through your tireless work, you play a key role in keeping the bond between north america and europe strong, now and into the future. we recently marked the 70th anniversary of the d-day landings. a stark reminder of the horrors of war, but also of what is possible when our nations unite against tyranny. since then, the nato alliance has underpinned freedom, peace and prosperity across europe and north america, protecting our values, individual liberty, democracy, human rights and the rule of law. today, those values and our way

of life are once more under threat. we are surrounded by conflict, danger, disorder and autocratic regimes. instability from the middle east, to north africa and the sahara. rising tensions and territorial dispute in asia, and revisionist russia breaking international rules and undermining trust. but russia is not just trying to recreate a sphere of influence. it has dealt a dangerous blow to the international rules-based system we have built up over decades. and its illegal and illegitimate actions encourage other autocratic regimes to follow suit.

the best way to face such threats is clear. we must be confident in our values. reenforce our readiness and strengthen the transatlantic bond that remains the bedrock of our international order. since world war ii, the solution to every strategic challenge has been transatlantic, be it the cold war, the balkans, afghanistan or the financial crisis. america and europe working together, training together, and when necessary, fighting together. this is how we have protected our nations and promoted our values.

but even the most successful relationship needs work. we cannot take our transatlantic bond for granted. we must renew our commitment and continue to invest time, energy and resources to keep it strong. to me, the challenges we face, we need a truly integrated transatlantic community. a truly integrated transatlantic community. and i believe there are three things we must do. reenforce our economic ties. deepen our personal and cultural links, and strengthen our security. first to the economy.

trade encourages the creation of wealth. it discourages conflict and conquest. it generates greater prosperity, and this in turn leads to greater security as people do not want to put their prosperity at risk. so a healthy economy and sound security create a virtuous circle. in today's interconnected world the link between economics and security and between peace and prosperity is stronger than ever. and it is particularly strong in the relationship between europe and north america. together, we represent the most

powerful economic bloc the world has ever known. but with the greater global competition, we need to work harder to ensure our prosperity for the future. a transatlantic free trade area is a unique opportunity to reenforce our economic ties, and to lock in our prosperity. the trade deals currently being negotiated between north america and europe are the next step. and the right step. the transatlantic trade and investment partnership will eliminate tariffs, cut red tape and open up new markets. it is potentially the biggest trade and investment deal in history.

as a former prime minister, i know just how difficult trade negotiations can be. but we must look beyond the technical details to see the big gains within our rich and to move forward because this is an opportunity we cannot miss, to promote growth, create jobs and improve our quality of life. we also need a new focus on energy security. much of europe is now reliant on russia's oil and gas. we have, so to speak, burned our way into a position of dependence. as we see in ukraine, russia is

quite capable of turning off the taps. putting an end to that dependency is now of the utmost strategic importance. european nations are already doing more to reduce this dependency. they are increasing their storage reserves, engineering pipelines to redirect energy to where it is needed. we must also find new ways to generate, extract, and distribute energy, be that oil and gas or renewables. and we need to open our markets to each other. because if you have to depend on

anyone, it is better to depend on your friends. and those friendships must be fostered. so this is my second point. we have to deepen the personal and cultural ties that bind us so closely. 30 years ago i came to the united states as a guest of the international visitor leadership program. i can tell you a life-changing experience. it helped me to know and appreciate this great country and its people. as many people as possible should have that same opportunity.

i want to further strengthen the personal bonds across the atlantic. so in preparation for our summit in wales in september, i asked young, emerging leaders from all nations of the alliance how they think we should do it. and i would like to thank the atlantic council for facilitating this work. the results have been truly enlightening and valuable. one of the main recommendations of the emerging leaders is to enhance mutual understanding between the nations of the alliance through personal ties. and i think they are right. we need to increase our transatlantic student scholarships and exchange programs, to increase our scientific and cultural

cooperation, to appoint ambassadors to spread the word about the value of the transatlantic bond and of nato, and to form those lifelong relationships that have bound our people together for so long. now, my third point underpinning everything we do is we need to strengthen our security. the english philosopher thomas hobbs wrote of a world without rules, a world without security. he described this world as having no industry, no movement, no culture, no society. of nothing but the continual

fear of what violent death, of a world where the life of man was nasty, brutish, and short. security is necessary for us to live free from fear, but security takes work. and for 65 years that work has been led by the countries of the nato alliance. in today's dangerous world, nato must be ready to respond to whatever threats we face, to act quickly whenever, wherever, and however needed. this means europe and north america consulting together, acting together, and sharing the responsibility together.

