that senator landrieu made reference to, simply because you filed an incomplete application or have an unclear data on your application does not automatically put you in a bucket of a fraudulent applicant. it puts new a bucket as a potential ineligible applicant. >> and there's a difference. absolutely. >> i'd like to make that clarification. >> i'm pleased that you did, because i was going to ask you that very question. i want to ask you a series of questions about that, but since my time on this round is almost expired i'll wait for the next round. >> thanks, senator. thanks for being here. >> wouldn't miss it. i don't think i have, actually. so -- happy to be here, obviously appreciate you holding this. a report published in the, in a boston paper indicates that the bay state nuclear power plant is

the second highest in the nation for the potential suffering core damage from an earthquake. any of you familiar with that report at all? >> no, i'm not. >> no. >> mr. chairman, senator, i think i'm familiar with the -- is think the ranking of the power plants? >> right. >> the one done by the nrc that went back and reranked the probability of events? >> yes. >> i've seen that report, sir. >> so in light of that, my number two, apparently, you know, has there been any efforts by any of you at all to reach out and make sure that we're squared away? >> senator, we work with what's going on inside the plant, the regulatory part of that, the nuclear regulatory commission, but around each one of the licensed nuclear power plants, fema support local governments to do the exercises they do for certification and exercise in drills for those plants. so unless we -- this really goes back to the report is from nrc. what we do at fema, prior to

this report, based upon regulatory requirements to do the exercises and things we exercise against. that's an ongoing program. i'm not sure what the nrc is, with this report, what, if anything, would change from that. regarding the plant. >> if pi want to find that out have to reach out to them. >> yes, sir. >> okay. let me just backtrack for a second. god forbid anything like this happens. just take this particular plant, it's near the ocean. very similar situation. apparently number two in the country. how confident are you that if something like this happens in the u.s. that you'll have the ability, and i understand apparently from some of the testimony, what i've read is apparently you guys are in charge. in terms of implementing, you're the go-to people now? is that accurate in terms of dictating who does what and who's in charge? an ongoing plan that's

developing? >> in response to nuclear power plant, the inside of the facility is regulated by nuclear regulatory commission. outside of the plant is actually the local and state responders with fema supporting them. if you have a scenario that resulted in release, the most important thing to occur is successfully evacuate people away from that plant. those the type of things that the exercise plans work on. these are the things that local and state officials train against, and our role of the federal government, to support them we additional resources required in the event of an evacuations had to take place. those are the thing, and i think from a standpoint of your question, if you would like senators to have our staff, reach out with the state and give your staff and update on what the plans are to look at that and get a better idea of what -- that would be great. i'm concerned, who's in charge? i just see in listening and doing some of the work on it, i have a great concern.

it's like the left hand is similar to a katrina situation, is going to be, a lot of breakdowns. i know there's been a lot of improvement. i want to obviously make that well known, but now that we're getting to the point where we always seem to be reactionary instead of, you know, obviously keeping ahead of the ball game. i don't want to take the thunder from senator collins' comments about the $643 million fraudulent and ineligible, but -- i'm just going to make a statement which is, i find -- i find it amazing that we just give away millions and millions of dollars and really no accountability. if, in fact, we've improperly paid somebody, then we go after it. you know? we get a collection agency, go after it. get our money. give them one-third, collect it, do what we got to the do. i was in a medicare, medicaid, talking $76 billion given out. whether through ineligible or

fraudulent. bottom line, there's a breakdown somewhere, and being one of the newer people here, still over a year away, i'm flabbergasted at the amount of -- a million here, a million there. we're fighting for millions. my state could use millions, whether it's headstart programs, the fishing industry. i'm hopeful that -- i'd like to hear, i have to run to another hearing, but i'd love to hear, senator collins, like, where's the money? is it coming back? and why did they give up? i don't want to take away from that but i do have time for one or two more questions. the -- when you talk about the all hazard approach, i think it's an extension of what i was just asking. if you could maybe follow-up again with my office or do it off-line, with everything that's happening -- i've been following it, like, what happened in japan, like everybody else. it's just so devastating.

i can't imagine that there's going to be one agency in massachusetts who just says, you go here, you here -- i'm concerned not only in massachusetts but throughout the country if something like this happens, i'm not confident yet and i'm hopeful someone can give me the information that make sure that we all know what to do. you know? is it evacuation? is it command and control? is it military? i think it's a combination of everything. can you shed any light on my thoughts? >> in timely, i can start and then like to have an opportunity, senator brown -- >> just do that. i don't want to take the senator's time. >> i want to make one point. >> i think you're asking an important question. >> okay. >> i'd urge -- >> many of our disasters -- we always start with who's going to be the closest responders, no matter how big the disaster. it's always the local responders. we saw this, they can be destroyed, in the disaster itself. we saw this in katrina and in the tsunami.

the next is the governor and their team including unimpacted communities in the national guard responding. next the federal government. one of the things that is different this committee oversaw the fact previously fema would have to wait to call for help before begin mobilizing federal resources including department of feds. this community changed the law no longer do we have to wait until a state is overwhelm pd even if there's an appearance they may need the help, we can mobilize resources. a key thing, as a coordinated effort with the local official, governor and their team and then the president's team as directed under the homeland security act, stafford act, to coordinate federal assistance so that governors don't have to go shopping to federal agencies to figure who's coming or who does what. this is one thing this committee focused on after katrina. had you to make sure the governor then responsible for coordinating response in their state has that one place that's going to coordinate on behalf of

the president, all the federal resources including the department of defense in their disaster. >> i'd love to talk to you off-line. maybe someone from your staff and i can connect. >> am i not right that once a year fema and the nrc and perhaps local officials go through a dry run about a disaster at every nuclear plant in the country? or am i -- is that right? >> it's actually a little bit more than that. we do a formal evaluation exercise where we actually grade the operator and the local government, state governments and that's every two years they actually have to be certified. any deficiencies or areas requiring correction have to be addressed. they perform about four drill as year. those could be anything from a decon exercise, we're actually taking vehicles, how you'd watch them down or monitor, the warning systems or other parts of the plan. generally, they also have practices built into that cycle. rather than just every two years

do one exercise, there's a series of drills and exercises and then the evaluated exercise is where they're actually graded on their able to perform those functions and again, it's done against those regulatory functions that say you have to warn the population in this amount of time, from the time the event escalates. you have to be able to shelter and evacuate the populations with these time frames, be able to do all of these things against the population at risk. it's actually based, who lives there? what's that population? >> right. >> it's adjusted to that particular community and that local and state government response. >> so in the case of the power plant in massachusetts, there is a plan, if something should happen? >> i would imagine if you went to the local phone books you could actually find a map. this is generally how we do stuff, get information out, people know if you live inside this zone, this would be an evacuation zone. you'll generally find outdoor warning systems, sirens, telephone notifications systems,

emergency alert system tied to that area. you'll find the local responders have a lot more equipment for radiological monitoring detection than you would normally find. these are things because these are, again, point-specific hazards that we plan against and you exercise against, they're very well known to the local officials and the state officials who do that planning. >> thank you. senator? >> thank you very much, mr. chairman and senator collins. thank you for holding this hearing. i also want to extend my thank you for witnesses for being here today. i would like to recognize fema, particularly region nine, administrator nancy ward, for collaborating extensively with hawaii's civil defense and joint

catastrophic planning. she does a great job. my home state of hawaii in the pacific territories face unique challenges, as you know very well, because of the remote locations and limited logistic base in hawaii. so there is still much for us to do, and i'm so glad that we are having this hearing. administrator fugate, as you know, states rely on neighboring states to provide critical assistance in the event of a disaster. however, hawaii is over 2,000 miles from the mainland. so other states may not be able to provide timely support. fema has a disaster supply warehouse in west oahu, and one in guam.

should a major disaster strike hawaii, either damaging the warehouse or overwhelming our supplies, what plans does fema have to help quickly resupply the hawaii warehouse? >> thank you for that question, senator, and also i have to thank the state of hawaii and the hawaiian national guard who helped us respond to the america samoa when the tsunami hit there. the challenges, again, as we know, in the pacific, the distances require us to both leverage what we have in the fema warehouses, but also our close coordination with paycom, pacific command and their resources. nancy ward, you point out, one of our regional administrators, starts to talk with counter parts in hawaii or in the territories, in the event we see something coming, again, we know the distances, we know we can't wait. we are looking at how we'll start to ship or fly resources

in. this is the close coordination we have, the ability to charter aircraft and work with the department of defense for those most critical supplies. as you remember in america samoa, one of the key issues the governor had was generators and couldn't wait for them to come by barge because he had to get his critical systems back up. so we were able to task initially d.o.d. and later extractors to fly the generators in there. it goes back to the authorities. this can be vested. we know we have tremendous distances we oftentimeses have to make decisions when we have requests or all the information to start moving. particularly in the most critical life safety, life-saving supplies, because we won't have time to make up. so those are the contingencies plans. in guam as well as hawaii, we base those supplies on the time 2-it-would take to ship supplies recognizing if they are impacted we would actually be flying supplies as soon as airfields were available. >> well, i'm so glad that

relationship with the military really makes a good difference. administrator fugate, as was evident in recent events hawaii and pacific territories face the greatest tsunami hazard in the united states. the national oceanic and atmospheric administration manages federal tsunami detection and warning efforts and partners with the federal agencies to reduce tsunami risks. how is fema working with noaa to coordinate tsunami preparedness and response plans? >> we work very closely. as they are the subject matter experts on the hazard and then supporting the states and territories as they map their inundation zones, one of the areas we help them in in their

new mexico ready progra tsunami ready programs is in the warning systems. the governor did not have a tsunami warning system prior to the last event, particularly the outdoor notification systems which we saw worked very effectively in hawaii during the last crisis. so we continue to work with noaa as they give us the warnings to activate through our national warnings system was how we originally got the calls out to the states and territories we did have a tsunami warning and working with the grant programs we provide for them to build and develop the warning systems. this is the other part of looking at where we are making progress with the homeland security funds is building warning systems for these type of events that fortunately we had a lot more warning. as we saw with american sow mow wh , the mapping and understanding of those hazards are key so local officials have the information about how far you have to evacuate and supporting

them through the warning tools we have so we can warn that population in time. >> administrator fugate according to census data nearly 25 million adults in the united states do not speak english well. fema must communicate effectively, of course, during disaster response and recovery with the large and diverse population of nonenglish speakers. my question to you is what steps has fema taken to make sure that it can do so? >> we continue to look at our populations, and one of the concepts that is not new, it's actually i thought was pretty much a reflection of what this committee was trying to drive it, we needed to quit planning for easy and plan for real.

