggle is the implementation. they need to take all of the bits they like maintained by the government but actually we think that we will keep the rocket launchers in the quds force.

that's how they try to play it. they always do but we need to stay on this and this brings us back to the final point. some of the individuals in the party are trying to keep a hand in the administrative interior. they had in the senior deputy positions likewise the bottom left-hand side running the portfolio i guess you could say the national security adviser again, some conservative elements of the party for conservative as if they don't want a radical change in the nature of the power in iraq. those are the politicians that we keep in the cupboard and bring them out when we want to look acceptable. so we have allies we can work with but the only way that we are going to get those allies is

if we outperform iran as a security partner. we can't ask for everything we want from the iraq ease unless we demonstrate that we are seriously committed about going forward and not just until they are gone or liberated but finally we need to do the visionary. it's for the deep lasting security corporation. the security structure is with the same oil as saudi arabia. package to every state is like losing china in the 50s this is in a small country even though in some people in the administration put it in a small box in their mind.

that's not what it is. they need to do more than the minimum and demonstrate that they are there for the long-term the iranians are serious. they are doing what we used to. they are close air controllers and pilots who know how. they go back to iraq and work and they are doing this really well. they need to start putting the special forces close to the frontline because if we don't demonstrate. they will rely on them as their primary offensive weapon system. they cannot take it that way they will not accept it. it will cause more problems.

we need to get headed in that direction and we need a build up we need to outperform them as a security partner. we have a run walk going on in alexandria virginia may 9, 2015 if you are interested it is www.sicfiraq.org. it is a good cause so support it if you can. [applause]

>> okay. without the slides and going to have to try to work with this. what is going on in syria writenow? it seemed that we had a jihad that nobody even knew was going on. everybody picked up on isis, al qaeda as a section of al qaeda fighting and this was described as jihad going on inside of syria but people neglected the fact -- sorry about that. back to the main story. people were neglecting this. this is another major jihad that seems to float under everybody's nose. maybe it looked more organized or it was organic or they were coming to defend this shrine in the back south of damascus.

that's all that it was to many people. that a few of the fighters went to serious and they just wanted to defend the shrine, but it's not. it hides something that is much much larger and we are seeing it in iraq and an ideological spread that iran is trying to push to the absolute ideology. i don't like to use the term moderate shia but they do not be leaving the concept. now we are seeing it on this regional plane and it's shocking not as many people were noticing it. so, there are a few facts about this and i think that unfortunately in the press because it is hard to cover the issue a few things have popped up and i collected quotes from people that i know that for asking about it as i was doing research and one of them said that the don't all fighters come in the sunni.

it just lists them as foreign fighters. it has nothing to do with al qaeda. it had everything to do with routing people from iraq about lebanon afghan refugees living in iran sometimes from afghanistan and routed and african fighters and somalia and one who was killed so this was a large-scale operation talking about tens of thousands of people. another primary vivid media says you know isis uses facebook and twitter. that means you're more advanced. the shia militia groups that are run by the iranians have a far more advanced structure online. nobody has done anything to take

it off or even investigate it. they are doing this quite openly and not hiding it. they are putting up graphic images and they are ones that many of us have written a hash tag about on twitter. much the same kind of material. there is another issue here. i talked about the control of these organizations and the fighters. one of the lions that was given to me by a friend, she probably won't be my friend anymore of all of these groups that are pretty independent if the devil is in the details and it is about a granular look focus on the importance. a lot of the groups that we are fighting openly stated that the baby leave dan absolute and they just kind of passed below the radar. there is a lot of

interconnection. they are being shipped back to iran, not to iraq. they are directly controlled. they are not as brutal and we are fighting the same enemy. this makes a lot of sense kind of if you get past the whole narrative structure. these groups cast a narrative structure that says that all of the rebels were muslims who wanted to use others and thus they could be killed. this is the u.s. moderate so-called moderate allies. this is a larger narrative process that they underwent and now it is coming to full force not that i'm saying it's isis doing the fighting but they've got this enemy of theirs. it doesn't necessarily mean that they are your buddies.

the other thing is they were reactionary. they were around for quite some time. i i could give you an example of the organization in iraq. they created or helped create from the iraq he refugees that went over in the 1980s to fight saddam hussein part of iraq's's government. so they've been around for quite a while. it doesn't mean they are growing at rates that we've never seen before. there is a new crisis that we have in the organization. the other main thing is the breach and this is totally overstated. i can't say how much annoyance that causes me because they are so open about this and how they control these organizations. they have to follow the media and here is the weird thing even if they are not directly controlling the group then

beyond that they will try to influence some with cash and weapons and support and then guess what happens, they become another little micro has hezbollah. you can't ignore this top-down strategy because the people are recruiting. there is a top-down trickle-down structure here how many of you in a few decades ago but have said. these are the main issues. why are they going to fight ends. and how did this me to the current events in iraq and of the militia fighting against

isis? a religious crisis needed to be manufactured. and there was a supposed threat against this major mosque and shrine and this granular connection. and they've rebuilt it so it has a nice pretty golden dome. so they get the fighters to go into syria for a justified reason for the justified reason is they were doing the shrine. it wasn't just that. there was a whole conspiracy

wrapped in this and if you are looking at the the long-term real long-term problem in this kind of outlook it casts a vision that may be they didn't want to push for the shrine to be destroyed. they came out and they said america has been trying to push all qaeda into syria. that's been a the narrative, so there's that. by doing this move they are executing. it targets a lot of the minorities and -- >> would you mind if i ask -- sorry. i'm running dry.

they are porting out of lebanon. and they have this catholic ally and they put a veneer over them and say we are a lebanese nationalist. christians are not really treated that well. they are playing into the fears of the city and they've been doing this quite a bit with christians and if you noticed they also post this message in up. if you don't align they are going to come in and brutalize you and going to destroy you. so there's been that other move that has been pushing them in that direction kind of pushing

the minority line of sorts. they also pushed the good sunnis as i like to call it so they've actually come out and say we are not against sunnis and to simultaneously make the message that they were not against sunnis. they were not they were not even muslims and declaring them as enemies as a positive. so there's that other categorization. iran is the protector for the shia in the region they are still casting a message that says that we are islamic and he is for all muslims but they are starting with shia first if you think about it in this sense if

you are trying to form clamps are bound at the enemies it makes a lot sense when you also have the forces in those areas. so, those have been a big thing but then there is this. they tried to minimize the link to this while also trying to say that we have maintained. and it's kind of strange. they don't want to show that they are our geopolitical interests at stake. if they lose their most valuable ally which is lebanese and hezbollah do have to have serious and have that bridge. and if they lost it, that would be no good. i attached a photo in here and this is one of my favorite.

it is a direct iranian prophecy. we are fighting here for the shia. that's been the message message out they tried to cast it and if we are looking at iraq and how a lot of the fighters filtered back there what do we see now? we are protecting that's how they are doing it. so we have to look at this and we have to focus on the militia that is going into sending people to serious. there is this terrible guy. there's kind of a gray area when it comes to this and it is kind of a weird thing.

when we were there they were trying to maintain the army and this didn't work out so well. they try to build separate organizations. i tried to look up people that helped form of this group. this network the initial core of commanders, almost all of them were split. one of them who was killed i want to say december, 2012, this is a person that actually served

who converted to shiaism in the network and they also rated the provincial headquarters. so he was in some way related to it. they may have been promoting a lot of other things that they had the direct links. so, going down more, we had the old standardbearers. i mean the good old prophecy that we know so well. mainly that lebanese, hezbollah they were some of the initial force is sent into serious. they were serving as advisors and they were also serving as the direct combat advisers but also hoping to form up the localized militia made up.

when you look at the organization what did he do he also simultaneously with building the process and putting the fighters into syria and building special groups inside iraq and taking some of the members and putting them in there to say now that this new group is formed we are going to send these people to syria. one of the new groups that passed one of the first was actually the son of a prime corps commander who was killed many years ago celebrated by the organization and his son was somehow killed which believes in the exact same ideological concept which just kind of came out of nowhere in early 2013 and this is kind of the connection

that they have. going past to that i'm sure again all other people remember these groups are the american soldiers, they killed a lot of coalition forces had also gave her the first into iraq and the interesting thing they would do is go to iran and then take a flight into damascus. they are on the facebook pages which is a sale on their part or was it something else are they trying to promote the case we can go into serious whenever we want, what's going to stop us?

initially the intelligence groupings tried to help form a lot of localized militia. the main one that came out of this it's just kind of expanded out. think of it like an octopus with a million different groups that were associated. could he'd write them off as subdivisions of the network of the battalion underneath the larger army group. i would say yes they are all networked together but they've taken on their own separate names and separate identities in some cases they've taken on their own separate recruitment activities both in iraq and syria. they have their own commanders coming out of that initial network. so this is kind of the nexus that has formed. so the prophecy and i actually put it over here and they are holding hands.

he is a guy that helped found. as i went through before one of these special groups that we saw in iraq. but what is he doing now? he is leading a group so you can see through these trails it looks crazy. there's a million links here and there and everywhere. a lot of people ask me how does this make sense for the grand regional strategy? now check this out. but wait there's more. i try to track down all the different connections and they put out a radical cleric where some of the fighters and people that claimed that they are with them have gone and we have -- i'm sorry if i'm making c-span

angry. i keep winning back. i put in black-and-white the symbol over here. it was formed to route afghan fighters. they put us in the core and then what do they do the minute they got to syria they were fighting and put the patches on and served under the commander and sometimes they have their own sub regimens that all of this confusing jumble. after we splintered 4,000 different ways what did we end up having? they did it again. it's crazy. they did it again.

the groups have taken on the last name, tons of them actually and a lot of them even had connections back. is this a deliberate move it's possible. if it's not i really don't know. we need to get the stuff together. but a bunch of these different groups that have done this. all of this is going on in this thread and the movement and the networking and if we are getting down to the brass tacks on this one when we look at it i think a lot of this is just a little game that a lot of people in the irgc like to play to put the

same front and they will say they lost the same member. it's all a big game so i can sit here and slam i had against the table as i'm looking for another militia group. i followed him since he had his first facebook page. everything about him was this own personality but when you're looking at it or does his presence represents? it was announced in this new group through their organization that he was a commander. that is nowhere near damascus that they are supposed to be defending. then they promoted him as a

sadrist that is a picture of him after he was killed with the front end you will see him in a shirt in the back. he came back in the spring of 2014 but then he was named as a commander. the greatest thing about this if he had two music videos dedicated and appeared in one. not making this up but afterwards another shift seem to have been. where did it gocommented it does appear into thin air? i didn't see anything on the tv media which i read on most of the time. but then they showed him what has the -- hezbollah by showing this it was a new with a new organization that was formed in iraq but he was the secretary general as doctor knight mentioned before it's kind of the real push behind that.

after the pictures he was named as one of their guys. he had a funeral and everything and all of a sudden his name and face spread all over the web. a huge thing i realized when i was doing the research is the recruitment factor online, something i truly belief nobody is paying that much attention to. they have been posting phone numbers and all sorts of things and this is one of the initial ones where they would put up a popular committee member in the imagery that we are looking at. more needs to be done because guess what i called in to these numbers in the audience they called in with me to these numbers and they had conversations with these guys so

it's really not that hard. what did they accomplish? it fits into that narrative that we are pushing isis. they secured damascus hands down. this isn't a republican guard or a magical local seer ian militia this is the allied organizations and i would even describe these as links. they are all part of a unified network and that is how they are developing. while they've done this they've taken a ton of geography and they've been able to construct the new go on front if we think about the move i was talking about before they are infiltration in the iraq e. government and also in syria it's not like he can push back against them because they are the main fighting force and then

on top of that building with narrative of the strength and protection this is huge. when you feel you've are under an x. essential threat if someone came to me and said i'm going to give you money, the americans are not doing enough for you and they never will. i'm pretty sure that i would take it if i thought that they were going to destroy me. they are playing off of that so effectively. bigger thing there are other breeds all consequences to that group. i heard this question will be magically moderate after isis is defeated? it's like saying you did they drop their weapons after the israelis held out of southern

lebanon they most certainly did not. the same thing happened when we pulled out of 2011 to join the government but they never did. but here's the biggest thing. does anybody know what poster this was? they came out of the february 14 youth movement and put this up for him. why would they put that if you are pushing for serious -- syria or iraq for speaking out against the government of this has become kind of this new cause.