i know very well that from this side of the atlantic, it can appear that european allies expect the united states to defend them, but they're not prepared to defend themselves. but i have to say, this is simply not true. remember, during the cold war, european soldiers were confined to barracks. not so now. europeans have placed themselves in the line of fire in the balkans and over libya, in afghanistan. for every two american soldiers who have served, one european

soldier has served with them. and many paid the ultimate sacrifice in our common cause. responding to russia's aggression in our eastern neighborhood, all 28 allies have stepped up to the plate to re-enforce our collective defense. from the baltics to the black sea, we have more planes in the air, more ships at sea, and more troops on the ground. the united states took the lead, and its continuing leadership remains crucial, but most of the planes are european, most of the ships are european, and many of the troops are european.

this is nato solidarity in action. truly all for one and one for all. but we must also plan for the future and be ready to deal with any threats from wherever they come. so for our wales summit, we will ensure that nato is always prepared through our new readiness action plan. we're looking closely at how we deploy our forces for defense and deterrence, what combination of forces we need, where they should be deployed, and their

readiness. we are also considering re-enforcement meshes, such as necessary infrastructure, the designation of bases, and prepositioning of equipment and supplies. we are reviewing our defense plans, threat assessments, intelligence sharing arrangements, and early warning procedures. we also are developing a new exercise schedule adapted to the new security environment. and we want to further strengthen our nato response force and special forces so we can respond more quickly to any threat against any member of the alliance, including when we have little warning. but readiness requires

resources. so i welcome president obama's proposed $1 billion european reassurance initiative. it shows the united states' enduring commitment to the security of europe. now other allies need to strengthen their commitment. and i am the first to say that some european nations can and should do more. nato is an insurance policy. an insurance policy against instability, and all members must pay their premiums. and that premium has just gone up.

at our summit in wales, i expect all alliance leaders to commit to change course on defense spending, to reverse the decline and to back up their commitment with concrete action. estonia, as an example, estonia has shown that despite a severe economic crisis, it can be done. estonia has joined the united states, greece, and the united kingdom as allies that invest at least 2% of the gross domestic product in defense. and i welcome the commitment of latvia, lithuania, poland, romania, and turkey to do the

same. and if all the european allies spent 2% of their national income on defense this year, we would have another $90 billion to spend. that is the equivalent of today's defense budget of germany, italy, netherlands and norway combined. now, i'm not naive. i know we will not achieve this overnight, but at the summit in wales, we need to turn a corner,

to start to see defense spending in europe rise in real terms for the first time since the end of the cold war. of course, national budgets have been under incredible stress, but things are changing. public finances are coming under control, and our economies are beginning to grow. i know very well that increasing defense spending is never easy, but in light of the threats we face, it has become a necessity. but of course this is not just about what we spend. it is also about how we spend. we need to focus on what we

really need to keep our nations safe in the 21st century. on capabilities and skills for the future, and we must do more together as allies and with partners. in afghanistan, we forged the biggest coalition in recent history. 50 nations from many continents united in a single cause. and in all our operations from the balkans to libya, partners have made invaluable contributions. so we must maintain our political and military cooperation with them to build stability in the world. we must also do more to help

those who require our assistance to reform and develop effective local forces. in wales, we will launch a defense capacity building initiative. this defense capacity building initiative will allow us to help other nations build up effective defense structures and forces of their own so that they are better able to take care of security in their own region. and so we can project stability without always deploying large numbers of our own troops. so our wales summit will ensure that nato stands ready, robust,

and resolute to face the future. ladies and gentlemen, we are fortunate to live in lands that are free, but freedom is not a natural state. it has been fought for, suffered for, died for. to safeguard the flame of freedom, we must stand ready to protect and promote our values, stay strong, confident, and united, and strengthen our transatlantic community. thank you. [ applause ]