eng lush doesn't cut it if i'm deaf and hard of hearing and all i know is american sign language and all you gave me is closed captioning and that's not my prime language. if i don't get the information i need. we work very closely with our state and local partners to look at the languages and needs and recognize that we have to make sure that we're providing information in the way that people need it, not what's convenient to us. and so we have worked to provide more and more of our preparedness information in multiple languages. we have created in addition to our ready.gov website, a full site in spanish as well as ensuring in the various languages in our states where they have identified significant populations that we provide preparedness information in those languages. that we have those language skills available to back up our registration centers. most importantly we understand that american sign language is a language we have to communicate

in and we can't depend on text messages or text crawls to reach that population. >> yes. well, i thank you very much for the work that you are doing and the responses you have given me on my questions and i wish you well. >> thank you. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> thanks, senator. the reports that i have seen, administrator fugate, indicate as a result of the earthquake and tsunami in japan there are more than 400,000 people who have been forced from their homes and are living in emergency shelters or with relatives. apparently another 24,000 or 25,000 are stranded. obviously, these are the nightmare memories we have of katrina with people pushed out of their homes and not an adequate system to give them shelter. i know that fema recently signed an agreement with the american red cross to co-lead efforts for mass care and sheltering after a

disaster, including what we called today a catastrophic disaster. what's -- what will be the capacity in most parts of the country? in other words, i know 430,000 is an enormous number, but how many people will under fema's current organization will we be able to shelter who have been made homeless by a catastrophe? >> mr. chairman, a lot of times that's going to be based upon the state and the type of hazards they have. in the state of florida where i came from, we had shelter capacity getting up to over 800,000, but we would not expect to use that because very rarely would a hurricane produce that big of an evacuation, but i think this comes back to what the general accounting offices is really coming back on. when we talk about preparedness, unless we're planning against a number, we don't really -- it's like how do you get traction because everything is always localized or state-based. so in our strategic plan when we

said we're going to do all this stuff, i said put a number against it because i can't measure it. so we started looking at if you look at our -- what we call the maximum maximum, you look at improvised nuclear device, the most catastrophic thing we could think of in a metropolitan area, if we looked at our worst category five hurricane hitting the most populated areas, we looked at large earthquakes, what are the upper end numbers? and we start finding the numbers actually look primarily at the numbers we're seeing from japan, we're actually -- we were actually looking at these types of numbers. >> that it would be potentially over 400,000 or in that range? >> yes, sir. we have looked at for casualties requiring medical assistance several hundred thousand. this is why we're trying to plan our logistics to move to the area we know we have a risk and also where we didn't see it coming but it's there. for about a million and a half.

can we get enough supplies and provide enough capacity. what may happen su may not be able to shelter people in the surrounding areas. you may have to move people to where you could shelter them. that's one of the advantages of working with red cross is other organizations. we saw when we were in katrina, we could move them to areas out of that that. this is in the short-term shelter phase of getting people where we're meeting the most basic needs of medical care, food, water, and a roof over their heads until we can see what's next. is this some place we can get back to or in the case we're seeing there, this devastation will not be repaired quickly. you're not going to be doing temporary housing there. you're going to have to find a longer term housing solution as people make a decision about what's the next step. >> so are we prepared now to temporarily house that number of people? >> i think we could say it would not be in any one area. we'd have to distribute those folks across the country, but these are the things we're planning against, and i think

this is where we're looking at what does it take to get there and how do we build that capacity based upon the local and state but where do we fill the gaps. if you go to certain parts of the country, yes, they have that canability because of the threats they face. what if it occurs somewhere we weren't expecting that, we sill have to meet that need. this is where we're trying to go with national preparedness is looking at take these events, add them up, and go what's the upper number? can you move enough supplies in to provide emergency food, medical care, and basic sheltering for that population, and if you cannot bring it to them, can you take them from that area and get them to where you can. it becomes critical when we're talking about housing. this is what we're planning against and also looking at the time frames to do it. >> did you have a response you wanted to offer to that? i noticed you -- >> i agree. fema from the lessons concerned with katrina has taken some very positive steps towards short-term housing, sheltering and short-term housing, and

they're also experimenting with different types of housing, and it can be a very complex issue. one of the concerns that we have we're witnessing now after katrina and as well as the disasters in florida is not the short -- the sheltering or the short-term housing but it's the long-term housing. and that's the issues that i think need -- still need to be addressed and there's still some thorny questions or relationships that have to be built to accommodate the population for its long-term housing because these things will often times last, two, three, four years before you can move back home. >> right. thanks. you know, one of the things our committee has done h we feel various times we've got to ask kind of extreme questions, and we've done some hearings and work on what our preparedness would be to respond to, as i

mentioned earlier, the explosion of a radiological device by a terrorist or a nuclear weapon. and one of the striking conclusions is that how people behave in response to that can actually save tens of thousands of lives. in some cases a decision not to run to evacuate will save your life. and we heard expert testimony that what's particularly critical, and, of course, it would be critical in the case of an event at a nuclear power plant as well, is public messaging. so i wanted to ask you, administrator fugate if you could give us a status report on where fema is on effective messaging to the public in the case of a radiological incident. >> mr. chairman, the first thing people have to understand is that as surprising as it may be

and this is what the experts told you, a nuclear debt nation is actually more survivable than people realize if they know those important steps. what we started doing, and it kind of got overshadowed, we did what we call a webinar with our citizen corps program with the department of energy, and their experts started talking about messaging and sheltering in place and working with our citizen corps councils. so we did this as part of a webinar to really start bringing up these topics that have historically been so difficult to talk about. we often times didn't. trying to break this and get over it and say, look, if this does happen, these are the things people need to do. this was a webinar that was done this week where we brought people in and it allows us to bring people into an environment where we can have suggest matter experts briefing them. starting this process using the citizen corps councils thinking about how do you message this

locally, what is going to be effective, and there's actually a book with this title "how do you think about the unthinkable" and communicate that in a way that's not based on fear. so we're working with the department of energy experts, their national laboratories are really who are the experts. we were conducting this webinar this week on how we work with our citizen corps councils and talk about something that's very difficult to talk about. >> so that's a work in progress now. >> yes, sir. >> but obviously you are working on it and i presume you would train all the local areas around the country to use both existing communication systems, public ones like radio and tv, but also obviously now internet and cell phone and the like. >> yes, sir. again, how do -- this is what i really challenge our team on. there's a tendency we make people xun kat the way we're set up to communicate and do not

always recognize there are different tools and the people aren't using the same tools we are. how do you start incorporating that in and look at how people communicate versus the way we are prepared to do it. so looking at things in social media and other tools that -- i'll give you a real short example because i know we want more questions. we provide information to the public on web pages. most disasters if i'm evacuated in a shelter, do i have a computer and a web page i can get to? but i may have a smart phone. we've seen that many of our events, the phones are actually working even in haiti after the earthquake surprisingly, so we went back and said let's quit making people go to a web page when if they're going to be on a mobile phone, let's change our delivery. we created a mobile fema page m.fema.gov that works well on a cell phone. you don't need to see any of our pretty pictures or graphs. you need the information about what's happening. we're trying to look at how

people are using these tools, what makes sense, how are they going to get information and try to put it in a way that was useful to them, not in a way that's convenient for us. >> good work. that's very sensible. senator collins. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. skinner, in your testimony you gave us the depressing news that fraud and improper payments have plagued fema for a very, very long time. i remember when i was chair of this committee back in the good old days that i held a hearing to look at fraud after hurricane andrew, and we found improper payments and it was senator bill nelson who suggested that we have those hearings. then katrina hit, and we found out just terrible -- hundreds of millions of dollars in improper payments, fraud, and abuse.

it's troubling to me that you can go back decades apparently and there's still a lack of attention to this problem. i was thinking about the fact that the president's budget cuts fema's budget, and it cuts it in ways that may actually be harmful because it cuts some i.t. projects out. but what is even more disturbing to me is perhaps these cuts wouldn't be necessary if we hadn't lost more than $1 billion over the years in improper payments. certainly that money could be put to better use. could you help guide us on what should we be asking fema to do, what kind of controls should be put in place so when the next

catastrophe inevitably hits, we don't see a repetition of widespread fraud, waste, and abuse? you referred to the work that was done with the stimulus bill, and i agree with you that the transparency and the accountability was much better, but what specifically would you recommend be done? >> i think, first, administrator fugate coined it very concisely. that is we need to be -- fema needs to be fast but not haste, and with regards to the individual assistance programs, there's a mindset or a tendency that we have to have the money out on the street and we have to have it out within hours, and, therefore, we will make payment, a blanket payment, and worry about the fraud later. unfortunately, fema doesn't have the resources or the wherewithal to go back and look and try to

get payments that were improperly distributed. so if we impose internal controls, now, it may slow the process up a few hours but not days or weeks or like the old days in hugo where it took months to get payments or andrew where it took weeks or northridge where it took weeks. we can still make timely payments to those that are deserving that are in need but at the same time be able to offer a screening process and have the internal controls and red flags in place to put aside those applications that are in question, whether they be just because of poor information or because it's a fraudulent application. second thing is i think with the public assistance programs we can do a better job there as well with regards to providing our oversight. the recovery board under the --