they execute him and said this. if they execute him we will retaliate against them and strike them so now they have a new cause to fight and it will keep going like that. it doesn't adjust to syria. it is going to encompass a lot war. ignoring it won't make it go away. aligning with it certainly won't make it go away because i would say that they have manipulated the process write-down to pettitte. they've done a very good job of it. and i don't see it really going away anytime soon, which is sad.

trying to digest all of that my name is pj, retired military officers started as a infantry and then went 80 asian in the conventional -- in the 80s and went conventional. i'm going to bring it up a little bit and hopefully get through this without a lot of tears because the movements are emotional to myself and those that served on the ground trying to figure out what to do with the information that was put out in the briefings that we would go to and try to figure out how to put it together in a practical sense and give a couple of policy wreck and additions. i think i would start off by saying david asked me to give a small synopsis about the papers. i am in a pretty good conference with mike. it is how complicated even more

so but how complicated things are now. we tend to work in the borders and the nationstate and fundamentals of the regional actors and the fundamentals of the theory of that reactor theory meaning i punch you, you punch me back. what are you doing why are you not punching me back? sometimes we lost. i think with both of the author officers pointed out in the line of the block charts is quite complicated how did you maneuver and we will put out to the crowd today that it isn't new. we have seen these demarcations and lenny before i was in

serious in 1982 and in 1982 dot seer -- syrians asked me what i was going to do but never mind. you get to see these split through. there's a lot of personality involved, a lot of personal interest. at the end of the day it was who knows why actors do what they do. in 2008 when i was in the negotiations so self set up by general petraeus, mike was with me in the audience back there. he wrote a great article on michael saying how the iranians are the best thing that isis can have. those with the same intellectual brilliance of failure and i mean that, they would come in and lay out these charts about how this guy talked to this guy and he phone calls and they would sneak a way and the person that was responsible for going face to face with the folks on the side

a lot of them in prison and a lot of them not we would look at the chart and go wow. a lot of names and numbers. so who can i talk to? number two, when i'm with them what do i say? glad to see you in bahrain today. there is an essence that sooner or later you have to bring to a practical level. it is how much more complicated the ground is then i think in fairness and i would agree i think that we are fundamentally understanding or if we understand it lets say we do our actions are not on the fact that we do. we are currently embarked to train and equip in order to

defeat isis campaign. that's where the focus of washington is and where americans have been redeployed to iraq to imagine to build up forces to defeat isis. great. but the officers pointed out and i would agree it is first off how do you get this bad? ..

very very heavy, killed most of our mates in the fighting. they will penetrate anything. they are giving these information, and their information and marching and even the clerics are dressed up. that didn't happen between the time isis took mosul and the time the news guys got their meaning it had been going on for a very long time to include while we were there. not just since we were deployed. that's the basis and navigate to the basis part and the schisms that are now developing. it's gone from an isis takeover to a perhaps religious conundrum throughout the middle east. again unfortunate not new industry but in our time new enough. and how do you act? that's the tough question. it's nice to see the charts but

somewhere in this world of issue where do you plug into the first possible thing to do? right now we're going to go get isis in mosul. okay but the rest of the general crowd out there as michael pointed out, it's a tactical thing for them. isis is not a strategic issue. i think we need to rise to the of a look at the strategic ultimate was out there. i'm a believer in approaching it from fault line and on the medals. there are certain fundamental issues in the middle east in any sphere, middle east as well that exist. one of them i think it's still true of how do we -- one is very much the arab iranian divide shia-sunni divide the persian, persian arab history gulf. that is not a small fundamental. might prove in this is when we got to iraq, and my first trip was building a city council and then i went all over iraq with

just iraqis for nine to 10 months building the new m.o.d. and the army. i was the main recruiter. all these bad characters all the ones that are left alive, don't know where they are, most of them are dead or gone. okay. but to a t. you have the meeting room have the meeting revenge of the sidebars where they put aside one on one, to achieve the common thread was no malign party influence, political party. no party hacks. we want technical guys scientific guys, meaning proper training for the task ahead. military but same thing. so to a t. we did find a lot of skin. the clerics weren't on top of it like they are now. moreover it crossed boundaries. it crossed boundaries. in 2008 after fighting in basra and baghdad i was a senior military adviser in baghdad an

iraqi division committee came to us and said, this is what a great day. yes. sadr retired from the battlefield mainly because maliki took the gloves off a bus and the iraqis came forward with us and we did a lot of fighting. special groups did not play in that fight. special groups were being guided from a different place. i think that is the key to understand between the nationalist point of the get to the second. what he said in his speech, gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, great americans, great iraqi patriot, today's the first day in the battle against iran. this division commander was shia. a sunni would say that anyway but he said that. this commander by the way is now in the state seeking a

sovereignty was given command in the south, i will say where just a few months ago. and wendy got a call from maliki, and maliki said i have visitors coming and i want you to put them to work embed them in your step and they will help you achieve stardom. the division commander, the commander, not division, said who are you sending to my staff? they knocked on the door and they were from -- and the commander said, prime minister maliki? yes. where would you like us to go? and the great patriot shia iraqis said not here. i don't have a place for you. they said that's great we love of your opinion but you don't get to decide. this commander got on the phone with maliki and this is a story really by him and i've had cooperated with the have complete 100 faith. i put him in power in 2003.

i got a phone to maliki and for 45 minutes was arguing back and forth single, i can put them in the patrol, have them do food duty but there cannot be in my general staff headquarters, cannot be on the streets with my soldiers. maliki says thanks for your loyal opinion. take them or else. two days later i got a call and he was in istanbul. i got very mad at him. what he doing in istanbul so fast? are you crazy? he left his family and everything. that's how immediately took it and the rest is he's trying to work out right now. he didn't think that was the way to go. so i think there is these fundamentals don't fail i.e. iraqi nationals. the question is, okay, if so how do we work in that had we operate indicted by the? operating in a religious environment, which is fight in iraq and syria and in the gulf

in yemen all happening under the guise of a religious now break up which is bigger than what we started with, we are going to have a tough time because we work in fundamental ways here on earth. negotiating with bad guys, we never had a problem getting one on one with the bad guy, getting a dialogue with the killer. never had a problem getting along with a killer. sooner or later you could find the ground we could work out something. even with the sadr group i had some neat things happen. but the minute you approach with the opening line okay, if the winning two more bridges dialogue after the to include saying that we prepared to die for our god today, we have two ways to respond to we were prepared to help you okay? okay, we are very much so to include would walk out of this building. or i can go there. i'm not at that level with all

due respect, we are going to have to bow out of this part of the negotiations because i don't speak for my god. this could get rather complicated. now, if you're willing to come down a level or whatever level you want to call it come up a little, i'm not going to speak to you, let us begin. but at the point of dealing at that level, i don't know where you go. we had a chaplain in one of the units in baghdad great guy 6'6" crucial into the reconciliation council, have a whiteboard, with committees canopus. i offered that he should take lead of this. you and your guys should be leading, not us on earth. this is not our bailiwick. so number one the complications are fast. number two, understand the fundamentals. three at i agree with michael, very much so did in the big game. game of isis is bad news.

those guys gals, whatever they are made above are really projecting themselves in a way that we all agree is pretty macabre. not new unfortunately. that's not again. we are not in that game. the united states military is unleashed and allowed to play in the sandbox can do a lot of damage but you got to also understand that is not just information of guys in black with weapons. isis is not i would argue not a formidable, its formal but it's not, it's a structured thing that we could push it out of mosul are out of x. spot in kurdistan to go somewhere and then you will be there for our beckoning with our air power. no. know. understand what it is. philip has done a very good job of helping explained that about pushing isis out of mosul it's not a bumper sticker. it's not a bumper sticker. 's we have to be integrated game and it integrated game outlined of course the iranian influence.

so people said i don't know what that means. what do you mean? they get first cut. that's what it means. they are the first ones in the morning, lessons out of me. they get six hours a day, we get 45 minutes with the body in between whatever. no. we will take six hours. and you know what you can put your office inside the embassy if they so decide. but we're not in that game. and i've seen this time and time and time again. i've done it plummets with a with a teen before christmas the place in the middle east where we show up what you want to do and we are meeting and just when are you going to play? are you guys going to play? why the keep getting on a plane and leave? the bricks are here, the french are here, where are you guys? okay, hold that thought. we would be back in a few months in the next meeting. you have to be in the game. i also would argue that this is not, this is not a conflict of

beef, far away from. if you don't want to play in this game, we have to adjust the balance between the force protection concepts we have fallen under and the ability to meet face-to-face. you have to ask the question ask the question where did the most you -- shia militia get all this armament under our noses? but what happened since 2011, or pick a date, i don't care common terms of the diplomatic moves? the guys are living out there day in and day out where was the influence? can we get it back? six hours a day go with by that uphill fight to get the influence that we should have to be back but it's interesting. there's a conundrum, a contradiction. you won't need anybody armed or not armed, shia-sunni, that doesn't look at you as an american represented either civilian or uniformed.

with don kelly is be the power. you are the power. be the power. stopped playing a round. if you are not the power that epidemic you have a real big problem about what's going on out here. for reasons we don't understand but it's your business. whenever you're ready to quit playing possum, come on out. but anytime i got to talk to them because they are here. in their hierarchy of needs, yes, we are alive. so understand the fundamentals be in the game can understand the complexities and last i would just add i would agree with mike and also with phill that concentrated in the fringes which it looks like now with the air campaign the number of sorties, the number of kurdish movement even kobani as deadly as it was is not where it lies. this fight, this struggle lies in the capitals.

it lies in the capitals of power. our pressure our priority as much as enjoying freedom of the skies in iraq right now, i don't know which we are doing in three, lives in baghdad and damascus and riyadh. and i've never been out anyplace at a level that never always wanted to go higher. the first question is who are you and who do you represent? there is no weight when we were negotiating as negotiators for general petraeus at ambassador crocker, the two three, or four of us that were out. that was the first thing we establish, are you speaking for your grand self, colonel or have you been former center in a position? because that's what it where it lies. the playground that phillip has so rightly outlined, these guys are being manipulated from a to b. one day they will solve this next day that. there are reasons for doing

things are really at the end of the day i argued not that complicated. but up top where the real game is is where we need to be. and the one or two people that i would never happy to go in with in a closed room and always, always on my game if i had a game as the guys that were doing the thinking, the guys that were doing the information operations, the guys with the mouthpieces, the guys who were the whispers in the ear of sadr and of ex. because these were the good looking guys. they have the nicest clothing and a very intellectually astute, very well studied in whatever world they came from. not my world but their world, never mind. they could spend if you were careful to turn this our current. i would want to join by the time i left the room if i wasn't careful. it was going to happen but sometimes, i don't know. the point is is that intellect is out there as manipulative as it can be as phillip pointed out

and you have to be first doctor to take an hour worth of lecture against the great satan. got. yeah, i got it. we are the worst. we are the worst but i know one worse than us. over there. at least we live the school, hospital, whatever. at least we intend to. what they're going to leave i don't know, but you will do what they tell you, no matter what they tell you, for the rest of your life. so this is not easy but these precepts have to be joined in to do. i think you sum up i would argue that mike has done a great job. phill has done something that very few can pull together, and all with open-source information which is actually important to understand the especially today in the communicative world. i would be in baghdad inside the command center of baghdad watching or advising the senior. one of the villains of mosul

the ground forces commander. he was a great guy he was a nice man, a decent man. he really was the he just wasn't a classic wartime commander. he hated the fact that divide iraqis which, oh, by the way, was another theme throughout the armed forces. nobody in uniform in iraq unless they had -- wanted by anyone in the population of iraq. this is what happened in the turmeric in fallujah in 2003 and the reticence of the iraqi forces to fight in basra in 2008 and the backend. bailey went, forces only move forward when we came on the battlefield and went first. and we lost a lot of guys. that's when they came forth. none of them wanted to tackle this. this is another dilemma i would add. once if isis is defeated, we coming back for a whole nother around a fight because the iraqi forces come under what, if they

are nationalist themed, won't want to give it again. thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much. by the way these studies can be found downloaded in pdf on washingtoninstitute.org. i know we're going to go about 10 minutes worth of questions but let me just ask first, mike in terms of specifics, how my soldiers right now isf currently being trained up? what's the order about the iraq is going to go to bring against isis? when are they going to bring it? when will it be at its greatest force. that's for you. phillip, hezbollah perhaps the largest of all this operating in syria, how does it coordinate

with the others, and what are your estimates of the losses to date? make a fully short answers and then we will get to the group. >> i think the real numbers of iraqi security force and assured, to be honest -- peshmerga, all those figures are in the report. snapshot view in early 2015 was around 48,000 active combat for iraqi army. a significantly higher number for m.o.i. but again nowhere near what they were back in 2009 or even before isis in 2014 the big takeover. the main thing is this. helmet active forces to the have better capable of moving and undertaking offensive

operations? that's the key measure we're looking for. with the iraqi army, it's a remarkably small number. it's probably a limits of one armored division and special forces. it's well under 10,000 guys and that means currently being used, they're probably able to throw more offensive mobile troops than the iraqi army can right now. and puzzled even the iraqi army and the minister of interior combined. the peshmerga i would probably have as much active mobile capability as the entire iraqi army history of interior, and maybe even the other put together in terms of people that can actually move to a battlefield. >> in terms of hezbollah serving as advisor and also working with the syrian army initially they came in as that come in that advisory kind of role that now has taken on far more of a command style role.

actually if you juxtapose it to iraq in certain areas and taking leadership roles with some iraqi, this didn't please a lot of guys in the iraqi army it also didn't play some people in the syrian army. they were a few little firefights that actually occurred between some of the iraqi shia militiamen were with hezbollah and also with some of the local militias. but they're essentially running the show now. are running the show in terms of command structure and everything else. i'm not saying that there's no syrian army left, but these guys to have a strategic -- in terms of numbers that lost. official hezbollah said in a high couple hundred. i would say it's much higher than that probably in the 1000 range, probably more because they didn't a number of the cashless or they have hidden them as casually as from syria. so it's very, very hard to get it to gauge of that.