>> thank you very much, mr. secretary general. that was just terrific. i'm damon wilson, executive vice president here at the atlantic council. we've got about 25 minutes to continue the conversation with the secretary general. first, let me echo the warm welcome from fred and general jones for coming to the atlantic council for this. we're especially grateful as he's just come off the plane, arriving at dulles. second, to remind everyone who's covering this, either online or television audience of the hash tag #futurenato. and finally, before we begin our conversation, thank you for your shoutout to the nato future leaders. i think we have two of them with us today. one of our american delegates, gina jones, and our turkish delegate. they're both over here. terrific. thanks for being with us today. really important program, and thanks for your leadership on getting that off the ground. mr. secretary general, you just delivered a pretty strong

message about how to strengthen the transatlantic bond and really capture the spirit of an atlantic council mission, that the solution to every strategic challenge has been transatlantic. and i think interestingly for secretary general of nato, you began this strategy by talking about the economy and energy, talking then about people-to-people tie, cultural ties, and third only getting into the security components of that. so let me just start there, and then i want to get into today's crises. but as a nato sec gen, that's an unusual message to hear your leading policy point being t-tip. what's behind your rationale for leading with messages that typically would be outside the scope of the alliance? >> the nato treaty. if you read article two in the nato treaty, you will see that already the founding fathers stressed the importance 6 of

close economic ties. but i would very much like to see a strengthening of the transatlantic economic ties. i think that's very much in accordance with article two in the nato treaty. so it's legitimate for a nato secretary general to also speak about t-tip, the transatlantic trade and investment partnership. because economics and security are interlinked. >> i think that's an important point to point out for folks that wouldn't have assumed and understood what article two covers. let me turn to the issues most immediately at hand. you've been working on the wales summit agenda for a while. you've been talking about preparing nato to be fit for purpose ever since it was clear that the alliance would be drawing down its forces in

afghanistan and potentially moving away from being an operational alliance. and yet now you have two pretty compelling crises on nato's frontiers. one in the east with russia undertaking aggression in ukraine. and you've been pretty plain spoken about that. but also on turkey's frontier, another nato member, with what's happening in not just syria but iraq and isis. i think you said in your remarks here at the beginning that we're surrounded by conflict, danger, disorder, and autocratic regimes. so how have these two immediate crises, which weren't frankly part of the planning horizon for wales, how are these impacting your agenda and shaping your agenda heading into the wales summit? >> both of these crises will have a major impact on our agenda in wales. obviously, russia's aggression against ukraine will put a lot

of emphasis on the need for a strong collective defense. that's why at the summit i hope we will adopt a readiness action plan which will improve our ability to respond swiftly if needed to defend and protect our allies. so maybe you would expect, then, the summit to be very much focused on the situation in the east. but at the same time, we have seen the evolving crisis not only in syria but now also in iraq. but i could also mention libya, north africa as examples that the alliance must never become a one-dimensional alliance. it's of utmost importance that while we focus on strengthening collective defense to protect allies against a potential threat from the east, we should

not forget other security challenges from the middle east, from north africa, even from cyberspace. so the wales summit will focus on the broad range of security challenges and address all three nato core tasks. territorial defense, crisis management, and cooperative security. >> if you think about what's playing out in the east in ukraine, it's clear that the alliance has taken quite a few moves to reassure and to reposition forces to many of the eastern allies. but what about ukraine itself? what about the eastern partners, if you will? right now it's clear that the focus from the kremlin is on ukraine or moldova or georgia and less so poland or romania where the alliance is taking actions. how do you grapple with what are essentially nato's eastern partners? >> we have decided to step up

our cooperation with our eastern partners. ukraine, we have a nato ukraine commission, and we have had several meetings recently, also with the new foreign minister, and we have adopted a comprehensive cooperation program. so you will see enhanced cooperation between nato and ukraine in the coming years, including military to military cooperation. it remains to be seen at the summit how far we can go, but personally, and i'm very outspoken about it, personally i hope our defense capacity building initiative could also apply to ukraine. but we will see. >> what would that entail? what is the military-to-military type relationship you would expect as part of the defense capacity initiative? >> yeah, i think it's clear to