for the recovery funds, the $800 billion, were able to produce reports -- we required anyone that's going to receive any funds, any state or local or primary contractor at the subgrantee level is going to receive any funds, they must report to the recovery board. and the system is already in place. anyone can use this system. department of energy introduced this system years and years ago, and it's something i think maybe fema might want to consider because i believe, and this is what we believe at the recovery board, is that transparency drives accountability. what you don't have a just one ig looking at you, you have millions looking at you a because when the local citizens see where the money is going, how it's been spent, they can report in there's something amiss here, that the money is not going where they say it's going or that contractors are receiving preferential treatments or are not performing

as they should be. that's what drives the accountability. if we can produce that type of reporting after a disaster and train the states and locals, and it's not difficult, everyone thought it would drive costs up, it did not. the technology today now allows you to take that information and transform it into very usable formats that can be manipulated for your own personal assessments. reporters may want to take the data and manipulate it to determine what type of demographics certain funds are going to. state and local governments could take it to see what type of projects -- are we spending money in the -- in education versus highways or airports, things of that nature. it can be now manipulated to meet your individual needs, and at the same time we at the recovery board developed a

screening process to assist program managers, and that is when contracts are awarded, we can take those contractors -- we can take a look at those grantees, run them through open source information as well as closed source information, law enforcement information, and give you some type of association, whether these firms have association with companies that may have tried to defraud the government in the past. and we're able to stop those grants, those contracts early on before money was spend because once the money is spent, it's very, very difficult to get it back. >> don't you think there's also a deterrent effect when you announce that there's going to be an aggressive effort to prevent waste, fraud, abuse, mismanagement, improper payments? i think one reason that the

recovery board was successful largely is it was set up from the beginning, it was very well-publicized. there were websites to track spending and enlisted the public to help be the eyes and ears. but i would also argue there's a deterrence impact if you go after some of the fraud. i know fema has argued that it's too expensive to go after some of this, quote, small dollar fraud that in a cumulative sense is huge amounts of money, but, in fact, i think it's worth the money of going after it because of the message it sends that it's not going to be tolerated. >> absolutely. and i personal witnessed that after andrew, after northridge, after katrina. a good example is in northridge

we tried to early on get anywhere from a dozen to two dozen arrests within the first two weeks after the checks went out. when we made those arrests, we publicized it in the radio, television, newspaper. within days $20 million, $30 million was voluntarily returned to fema saying, i received these funds in error. i witnessed the same thing after andrew, after we made four arrests the following day, $11 million was returned to fema. they thought they were next. it has a deterrent effect. also when you're transparent the last place you want to steal money from is -- a contractor does not want to be stealing recovery funds because of the transparency that exists there. we know where it's going. we're watching it. we're able to do screening, and so that in itself for those contractors who have bad

intentions to steal will often times back off knowing it's just too risky. mr. fugate, you've heard what mr. skinner has said, that it is worth going after this money. i realize you were not administrator at the time of katrina, but, in fact, there's been a new bro ses that the chief counsel had for recouping improper payments that's been languishing since late 2008. yesterday we received word that fema is going to start implementing the new process, but that's a long gap. that really sends the wrong message. so i guess i'm asking for you to give a commitment to put in those internal controls. i think it's a false choice between providing the money

quickly enough and providing it in a way that guards against fraud. in today's world with the technology we have, that's -- it's not an either/or proposition. so i want to encourage you, i'm going to ask you are you going to go after some of these improper payments? >> the answer is yes. particularly those recoupments where we know that we had duplication of benefits and if it was fraud, i think they would agree if i found fraud as soon as we know it, we refer this and those that did this willfully need to be treated as fraud. where we have those who have lack of information, duplication of benefits, we seek reimbursment. the idea was correct in that it has to be speed, not haste. the question is why are we

giving them money? i think it's not the size of scale to reassure you that it would scale up, but in the floods in tennessee where we i believe it was about $100 million in assistance in the first 30 days. nobody got a check unless they registered, had their home inspection, and they received their funds. and, again, we were working on speed. we got the inspectors in there. often times the turnaround time was several days. and we also worked very aggressively with hud to go into the shelters because these people that were in shelters were going to need disaster housing assistance and get them into the disaster housing assistance programs. so i think that we -- it was not to the scale we saw in katrina but many of the things that say we want to have a positive var fi vation that you're actually living where you say you were, that we had the inspector get there, verify the damages, and,

again, as we go through this and look at the recoupments on that disaster, did we drive that error rate down. and the other piece of this is again in responding if we can achieve the goal of meeting those basic needs and decrease the need to defall to the financial assistance, which certainly is a sign you can't get supplies in, you're not able to get enough critical infrastructure up, and you're not meeting basic needs so what you're going to do is give money to people and say go figure it out yourself. that comes back to that aggressive response at the front end and look at the financial assistance not as the primary tool but to help them as they move into the first steps of recovery. >> weren't those $2,000 debit cards just an invitation to improper spending? i mean, look what they were used for. firearms, bail bonds, diamond rings, entertainment. they weren't used for food, water, medical supplies in far

too many cases. should we be giving out $2,000 debit cards with few questions asked? >> i think, you know, the senator -- >> you weren't there at the time. >> i think the senator makes a point that again i think this is something the ig can go back and say in hugo and andrew and other cases, if you're not meeting the basic needs, that's often times the fallback and it does invite a lot of challenges. >> i want to hear a no on that. we're not going to give out $2,000 debit cards. >> we're not doing debit cards, and that program went away. but i have to be cautious in going, there are those situations where we may not be -- an example would be the tsunami itself. we may not be able to get in to do home inspections. so we may have to look at other ways to verify that people lived there. this is where the ig has given us recommend dags to use tools

like using the types of things you do when anybody is applying for a loan. utility bills to verify it. where as everybody in this zip code is going to get assistance. we may not be able to do an inspection. are there other ways to minimize the number of people applying for assistance by showing us some way they were in that area without necessarily be doing a home inspection but where we can it makes it very, i think, efficient to be able -- i have asked for help, i have an inspector go to where you were living. i think that's a huge step to reduce the level of fraud and then often times we will see if it was ineligible or duplication of benefits because of insurance not because we were in such haste. >> i realize i have gone over my time. >> not at all. it was important and the answer was no about the debit card program.

as i look back to hurricane katrina, first off we had an extraordinary natural disaster event as, of course, has happened in japan. but part of what happened is that all levels of government, including the federal government and fema, did not act quickly and preventablely. and as it became clear that that was so, particularly with the television coverage and everybody became horrified about how people were being treated or not taken care of on the gulf coast, in some sense the government overreacted and started to kind of throw out assistance in a way that was just terribly wasteful and was also inviting fraud, and that's just what we got. mr. skinner, do you want to comment on that at all. >> i think it's exactly what happened. it's the same thing after andrew

because the cavalry was slow to arrive and the best way to treat the situation was to get funds out on the street as fast as possible whether you were eligible or not. >> yeah. and something you said earlier, mr. fugate, about getting supplies out there, meeting the needs. once you do that you don't have to start throwing debit cards or money around. >> the other issue is because the amount of funds we provide are really not designed to make people whole, the less money that we give them incrementally that takes away from the total amount, because it comes back to the issue if they lost eferl, don't have insurance, you want as much of that money going to their recovery not their immediate needs. this also comes back to the preservation of what the intense of these funds were. it's never been the intent of congress to make you whole after a disaster. it's to help you start recovery. if we're putting these funds out

ahead of type and they're not getting to you that point, it decreases the ability to support people when they really should start now to manage things on their own and be able to use these funds to start that rek recovery process. if the basic needs aren't being met and we are in this situation, we go from being fast to a lot of haste and then that in turn leads to fraud, waste, and the inability to really make sure we're good stewards of the funds. we put a high premium on this idea of stabilization and speed to support this and drive then the next steps of that initial recovery with these funds so they're going towards the intended purposes. >> right. do you want to respond to that? i wap nt to ask you one factual question which may be of interest to people watching. there's been a certain amount of

confusion about what the potential danger is to the u.s. from the nuclear plant problems in japan and particularly as the media has been following the last few days and the sense that the pocket of a meltdown at one of the plants or an explosion, the emission of a large amount of radioactivity goes up. people have been worried about the extent to which the west coast of the u.s. particularly hawaii obviously guam, maare th subject of danger. >> i'll refer back to the statement made by the chairman. in looking at all these scenarios they do not see any radiation reaching the u.s. that would be of a danger or require prodeck tiff actions.

they have a system called rad net that 24 hours a day, seven days a week monitors various channels, air, water, other types of things across the country. and so if we were to detect, we may detect things well below levels that require any action, but we did not have any monitors in our territories, particularly gu guam. so we were in the support role, epa is in a lead role. they deployed monitors out to augment that network they already have as well as supporting alaska with additional monitors. this is a two part. one based upon the scenario that the commission does not see this reaching the u.s. territories or the west coast but we also had an active monitoring ske that epa expanded to be able to do

active monitoring to provide that information. the epa is gep looking at this not that we think we're going it get something but we have to be able to answer the question, are you testing, are you monitoring, are you sure? this was the decision to send these monitors out to guam and the commonwealth of the northern marianna islands and the aleutian islands. >> as i understand it, we have more than 100 existing monitors on the west coast. >> you can go to our web page and look at where the sites are. and what they monitor and the purpose and history of the program. >> so i presume that just trying to be helpful that people including on the west coast should not yet be taking potassium iodide pills because right now there's no risk and there is some slight risk of side effects from those pills.