>> i'm going to call on folks in the crowd and maybe identify yourself, wait until the microphone comes. up front please. >> high. barbara slavin from the atlantic council. as claude rains would say i'm shocked, gamble is going on. when the u.s. overthrew saddam, something like 50,000 members of the brigade came in untold and benefited as the u.s. defense tobacco, they came in right behind. hello, iran is next door and have fought a war with iraq and had groomed all these people and now it is reaping the benefits of the u.s. decision to get rid of saddam hussein. we will leave that aside for now but the question is this. i am hearing from some iranians that iraqi shia don't really want to fight to take back the sunni areas. what they want to do is control baghdad south.

similarly in the city where we have a partition of the country in effect. how would all of you react to the notion that what we're watching is sipping a partition of these two countries and that the u.s. would like to keep them unify, particularly in the case of iraq but the people who live there actually don't really care and iran doesn't really care as long as it has its order to lebanon, it's influence particularly in iraq in areas that were most where the oil is? thanks. >> the first thing i would tell you is partition sounds great until you address the map and then you go put all the layers on it of identity, geography et cetera. it ain't that easy anorectic if you look at where the iraqi security forces have punched back to now you can see them spreading up the scenes of shia turkmen community, for instance a stretch all the way up into her cook.

-- kirkuk. so no partition of the country and there is no limit to the pmu -- who have to go very far north to liberate all shia areas. i don't think it's neat and tidy for sure if you're trying to maintain a line of supply up to syria that is running right through anbar alien areas. >> i will pick up on the point. i think there is no reason to if you have basra which is the major income for the country essentially no one. we like to see say those of us who've been after doing business, that bowser doesn't need baghdad or baghdad needs basra. he had had the oil in the have baghdad, the capital. yeah. by pusher look? why go into food fights up there

in indian land for what? you are not losing anything. and i do also believe that once victory has happened there's a very good scheme of evidence that fights within themselves will occur and i think phillip what he should today supports that studied other civil wars in the middle east which support that as well. we have to challenge the assumption end of the shia when our kids a certain point in the program, then they will settle and the sunni areas are left. the sparse thing they could do is just sits because the dynamics of history of original show they will turn on themselves sooner or later one way or another. all those lines that phillip showed will have to go somewhere. >> ambassador? >> thank you very much. i have an observation and question. and observation, as a look at

this strategic appointed you i think all that isis was loss which i think is a tragedy but think we need to -- [inaudible] and the venom of isis engagement viciousness creating on its own a culture of violence which make mushroom into other as well. and in relation to all the shia entities, you can have a simmer entity which is mushrooming out of school. so forcefully that's the dangers. i think the key question here is in the midst of that who are your partners and to kenya work with? that i think is what the government of iraq has dictated as democratic as others as well. a are the only sort of within this mode all that the safer option to work with. come over to do that there has to be a clear commitment from the united states. i would say one key issue is not to repeat the last 10 years mistake and learn from it.

that i think what any reengage with susan has to take that into account. in having better culture awareness and doing something new. that's on the micro level. at the macro level, the more holistic point of view, i think you are right when you say that the capitals have to have a dialogue. that dialogue can't be just shia-sunni problem because it's not. much more than that. it can't be about dividing iraq are not divided because that creates its own mushroom. with the u.s. has a role let's be clear about that. but i think it has to be a series dialogue. the nuclear issue is one element of that dialogue by the way. a series dialogue between the regions. you have to say significantly everyone wants that dialogue and create some environment for a series chat to take place but otherwise i think we are doomed. >> i will take just one part of

that. i agree. i agree on a number of things but with all due respect in terms of the growth of isis this is a two-way street, particularly on par. they would go out and kill tribal leaders kill awakening leaders, but who was also killing awakenings leaders. they're putting power drills through people's heads and dumping their bodies to his aides to a radicalization process. i will say this on a personal level because i focus on the shia entities. i don't think it's gotten all that much attention. there's a few "new york times" articles on it and that's about it but this is far more circular than just the absolute and utter disgusting brutality that is isis. it's a far larger picture and i think if we addressed it holistic with as you said we would probably have much better results. >> do you want to say something about the u.s. commitment the ambassador was talking about? >> yeah, i thought he said it well enough.

he said two things. don't repeat the same mistakes again years ago. i would agree because i was part of those mistakes. i second-guessed many me thinks i did personally and we did a lot of to serve in iraq say we could have done more it and i like to argue, i'm glad we didn't in some ways, you know. just being honest. but not only the u.s. commitment the u.s. initiative. either we are leading this thing or not. you can't have it both ways as who we are. that's what we hear every time we travel. there's an incredible befuddlement in the region at large has to not only will we not take charge but the minute we leave the room and we hear somebody doing something to call him up and say don't do that. why are you doing that? wait a minute, that didn't come out in the office call. i know but we don't want you to do that. an incredible conundrum. i don't know how parties out there get it.

>> we have a number of additional questions you but don't want to go over today, so if you have those, these come up. until then thank you very much for coming. i think this was a great panel and i think everyone will benefit from looking at these publications. so thank you once again for coming. thank you. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> we have more live coverage

coming up. shortly will get the use of u.s. drug policy at home and abroad with the acting director of the white house council of national drug control policy, and assistance act of state for international narcotics and law enforcement affairs. that would be live from the center for strategic and international studies here in washington. that begins at 3 p.m. eastern on c-span2. >> here are some of our featured programs for this weekend on the c-span networks.

>> you can find or complete television schedule at c-span.org and let us know what you think on the programs you're watching. join the c-span conversation, like uslike us on facebook, follow us on twitter. >> in congressional news this afternoon from the ap, a spokeswoman says that congressman alan nunnelee of mississippi died today in his hometown of tupelo. last june he suffered a stroke during an operation to remove a

brain tumor. in december he was hospitalized. house leaders allowed him to take a bow before a judge in mississippi. 2010 congressman nunnally unseated democrat travis childers what you don't mississippi first district seat since mid-2008. alan nunnelee was 56. >> recently mississippi governor bill bryant pashtun phil bryant delivered the state of the state address in jackson. he discussed his agenda focusing man on education investment and promote justice system reform. he outlined a proposal to provide tax cuts to working families. this comes to us courtesy of mississippi public broadcasting. >> thank you. thank you so very much. thank you, mr. lt. governor, mr. speaker and mr. speaker pro-tem.

it is my high honor to be with all of you at this joint session. and isn't wonderful to have the ladies of your? they make us look a lot better. [applause] i wish i could say that was my idea. i welcome to the platform president pro-tem of the mississippi senate, senator giles ward. [applause] i am mindful tonight of the absence of my friend, terry brown. each time we have appeared here, terry welcomed me with a strong handshake and deborah with a prolonged and enthusiastic hug. [laughter] we will miss our friend. but as it is often said, he is

with us tonight. he only has a better seat. three years ago i stood at this podium and delivered my inaugural address. the weather had forced us inside to gather in this historic chamber for the swearing-in ceremonies. i will always remember it was in this chamber i began my life in public service. twenty years later, it was where deborah and i began our journey as your governor and first lady. i am fairly certain some in this chamber may not agree with all of my policies as governor. but i believe it is safe to say there is universal agreement that deborah has been one of our state's finest first ladies. [applause] are from reading to children in classrooms in every county in the state to being a first responder after the louisville tornado, she has served this state and its people with grace

and commitment. she asked me not to say this, but i have to. i often think the good lord allowed me to become governor just so mississippians would have deborah as their first lady. [applause] in the three years that have passed, we have achieved remarkable things together. so let us look at some of the positive facts about mississippi. we have created one of the most job-friendly states in america. according to area development magazine, mississippi ranks in the top ten states in the nation conomic development. this is a ranking based on input from site selectors across the nation, men and women whose profession is to know each state's economic environment and potential for productivity. for the third year in a row, we have been awarded a silver

shovel, representative of breaking ground on a number of new businesses. only 20 states each year receive this prestigious award. one of my personal favorites is the report that rates mississippi number five in america for growth in women-owned businesses, this according to american express. the american economic development institute also ranks our mississippi development authority as number nine in the nation among state economic development entities. i want to personally thank director brent christensen and his team at mda for a job well done. [applause] it's great to have nationally ranked football teams but we

need world-class economic developers as well. as i often say, economic development is a team sport. let us look at some other positive indicators. three years ago, the unemployment rate in mississippi was 9.8%. today, it is around 7.3%. according to our state economist, mississippi added 8,800 more jobs in 2014 than in 2013. projected real personal income growth in mississippi during 2015 is expected to be 3.9%. we also know that personal income buys even more in mississippi than it would in other states because of our low cost of living. the tax foundation has found income in mississippi goes 16% further than the national

average. so for every $100 in income, a mississippian would make $116 compared to other states. so many new employees who move to mississippi actually get a raise. if they move here from washington, d.c., they could get around a 40% raise. obviously, we would have to retrain most of them. there are other reliable indicators of the health of our economy. if we look at the amount of individual income tax collected in mississippi from fiscal year 2011 to fiscal year 2014, we see a nearly $300 million increase. it would appear working mississippians are making more money and revenues are rising. we have also seen a decline in the number of people in our state who are receiving unemployment payments.

from november 2013 to november 2014 there has been a reduction of 24%. these facts may not be printed in a magazine or included in a study, but they prove positive momentum exists. while we are discussing economic development, let me take this time to assure you, the standards for investing in economic development projects under this administration have been demanding. we thoroughly examine each investment for financial stability, probability of success and the company's history. our qualifying standards are high and thorough. for your peace of mind, we intend to keep them that way. do not misunderstand my position. we are not yet where we need to

be to move to that new level, but we are moving ahead and should not be timid about recognizing the good things in mississippi. others will certainly revel in the bad. but as for me, i am proud of my mississippi. [applause] now we know progress is never immediate, and it is often made during the most difficult of times. the key to eventually obtaining lasting success is to stay the course and to never abandon your core beliefs and historic principles. for example, we realize that finding a job can and has changed lives for the better. so we must do all in our power to put people to work. tonight, i am announcing the keep mississippi working fund, a program that will move nearly $50 million over the next two years into workforce training efforts without putting a demand

on the general fund. mississippi has one of the healthiest unemployment trust funds in the nation. due to the decreased demand on the unemployment fund, we will be allocating those dollars for training purposes. these workforce-training dollars will be managed by the state workforce investment board and committed to training programs at our community colleges. the mississippi economic council's blueprint competitiveness study identified the need for more skilled labor in mississippi and a centralized agency to manage workforce development. to sum it up we will keep mississippi working by investing more in skills training at our community colleges and having faith in mississippi workers that they can help build the future. [applause]

i have also requested $3 million in my executive budget recommendation to begin the mississippi works scholarship fund. this would offer a student in any high school involved in a career readiness curriculum who maintains a c average an opportunity to continue that course of study through a community college on a full scholarship. as a blue-collar kid, i worked my way through junior college, but today's conditions are different and tuition is more challenging. our working class kids need an even break to advance their skills. let us give them a chance to be skilled craftsmen and women and find them a job. i believe with these two programs we can focus on creating a world-class workforce.