everybody that the ukrainian armed forces need modernization and further capability development. i think nato has expertise at its disposal that could be used to reform and modernize the ukrainian armed forces. but we have also decided to enhance our cooperation with moldova. by the way, recently we saw moldova take a significant step by providing troops to our k-4 operation in kosovo. we have decided to develop what we call a substantive package of cooperation elements with georgia. so with all our eastern neighbors, we want to step up our cooperation in the coming years. >> but we're not quite ready for

enlargement. is that the message coming out of nato headquarters right now? >> now you put it in a negative way. i would put it in the positive way that we continue to take steps within our open-door policy. our door remains open to european countries that fulfill the necessary criteria. and of course, it will be the summit -- it will be for the summit to take decisions, but we're preparing, as i said, a substantive package for georgia and as regards montenegro. we have decided to open focused and intensify talks, and foreign ministers will assess the situation at the latest by the end of 2015 and decide whether time is right for inviting

montenegro. so i think it strikes the right balance to ensure that our open-door policy remains credible, but at the same time, we don't compromise on criteria. >> let me just follow up on the defense capacity initiative in libya. is this initiative in part a reflection of lessons learned from the alliance in libya? this was an operation after all that nato wasn't planning for, and at the end of the operation, we've obviously seen real difficulties in libya. we have a terrific amount of work taking place here at the atlantic council on the challenges of governance and security any in libya today. has that directly informed this new effort, this new initiative you announced today? >> yes, indeed, but i would broaden it and also add afghanistan as one of the lessons learned in that respect. seeing retrospectively, i think we started our training mission in afghanistan much too late. we didn't start it in earnest until 2009.

i think we should have started much earlier. it's much better to train and develop local security forces. politically it's better to give the defense of afghanistan, for instance, an afghan face, and economically, of course, it's a better deal to make local security forces capable to take responsibility for security, then to deploy our troops for a very long time. so afghanistan is an example. what we have seen in libya is an example. and actually, last year, we received a request from the libyan government, a request for assistance to help them build their security sector. we responded positively, but for well-known reasons, it's been a bit difficult to implement that positive response. but we stand ready. so once the libyans are ready, we're ready to assist them.

>> let me shift the gear for a minute before we turn to the audience back to the transatlantic part of the conversation. you referred to the alliance as an insurance policy for its members and that the premium's just gone up. i think what i took away is a pretty strong statement you offered, that at wales you expect all alliance leaders to commit to change the course on defense spending. that's a pretty big goal i think you've laid out for the alliance. you mentioned president obama's announcement of a $1 billion european response initiative. and it's been clear to us as we spent time up on capitol hill that there's a strong sort of political instinct that it resonates. people understand the challenge that we're facing from putin's russia. there's rationale behind that. but i think they've been skeptical and concerned about whether european allies will step up to the plate with their own investment and resources. you've just put -- raised the bench pretty high, i think, in what you articulated here.

do you see the momentum? do you think that you are on a path of actually now recovering from the bottom of where we've been in the recession on defense spending and reversing that trend? >> i see a momentum. i wouldn't suggest that it will be easy. on the contrary, i think it will be uphill. but because many countries are still struggling with weak economies -- and it is, of course, important to cut deficits and stop indebtedness. indebted countries also, too, are volatile. so it is part of security policy, a sound security policy to also pursue sound fiscal policies. but having said that, i see a positive development in europe. i mentioned in my introduction countries that have already decided to reverse the trend, and that's not just hot air. it's really commitments based on

broad political agreements in the parliament. estonia has already achieved the 2% goal. latvia, lithuania, poland, romania, turkey have promised to work in the same direction within a timeframe spanning 2017 to 2020. and i think more will follow. in addition to that, it would also be important if nato allies would commit to fulfill the nato benchmark of spending at least 20% of their defense budget on future equipment and research and development. so it's not just the size of the budget but also how money is spent that is important, and we will focus on both issues ats the summit. >> i think as the hill deliberates how to respond to this $1 billion request, it's important to get that message up there. let me turn to the audience and take in some comments and

questions in our remaining time. let me start here in the front, and i'll pick up a few. let me maybe collect a couple, if i may. please introduce yourself for our audience. >> i'm the former conductor of the iraqi national orchestra, but i also happen to be an independent adviser. i was in iraq for nine years or so as a political adviser. my question concerning the current situation in the middle east and focusing on iraq, if and only if there was an initiative of awakening similar to the situation back in 2006 that are not necessarily under the control of the central government -- central legitimate government in baghdad, and if such groups or such initiative requires the assistance of nato