>> yes, sir. as i understand it, the public health departments are telling people this is something they should not be doing, there's no indicator to do this, and their recommendation is that people not take potassium eye o dine in this event. as you point out there, may be other concerns. both state health offices are telling people they do not recommend this and they would not want you to take this based upon this event because they don't see where there would be any need and we do have the active monitoring that is taking place now. >> i appreciate those answers. i hope they're helpful to people. i think the three witnesses. senator collins and i were commented to each other that in a sense we were conducting two hearings at once, one on the ig's report and on the management of fema and the other on what's happened in japan.

we tried to bring them together. i appreciate the patience epps of the witnesses. i appreciate the work on of thenesses. all of the comments will be included in the record. we'll keep it open for 15 days. senator collins, do you have anything more? thank you very, very much. with that, the hearing is adjourned.

>> secretary of state hillary clinton said latin america can serve as a model for democratic movement. she responded to critics of the president's trip to the region, saying strong ties with latin america are in america's interest. the president will visit brazil, chile and bill salvador. this is 35 minutes. >> thank you. good afternoon. i thank each and every one of you for joining us to be with

the distinguished secretary for her comments on the eve of president obama's trip to latin america. we thank you for coming. welcome, secretary. it is good to see you here as well as good friends. i am mac mclarty. i had the privilege of serving as president clinton's chief of staff. i have the privilege of being a senior adviser here. dr. john is traveling today so he asked me to step in and will commute for this event on the eve of the president's trip to brazil andy al salvador and introduce our keynote speaker, which i am honored to do. madam secretary, thank you for joining us on what we know is a full schedule and the demanding

time. that is the understatement of this year. [laughter] what a good friend the consulate of washington inside ambassador bob strauss meet someone he at miers, he often declares in his commanding voice, you are a great american. it is as though he has a trademark on that phrase. he probably thinks that he does. i am not an objective observer, but i think so many people in our country and are around the world would use that phrase to describe the leader i am privileged to introduce to you today. we saw that first hand a few hours ago in egypt. secretary clinton has been

number one on the gallup poll of americans most admired women for nine years in a row. her achievements are well known. one of the most influential and active first ladies in history which i can confirm. the first first lady of the u.s. to be elected to public office. the first woman elected independently statewide in new york, and a candidate in the historical presidential campaign where the glass ceiling was cracked. now our nation's 67th secretary of state. my wife and i feel very fortunate that we had gotten a preview of the secretary's talents and enormous capacity during her tenure as first lady

of arkansas. we have heard for many years her perfectly organized speeches that are thoughtful and persuasive. as one of our nation's top lawyers and passionate champion for children's education, she lifted the lives of many. she notes even then it takes a village to raise a child but it takes effect of leaders to build a village. she was an indispensable partner with our governor and another member of the clinton family along with chelsey. a moment of personal privilege, i am so proud of and pleased for your husband in his post presidency work that has helped

so many of around the world. and for his two terms as president which will be viewed in a very favorable way. as our nation's first lady she remained an advocate for children and families and traveled to 80 countries and as a world -- voice for women's leadership. she was a strong promoter of america's national security while staying fully engaged on economic issues of the day. now she is president obama's chief foreign policy adviser and has been an effective representative of u.s. interests around the world walking a half-million miles of travel since she assumed her job two years ago.

most immediately, she just returned from europe and the middle east. import late today -- importantly today, her trips include the caribbean and leaders of 20 countries from mexico to argentina. like so many here today, i am a committed believer in u.s.-latin american relations. i believe the obama administration is determined to support a true community of the americas built on mutual respect and made active through sustained dialogue and engagement. we live in a world where so many of the challenges we face must be dealt with in a partnership

with others. so many of the opportunities before us can only be achieved by working together. this will mark the 50th anniversary of the last progress. we have advanced together in some ways that would have surprised president kennedy. now is the time to double our commitment to achievement in the build a brighter future. i know we all look forward to hearing the secretary spots on these issues. it is with warm regard and the deepest of respect i am delighted to introduce hillary rodham clinton. [applause] >> thank you very much. thank you. thank you. it is a delight to be back csis

and have this opportunity to speak with you. i want to thank mcak -- mack for his introduction. always ask a longtime friend to introduce you and you are guaranteed to have a positive print with. -- positive prelude. he is a longtime champion of u.s. engagement in latin america and did an excellent job as my husband's on floyd during the clinton administration. my thanks to john henry, csis for your generosity in hosting us. as an institution focused on the deeper forces and dynamics that shaded, this is an ideal place to discuss one of the central

strategic opportunities for the u.s. today. obviously there is a lot going on our around the world. much that the man's our urgent attention, from the historic changes in the middle east and north africa, to the tragedy in japan. but we have to deal with both of the urgent and important at the >> the president's trip coincides with the anniversary of a major milestone in hemispheric relations. president can a little blancs the alliance for progress, pledging that the u.s. could join with latin american leaders

to address head-on a development challenge that was, as he put it, staggering in its dimensions. he understood that our failure to tackle poverty and inequality in latin america could tear the social fabric and undercut democracy's prospects throughout the hemisphere. president kennedy announced the alliance here in washington to an audience of latin-american ambassadors at the white house. president obama will mark this anniversary in latin america, and i think that is fitting. too few americans have noticed that something remarkable has been happening in the region. there are of course plenty of tech -- challenges, and they often of the headlines, transnational crime, continuing inequality and poverty, inadequate education, and so on.

those are challenges that apply in many cases, including in our own country. but the real story of latin america today runs in a very different direction. it is a story of political transition and a broad commitment to democratic development. the story of pragmatic leaders who helped turn 01 troubled region into an area of dynamic, 21st century economies and societies, a story of active new players on the global stage. in the coming days, president obama will visit three countries, brazil, chile, and el salvador. each is living this story in unique ways. the president will build on a pledge he made at the summit of the americas early in his presidency, to work as equal partners in a new chapter of

engagement, based on mutual respect and common interests and shared values. he and the three leaders hosting him will show in word and deed how much such a partnership can accomplish. but i want to focus on why this partnership matters to us. what this story means for the united states, for our economic interest as we rebuild our economy and renew our competitiveness for a new time, for our security and global strategic interests as we designed a 21st century architecture of cooperation with the help of like-minded partners, for our core values as we promote democracy and human rights around the world, and for our society and our culture and the growing connections between our peoples make us all more vital and

innovative. during the past two years, i have had the opportunity to travel the hemisphere and meet with presidents and foreign ministers, journalists and ceo's, activists and entrepreneurs. last summer the washington post noted that i had visited 17 countries in latin america and the caribbean during of my first 18 months in office. apparently that was more than any other secretary of state, and i am proud to hold the record. but what really matters is the common purpose behind it these trips and president obama's, bolstering our current partnerships in latin america and highlighting the remarkable opportunities we have to accomplish even more together. so let's start with economic opportunities. this is the challenge on everyone's mind today, and with very good reason. there are still too many americans out of work, and our recovery from the financial

crisis is far from complete. in this year's state of the union address, president obama laid out an agenda for how we will emerge from the crisis stronger than before, how america will win the future, and i share president obama optimism, but as certain as we are of the goal, it is not something that america can accomplish alone. enhancing our competitiveness, accelerating innovation, achieving energy security, and expanding our exports, all of these require robust engagement with latin america. it is not only the developing economies of asia that are aiding the global recovery today. it is also the economies of our neighbors. brazil, with nearly 8% gdp growth last year, is predicted to become the world's fourth or fifth largest economy in the coming decades. peru has also been growing at

rates which typically associate with china and india. chile, uruguay and argentina are close behind, followed by mexico, panama, and colombia. the combined economies of latin america grew 6% last year. this dynamism, coupled with smart public policies promoting broadbased opportunity led the president of the inter-american development bank to call this the start of a latin america decade. the latin american economy is not far behind china and japan. that america has a future -- huge advantage that will serve it well in the coming decade, a young population.

if the countries of the region succeed in delivering education for their young people, they will have a significant edge for years to come over other major economies that are starting to feel the strain of an aging population. the size of the latin american economy and its young demographics are especially important for the united states, because our economy is tied much more closely to the economies of our neighbors and to those across the oceans. 43% of all of our exports stay in the western hemisphere. we export more than three times as much to latin america than we do to china. i want to repeat that, because i don't think there are very many americans to understand or know that. we export more than three times as much to latin america than we do to china. we export more to latin america

than to europe, and more to chile or colombia than to russia. north america is the largest free trade area in the world. all of these facts point to a very promising trend. latin america is producing more and more new consumers for u.s. products each year. tens of millions of people in the region are entering the middle class, more than 30 million in brazil alone since 2003. at the same time, latin america is home to dynamic companies, entrepreneurs, and innovators who are purchasing technology and equipment and helping drive competitiveness and innovation in american businesses. the bottom line is that geography matters. it is a comparative advantage to be embraced, and we neglected -- we neglect it at our own peril. growth in the latin american market stands to benefit

american workers and companies more than growth anywhere else in the world. it is the power of proximity. geographic proximity, and also the proximity of our global economic interests and our challenges at home and what it will take to overcome them. both are government and our private sector need to direct our efforts to harness that power of proximity. i do understand the concerns of those who worry that globalization and integration will take jobs away from americans. but i also know that with the right policies, we can channel those forces to create more and better jobs for the benefit of american workers. look at the american auto industry. it is reviving itself in part by integrating more closely with our neighbors. assembling a car today involves

material inputs and processes that cross borders several times before a finished product rolls off the assembly line. in the end, our workers are the better for it. take the jet manufacturer and one of brazil's biggest exporters. the united states account for about 65% of its sales, but about 70% of the parts that it puts into its planes are made in the united states. these economic relations therefore are not 0 some. ultimately, they do benefit the people of every country involved. that's why it is good news for us that monterrey, mexico, is becoming a base for research and development, or that brazil's agricultural research and investment have helped turn it into one of the world's top food suppliers. bras issued one of

the large stock offerings ever and that rielle will soon host both the world cup and the olympics. there is no doubt that when construction and drilling start, american companies will also be there. our energy security depends on this hemisphere, the source of one-half of our oil imports. latin america alone accounts for one-third of our imported oil. mexico is our second biggest supplier. venezuela is also a major source. did you know that columbia is now as well? brazil is poised to become one of our top suppliers, thanks to its recent offshore find. as we move toward a clean energy economy, latin america's role will have to grow. already we are working on renewable energy technology and resources with mexico, brazil, the caribbean, and across the region, thanks in part to