with that accomplished, our economic success can be unlimited. we will keep breaking ground and cutting ribbons across the entire state and winning more silver shovels. one day i would like to have a gold one. [applause] i will admit to being an eternal optimist who believes mississippi's best days lie ahead and within our grasp. [applause] tonight i can report the state of mississippi is in the best financial condition in recent history. our hard work has begun to make measured progress. mississippi's gross domestic product exceeded $100 billion in 2012 for the first time in history and has continued to do

so each year since. in the last three years, our state's revenue has cumulatively grown almost 10%. revenue for fiscal year 2016 is projected to grow by $166 million. our budget now uses little, if any, one time revenues for recurring expenses, and our rainy day fund is filled to its statutory limit. [applause] thank you. thank you, mr. speaker. thank you lieutenant governor. thank you leadership. because of our state's judicious borrowing and refinancing when interest rates are advantageous our state's credit rating remains a strong double a. in fact we have retired as much debt as we have issued with the

exception of economic development financing which has shown an $11 return for every $1 invested over the last three years. in short, we pay our bills, save our money and invest wisely. health care continues to be an issue of debate in mississippi. even without expansion, the mississippi division of medicaid's general fund budget request this year is nearly $1 billion. the woodwork effect and other provisions of the affordable care act have already resulted in an additional 71,000 medicaid recipients resulting in budget increases we can ill afford. to make matters more challenging, this number is projected to rise to 90,000 by july 1. realistically, the conditions surrounding health care are even more uncertain than before. i fully expect dramatic changes

in the affordable care act with republicans in charge of both houses of congress. a number of the new majority were sent to washington promising to repeal the affordable care act an action congress has attempted in whole or in part more than forty different times. i do believe we will see some positive changes proposed, such as portability, national tort reform and health care savings accounts. another positive reform i am encouraging is the restoration of medicare and medicaid dsh payments. these payments were originally designed to defray the costs of uncompensated care. in an effort to assist our hospitals, i have reached out to our congressional delegation to suggest the portion of the affordable care act that ends medicaid and medicare dsh payments be suspended.

this would return revenue to hospitals, which continue to provide uncompensated care even in states where expansion has occurred. congress passed similar provisions restoring the medicaid dsh payments, and restoration of funding for dsh payments was even a part of the president's budget. obviously, elimination of the disproportionate share hospital payments is a portion of the law that should have been read before it was passed. most every state's success is largely judged by its education system. admittedly, our public education system has been a challenge for as long as any of us can remember. in fact there is no recorded history of mississippi's public education system that shows statewide success. however, i believe the transformational changes brought about by the mississippi legislature in the past three

years will finally begin to show progress. a brief review can begin with the literacy program that will end social promotion at the critical point of entering the fourth grade. charter schools for the first time in mississippi history will offer hope to those children trapped in failing school districts. funding early childhood learning programs began in our first legislative session together and this year i will support doubling the funding for the pre-k collaborative program with a total appropriation of $6 million. because of our success, education week ranks mississippi number nine in the nation in pre-school enrollments. to put more funding in the

classroom, you passed and i two-year $100 million teacher pay raise. performance based pilot programs continue in 14 school districts and over $1 million has gone to teachers who are performing at the highest levels. we have also appropriated $65 million in the last three years for the national board certified teacher program. nationally certified teachers can receive a $6,000 annual salary increase. your commitment to this program has resulted in mississippi becoming number seven in the nation for board certified teachers. as i have said many times, we must find the best teachers possible and pay them well. [applause]

you and i together have offered complete scholarships to students achieving high marks on their act and who want to become teachers. we have, working with the institutions of higher learning, increased the demands on students who major in education in our universities. and we have put into place a dyslexia training program for teachers and funded scholarships to help with this training. i can assure you from personal experience, this response to dyslexia will result in direct benefits. this reading disorder is the number one reason children drop out of school. if we confront it aggressively we can see a dramatic decrease in our state's dropout rate and help turn around our reading scores for thousands of mississippi children. this year we must also do all

in our power to help children with special needs. the equal opportunity for students with special needs act will empower parents with educational choice to get their children the services they need. [applause] when only 22.5% of special needs children graduate from high school, something is terribly wrong. i would ask you to send this bill to my desk. mississippi children with special needs, and their parents, deserve nothing less. now let's spend a moment on the reality of education funding. the education week research center ranks mississippi as 19th in the nation for state expenditures on k-12 education as a percentage of state taxable resources.

no less authority than the u.s. department of education lists our state as number twelve in the nation for school expenditures as a percentage of the state's gross domestic product. my executive budget recommendation increases maep funding by $53 million over the current year. under my recommendation maep funding will reach nearly $2.2 billion or a 2.5% annual increase. funding for k-12 overall will reach $2.5 billion. it includes $41 million this year for the second year of a $100 million teacher pay raise and $15 million for more reading coaches to assist in the literacy program within the third grade gate.

i believe most of us want to fund reforms in education that work and make certain the money goes to the classroom. [applause] each year we have worked together to balance our budget and this year will certainly be no different, with one exception. this year i intend to take the bold and controversial position that when times are good, we shouldn't spend all the money. in fact i will ask you to give a raise to the people who need it most the working people of mississippi. [applause] i have proposed a working families tax cut that would provide an income tax credit to working mississippians earning up to $52,000 annually.

it is non-refundable and would be a tax dividend subject to revenue growth and filling the rainy day fund. i realize the legislative process will generate additional ideas to provide tax relief to mississippi families. the good news is i am open to any number of tax cuts that put money in the pockets of working mississippians. [applause] in short, put a tax cut on my desk, and i will sign it. 2014 had its challenges just as every year does. nothing is ever perfect or controllable. on april 28 a recorded 23 tornadoes struck our state.

particularly hard hit were louisville and tupelo. of the 14 people who lost their lives that tragic day, ten were in the louisville area. president pro-tem giles ward's home was totally destroyed, as were so many others. the hospital and an extended care facility were badly damaged. some of the town's biggest employers, including the winston county medical center and natron wood products, were closed. as always in times of disaster, mississippians pulled together and got to work. the city, county and state responders set about saving lives and comforting victims. the officials joined the private sector, our mississippi national guard and faith-based organizations to begin rebuilding in all the affected

areas. within 21 days, a modular hospital was opened, fema's first ever success with such a system. [applause] and i am proud to say that natron wood products will reopen as winston plywood and veneer and will become one of the largest plywood manufacturers in north america. now that's recovery mississippi [applause] style. [applause] joining us tonight is someone who is very important to that recovery kurt liebich, ceo of winston plywood's parent company, new wood resources. please help me welcome kurt.

kurt, thank you very much. [applause] thank you for believing in mississippi. on december 23, 2014, five tornadoes struck again with the hardest hit areas in marion and jones counties. these storms took the lives of five mississippians, including the brother of senator billy hudson. homes were destroyed and lives were forever changed. once again we wept and prayed and thanked god more were not taken. then we went back to work. on christmas eve, i toured the damage and witnessed how the joys of the christmas season were shattered for so many. but once again we became mississippi strong.

since that time more than 3,200 volunteers have worked more than 19,000 hours. private donations have exceeded a quarter of a million dollars for tornado victims. the gift of hope continues across this great state in winston, leake, lamar, jones clarke, rankin and other affected counties. we continue to be ever thankful while expressing man's unending prayer for peace on earth and good will towards men. last year also brought us man-made challenges such as those at the department of corrections. this even as we passed the most comprehensive corrections and criminal justice reform in this state's history. but as with all challenges there exist opportunities.

with a stellar independent task force to review all contracts within the department, we will make changes to add accountability to the department of corrections and beyond. with your help, we will bring long needed reform to laws governing state contracts [applause] including an overhaul of our state's contract review board. this reform also included the appointment of a new commissioner for the mississippi department of corrections. ..

single source contracts across the state government. we've all asked to transfer the patrol of all corrections to the authority of the secretary of state and place the welfare account of the treasurer's office to separate the controls of income and expenditures. [applause] with your support and the leadership we will reform the department of corrections we

will reform the accountability and outcomes. rest assured that the change is on the way. some are challenging and others are positively transformational. it was the year of the creative economy and more than 22 million visitors came to the state. the potential to increase this number into the $390 million that it brings to our general fund is obvious. that's why i will be asking you this year to end debate invested $5.1 million into tourism. help us bring the world to mississippi one visitor at a time and i will return your

investment sixfold. [applause] lets us share mississippi with everyone to help us promote this and other opportunities as the ambassador for the creative economy and country music legend of mississippi's own marty stuart. [applause] and they talk about my hair. [laughter] like many supporters of the children's hospital i'm also working with the university of mississippi medical center to bring $150 million addition. $120 million which will be

raised privately. the work of the children's hospital is a phenomenal success story that has changed the lives of so many. it would have become a reality without the man who's dedicated. please help me think the vice chancellor of the university of mississippi medical center jimmy. [applause] thank you for your service. stand up. work continues on the new medical school. this will allow us to reach the goal of adding 1000 new positions by 2025. it's also notable that the university college of osteoporosis medicine has

graduated its first class of over 90 primary care physicians. the scholarship program into the office of the physician workforce development will keep these doctors here in mississippi where they are needed most. i'd also like to remind the students the physician practice medicine magazine has named mississippi as the best state in america to practice medicine two years in a row. [applause] i often tell people don't believe me google it. mississippi also achieved high acclaim for excellence in telemedicine. in fact we are one of only seven states in america to earn an a

rating from the american medicine association. i want to thank the health association for their hard work bringing cutting-edge health care to mississippi and also think the legislature for its commitment to defending mississippi's second amendment rights. your work has been so successful that i received the freedom award. thank you very much. [applause] mississippi's automotive industry remains strong. nissan has expanded its facility by adding 1300 jobs and rolled off of the new bar on -- morano one made in mississippi. in blue springs they will reach

the half-million mark for manufacturing carl -- carolas. this outplays the toyota plans in the world. in the world. [applause] no plan to on this planet has been so successful. other important projects include a baseball stadium and alexia. mississippi and the civil rights museum in jackson and the tire factory in west point 19 movies were made in mississippi last year while the museum in cleveland and the arts and entertainment center are being planned or constructed. as the football world watched the fcc a few other things occurred that demanded recognition.

all state university's football teams won the championship. [applause] east mississippi community college became national champions for the third time in four years making football history. [applause] and legendary university of southern mississippi was enshrined in the pro football hall of fame in 2014 joining eight others from mississippi. congratulations. [applause] this is a new year for mississippi and for all of us

filled with promise and challenges. being an optimist i always look for the greater possibility. i believe mississippi can and will improve its public education system. build a stronger economy, become a healthier place to live and put our people to work. as the national chairman of jobs for america's graduates, i believe that we must offer every child a pathway to success. iam more determined than ever to see that happen. i believe mississippi can rise to a new level. but if we are to do so we must set aside these political differences that we have to seek real solutions in both our economic and social environments last year i asked you to make a simple profound change in the state. some said it was a waste of time, but we knew better. by simply adding our national

motto to the great state of mississippi we professed our understanding of a higher power over the affairs. we expressed the faith that this wonderful state would continue to be blessed. let us now without apology a firm tonight in god we trust. thank you all for your attention and attendance here tonight. god bless you and god bless you and the great state of mississippi. [applause] live now to a discussion on u.s. drug policy addressing the issue is the acting director of the white house office of national drug control policy and assistant secretary of state for international narcotics and law-enforcement affairs. this is just getting started. >> senior vice president here. we are delighted today to be able to host the acting director

of the white house office of national drug policy and the ambassador assistant secretary in the bureau at the department of state and narcotics law enforcement. let me just say a few words here. this event which is the first time that we have had the opportunity to welcome michael to csi this event follows a couple different opportunities that we have had over the last year year and a half to focus on policies on domestic and international drug policy. on march 31 of last year we toasted the ambassador a long with the former head of state and former health minister. both of them here representing the global commission on drug policy and last september we had

the good fortune to host richard grant also on the release of the commission's most recent report. i want to offer a special thanks to the number of people that helped make this possible by colleagues here from csi was instrumental putting everything together. well jenkins from the omd cp was very helpful as well as eric green from the department and a special thanks to them. we are here to talk about a drug policy at home and globally and i think what we will hear is there's quite a bit of dynamism that crosses over him on these two domains. the obama administration has been quite active as we go here in a period of quite energetic innovation and reform across the spectrum of different issues. president obama just recently had a extended set of remarks

youtube interview in which he was speaking directly to the efforts underway in several states in this country in terms of legalization of cannabis. what that meant in terms of the power of referendum and states rights and how to navigate the differences between federal government and the department of department of justice on equities in this issue and the state street issues. it was a very forward leaning statement from the president i think quite encouraging. we also got the special session scheduled for the early part of 2016 on the global drug policy. this is the first occasion since 1998 when there's been such a gathering to review where we are in terms of the conventions and further refinement of the global approaches so it is a great opportunity as we move towards vienna in march on drug policy

and the approaches to hear from the ambassador brownfield at the preparations and what lies ahead in this period. what we are going to do is ask michael and bill to each open up with a six to eight minutes of topline prepared remarks without the respective areas and the planes they want to get out in terms of the major policy considerations at the moment and then we will have a conversation across those lines among ourselves and then we will open the floor to you all for your comments and questions. when we get to that point we will bundle together a number. your hand up and we will bring a microphone to you. please identify yourself and be succinct. we will come back to the speakers. i'm going to ask michael to open up if you wouldn't mind.