directly, would that be something that would be of discussion or consideration? >> thank you. let me pick up ambassador hunter here as well. >> thank you very much, secretary general. i liked the idea you started with economics and moved to security later on. but as you know, the relationship between nato and the eu is imperfect. is there any chance between now and wales or afterwards to get -- i'm going to use a strong phrase -- the three recalcitrant countries to allow these two institutions to work together? greece u turkey and cypress. also, an idea that's been around a long time, to have an extra half day after the nato summit to bring the european union leaders in so there can start be some kind of active, serious coordination between the two institutions for common purposes. >> terrific. maybe you take these two and we'll pick up a few more.

>> yeah. first on iraq, if i understood the question correctly, it was, in essence, could we imagine nato assists iraq upon request. >> awakening initiative, very similar to the tribal system community fighting back against isis. similar to 2006. >> i don't see nato engaged directly in iraq. but as you know, the iraqi government has requested assistance from individual nato allies. primarily from the united states. as regards nato, we are focused on providing effective defensive

protection of our allies. in this case, of course, turkey in particular is very much focused on the security situation in the region, and i visited recently and we discussed it in depth. we've also had consultations within nato upon request from turkey. that's how i see nato rating right now. on nato/eu, you're right. we have not reached the full potential of a nato/eu cooperation. but having said that, i would add that we have made a lot of progress during recent years. when it comes to operations, we coordinate and cooperate seamlessly in theaters where the eu and nato operate together.

so from a practical point of view, it works quite efficiently. when it comes to capability development, we have achieved a lot of progress. the european defense agency and allied command transformation norfolk work very closely together, and i think i could safely say that we avoid duplication and waste of resources through close coordination, and i would say an efficient division of labor. finally on political consultations, here i think we have the biggest problem. because of these well-known topics and disputes, it's sometimes difficult to organize joint nato/eu meetings. there's one area we are allowed to discuss in formal meetings, namely bosnia because the eu

operates a so-called berlin-plus operation, which means that the eu can use nato assets to conduct their operations. so in such an operation, we are allowed to have formal nato/eu meetings. and while bosnia, of course, is important, i could easily think of other issues that warrant close nato/eu cooperation. but even in this area we have seen progress recently. actually, we have had two joint nato/eu meetings on ukraine. so it's an example that when the situation so warrants, it is possible to find a pragmatic way forward. so all in all, i wouldn't provide such a bleak picture as you did, ambassador. i see some light.

i see some light. but there's still progress to be made, and of course, ultimately we need to find a solution to the cyprus conflict. >> so let me move from a former nato ambassador to former nato secretary, who's with us today, wes clark. >> wes clark here. so it looks to me like in ukraine they're fighting back pretty effectively right now. but what is nato able to do to help the other countries deal with the internal challenges that are present in the baltics and in countries like bulgaria? do we have a role in that, or are we seating that to the eu? >> in terms of inside nato countries themselves. let me move to this young woman right here, please. is there a mic on that side of the room? oh, it's in the back, sorry. >> thank you.

leandra bernstein. my question is, you've created quite a narrative as far as russia giving an enemy image, and it's just questionable whether creating that image of russia is intended to re-invigorate somehow the nato alliance, which has seen a lot of, in certain analysts' views, defeats in the 21st century in particular and significant struggles economically and likewise. so is this creation of russia as a boogie man an attempt -- a defensive attempt to try to pull the alliance back together? >> let me go ahead and pick up the ambassador as well.

here, please. >> secretary general, you mentioned the necessary conditions for the enlargement of the nato. could you describe more specifically what the necessary conditions are? are they measurable? and will enhanced cooperation cover those necessary conditions? and as a result, will it pave the way toward the nato membership for the countries? >> terrific. we'll come back to you, mr. secretary general. >> first to wes clark, what we are witnessing is maybe not entirely a new kind of warfare, but we call it hybrid warfare. a combination of traditional methods and more sophisticated, covert military operations

combined with sophisticated information and disinformation operations. and you're right in pointing to the risk that such hybrid warfare could be used against some nato allies. for instance, in the baltic states, taking into account the russian doctrine that they preserve the right to interfere or intervene to protect what they consider the interests of russian-speaking communities. and as we all know, in particular in estonia and latvia, we have quite