president obama's leadership and launching the energy and climate partnership of the americas. many other players are also recognizing latin america's potential. they are making their own in roads, building their own economies, citing their own investment deals and free trade agreements. but that should not worry us. rather, it should spur us on. president obama pose a national export initiative is leveraging every facet of our diplomacy to promote american jobs. as productivity rises, companies need your employees to meet their goals. to create more jobs, we have to expand our existing trade relationships and create new ones. that is why a broad cross- section of businesses from high- tech companies to heavy equipment manufacturers to the montana grain growers, all support free trade agreements with colombia and panama. they know that opening these markets is essential to our own

exports, jobs, and competitiveness. we are also building a 21st century smart border with mexico that supports security and competitiveness on both sides. earlier this month, we took a significant step in finally resolving a longstanding dispute over trucking under nafta. strengthening our economic relationships has benefits for all the people of the region, but it also has another of bandage. it leads to the rise of even more capable partners who can help us accomplish our strategic objectives, from ingesting -- addressing the challenge of climate change to improving security in the region. the opportunity to partner with latin america on global, strategic issues. president obama's visit occurs at a time when there is a growing recognition that the hemisphere stands to gain from

greater cooperation premised on shared values. that governments and societies each bring their own capabilities to solving common problems. when we think about addressing the serious challenges of drug- trafficking and criminal violence, for example, countries such aschile and colombia have much to share about the process of training affective, accountable police and judges in central america. when it comes to promoting social inclusion, brazil, uruguay and barbados have set an enviable example. just as latin america goes global, building its ties with europe and africa, with asia and the middle east, so will our relationship. day-to-day, it can be as much about how we can work together in the world as about issues particular to our region. as countries stepped up on the global stage, they will make

essential contributions to helping all of us meet some of those most important challenges. mexico, for example, made a crucial contribution to the fight against climate change through is remarkable leadership in cancun last year. brazil, mexico, and argentina in the g-20, chile and mexico in oecd c,hile and peru along with mexico in a peck. these are all helping build a transfer -- a foundation for broadbased opportunity. colombia and brazil are vital partners this year on the un security council. uruguay contributes more troops per-capita to un peacekeeping operations than any other country. poster read it is working to become the first carbon -- coaster rica is working to become the first carbon neutral

nation in the world. every country joined to assist haiti after the earthquake, and continues to assist in the reconstruction. as margaret a picture as the hemisphere present, at -- as vibrant picture as the hemisphere present, and has not realize its full global potential. it is very much in our interest to help our latin-american partners for their embrace an active and constructive global role. let me hasten to add, this does not mean that we will always agree. but we will agree much more often than not. even when we disagree, we will never lose sight of the powerful interests and core values that connect us. one of our most important, powerful bonds is our commitment to democracy. that brings me to the third opportunity we have in our

engagement in the region. latin america has undergone such a profound democratic transformation that it can now be a model and even a mentor for those fighting to create and protect democracy everywhere. thes not forget that before middle east, it was latin- american that people dismissed as the arid ground for democracy. we can still recall a time when dictators and strong men dominated hemisphere, and plenty of americans thought that friendly autocrats were the best we could ever hope for. but citizens coming together, asserting their fundamental rights in the face of autocrats and military governments overcame the doubts of the world and the challenges of transition to build democracy is that deliver results.

the very ideals we hope for in egypt and tunisia. they have already taken place in our own hemisphere. this task is not finished, and this hemisphere can do much more to guard against threats and challenges to democracy closer to home. in some countries, insecurity and a lack of opportunity remain real obstacles. in others, democracy is being rolled back rather than strengthened, and cuba remains a glaring exception to the democratic convergence. that is something that all of us have to face up to and work toward dealing with. but the overall direction is clear. the region's commitment to democratic development is widespread and strong. that does give latin-american is a special role in helping support other nations making the difficult transition to democracy today.

in recent weeks, we have seen some promising examples of just that. democratic chile's -- the importance of advancing reconciliation and ensuring that democracy delivers results. mexico took the lead in suspending libya from the human rights council. i would add that we in the united states can also learned some things from latin american democracy as well. one example i particularly like is the encouraging number of female presidents in the region. [laughter] i must say that i am far enough away from my own career in electoral politics that i will not take too much heat for suggesting that these women and societies can teach american voters a thing or two. finally, i want to emphasize that all these opportunities are strengthened by the independence

of our societies, our cultures, and our people. the united states has one of the largest spanish-speaking populations in the world. latinos are the fastest-growing group in our country today, and we also share a rich heritage from our caribbean neighbors. more than half of are foreign- born population has roots in latin america. these ties have shaped every aspect of our society and culture, and we are the better for it. i know that immigration and interdependence can bring real challenges, and that they do make a lot of americans anxious. that is understandable. but immigration has always been a source of our vitality and innovative spirit. so if we work together to address these challenges, i have no doubt that this will continue to be an enormous advantage for

the united states, one that bears directly and crucially on our economic and geopolitical prospects. we cannot afford to surrender that advantage now. going forward, all these areas of opportunity will also be a roadmap for our engagements, and president obama will highlight each of them during his trip. in brazil, he will announce new economic opportunities and discuss new ways we can work together on our court challenges in energy, innovation, education, and beyond. he will go to chile to emphasize our fundamental values and shared commitment to democracy, and he will point to the importance of latin america's broad commitment to pick them up -- to democratic development. in el salvador, he will show how we can do our part on meeting at

the shared challenges of security and development in a country that has shown the will to move forward. ultimately, all of these partnerships boiled down to this. seizing the phenomenal opportunities we now have in this region. the opportunity to create jobs and drive development. the opportunities to secure democratic progress in our hemisphere, and together, foster it beyond. the opportunity to advance human security in all its forms, whether acting on our responsibility to address unacceptable levels of violence , or unacceptable levels of inequality, to promote inclusive growth for everyone. i know that looking for opportunities abroad can sometimes be a tough sell here at home. especially at a time of strained

budgets and high unemployment. i know well how dangerous, crisis, and catastrophe can take over your week. week after week after week. but that is why this trip, which some questioned, about how could the president go to latin america on this long-planned trip with everything happening from japan to the middle east and north half of. it is being answered -- and north africa. it is being answered in the right way. as the experts here at csis will tell you, strategy depends on the ability to look deeper and further than the day today. there are so many reasons why this trip at this time is so important. just one way of perhaps putting it into context, when i think

about why we should invest in our relationships in latin america, i think about the path that colombia has traveled over the last years. i remember vividly when my daughter and husband visited in 2000, when plan colombia was just beginning. it was a country terrorized by drug traffickers and guerrillas who controlled vast parts of territory, and who could strike in any major city. foreign policy experts in this city and so many other places were calling get a failed state. 10 years later, i travel to colombia as secretary of state, and this time, i walked through the streets of downtown bogota. i visited a bakery owned by former military members.

when i sat down with the foreign minister and then president uribe, the challenges were still very real, but there were only part of the discussion. we spend more time talking about how colombia and the united states can work together to take the agenda further to stall global and regional problems from climate change to partnering in the security council, to expanding economic growth, and about what columbia could do to help central america and mexico in meeting their own security challenges. we talked about how we could deepen the ties between our societies and advance our shared values. and about what will be achieved when colombia host next year's summit of the americas. and we talked about the inclusion and human rights agenda that president santos is

now advancing with extraordinary commitment and results. so columbia into short had gone from a source of danger to itself and others to a source of inspiration to all of us, and to becoming a vital partner in the great debates of our time. the real credit goes to the colombian people and to the leaders who had to make very hard choices, not just once to twice, but over and over again. but the united states played an important, some would say and the central role. the money we invested in plan colombia over that decade, while significant, is less than we spent in afghanistan in a single week.

when president obama returned from latin america, he will have set the stage for more stories like columbia's in the years ahead, stories with powerful implications for trade and jobs, for education and innovation, for many advances in human potential that we will be so proud to see, and that we will benefit from. he will have invested in key relationships and delivered a message of partnership throughout the hemisphere. it is a message we must hear at home. these are opportunities we cannot afford to pass up, or let them pass us by. the world is so dynamic right now. events are moving so quickly. people are connected in ways they could not even have been imagined a decade ago.

what i am not sure yet that many americans understand is that if you are not in the mix, if you are not in the arena, if you are not reaching out and building those relationships on an ongoing basis, you will find that others have stepped in to do just that, and there is no part of the world that is more closely linked with who we are as americans and what kind of future we want for our children than this hemisphere, and in particular, in latin america. so i am excited that in the midst of another unbelievable week in the world, the president is off to a trip that will take him to three important countries and send a message to all the others, and that i had this opportunity to come and discuss with you why we think it is one

of the most important, long-term commitments that the united states has and must continue to follow through on. thank you all very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> next, the latest on the situation in libya. we will have remarks from president obama, libya's foreign minister, secretary of state hillary clinton, and british prime minister david cameron. now, president obama on the situation in libya. he said muammar gaddafi was put his government's words into action and immediately implement a cease-fire against rebel forces, or face the enforcement of a no-fly zone over parts of

his country by the u.s. and its allies. yesterday the un security council passed a resolution authorizing military force if necessary to protect civilian populated areas that are under the threat of attack. the president also stated that american ground troops would not be sent to libya. he spoke at the white house after meeting with congressional leaders. this is 10 minutes. >> i want to take this opportunity to update the american people about the situation in libya. over the last several weeks, the world has watched events unfold in libya with houlton and alarm. last month, protesters took to the streets across the country demand their universal rights and a government that is accountable to them and responsive to their aspirations. they were met with an iron fist. within days, while parts of the country declared their independence from a liberal regime. members of the government

serving in libya and abroad chose to align themselves with the forces of change. muammar gaddafi clearly lost the confidence of his own people and legitimacy to lead. instead of respecting the rights of his own people, innocent civilians were beaten and imprisoned and in some cases, killed. hospitals were attacked and patients disappeared. a campaign of intimidation and repression began. in the face of this injustice, the u.s. and the international community moved swiftly. sanctions were put in place by the u.s. and our allies and partners. the u.n. security council to impose further sanctions. an arms embargo, and the specter of international, accountability for gaddafi and those around him.