and thank you so much for being with us. >> thanks for the invitation. i relish the six to eight minutes because i love being with the ambassador brownfield. about getting my interventions in place when we work together is always an interesting dynamic. static i will always die for the buy for the director of the national drug policy. >> it is actually always a pleasure to work with the ambassador and so i want to spend a majority of my time in terms of opening remarks talking about where we are on the drug policy in the united states because i think undercover op i think that under the obama administration we've taken reforms as it relates to drug policy in the united states. i think for a long time we have relied on anecdotes to guide the policy and under this administration we've really focused on the science-based evidence-based strategy to do

that and as a context for this, the vast majority of my career i spent in public health and i worked at the massachusetts public health department. pretty forward leaning states with a pretty forward leaning health department and i remembered being there when the non- jarreau policy was released and i remembered then remember then that director talking about the fact that we couldn't arrest and incarcerate our way out of this problem, that we needed to rely specifically on the public health approaches to this disease while law enforcement plays a role in what we do isn't going to be the solution to the problems and i was like this isn't what i needs to and really embracing some cutting-edge at least for the administration cutting edge cutting-edge activities like the overdose prevention programs and so from my perspective, you know i was fortunate to have the opportunity to come here in november of 2012 so i think it

is really important for us to understand where we've tried to go both in terms of policy and budget as it focuses on that. one of the areas that we have been really trying to focus on are the public health strategies really looking from the policy perspective and the budget perspective focusing on things like prevention, treatment and recovery. let me give you a couple examples of what are some of the significant reforms that we have seen? the other piece i'm actually recovering from my own addictive disorders of the fact that i am hopefully the soon-to-be director if the senate votes the way that i wanted to on monday, it is emblematic of where we are. so i am not a general or law-enforcement person, i may public hold person. i am an openly gay man and recovery and that is the person that the president chose to leave drug policy and hope we have more reforms to come.

one of the areas i think is particularly important is the affordable care act as we talk about this issue. so if you think about substance abuse disorders we had about 23 million people in the united united states to meet who meet the criteria for the substance abuse disorders and only 10% of those got care at the specialty treatment program and it is one of the reasons people with untreated addiction interact interacts with the justice system because we don't do a good job eking sure people have access to treatment for the affordable care act revolutionizes that in two ways. basically it makes the disorder treatment and essential help benefit of any of the expansion plans that we have both in medicaid and in that exchange plan. the second piece but it does is it basically says that insurance companies have to offer these benefits with other health benefits. for a long time in particular in the private insurance world they used a variety of

mechanisms like lifetime limits co-pays and deductibles to limit people's access so that is a real profound change in how we think about the drug policy and access to recovery so i think it's important that we talk about that. the other piece i think this administration needs credit for is how we've looked at things how we've approached the reform activity and it really is important to understand the track record of both the president and the attorney general particularly as it relates to low level offenders coming into contact with the criminal justice system largely as a result of their own addictive disorders and when we think of our policy we look at it in three fundamental ways. one how do we divert people away from the criminal justice system in the first place, so how do we enhance policy and practice and how do we do things like increase the opportunity for the police department to have a different intervention rather than just arresting someone and incarcerating than?

we know the vast majority of people in the prison facilities are there largely because of their own substance abuse disorders and how do we make sure that they get good care and treatment and how do we make sure people are covering from their addiction and particularly with criminal records don't have lifelong barriers as a result of the criminal records because of their addictive disorders. so i will share a personal anecdote. it's interesting as one of the highest level folks who are in recovery with my own criminal record going through an fbi than being processed trying to explain that goes the rest records but i think that it provides an opportunity to do that. the other piece i want to share with you is how we've begun to work with law enforcement in a different way. and i think that many of you have seen reporting about the dramatic increase in opiate related deaths in the united states so we now have 120 people dying every single day of a drug overdose in the united states. that's largely driven by

protection drugs and through the work of our office, we are basically trying to make sure that law enforcement is equipped with this remarkable anecdote to reverse an overdose and we have seen two things happened. one, the incredible uptake on local law enforcement on saving people's lives and so we now have law enforcement entities across the united states doing it as well as the state law that provided immunity from people that are reporting an overdose from criminal prosecution. but the byproduct of that you will hear and we just had a conference the other day is that it dramatically changes the relationship of local law enforcement with the drug using community. and it precipitated a conversation about how can the law-enforcement community have a different response to people with substance abuse disorders not only saving their lives using that as an opportunity to get people into care and

treatment. so i think that these are kind of pieces that we wanted to make sure that our part of the work that we do. it's very interesting and i will end here and turn over to the ambassador. i don't come from an international background. one of the site is really astounding to me is how the drug policy in the united states gets reverberated across the world. and it's really tremendous and i see the ambassador is here who's been a huge part of that of how many countries across this hemisphere or across the world quite honestly are talking about and moving towards implementing public health strategies as it relates to their own issues. now i would like to see them fund public health strategies but also things like alternatives to incarceration. and this is into the country but it's really been heartening to me to think about how the u.s.

drug policy has precipitated a conversation among many countries as they rethink their own policy. the last piece i will say that it is heartening to me is even in the international world focusing on recovery and how we can lessen the stigma of addiction and people who are or have addiction and the international community so working with our state department we actually passed a resolution last year focusing on the recovery. i got to lead a panel discussion among the countries about how we can continue to promote this concept of treating people with dignity and respect and diminishing the barriers. so it's really been i think heartening. i want to spend more time on this it has been kind of our view of the legalization. and i don't come at this from an ideological perspective. i cannot does this from a scientific perspective. the american academy of pediatrics have an has an excellent policy piece that came

out last week not supporting legalization and one of the things they say that said that i think resonates with us about how we think about legalization efforts is that the most feeling criteria as we think about the drug policy in the united states should be about what are the harms as it relates to the youth of our country and that is the pivotal reason for us why we have not been supportive of legalization efforts. it doesn't mean however that we don't need to continue to think about how we reform our criminal justice system, how we deal with issues of disproportionality as it relates to arrest and incarceration. it means we believe there's another way to move forward as we think about drug policy in the united states that is balanced, it's not about the war in drugs or legalization and i know we will talk more about that but i just wanted to put that out there as we thought about how we formulated drug policy in our position around marijuana. >> thank you very much.

>> shall i launch -- by the way thank you very much steve and csis for providing this conversation. ladies and gentlemen there is some logic to the fact that i'm following this presentation michael. it's not just because he has a more handsome set of green shoelaces than my somewhat dull and boring black shoelaces but rather because what the director of the national drug control policy has done for you and for me is to lay out the domestic reality of this issue here in the united states of america and the bad to a very considerable extent is my starting point as i tried to engage on behalf of the united states of america in the international community on this issue. i obviously cannot take

positions and express views and offer a u.s. position that does not take into account what we are doing here in the united states of america. but that is not the only set of realities that i must deal with as i prepare for the year 2015 and the international context. another set of realities is we are going to have in about four weeks time a meeting on the un commission on narcotic drugs that will establish for the united nations drug policies reform the ideas concepts and lead onto the special session of the united nations in the year 2016. regardless of the u.s. domestic realities those international meetings will occur. there are other realities out there that some of us in this room, not including the ambassador simon who's aware of everything i have said and will

say that appointed the rest of my life that some the others among us may not be so much aware. first, there's there is a tremendous debate in the international community between those who wish to reform and those who wish to continue current policies. those who wish to change or completely alter the three international drug control conventions and of those that wish to preserve them. to make it as simplistic as possible, those who support legalization and those who support the prohibition. this is not an exclusively u.s. argument, ladies and gentlemen. and as i prepare to work through this set of challenges in this year and the year i had we have to take these into account and i will offer you two more reality is that while they may not sound overwhelming to you the major

major issues that we have to factor in from the united states foreign-policy perspective one any change in the international legal architecture related to drugs requires by the un rule something in the vicinity of 120 member states to endorse before the change is enacted to treat the convention. that is merely identity is 60%. it is almost two thirds. in other words, there is going to be no major legal change unless a this number of governments agreed. and the second reality for me although it sounds domesticate is definitely quite international as well, there's also going to be no change in the u.s. position on any treaty or convention unless i can line

up 67 united states senators to agree with that new treaty, the new convention, the new international obligation. i will leave to you far more expert than ie and how easy it is to produce 67 senators in agreement on any major issue in the world today and i will not give any further down go any further down the road and that's because while i name be done i am not completely stupid. so my challenge i suggest to all of you is to try to find a way whereby the united states continues to exercise leadership in this field which i hope most, not all but most would agree is a helpful and a positive thing. leadership that in my opinion should be pragmatic, practical

and realistic in terms of where we are trying to guide, not a chick, prodded or work with the larger international community representing the 7.5 billion inhabitants of planet earth at this time. i would suggest and i will right now suggest that we should start with some sort of a common understanding in terms of the legal architecture. some of you come and certainly steve, have heard this before because i rolled this out for the first time i belief in this exact room about a year or so ago when i suggested to the world should be able to reach consensus on four basic principles. first principle don't try a dramatic change in the three international conventions.

not because they are perfect because i acknowledge they lack any written document are not perfect but rather because getting something new probably is beyond the realm of the possible at this point and something that is good but not perfect perhaps it's better than having nothing at all. principle number two, what i call the flexibility principle. i want to be clear on what i mean by flexibility. i do not mean that every government should be allowed to interpret the three conventions as it wishes. that would be rather -- it would be a weak set of conventions. but rather, within the conventions themselves there is discretion and flexibility that is permitted by the text of the conventions. why not take advantage of that discretion and flexibility to

accomplish some things in terms of reforms, new ideas, new approaches. third principle from my perspective is what i call tolerance of differing national policies. let us accept that over the past 50 years the international community's attempt to get all 190 i think it is 94 members of the united nations to adopt exactly the same drug control policy has not been an overwhelming success. let us assume therefore and accept that government and nations responding to their own national conditions and realities will have somewhat differing policies. let us have an international approach that accepts a reality quite frankly ladies and gentlemen because it is going to happen whether we accept it or

want it or not. and my fourth suggested principle is the principle that regardless of our position on legalization versus prohibition as i'm on reform versus contiguity we all agree that the criminal organizations those institutions that conduct activities for purpose of economic gain using violence and blood as their mechanisms for earning revenues in order to traffic and market and illicit products should in fact be resisted by all nations on the planet regardless of what our individual national drug policies might be. integrity of the convention accept some flexibility within the convention, tolerance for differing national positions and

the consensus against the criminal organizations. now that is a framework, ladies and gentlemen. he would say a framework is not a policy and he's right and i will throw out some ideas that i think would constitute a policy and you will hear more on these in the course of this year and the next. one we have just heard from the director of director of national drug control policy. public health, public health public health. this is not a criminal justice problem. at least it is not exclusively a criminal justice problem. we should quite correctly focused more of our international attention on the health aspects of this issue. second, let's say it right up front criminal justice reform. we dance around the issue sometimes and sometimes we say it quite bluntly and sometimes we use simplistic expressions and sometimes people speak for 45 minutes trying to say the same thing which is the sure to