substantial russian-speaking minorities. bulgaria is another case. but still, we know for historical reasons that there are special ties. so it's a relevant -- it's a highly relevant issue. we are dealing with that. we will address this particular issue as part of our readiness action plan because it is also necessary to be ready to counter such hybrid warfare. having said that, and also in response to your question, is this purely a nato issue? no, it's not. it goes beyond traditional military means. as i mentioned, it also includes propaganda information and disinformation operations. and that goes beyond traditional nato operations, so i think it's an excellent example of an area where we need close cooperation and coordination with other organizations like the european union.

but i could also think of other organizations. but it is of utmost importance that we improve our ability to counter that kind of warfare. now, on russia, there's no -- first of all, there's no need to develop or create a specific picture of russia to re-invigorate our alliance. i think it's quite obvious to everybody why nato is needed. we need a strong collective defense to protect our populations against any kind of threat. so i would argue that it's russia herself that creates a particular picture right now. let me remind you that in

november 2010 at the nato/russia summit in lisbon, we decided to develop a true strategic partnership between nato and russia. we have done a lot during the last more than 20 years to develop a constructive cooperation with russia. because we do believe that a positive engagement with russia is the right way. forward. just to discover that russia sees it differently. and if you read the russian military doctrines, they point to nato not as a partner but as an adversary. so it's russia that creates this particular picture. finally, on the open-door policy, well, let me put it this way. at the end of the day, it is a political decision, whether the

time is ripe to open for membership. we are in close dialogue with applicant countries.membership. we are in close dialogue with applicant countries, for some of them, we have developed what we call a membership action plan, and within that membership action plan, we defined certain reforms, certain reforms to be carried out, certain criteria that must be fulfill ed, and in regards to monte nenegro, we wi intensify our talks with mon montenegro on that specific issue. so the countries know very well what is needed to enter the

door. >> mr. secretary general, if i may, we're coming to the end of an hour, but i would like to ask you a question. i know we've got a ton of questions remaining in the audience, but ask you a question to help wrap up our conversation today. even as we talk about looking forward to the end of your tenure, when you step down, you have an enormous plate, an enormous agenda still on your plate. but i wanted to ask, as you think back on your time as secretary general, when you first came to the atlantic council in 2009, you said something that struck me, as i was looking back at your original remarks. as nato sec-gen, i have to straddle the line. and when europe and north america come together, i'm comfortable. when they drift apart, i'm the one that feels the pain. so if you think back, if you think back over your tenure as nato sec-gen, where have you felt the most pain? what was your biggest challenge? >> but i haven't felt pain.

i'm quite comfortable. because we have -- i would argue, we have seen a close-up transatlantic relationship during my tenure as secretary general. you have, of course, seen our operation in afghanistan, and as jim jones mentioned, in his introduction tonight, we decided on a search in late 2009. the american decision was followed by a european commitment and also the europeans searched in libya, 2011. you saw the europeans take the lead, actually, for the first time, in the history of our alliance, and i have experienced

during my tenure as secretary general, that we have had more political consultations in the nato council than we had in the past. also following the new concept in which we declared that any ally can request consultations on any issue of interest. so we have had a lot of consultations, also on issues where we didn't have any intention to intervene, as a nato alliance, but we have seen the north atlantic council as a forum for a very intensive transatlantic dialogue. so both when we're speaking about operations, and when we're speaking about the transatlantic dialogue, i think we have seen a close-up corporation developed during those five years and that's why i don't feel pain,

but i'm quite comfortable. >> terrific, terrific. well, i apologize for those of you whose questions i was not able to take. i do want to remind those of you that are watching online or through television, if you want to join the secretary general in wales and you're under 35, we're recruiting right now for our nato future leaders to travel to the nato summit in september. please get your applications in at www.atlanticcouncil.org. thank you, mr. secretary general. thank you to your team, who's been terrific to work, as well as the atlantic council team. it's a delight to have you here at the atlantic council on the eve of the summit. please join me in congratulating the secretary general. [ applause ] today, the heads of fema and u.s. customs and border protection testify on capitol hill about security challenges