humanitarian assistance was positioned on libya's borders. those displaced by the violence receive our help. ample warning was given that he needed to stop his campaign of oppression or be held accountable. the arab league and the european union joined us in calling for an end to violence. once again, but often chose to ignore the will of his people and the international community. instead, he launched a military campaign against his own people. there should be no doubt about his intentions because he, himself, has made it clear. for decades he has demonstrated a willingness to use perforce through his sponsorship of terrorism against the american people and others, and with the killings within his own borders. and just yesterday, speaking of the city of ben ghazi, a city of roughly 700,000 people, he

threatened, and i quote, "we will have no mercy and no pity." no mercy on his own citizens. here is why this matters to us. left unchecked we have every reason to believe that gaddafi would commit atrocities against his people. and as many thousands would die. a humanitarian crisis would ensue. the entire region could be destabilized, endangering many of our allies and partners. the calls of the libyan people for help would go unanswered. the democratic values that we stand for would be overrun. moreover, the words of the international committee would be rendered a hollow. that is what the u.s. has worked to render a strong international response at the united nations. our focus has been clear.

protecting civilians within libya and holding the about the regime accountable. yesterday, in response to a call for action by the libyan people and the arab league, the u.n. security council passed a strong resolution that demands an end to the violence against citizens. it authorizes the use of force with an explicit commitment to pursue all necessary measures to stop the killing. to include the enforcement of a no-fly zone over libya. it also strengthens our sanctions and the enforcement of an arms embargo against the gaddafi regime. now, once more, muammar gaddafi has a choice. the resolution that passed ways out very clear conditions that must be met. the united states, the united kingdom, france, and arab

states agree that a cease-fire must be implemented immediately. that means all attacks against civilians must stop. gaddafi must stop instrument dancing on van ghazi, pull them back and establish water and electricity and gas supplies to all areas. humanitarian assistance must be allowed to reach the people of libya. let me be clear, these terms are not negotiable. these terms are not subject to negotiation. if gaddafi does not comply with the resolution, the international community will impose consequences and the resolution will be enforced through military action. in this effort, the united states is prepared to act as part of an international

coalition. american leadership is essential, but that does not mean acting alone. it means shaving the conditions for the international community to act together. that is why i have directed secretary gates and our military to coordinate their planning and tomorrow, secretary clinton will travel to paris for a meeting with allies and their partners about the resolution from 1973. we will provide a unique capabilities that we can bring to bear to stop violence against civilians, including enabling our european allies and their partners to effectively enforce a no-fly zone. i have no doubt that the men and women of our military are capable of carrying out this mission. once more, they have the thanks of a grateful nation and the world. i also want to be clear about what we are not doing. the united states is not going to deploy ground troops into libya.

and we are not going to use force to go beyond a well- defined goal, specifically the protection of civilians in libya. in the coming weeks we will continue to help the libyan people with humanitarian and economic assistance so that they can fulfill their aspirations peacefully. the united states did not seek this outcome. our decisions have been driven by gaddafi's refusal to respect the rights of his people and the potential for mass murder of civilians. it is not an action that will pursue alone. indeed, our british and french allies and members of the arab league have already committed to take a leadership role in the enforcement of this resolution, just as they were instrumental in pursuing it. we are coordinating closely with them. and this is precisely how the international community should work as more nations bear both

the response button and the costs of enforcing international law. this is just one more chapter in the changes unfolding across the middle east and north africa. from the beginning of these protests we made it clear that we are opposed to violence. we made clear our support for a set of universal and values and our support for the political and economic change that the people of the region deserve. but i want to be clear, the change will not and cannot be imposed by any united states foreign policy. ultimately, it will be driven by the people of the arab world. it is their right and their responsibility to determine their own destiny. let me close by saying there is no decision i face as your commander in chief that i consider as carefully as the decision to ask our men and women to use military force.

particularly at a time when our military is fighting in afghanistan and winding down our activities in iraq. that decision is only made more difficult. but the united states of america will not stand idly by in the face of actions that will undermine global security. i have taken the stance that this action is necessary and will not be acting alone. our goal is focused. our cause is just. and our coalition is strong. thank you very much. >> libya's foreign minister has declared an immediate cease-fire and stop all military operations. the decision comes one day after the un voted to authorize a no- fly zone and all necessary measures including air strikes to protect the libyan people.

the foreign minister says the cease-fire will take the country back to safety and secure security for all libyans. he criticized the authorization of international military action, calling it a violation of libya sovereignty. his remarks are about 10 minutes. >> after having reviewed the resolution of like to explain the following. the country will try to deal with this resolution.

>> [unintelligible] now has knowledge of this resolution and according to article 25 of the un charter [unintelligible] and taking into consideration that libya is a member of the un, we except that it is obliged to accept the security council resolution [unintelligible] therefore, libya has decided an immediate cease-fire and the stoppage of all military -- takes great

interest in protecting all civilians and authorizing all necessary humanitarian aid and respecting human rights, and obliging to international and humanitarian laws, and is also obliged to protect all of the assets of libya.

>> and in doing so, in accordance with the resolutions of the security council and the articles of the charter of the un. we emphasize robert -- resolution 1973 for the year 2011, we emphasize and agreed to the article regarding the protection of civilians and the territorial unity of libya.

and therefore build upon this the libyan state, encouraging open of all dynamic channels with everyone interested. [speaking foreign language] my country is very serious about continuing the development, economic, political, humanitarian, and social development of the libyan nation. we have indeed taken serious steps and continuing this

development for the good of the libyan people. we believe that this will take the country back to safety and security for all libyans. we also express our sadness towards what the resolution has included a procedures against the libyan nation, such as the no-fly zone, which includes commercial and civilian flights. it will increase the suffering

of the libyan nation and libyan people and will have a negative impact on the general life of libyan people. the international community should have omitted civilians from the resolution to secure their quality of life. also the inclusion of freezing of all libyan assets will have a

very negative impact on normal libyans and will also a negative toact on libya's ability fulfill its contracts and agreements locally and internationally. libya also finds it very strange and unreasonable that the security council announced in its resolution to use military power, and there are signs that this indeed might take place.

this goes clearly against the un charter. it is a violation of the national sovereignty of libya. it is also a in violation of article 42 of the charter. >> and finally, we emphasize our request for all international government ngo's and others to check the facts on the ground by sending fact-finding missions to libya so they can take the right position.

thank you. >> secretary of state hillary clinton told reporters the killing of civilians in libya leaves the world no choice but to threaten military action through a un security council resolution that established a no-fly zone in libya. her comments came at a press briefing with ireland's deputy prime minister and foreign affairs minister in the treaty room at the state department. they also spoke about the japanese nuclear plant crisis and u.s.-ireland relations. this is about 15 minutes. >> good morning, everyone. as the pressure -- it is a pleasure to welcome mr. gilmore, and we had an excellent discussion. there was a broad agreement between two such strong friends and allies. i am sorry i had to spend st.

patrick's day away from the celebrations, but i am delighted that we have so many common goals for the continuing close cooperation between our two countries. we are obviously following what is happening in japan on a minute by minute basis. ireland very generously has contributed to the appeal for humanitarian assistance. we are also grateful for the offer of irish experts to assist in dealing with this as both ireland and the u.s. no, japan has been very generous in the past during other times of need, so we are responding. the conversation we had about libya began with the passage of the security council resolution 1973, which provides authority for the international community

to take enforcement actions to protect civilians in libya. the libyan people have called for international assistance. this resolution paves the way for that call to be answered. colonel gaddafi's refusal to hear the repeated calls, up until now, to halt violence against his own people, has left us with no other choice but to pursue this course of action. while this resolution is an important step, it is only that -- an important step. we and our partners will continue to explore the most important -- expected measures to end this crisis. we talked at length about the irish government's extraordinary support for ending global hunger, an area that we're going to continue to work on together. we will be, hopefully, traveling to africa at some point to highlight the joint project, the thousand-days campaign to improve maternal and child nutrition.

priscian greatly ireland's support of the -- we appreciate greatly ireland's support of this very important effort which we kicked off last september, which has such pretended to protect women and children from death and illness by toxic smoke, and to protect the environment. we talked about the ongoing peace efforts in northern ireland. we commend everyone on the progress that has been made. i will meet later today with others who are absolutely committed to working together to give a consistent message of support that the path to peace is the only piece. let me thank you again for coming and having this opportunity to meet with you again here in washington. >> thank you very much, secretary clinton, for your kind words and for your warm welcome. it is a great personal pleasure and privilege for me to have the opportunity to visit

washington today and to have some extensive -- have substantive discussions with you on a broad range of issues. i am grateful that he would make time in your increasingly hectic schedule -- that you would make time in your increasingly at the schedule for this exchange -- hectic schedule for this exchange. it is useful to hear your impressions on these issues which are at the forefront of our concerns. we discussed the situation in japan and the ongoing critical situation there. our thoughts are very much with the japanese people, who are such good friends of the united states and of ireland. for my part, i updated secretary clinton on the economic situation in ireland and the steps which the new government intends to take to promote economic growth, restore confidence, fix our banking system, and support the production and creation of jobs. we are determined to rebuild irelands intonation --