entertain we should entertain reform of our criminal justice process where it makes sense. what might make sense? sentencing the reform? we should be open to that. alternatives to incarceration might not be a bad idea. certainly in some situations. drug courts rather than the criminal justice courts to manage, process or adjudicated these sorts of issues. these are the sort of ideas that smart men and women i hope will pull out into international dialogue in the course of 2015- 2016. a concept i'm pushing as hard as i can is let's find ways for greater international cooperation. we will have to accept, ladies and gentlemen that the world is a complicated place. there are today some countries that have chosen to legalize entire categories of what in

other places are prescribed drugs and other countries are executing people who traffic those drugs. we've somehow got to find enough common ground that we can do some things together, accepting that different countries will take different approaches and the fourth in my so-called policy prescriptions if i said it once i will say it again is let's think of new ways to address the organized criminal side of this heat vision, not the people who consume, not the people who are buying and selling in small quantities but the people who constitute multibillion-dollar, multinational enterprises that are marketing the stuff. ladies and gentlemen i would close by suggesting optimistically that we have some success opening up this aperture

of dialogue on having a useful conversation. and i said or signing in are not aware of who he is is sitting three rows back adjusts to the left of the aisle as i'm looking at it he had considerable success about four months ago in bringing together the nations of the organization of american states to address just to these issues and they came up with what i think was actually a pretty good declaration. i hope others will ask me about it in the course of the question and answer session. ladies and gentlemen, my closing sentence is this. there is room for reform in this field. 2016 is not 1961. the world has changed. we are not idiots. i think that we acknowledge this

reality but let's acknowledge one other reality as well as mentioned in his own remarks and that is there is a reason why 100 years ago most of the governments in the world decided to control access to a certain number of drugs. it is because they were found to be harmful to those who use them. so as we address reform and as we think about change, as we discussed new ways of doing things, let's not forget that there is a reason why we pay particular attention to these drugs and make sure if i can use the old saying of so many decades in the past we don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

thank you very much. i relinquish the floor. >> congratulations and i wish you the best. >> we are going to congratulate you knowing that that will raise your probability. >> i want to ask you about the agenda that you've outlined which is quite consistent with what bill outlined. this reform agenda on the human rights into changing the law enforcement outlook and paradigm, this is all reflected at some that some level of the changes in our society, normatively it reflects shifts that have happened across party lines. it's something that is tied to the broader trends in the reform of the u.s. health systems and the like.

tell us a bit more as you are thinking about this and talking to the members of congress as you are out talking to the different constituencies within the united states how do you see this change that is underway unfolding because it seems to me that it's created this space for you a space for you to carry forward. what is the true reform agenda agenda that's agenda agenda that's made possible in that made that possible in the period that division in many other places is quite deep were prohibited. so what is it that permits you to feel so confident about your ability to move ahead? >> we have folks that are coming at this to the same place for sometimes different reasons. so if you think about the reform

there are very conservative people in this country who are undertaking significant criminal justice reforms largely because of cost. it's the incarceration capital of the world. i would like to think they came at it from a humanistic standpoint. i think quite honestly they came at it from a cost standpoint that we can't keep this up to areas other than health care, criminal justice is the expenditure at the state level so you have very conservative people, very conservative folks coming at this from a cost standpoint and then you have healthcare system coming at it from the same angle and in the untreated the untreated addiction has a significant level of cost as it relates so if you think of the cost containment strategies to do that, i think the other piece -- and i hope i'm not being overly optimistic by this, as we've

seen the evolution and the of the policy change on a whole host of issues and i think of marriage as being one of them so how do you change that policy not to be overly simplistic part of it was people's willingness to come and about who they were and change the way that all of us think about this and it drove the policy. somebody gave me advice on time ago. people drive public policy so part of this movement around, i am not open about -- we need that kind of political movement, that kind of visibility to change public perception and to change the way that we think about this. so, i do think that's part of what draws folks from different places along the political spec from coming to the same place but i think they come at it for different reasons.

>> have you had a chance to get out and speak with different audiences here in the united states about the international agenda and what do people say to you? >> before i say that i wish to protest most emphatically that haunting of the state of texas and suggest -- doctor morris in's vertically valid and legitimate question. i'm not going to suggest there is a monolithic set of views when i'm working around this issue i would suggest it makes perfectly good sense that most american citizens look at the drug issue through the prism of their own experiences. family, school community business and are not thinking necessarily in terms of the international aspects. when they are thinking of the

international aspects, they tend to see the negative side of it in their communities that are a better purpose the process or that the leave sometimes erroneously that the product comes in universally from overseas and from foreign countries. and at the end of the day that dialogue tends to be more than 50% of the impact on the drug issue, the international drug issue on their lives and considerably less then 50% in terms of what we are doing work and do overseas. that's partly my responsibility. that's one of the things i'm going around the country to do to try to establish with the bad as well as everyone in this room that there is a link between what we are doing or trying to do overseas and then what happens here on our own streets

and in our own communities. our success or failure in terms of addressing the root causes that generate drug production or transportation to the united states has an obvious impact on our lives here. i would be my long winded response to your simple question. >> for those of you standing in the back there are open seats in the front if you wish to come and grab a seat. there's a couple right here in front. there's one right there there in the couple over and a couple over here. so please come on down if you care to. let's stay on the domestic front for a moment. we know that we have a heroine epidemic right now linked in with oxycontin. can you say a few words about how you understand about and what is driving the bat and i

know this is a top issue and top preoccupation in the kind of strategy needed to roll that back and it's been another numerous communities across the country and it's always quite surprising when you are in this setting and you see a billboard and people talk about this and very new compelling ways. can you say that about the causes in which you see at the strategy? to >> this does have international implications. if you are looking at where we are there when used we know the root cause has been overprescribing the prescription pain medication so the recent report showed that they are prescribing enough pain medication to give every american a bottle of pain pills

today. and we want to make sure people who need those medications get them and if you look at the new users to heroine, four fifths of them started by using protection pain medication. and then as people progress in their acuity of opiate addiction particularly on prescription drugs, what appears to be a small percentage are transitioning to heroine. so why are they transitioning? we have been inundated by a very cheap and very pure supply of heroin. if you are going to pay a dollar a milligram on the street for a pill come for 60-milligram pill or you had the opportunity to spend five or $10 on a bag of heroin that has the same affect it doesn't take an economist a lot of math to say i'm going to start using heroine. we have seen this progression

and that is one of the areas that has been of significant concern. tickets to the question you asked me for i think it's also why we've been able to have a broad continuum of folks engage on the drug policy because we have had heroine used for a long time. it is a shared threat and it's a different demographic and it's in more suburban and verbal areas that we've seen before. so we have been engaged with all of the governors every state as well as folks in congress who historically for whom the drug policy has never been a top priority issue again i think it's another area where we have been able to work with people who have historically not seem to drug policy issue as one of

the top priorities. >> one of the issues that surface is in the domestic debate in improving access to palette of care for folks that are end-of-life or suffering from a severe medical condition and require that and try to give greater flexibility both domestically but also globally this is an issue under consideration. how does that match up against what is kind of an emergency and a way of the heroine epidemic and the abuse that predates and drives that. >> of the conversation that has come up a number of times when you look at many of the countries that have a prescription drug issue in the united states, canada and european issues it is about relative access to healthcare

and i think that part of what we have offered quite honestly to the rest of the country thinking about how they get good medicine to people who really need them is to basically keep them lessons learned and say we think to say we think that there are lessons that we have learned about how you can minimize some of the diversion and abuse issues as you think about how you implement public health practice and how you think about the guidelines and care to make sure people do get really good access to good pain medications when they need them. we have often offered some kind of opportunities and cautionary words for other countries as they think about and try to look at access to health care and medication to do this in a way that doesn't replicate things that have happened here. >> is this an area that you think there is potential progress in the special session?

>> yes although i would want to qualify that very carefully. keep in mind prescription drugs are completely and totally permitted under the three international drug control conditions as you would expect them to be. that is the one area where you would expect to be a loud to use this particular or these particular products that is to say a trained and licensed physician determines that this particular medication is required or called for or indicated for a particular medical condition. the problem obviously and with the conventions themselves as well as the bodies that provide the guidance to the united nations system as well as our own government are attempting to limit, control and ideally eliminate is the abuse and diversion of those prescription

drugs. now can they come up with ideas in terms of how better to do that, i suppose so. but again this is where i come back to you with my closing comment of let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater. at the end of the day i believe and i hope what we are all looking for is a solution and outcome where qualified professional physicians are making a determination as to when certain products should be used as medication and not to take them out of this formula. when we move into licensed physicians, we move into an area that for the last 60, 70 80 years has fallen within the national systems. one physician licensing system may be very different from another. is it an area for possible

consideration, yes but it's not going to be a simple issue is what i'm suggesting. >> let's talk a little bit about marijuana and cannabis. you mentioned in the continued concern about harm. we are in a fragmented moment here. we have states that are moving ahead with legalized recreational use and we've had a number of states that have already put in place the medical use. there's the existing federal law and the tension that exists between cairo and washington and oregon alaska, dc. the tension between that versus the conventions. so it's a -- it seems to be a somewhat mixed picture where you have the president saying we need this as part of a criminal justice reform issue. this is one about nonviolent offenders and there is a racial dimension to this and it's about shifting to the public health

approach but there is a deep ambivalence running through all of these discussions. can you say a bit more about that and how do you navigate that as the leader in this area? >> i think there are a couple dimensions to this that are important and when you look at many of the president's comments he is talking about this in the criminal justice context. that we can't continue down the path of a resting and incarcerating young kids of color and the impact that we see here. i completely agree with that as it relates to drug policy. but when you look at the impact of legalization and what it might portend not just in legalization but i also have significant concerns with the commercialization of marijuana and having done public-health for a long time i think we see the industry using the same tactics quite honestly that the tobacco industry has used as they thought about marketing their product.

so basically not full disclosure about the health harms associated with marijuana. i think some sense of the tightly regulated market is not going to increase access to youth. we now have more youth in the country that smoke marijuana than tobacco and we clearly know the health harms associated with marijuana as it relates to use. but not quite honestly portraying the substance as addictive when clearly we know that it is. so i think that there is significant -- two things. one, this is where we come from in terms of the unanimity of policy. that said, with the department of justice monitoring is keeping a close eye on what is happening in maine and colorado and washington.

there was a department of justice memo saying we are not preempting the referendum in washington, toronto we are reflecting action based on our monitoring of the eight criteria on the public criteria. and in essence reserve the right to take action. so our office has again -- if we say that we are financing the data-driven we need to be finance and data-driven. what has been the impact.

i think that it is important for us to continue to oppose the legalization to monitor what is happening in colorado and then in subsequent states. >> how soon do you think that we will be able because my sense is that a lot of states [inaudible] and there has been ambivalence among people have come down on this issue in a number of different ways. how soon will people be able to make judgments. our office does not intend to issue a level of the definitive. but part of it is the commitment to continue to rollout the public data. it exists and looks at things like the youth and things like treatment admissions and things like drug driving episodes.

but look at the version of marijuana from one state to another. it's not our intention to issue the definitive report to tuesday as to see if that works or no it doesn't. >> i need to jump in on this because what michael has laid out quite correctly is the united states of america's approach to marijuana and of a larger legalization issue and iv that is exactly right as i understand it. we govern ourselves thank you very much and sometime around 1788 we decided system which we would do if we don't states and federal government.

we have ratified the conventions and in two of those, marijuana is placed in the annex of the prescribed product which the national government is expected to control and to the extent possible prohibited except for in very limited examples. my task as your representative what you pay me to do is to march out to those international organizations and explain to them how everything that steve and michael just talked about still leave us in compliance with our international obligations. now this is a little bit tricky. i would remind all of you that most governments in the world continue to have fairly strong views on cannabis and that of the oversight bodies in the united nations of which we are a member have set up particularly

the international narcotics control board has been pretty clear i would even say at times severe with me in terms of not accepting the argument that we are in full and complete compliance and this is what i was talking about early on in terms of saying we are an independent nation and we will make our own decisions and determinations. we are governed by our constitution. thank you very much. this is one of the difficult things to explain. it's just the nature of the diplomatic predicaments that we face. >> they are very good at that sort of thing.