at the u.s./mexico border. live coverage of this senate homeland senate security hearing begins at 10:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span3. today, ncaa president mark amert testifies about college athletes and academics. the senate commerce committee is discussing whether student athletes are being exploited by college athlete departments. you can see the hearing at 2:30 p.m. eastern here on c-span3. >> the administration has requested $3.7 billion in emergency funding from congress for stopping some of the influx of children and dealing with the situation along the southern border with mexico. laura meckler is with "the wall street journal" and writing about this story. what's in the administration's request to congress? >> well, a lot of the money is to essentially detain and house

children and families who are crossing the border. that's really where the crisis has been, a huge influx, thousands of children traveling alone and adults traveling with children and family groups have come across the border. and in each of those cases, there are sort of special needs for housing them, and the administration is simply unable to handle right now and that's where a lot of the money would go towards. >> you write in your piece in the "wall street journal" that the white house's proposal puts the president in on awkward position, asking for more staff and detention facilities to crack down on illegal crossings when he had hoped to sign a liberalization of immigration law. does the white house get anything out of this request that they had wanted to get, even before all of this crisis started? >> no, this request is all directly related to the crisis itself. they related as many efforts to attach the other parts of immigration reform to it. it's a very different sort of situation. this really is a request for a crackdown. there is some stuff in there

that immigrant rights advocates do like, like legal representation for minors, efforts for some money to try to stem the root of the crisis in the central american countries where these children are coming from. but like i said, most of the money is either to house thesis children while they look for sponsors in the u.s., where they'll await their deportation proceedings, or for families to hold them in order to then quickly process them and deport them back to their countries. >> how is the request received on capitol hill? >> there's sort of a little bit of a mix. in general, there was openness from both parties to the request. there is some -- there are a few concerns out there, there are some republicans who are saying that this request should be offset with other spending cuts, or the few people who have said that, no, we should just work this into the regular appropriations process, but for the most part, there was openness from republican leaders, as well as from democratic leaders. harry reid said he hoped to move it through the senate before the august break. however, there is a complication

here, which is that there's another piece of this request, which is not the funding, but it's for a change in law, which the president reiterated in a letter to congress today, that he is also seeking. and what that would do is essentially change the way that the government handles unaccompanied minors, these children traveling alone. right now, the law, the 2008 law dictates the way that these kids are supposed to be handled is, again, they're placed with hhs, which looks for a sponsor and then their deportation proceedings unfold slowly, because our immigration courts are incredibly backlogged. so it can take years for their cases to be heard. that's not the way kids from mexico or theoretically from canada are handled. those cases are expedited. and what the white house is asking is to work with congress to change the law and allow for the expedited removal of these kids from central america as well. that is much more controversial with democrats. republicans are -- appear very open to that idea.

democrats, not so much. >> a couple of weeks ago, along those lines, you tweeted, obama's deportation policy, complicated by the surge of children s children. so what's next in terms of this request? how quickly will it make its way through congress? >> again, harry reid, the senate majority leader said today he hoped to move it through before the august break. that's a pretty fast track. we're talking about a few weeks there. it's unclear what will happen in the house. the chairman of the appropriations committee, hal rogers in the house, republican of kentucky, essentially he said he would have to review the request. but he issued a sort of very sympathetic statement to what the request is trying to accomplish and said it was something the house should definitely address. so i think that it's -- this could move quickly, however, again, if republicans try to attach this obama request, essentially, or a version of the obama request, to change that 2008 law, then that could complicate this. so, you know, i often say, no

one ever went broke betting against congress doing something, they tend to act very slowly, but this is a situation where people from all parties view as a true emergency. >> you can follow laura meckler's reporting at laura meckler on twitter. thanks for the update. >> thanks for having me. and live here on capitol hill, where we'll hear more about the influx of immigrants from central america, crossing into the u.s. over the u.s./mexico border. the senate homeland security committee, meeting this morning. they'll hear from top administration officials, including fema administrator, craig fugate, and u.s. customs and border protection, commissioner gil kerlikowske. we invite you to share your thoughts on today's meeting, both on facebook and on twitter. senator tom carper of delaware, he is the chair of the committee. senator tom coburn of oklahoma is ranking member. we do expect this to get underway shortly. by the way, it was scheduled to go until 1:00. we're hearing no