ireland's reputation internationally and to drive export-led recovery. island and the u.s. have many areas of common interest -- ireland and the u.s. have many areas of common interest. your unwavering support is deeply appreciated by all of your friends in ireland, as is your ongoing support for the international fund for ireland. i also want to thank secretary clinton for her strong support of the irish community here. we discussed the prospects for progress on immigration reform as well as bilateral visa our recent peer we discussed the popular uprising against autocratic regimes -- bilateral visas. we also discussed the popular uprising against autocratic regimes in north africa. i commend secretary clinton for offering support to those peacefully seeking change throughout the region. with regard to libya, i believe that crow gaddafi -- colonel

gaddafi has lost all legitimacy to rule and should leave the stage. we hope that the adoption of resolution 1973 will help facilitate humanitarian access. we also spoke about the pursuits of commons of peace in the middle east, the time and commitment which -- about the pursuit of peace in the middle east, the time and commitment with which you have dedicated to it. we continue to work together in developing food security. this is an issue of deep personal interest to you. the new government regards this as a central element in our foreign policy. we look forward to working closely with you to build on what we have achieved so far and to explore new areas of cooperation in the future. i am very pleased to announce ireland's support for the

initiative, in the amount of $500,000. i would thank secretary clinton for the very warm welcome extended to the toxic -- taoiseach yesterday. we appreciate it. thank you. >> thank you. >> two questions. >> secretary clinton, libya, the resolution. what is the endgame of this resolution? stop the violence against civilians, stop gaddafi's forces, get him out of office? should this continue until he is gone? the libyan government is saying that they're calling for a cease-fire. what do you think of that? would you engage with them about that? very briefly, these attacks --

the third question, yemen. snipers are firing from rooftops on people. what can you tell us about that? >> first, as to libya, obviously, the united states is very pleased with yesterday's vote. it sent a strong message that needs to be heated -- heeded. the efforts by the international community to come together to make clear to colonel gaddafi that he cannot continue his violence against his own people, he cannot continue to attack those who started out by peacefully demonstrating for changes that are within the right of any human being to do so, and the fact that he now has received not just the message of those of us who have been calling for him to end and the fact of he has lost its legitimacy, but the

arab league and a statement that they called for with respect to the resolution did we have seen press reports of a cease-fire -- the resolution. we have seen press reports of a cease-fire. this is a fluid and dynamic situation. we're not going to be rid -- be impressed by words. we have to see action on the ground. that is not yet at all clear. we will continue to work with our partners in the international community to press gaddafi to leave and to support the legitimate aspirations of the libyan people. it is important that we take this one step at a time. the diplomatic effort that was required to answer questions and create a level of

cooperation as represented by the resolution was very intense in the last weeks. the overwhelming vote by the security council i think reflects a broad understanding that, number one, stop the violence, and are two, we do believe that a final result in any negotiation would have to be the decision by colonel gaddafi to leave. let's take this one step at a time. with regard to yemen, our message remains the same. the violence since the end. negotiations -- the violence needs to end. >> next question. >> good morning, madame secretary. thank you for having us here again. on the question our colleague asked. is there anything short of

colonel gaddafi leaving that is acceptable? did you seek or receive any support from ireland on military action that may follow? also, secretary clinton, the last time you are in dublin, you were working hard to convince the president -- you were in dublin, you were working hard to convince the president to come to dublin. will you be there? .

we will obviously want to have the international community involved in any kind of dialogue with the opposition and with the gaddafi regime. so, we just passed this resolution last night and i think now we're going to be working to operationalize it. we'll see what the next steps will be. we're delighted that the president will be coming to ireland. that is a very good news for everyone and i don't know how many irish americans will

believe they have to be there with him, but i imagine the number will be substantial. the trip will be in may. we're working with the government of the republic of ireland to plan it. we're delighted by their enthusiastic positive response to the president in the oval office. i'm excited. i never know where i'm going to be as has been evident for the last several weeks. i would love to be there because i love to be in ireland under any circumstances. i do have a lot of good ideas about what the president would like to do that i will share with our ambassadors and others who will be planning this trip. in a time of very big challenges from nuclear reactor dysfunction to continuing strive and conflict, this is a very good news story. thank you all very much.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> british prime minister david cameron has announced that his government will send fighter jets to libya to enforce the u.n. security council resolution establishing a no-fly zope. it calls for an immediate see fires in libya and authorizes member states to take all necessary measures to secure the safety of the country's civilians. an opposition leader and members asked questions about the role of the arab league and union about humanitarian statements in libya. >> i would like to make a statement on last night's u.n. security council's resolution on libya. mr. speaker, over three weeks ago, the people of libya took to the streets in protest against colonel gaddafi and his regime asking for new rights and freedoms.

there were hopeful signs that a better future awaited them and that like people elsewhere in the middle east and north africa, they were taking their destiny into their own hands. mr. speaker, far from meeting those aspirations, colonel gaddafi has responded by attacking his own people. he has brought the full might have armed forces to bear on them backed up by mercenaries. the world has rushed as he has brutally crushed his own people. on february 23, the u.n. secretary-general cited the reported nature and scale of attacks on civilians as "egregious violations of national and human rights law" and called on the government of libya to meet its responsibility to protect its people. the secretary-general said later that more than 1,000 had been killed and more injured amongst reports of detentions and torture. over the weekend of february 26

and 27, at britain's instigation, the u.n. security council agreed resolution 1970. this condemned gaddafi's actions. it imposed a travel ban and asset freezes of those at the top of his regime. it demanded an end to the violence, access for human rights monitors and the lifting of restrictions on the media. it sent the situation in libya to the international criminal court. in my statement to this house on february 28, i set out the steps that we would take to implement these measures. our consistent approach has been to isolate the gaddafi regime, deprive it of money, shrink its power, and ensure that anyone responsible for abuses in libya will be held to account. i also told this house that i believe contingency planning should be done for different scenarios including involving military assets and that this should include plans for a no-fly zone.

mr. speaker, intervening in another country's affairs should not be undertaken save in quite exceptional circumstances. that is why we have always been clear that preparing for times that might include the use of force, including a no-fly zone and other sources to stop humanitarian catastrophe would require three steps to be met -- demonstrable need, regional support, and a clear legal base. first, demonstrable need. gaddafi's regime has ignored the security council resolution 1970 and it stopped the violence against the libyan people. his forces have attacked peaceful protesters and are preparing for an assault on ben gaddy on he. they have started air strikes in a brutal attack. gaddafi has publicly promised

that every home will be searched and that there will be no mercy and no pity shown. if you want any sense of what that might mean, we look what happened when tanks and heavy weaponry were used to smash through a heavily populated town with heavy loss of life. we don't have to guess what happens when he has subdued a population. human rights watch have cataloged the appalling human rights abuses that have occurred in tripoli. the people in eastern libya are faced with the same statement. that is demonstrable need. second, regional support. the people have asked for international action. it was the people of libya through their transitional national council who were the first to call for protection from air attack through a no-fly zone. the arab league has made the same demand. mr. speaker, it really has been remarkable how arab leaders

have come forward and condemned the actions of the gaddafi government. in recent days i have spoken with the leaders of saudi arabia, can you tar, the united emirates and jordan. they will enforce this resolution. this support goes far beyond the arab world. all three african members of the security council voted in favor of the resolution. mr. speaker, the third and essential condition was that there should be a clear legal base. that is why along with france, lebanon, and the united states, we worked hard to draw up appropriate language which could command the support of the international community. last night, the u.n. security council agreed that resolution. resolution 1973 demands the immediate establishment of a cease-fire and a complete end to violence and all attacks against and abuses of civilians. it established a ban on all flights in the air space of libya in order to protect

civilians. it authorizes member states to take and i quote, "all necessary measures to enforce compliance with the ban." crucially, it says this in paragraph four. it authorizes member states acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements and acting in cooperation with the secretary-general to take all necessary measures to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack including benghazi. mr. speaker, the resolution both authorizes and sets the limbs of our action, specifically it excludes an occupation force of any form on any part of libyan territory which was a clear agreement between all of the sponsors of the resolution including the u.k. and of course, the arab league. i absolutely believe that this is the right thing both to say and to do. as our ambassador to the united nations said, the central purpose of this resolution is to end the violence, protect

civilians, and allow the people of libya to determine their own future free from the brew taught unleashed by the gaddafi regime. the libyan population wants the same rights and freedoms that people across the middle east and north africa are demanding and are enshrined in the values of the u.n. charter. resolution 1973 puts the weight of the security council squarely behind the libyan people in defense of those values. our aims are entirely encapsulated by that resolution. mr. speaker, demonstrable need, regional support and a clear legal base, the three clear criteria are satisfied in full. now that the u.n. security council has reached its decision, there is a responsibility on its members to respond and that is what britain, with others, will now do. mr. speaker, the attorney general has been consulted and the government is satisfied that there is a clear and unequivocal legal basis for the deployment of u.k. forces and military assets. he advised the cabinet this morning and his advice was read

and discussed. the security council has adopted resolution 1973 as a measure to maintain or restore international peace and security under chapter seven of the united nations charter. the resolution specifically authorizes notifying member states to use all necessary measures to enforce a no-fly zone and to protect civilians and civilian populated areas including benghazi. the cabinet this morning, we agreed the u.k. will play its part. our forces will join an international operation to enforce the resolution if gaddafi fails to comply with its demands that he ends attacks on civilians. the defense secretary and i have now instructed the chief of the defense staff to work urgently with our allies to put in place the appropriate military measures to enforce the resolution including a no-fly zone. i can tell the house that britain will deploy tornadoes and typhoons and refueling and surveilling aircraft. preparations to supply these aircraft have already started and in the coming hours they

will move to air bases from where they can start the action. the government will table the motion for debate next week. the situation requires us to move forward on the basis of the security council resolution immediately. i'm sure that the whole house and all sides of the housecall upon colonel gaddafi to respond immediately to the international community and cease the violence against his own people. i spoke to president obama last night and to president sarkozy this morning. there will be a clear statement later today what we expect from colonel gaddafi. we should never prepare to or deploy british forces lightly or without careful thought. we have, i believe, in this case, given extremely careful thought to the situation that we have in hand. i think it is absolutely right that we play a leading role on the u.n. security council to secure permission for this action and i believe it is absolutely right that we now