>> let's talk for a second about harm reduction and the needle and syringe exchange all of which are highly sensitive and divisive issues but ones which many are arguing needed to be pushed forward as an element of both the domestic and international context. can you say a bit about that and then i would ask bill to comment. >> as long as i've been doing this work i hated it because it made so many different things to different people. if we are talking about a wide variety of intervention for the active users that minimize the health harms with their using of it -- >> politically it is uncomfortable.

again, we have always supported the change programs. we continue to support overdose prevention and education programs. you know, and a wide variety of other activities. the attention to me is the kind of international. it doesn't quite square away with me. we look at it as a valid treatment approach. part of what we laid out yesterday and the president's budget is even strengthening the united states effort access to medication treatments of these are the most highly evaluated medications that we have. so, we do support a wide variety of interventions that diminish the health harms associated and quite honestly the mortality associated with the drug use.

>> i agree not surprisingly 100% this entire area of discussion falls absolutely squarely into what i describe as the public-health components that we urge, accept, agree, support plead with him to vote for enhanced consideration in the international context. this is a good area for discussion. i wouldn't say that we should agree with every single proposal that comes in under the label of the harm reduction. i would say this is a valid issue for the 194 member states of the united nations to discuss in the context of the structure of the united states in the context of their individual national drug control policies. this is an area where i do b. the leave the nations of the world should be able to reach

some useful conclusions. as i might add doctor simon the states did in september of last year in guatemala city when they discussed public health in the the public-health in the final declaration as an area where the 34 states of the western hemisphere agreed we should address and focus efforts as we address the drug issue. >> thank you. >> we suspected the u.s. leadership as tour the special session to put a special emphasis on this area. >> to expand? >> what you have described about in the session suggests that there is proof already and we have some action in that area. it would give half of the people in this room a headache and the

other half would fall asleep but i would suggest that the united states of america has placed itself more or less in a position where it could influence the dialogue in the future because it has associated itself with neither of the two extremes neither those that espoused full prohibition in other words lock them up if they so much as think about it or if you think they might think about it were the other extreme, those that say let's just legalized everything and the entire problem would go away, we have placed ourselves in a position where we can influence and i would like to think help produce at least a majority if not consensus in this area and this would be an area --

>> and a sweet middleground we are going to put all of our energy looking at head what are the three or four things you want to take away from the special session in terms of the practical advances in that middle zone but are the concrete things where you make use of the existing flexibilities to push the rest of the world to see things more along the way as we want to see them. >> first i don't want to say people should see things the way we want to see them idb leave the way that we described this as we should find some common ground but all 194 member states of the united states can accept. i will start with at least two of the things that i said at the very beginning. and that is let's keep the basic architecture that we have the three international drug control, and let's keep a consensus in terms of resisting the large transnational organizations. then what are we actually trying

to accomplish in those parameters? i do believe public-health. and in an hour we could come up with 50 different proposals on public health, some of which we have already talked about in the course of our discussion .. what this does to a person

like me is i have got to find to proposals ideas concepts that we will be acceptable to some governments and others. i have come up with an suggested some of those ideas earlier today sentencing reform in terms of how many licenses you have to serve for this purpose alternatives to incarceration, adjudication processes that are different or separate from the criminal justice system. these are the sorts of areas i would like to think we could find and develop some degree of consensus, but i want to make it clear this is not going to be easy. if it were just us him we

could have a purpose -- a perfect document come out of the special session of the united nations in 2016. it might take more than an hour but we truly could. we are operating under a different set of rules and that is part of the reality i was trying to describe. if you think michael has accomplished to have a complicated a complicated situation trying to keep coherence among 50 states of the union plus the district of columbia, ladies and gentlemen, 196 individual member states of the united nations that operate by consensus, under those circumstances i would trade jobs any day of the week. >> thank you. >> i want to come back with one big question and then that i want to open the

floor for comments and questions. my question is what more do you need to do you believe in terms of tools, capacity to carry forward the mission of your office which is so expensive that has very high ambitions attached to it? and you are in the process of multiple transitions that outlook and paradigms and partnerships. it is striking reading through all the policy material that you generated. it is a dynamic environment you are trying to shape. where you sit, what more if you were to wish for an additional set of capacities and tools, with those be? >> no one has given me a blank check for.

you know i think a couple of things. one i will start with, continuing to change public perception is one of the areas know why people don't seek treatment. if i had my magic wand it would be changing how people with addiction are viewed. >> be able to communicate and mobilize. >> i would love to see a more vibrant, politically active recovery movement in the same way we have had movements in other areas that a change public policy. and i think they are changing and people are beginning to come together. i do think that that becomes really helpful. the 2nd piece, and i do believe this what we have here in the united states

we share that resource across the country we will we lead the world in research good evidence -based programming and we need to continue to focus particularly as it relates to justice and health care intervention. we have emerging models, but we need a better material. also handed our law enforcement folks some things. drug courts are great, drug market interventions are promising. we have other promising practices, but we need a a better area. those would be to things she resources are always important.

the vast majority of treatment comes from the public dollar. private insurance needs to step up in terms of how they provide a good benefit package. >> what would make your job easier? >> my budget and having a single coherent consensus position by the united states of america. very likely i would say at the end of the day what would be most useful for me would be an approach where their is some degree of consensus within the united states of america for so

long as we stay within these basic parameters we we will be allowed and permitted to reach understandings and agreements to cooperative and engage bilaterally, regionally and universally and during consolidations around the world. i am not sure we we will get that, but this is what i am trying to do what i i testify before congress, to try and clarify as much as possible the general direction we are trying to go so that this issue does not get caught up in a sort of political dialogue that does make it very difficult for us to get things done at

nationally. >> let's open it up for some comments and questions. two gentlemen in the middle she. i guarantee that we we will get everyone identify yourself and be sustained. >> a question. congratulations on your nomination. >> in advance congratulations he talked about the administration's position on marijuana. nevertheless the president has said it is important that washington and other states are allowed to implement the laws and move forward. the department of justice

will not intervene. do you agree with the administration's position? would you prefer to see the federal government imposed federal law on all states prohibition of marijuana? >> hold on one moment. >> yes. the newsletter, there is an issue at the intersection drug enforcement on the one hand and human rights in criminal justice on the other hand. not every country shares human rights standards and criminal justice. we do not have the death penalty for drug offenses.

some countries do. they're international tensions right now in indonesia of six convicted drug traffickers with dozens more. a number of countries have recalled ambassadors from the dea opening a branch office in jakarta in 2,011 one of many such offices around the world. we cooperate with indonesia, china many countries that have the death penalty for drug offenses. my question is as we move forward on criminal justice reform in the us is reform also going to be operational is it going to

be at the policy level? howie asking countries that we work with to give us assurances from what what we contribute to them or indirectly lead to executions for nonviolent offense. >> thank you. hands in the back. why don't we come up here. >> detective howard will bridge law enforcement against prohibition. you said earlier that law enforcement plays a key component. i started police work in 1974 and have seen tsunamis and drugs come into this country marijuana, lsd cocaine, meth, ecstasy, heroin. it is my experience that we have been the mosquito on the butt of an elephant.

drugs are cheaper, stronger, and readily available to america's youth. why do you continue to have faith that my profession can have any impact on the drug trade either nationally or internationally? these are the outer bounds of the toy 1st century. the only way we took him down was to end prohibition. >> my company is not involved in this. my question is this in getting the cooperation of the u.s. congress to do the things, to move toward that sweet spot you described

leaving aside the probability of getting 67 votes is this an issue in which the cooperation could be relatively bipartisan rather than split along party lines? an example is the transpacific partnership with the president will certainly need public cooperation. >> what is the probability? is this an issue that lends itself to republican -- >> which issue? >> the issue of getting a consensus on us drug policy to facilitate an effective approach to the international community to the united nations. >> thank you. >> sure. >> i think your question in terms of our response i

would say two things. i'll agree that many states are very interested in terms of what is happening in colorado and washington. you know that the department of justice as it relates to the issues with colorado and washington has the same approach. again our response is to continue to monitor what happens and in subsequent states to see if that is to be a different response from the department of justice in this administration and what that might be, tighter regulations of one of the possible options if it looks as if those criteria are not being met. it is important to do that. the president as it relates

to the district was very clear that the district should stick to its home rule. as a resident of that district of might not agree about legalization pellagra with our ability to spend our own money the way that we want. i think it we will be continually important to watch what happens. i think to your question it has been interesting for me. i come from the public health side and the demand reduction will and quite honestly with not coming at this work from the kind of lost centric. one of the things that i have come to appreciate particularly as it relates to the heroin issue there is a direct correlation between supply and demand

that we cannot ignore. the heroin situation is a good example. part of part of the reason we are in this situation but it is because we have such a plentiful supply. and so we do have the focus on strategies that focus on getting the supply out of the communities. if i think think about effective public health strategy for a long time if you think about tobacco i'm still a smoker but it is harder and harder to find a place to buy a pack of cigarettes these days. getting bad stuff out of the committee has been an effective public health strategy for a long time. working with the criminal organization i think it does have a synergistic effect as it relates to demand reduction. the other piece while we want to give law enforcement the different set of skills

and practices to be able to not rely solely on arrest and incarceration as they approach people. it is important to continue to focus. >> can you talk about the issue that david raised? >> the human rights intersection. >> here is the way i suppose i would frame the issue. international relations of the intersection of lots of different issues. human rights human rights and democracy issues, law enforcement or counter narcotics issues trade and commercial issues economic issues security issues, terrorism issues. at the end of the day our relations with any individual country are a combination of all of those, and we as a

government, as a nation command as a people try to develop some sort of balance in each individual case as to what is most important and what is not. obviously if all nations of the world were to determine not to have relations with the country that maintains a death penalty my job would become much easier due to the fact that we would have relations with no other country in the world. our job is to figure what are the priorities among those. is it right for us to have a liaison law enforcement relationship with the nation that applies the death penalty in matters such as drug trafficking where we would not apply death penalty? from my perspective i would address that question by saying why do we want the liaison relationship?

what do we get out of it in terms of are we protecting the american people, is it accomplishing something, getting a larger objective for example, having a a relationship with the largest most populous muslim country in the world which does not have a significant extremist issue. how do we balance that against legitimate proper and correct human rights concerns and considerations and come up with a conclusion. as is practically always the case in the hard issues the conclusion will not be accepted or agreed to by everyone. it will at the end of the day the one that has the largest non- majority accepting or agreeing with it. i would love to think that we could find something in this matter that does

generate a bipartisan support. my only comment this is a policy that is now under some degree of change and adjustment. my own experience of the past 36 years is that is a time when it is rather difficult to find bipartisan agreement because things are changing and that is the most difficult time for my experience to get everyone to come together and agree. i hope i am wrong. we will find out. >> let's get another round of comments or questions. please please is synced. >> thank you so much. my question actually is twofold for each of you.

the 1st question is as part of a group that would be deemed legalizes it is somewhat erroneously concluded that we are not in concern for the well-being of the youth of our nation. as you were speaking you're saying that you articulated somewhat of a 3rd way or an alternative sort of path between prohibition and legalization and i was wondering if you could expand on what that is. the narcotics control board, monetary donations. being negatively impacted by being out of compliance if you will with the international convention? >> can you handle that?

yes, sir. >> my question is for both of you regarding the policy that portugal past. solicitation solicitation rates have fallen by half. how do you see that impacting domestic policy in the united states as well as consensus on international policy at the un? >> summarize that question slowly. >> yes. sorry. how do you see the impact of what happened in portugal in the last 15 years impact domestic policy in the united states and international policy and consensus? >> thank you. >> david holiday, latin american program. the recent report, policy report of the american academy of pediatrics also recommended that marijuana be rescheduled.

i won't ask your position on that mother what are the obstacles of the future of that? what would it mean? >> one other comment in the back. >> as a follow-up to that don murphy with the marijuana project. yesterday morning you spoke with law enforcement officers were you suggested or stated marijuana would remain classified as a tightly regulated schedule on drugs. the administration continues to oppose attempts. this was driven by medical science and research. would you care to comment? you think that marijuana and heroin should be on the same schedule and are equally dangerous. >> why don't we come to bill 1st and then michael.

>> i will start with the eye ncb question. the international narcotics control board that body which was established by the united nations when they ratified in 1961 international convention on control of marco and set -- narcotic and psychotropic drugs. the role of incb is to serve as referee assessing whether individual member states are in compliance with they're treaty obligations and have other, more specific functions as well. i wish i wish i could say we had a tremendous amount of influence on the incb. their are, i believe 12 members of which one right

now is an american citizen. we do provide of whatever our proportional share is under the united nations whatever it is we pay into the united nations system we do provide to them. i can offer you that over the last two years i have not detected any evidence at all of a substantial amount of deference by the eye ncb to the united states government's presentations despite the brilliance with which those presentations have been made. made. we do not agree that the presentations were made brilliantly. your question goes beyond that and does say, say, so what would be the impact of the eye -- incb finally making a definitive determination that the united states is out of

compliance with its obligations under the three conventions which is an excellent question what i have been wrestling with for more than a year now. the the sun we will still arrive in the morning and said in the evening and the republic will still stand. those are good things. things. it is not an existential sort of issue. it does have an impact in terms of us on this issue and broader issues as we attempt to encourage other governments to abide by they're rules under the human rights convention or under the trade agreement of the wto or other such multinational conventions. you would have to factor that into our thinking. we also would obviously have to factor in the impact of this in terms of the three conventions themselves.

if the nation that has exercised more within the united nations over the 70 years than any other nation is in over it and admitted noncompliance with its treaty obligations i assume that would make it less likely that other governments would feel any sense of obligation to comply with they're treaty obligations as well. i repeat, and on this i do not mean to overstate the case. it is not the end of the world but there would be negative impacts. it would be better if we could convince the incb that our domestic posture and position leaves us in compliance with they're treaty obligations and i will continue to make the argument that i have been making now for more than two years that our federal system our continued

commitment to the fundamental objectives of the three conventions, and that is to discourage the abuse of these particular products and our discretionary authority as a sovereign state to determine how our limited law enforcement resources would be applied to this problem set wheelers in compliance with our treaty obligations. i believe it is an argument with making a correct a correct argument, and we are better off if we can get the eye ncb to accept that argument. portugal portugal has been rolled out, as have a number of other nations in terms of experimentation with different approaches on drugs. the netherlands, switzerland at times. my argument would be i put

i put portugal in the same category with virtually any other nation to which i will now add the states of colorado and washington in terms of providing us something that we can assess monitor, and determine what the impact of they're national experiment is both in terms of positive and negative elements from that approach. i would not want a single portugal out and i don't think they would want to be singled out in terms of standing as a single nation that the entire world looks to and determines whether this works or does not. portugal is a small nation, for the most part a very homogeneous nation are limited in terms of population and geography. they have a different problem set than you would

find from a large populous nation that is particularly rural particularly urban multicultural and located in the crossroads of traditional smuggling patterns. my own view view is portugal is an additional data.as we the people of the united states of america and we the 196 member states of the united states -- united nations assessment we want to go >> their are a couple of questions on marijuana. how do you carve a 3rd way? >> let me just the portugal peace because i think it is interesting even institutes freely talk about to the

extent they significantly increase the treatment may be a profound effect which leads into the 3rd way approach. what we're saying we are concerned with intended health harms. let's focus on strategies as a solution to the problem. i think that even some of the good things that might be coming out of portugal and it could be a significant result to the fact that they dramatically increased access to treatment and that is the kernel justice system. we had a couple of questions about scheduling. one of the things i always here is why is marijuana in the same category as heroin. drugs are not schedule based on relative risk. this is basically the they meet up or down criteria.

i think we need to be careful what we*saying we start saying why is marijuana in the same category? i think the other piece that is important because in the past it was a pretty fair criticism that usg were not doing an adequate job on investigating the potential

>> thank you. we have gotten to the end of our time hear. this has been extraordinarily rich. i want to thank our audience michael, we wish you the best of luck on monday. please join me in thanking our speakers. [applause]

[inaudible conversations] >> currently acting dir. of director of national drug control policy we will get a nomination vote in the senate on monday. they are in at 5:00 o'clock eastern. the nomination vote. also they may take the homeland security spending bill the buildup versus reverses the presence executive action on immigration. the house the house is back next week to take up the senate passed legislation on the keystone xl pipeline. yesterday kevin mccarthy outlines the present schedule for the rest of the week.

>> mr. speaker, on monday no votes are expected in the house. on tuesday the tuesday the house will meet at noon for morning our and 2:00 p.m. for legislative business. on wednesday and thursday the house will meet at ten 10:00 a.m. for morning hours and then for legislative business. on friday the house will meet at 9:00 a.m. for legislative business. mr. speaker the house will consider a number of suspensions next week to make complete list of which we will be announced by close of business tomorrow. in addition, the house will consider the senate keystone bill. after six years of waiting, this bipartisan bill which will create more than 40,000 jobs will finally be placed on the president's desk. i sincerely i sincerely hopes he considers his long-standing veto threat and sides with the american people by signing this important jobs bill. the house will also consider too critical tax packages

next week that we will provide much-needed certainty for americans and small businesses. hr 644 the fighting hunger actual make charitable giving provisions and include provisions offered by representative eric olson aaron shock, and mike kelly. together making a real difference in the lives of americans by encouraging donations of property for conservation and enhancing deductions for food contributions to those in need. finally the house will consider hr 636 sponsored by rep. patsy berry with additional provisions authored by rep. representative dave reichert, essential to creating stability for our nation's best job creators, small businesses by making increased expensing permanent. i thank the gentleman and you back.

>> as you heard from the majority leader the house takes up the senate passed measure tuesday at noon for morning our speeches and 2:00 p.m. for legislative work. the you as senate debates the nomination of the director of national drug control policy. a vote is set for 530 eastern. it is likely the senate will try to move forward on the department of homeland security spending bill. democrats blocked debate because it would repeal president obama's executive actions on immigration. the citizen monday at 3:00 o'clock eastern. >> the political landscape has changed. not only are the 43 new republicans and 15 the democrats and 12 the 12 the republicans and one a democrat in the senate also

108 women in congress including the 1st african-american republican in the house and the 1st woman veteran in the senate. keep track of keep track of the members of congress using congressional chronicle. lots of useful information. in congress, best access. >> the tour takes book tv and american history tv on the road traveling to us cities to learn about they're history and literary life. >> we are in the daniel kilgore reading room of the special collections corpus christi he made it his life

get the benefits that they have going for them is veterans these three items represent the case of private why gloria. private longoria served the united states during world war ii and was killed by gently slip to the end of the war. the only funeral home near corpus christi. they were willing to conduct the funeral but not to allow his body to remain in their funeral home overnight for fear of offending the white citizens in the area. she appealed to doctor garcia command he conducted a letterwriting a letterwriting campaign to the people with positions of influence. a response came from lyndon

johnson who had recently been elected senator. he states his belief that it is wrong for a fallen soldier to be discriminated against after death and offered burial the arlington national cemetery where private longoria was laid to rest. >> watch all of our events saturday at noon eastern and sunday afternoon at 2:00 o'clock. >> treasury secretary jacklin testified before the senate finance committee about the president's 2016 budget request. senator orrin hatch of utah chaired the two-hour hearing. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations]

>> the committee will come to order. schumer. the community will come to order. today's hearing is on president obama's budget for fiscal year 2016. i want to thank secretary jack lew for appearing before us today. the president's budget proposes proposes to hike taxes by $2.1 trillion seemingly not content with the 1.7 trillion in new taxes. the president wants to raise

taxes on savings investment, small business and more. sadly, this will desire to raise taxes and is not intended to bring our budget into balance. rather it is accompanied by proposals to further expand the government to an even greater share of our economy the proposed budget never balances. deficits continue with me is that a as a share of the economy would remain at levels not seen in our nation's nation's history outside of a few years surrounding world war ii. that would mean continuing risk of the nonpartisan congressional budget office has labeled a fiscal crisis. in fact cbo has warned us repeatedly about potential fiscal crises under president obama's tenure and the made have made clear that unsustainable entitlement spending is at the heart of the potential for a fiscal crisis. yet the president's budget proposals precious little in

the way of reining in spending and is virtually nothing to address social security. despite having pleasant 2,009 is exactly what the president is proposing to do even while the disability trust fund is projected to be exhausted next year. simply put their are too many shortcomings to adequately address but include higher taxes taxes, economic growth, savings, investment, new wealth taxes muddled thinking about distributional issues lack of significant reforms to unsustainable entitlements while ongoing deficits and outsized rescued federal debt in the recent package bank tax that

nods to the ineffectiveness of dodd frank. we have heard that the proposal has been withdrawn and label a distraction. it is still supported on policy grounds. this is unhelpful command that is the kindest word i can think of to describe a particular proposal that are founded on the notion the american people savings are not the real the targets were more redistribution. there is a lot i can complain about but let's be honest. this is not going to be the best use of the committees time. secretary lou palestra •-ellipsis some areas in the budget even if it falls

short on the substance. this try to work together to believe is the shared goal of everyone here, to help americans where we can get out of the way when we should. i believe i believe we were shared desire to a former tax code. does not help american families and harms american businesses. by businesses, i mean businesses of all types. i i believe we share a desire to renew trade promotion authority as you identified in your testimony i believe we've shared desire to promote investment in infrastructure. if you are going to effectively address these issues pres. and his administration over to the american people to suspend what often seems like an unending political campaign for enough time to at least explore bipartisan cooperation.

i'll close with a question for you that you did not answer and evaded in testimony earlier this week. the irs commissioner evaded a similar ?-question-mark he was here on tuesday. secretary burwell did the same yesterday. the american people deserve an answer. the the question is do you have contingency plans in place in the event the supreme court invalidates the current structure of the affordable care act? over of like you to address this question in your opening remarks and i will note that it is a simple question. once again i want to thank the secretary for appearing here today. with our alternative to the ranking member for his opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you, sec., for being here on day number three of what is essentially budget blizzard here at the finance committee. while the committee examines

the budget proposal today the underlying issue remains the health of the budget of middle-class workers and families trying to get ahead the fact is too many millions are hurting. our jobs to put american middle class on solid economic ground, lift ground lift wages, and make sure everyone benefits with the economy grows. the president's budget budget proposals go after that challenge and a number of ways, and many are designed to improve america's badly broken tax code. the budget proposes to make incentives for education child care and retirement savings more generous and would take several steps to address the unfair ways we treat wage earning middle-class tax earners. i am pleased to see the proposal move toward ending the system of tax deferral tracking the profits of american businesses overseas these are all strong ideas

but i see an opportunity to do something even bolder. when it comes to the tax code why keep bailing water out of the boat instead of fixing leaks? the most effective improvements congress can make would come through comprehensive tax reform the best route to a modern tax system that is simpler and more fair for all and the best way to end the uncertainty caused by tax code and to address the most persistent issues. through comprehensive reform the congress can ensure incentives provide the biggest help to the people most in need. too often that is not how the code works today. comprehensive reform can do more than piecemeal changes to level the playing field for wage earners and make filing easier to manage and

there is one indisputable fact a comprehensive approach to tax reform is the best option for middle-class families,, not one that is focused exclusively on business taxes. a lot of americans and certainly their are a number in the administration that have advocated a a corporate only or business only plan for reform. i would not want to have to explain to a single parent in oregon why the congress overhauled the tax code for corporations but not that middle-class person. the person. the corporate side of our tax code undeniably needs reform. tax tax reform can and should make american business more competitive in the tough global marketplace, but it would be a grave mistake to leave millions of middle-class families and small businesses out. of course, the the finance committee will be working with treasury department closely over the upcoming year on a variety of issues.

the treasury department is working hard to look at new approaches to make sure american workers and american priorities are maintained in tough global markets. markets. i look forward to hearing about the administration's efforts particularly with respect to the ongoing discussions on the transpacific partnership. it is important not to forget the treasury plays an integral role in managing economic sanctions against countries like russia, iran and cuba. we welcome an update on how those sanctions are working and how the administration envisions them changing the future. there is a lot on your plate we thank you for being here and i just want to note as i tried to do yesterday when it seemed as sometimes the finance committee looked like it was becoming a mock trial kind of getting in to

a whole host of legal, you know issues. i think their is something ironic about the fact that a number of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have filed the supreme court brief challenging the law and then keep demanding various cabinet secretaries explain how he or she plant to avert the disaster that is going to occur if the brief is successful. so i hope that we can have a discussion on the important issues relating to the budget taxes, and our competitiveness. i think we talked about this at great lengths yesterday. at some time i admitted that chairman hatch is a real lawyer a trial lawyer. i am a lawyer in name only. yesterday it felt like we were going back to the socratic method and i hope we can tackle these major issues today.