work with allies to make sure that resolution have been brought about. many people want the questions answered about what we are doing and how we'll go about it. i intend to answer all of those questions in the days ahead and work with the services to make sure we do the right thing for the people of libya, our country, and the world as a whole. mr. speaker, can i start by thanking the prime minister for his statement. can i say from this side of the house that we welcome last night's u.n. security council resolution and support britain playing its full part in the international action that is planned. the international community has shown clear resolve and i applaud all efforts to make this happen including the prime minister and the british government. his statement 2 1/2 weeks ago, we support feasible and practical action to help the libyan people. as the official opposition, we will both support the

government and ask the necessary questions that we think the country will want asked. it is important that the british people are clear about the purposes of this resolution and the basis for the commitment of british forces. any decision to commit british armed forces is a grave and serious one and must be based on a clear and compelling case. in this case, it is based as the prime minister said on the clear evidence to colonel gaddafi brutalizing his own people in response to the demand for democratic change. it is action backed in the region most importantly by the clear resolution of the arab league and it is backed now by legal mandate by the united nations. so the military action that is being embarked upon has brought support, a legal base, and recognizes our responsibility to protect the libyan people. these are necessary preconditions for legitimate and effective action. it will be quite wrong, given what is happening in libya for us to stand by and do nothing. mr. speaker, i want to ask some

questions about the obblets of the mission, the military implications of it, and the humanitarian context. first we need to be clear about the purpose of this mission. all of us will welcome the passage of last night's resolution to stop the immediately slaughter of people in benghazi. the whole world is aware of the urgency of the situation given the intentions of colonel gaddafi. account prime minister tell us that the military action can be done on a time scare that can make a real difference to the people in benghazi? should the effect of last night's resolution stop the advance of regime, the future of libya remains uncertain. account prime minister explain the broader strategy for libya's future should we succeed in stopping colonel gaddafi's advance given that last night's resolution is directed toward the specific aim of the protection of the libyan people rather than explicitly toward regime change? this this house, there is agreement that libya's future will be far better served without colonel gaddafi in

power. does the prime minister, therefore, agree that a range of other measures should continue to be brought to bear on the libyan regime to support the evidence of the libyan people in order to undermine the support for colonel gaddafi? we should be working now to sharper the voice facing the libyan military including action from the i.c.c. and the pressure of the other members of the regime and making explicit the risks for countries allowing their citizens to serve as mercenaries and i do believe the u.n. resolution does recognize that point. we should continue to make clear to the libyan people, the offer of a better life, the life beyond colonel gaddafi. can i urge him that discussions take place at the earliest staying with the arab league, the european union a continuing basis for a viable state beyond colonel gaddafi? in the broader context of the region emphasize that we should continue to show the utmost

vigilance about developments elsewhere including in bahrain and we make clear the form of restraint and not repression throughout the region. can the prime minister reassure us that all steps are being taken to make sure that those participating in military action reflect the broad base of support including from the arab league? does he agree that will require continuing diplomatic efforts to ensure it happens? can i further ask him under the contingencies that have been prepared, how does he envision the chain of command operating? let me ask about the humanitarian situation in libya. can he update the house on british nationals in light of the clearly changed circumstances that we are now facing? and we will note with concern that a division of the red cross prior to the resolution to withdraw from benghazi, can the prime minister assure that

efforts will be made to have continued humanitarian access to benghazi and what plans are being made to facilitate the return of humanitarian assistance? at this time we on this side of the house will give our full support to our armed forces. once again, they are engaging in dangerous and courageous actions on behalf of our country. we salute their procrastinationally and bravery. they are saving to uphold the will of the international community including the united nations. in their service, i believe they will have the support of the whole house. >> mr. prime minister, can i thank the gentleman for his support and for the way that he put that support in his questions just now. let me try and answer all of the questions that he has put. in terms of the time scale and potential military action, the issue is this. the security council resolution is absolutely clear in its first paragraph there should be a cease-fire, that gaddafi should stop his attacks on his

people. if that does not happen, yes, consequences will follow and all necessary measures of the resolution puts it and we are able to do it on a time scale that i believe effective. in terms of our broader strategy, what we believe we need in libya is a transition towards a more open society and towards a better democracy, but we have to be clear about our aims here. the u.n. security council resolution is absolutely clear. this is about saving lives and about protecting people. it is not about choosing the government of libya. that is an issue for the libyan people. in terms of mercenaries, this is included in the u.n. security council resolution, i think that is welcome. his point about the international criminal court, that was covered by the earlier resolution and of course that is still in force. in terms of consultations with the arab league and with arab countries, there will be a meeting in paris tomorrow which president sarkozy has called. i will be attending and there

will also be representatives across the arab world to bring together this coalition to help to achieve the goals that the u.n. security council has so right voted for. he said we must be vigilant elsewhere with all of the challenging problems in our world today and he mentioned bahrain, he is absolutely right and the government is keeping its travel advice and its work helping british nationals in bahrain and yemen and elsewhere permanently under review and making sure we do everything we can to help people as necessary. in terms of the air abe league participation, we seek the active participation from some air abe league countries. i believe we will good that. from calls, i have some reainsurances. in terms of military chain of command, this is a joint operation, if necessary, carried out by britain, america, and france with arab and other participation and it will be coordinated in that way. in terms of british nationals, obviously, as we have announced

before in this house, almost all of those that want to leave have left. there are some who remain. we have our relationship with the turkish embassy who are working with us and for us in tripoli and we also have an active cons legislature figure in ben -- consular figure in benghazi. stopping gaddafi from going to benghazi will be a big interest. an aim of the security council is to make sure that humanitarian aid can get through. above all, as he said any decision to put our armed forces in harm's way should only be taken when absolutely necessary. mr. speaker, we cannot stand back and let a dictator who have rejected him to kill them indiscriminately. i believe we should be clear about where our interests lie. in this country particularly, we know what colonel gaddafi is

capable of. we should not forget his support for the biggest atrocity on british soil. we can't have a situation where this state festers on the southern border. we are backing up our words with action. >> may i congratulate the prime minister for the superb leadership that he and the foreign secretary have given, both at home and at the united nations in securing this resolution without which the people of benghazi and of libya would be facing a humanitarian disaster. may i ask the prime minister whether consistent with the u.n. resolution which as he has indicated refers to all necessary measures to protect civilians, can he confirm that our forces would be used not only to intercept aircraft, but if necessary to attack other units on the ground that may be threatening civilian populated

areas? >> i thank the gentleman for his support and agree with him that time is now crucial. it is vital that we got this u.n. security council resolution and we make very clear the ultimatum to colonel gaddafi so that we secure that cease-fire and stop in the operation. in terms of the question that he asks about what the security council permits us to do, it talks about in paragraph four crucially all necessary measures to protect people, to protect civilians and indeed mentions specifically benghazi and the attorney general's advice which we can go into much more later is very clear that, that does mean we can take measures that help those things to be achieved. that is very important. we understand that. >> can i congratulate the prime minister and those in the foreign office including our excellent diplomats of the united nations on the work they have done in getting this chapter seven resolution, but can i also say that the french

government needs to get a lot of credit as well. they also worked very hard on this. can the prime minister clarify the role that is referred to in the resolution of the african union as well as the arab league? is there any possibility given that three african states including south africa also voted for the resolution, that the african union can use its good offices to try and find a way to get gaddafi out of power without this conflict going on for a very long time? >> he makes an extremely good point about the leadership that nicholas sarkozy and the french have taken in this role. i think the work that the french and the british and lebanese did together on the u.n. security council was vital. i absolutely pay tribute to our ambassador and his team who did a superb job at partially -- marshalling people to support. people read this, it's a strong

resolution, extremely comprehensive and i hope marks a new start in what the u.n. will be able to achieve. he asked about the african union. we very much hope they will use the good offices in the way that he suggests, there are missions still going to libya. i was particularly pleased that the three african members voted for the resolution. i hope that's a sign of things to come. >> one of the doubting thomases of the last few weeks, can i congratulate the prime minister on his success and this issue and offering my full support and join him to gave support to the team at the u.n., a remarkable diplomatic success and hopefully will mark a turning point of the development of these issues in the u.n. he will agree that difficult questions remain. however, right now it's an incumbent to get behind the armed forces who will implement this resolution. >> my honorable friend is entirely right.

of course, there are difficult questions. we are embarked on a difficult course, not least because we have set a limit on that course and quite rightly said this is not about an army of occupation. it's important that we all understand that this is a correct and people across the arab world want to hear. above all, our thoughts, everyone in this house and i'm sure everyone in our country will want to be with those armed forces and their families who will be preparing potentially for difficult days ahead. >> mr. jeffrey donaldson. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the government and armed forces have all support in this matter. the prime minister mentioned three criteria determining the appropriateness of intervention. surely there is another factor and that is whether we have the capacity and the military assets to intervene in situations such as this in light of developments in the middle east in recent works, will the prime minister and his colleagues have another look at fdsr to see if our continue

willton like this in the future >> i look very carefully at every decision that we make in defense. i see it it is a personal priority for me as prime minister. what i would say to colleagues is even at the end of this defense review, at the end of this parliament, we will have the fourth largest defense budget anywhere in the world. we have superbly equipped armed forces. many of the decisions we took in the defense review was make sure they had flexibility, the ability to deploy, extra investment in special forces and transport and also the point i would make is the typhoons that we are potentially looking at using is an aircraft that is not involved in afghanistan and i have had assurances from the chief of the defense staff that our planning for what may be necessary in libya does not affect the efforts that we are making in afternoon with our allies to bring greater security in that country. >> my right honorable friend for sharing a breath taker

degree of leadership and courage. i support what he has said and done. does my right honorable friend agree that while regime change is not the aim of this resolution in practice, there is little realistic chance of achieving the aims of these resolutions without having regime change? >> i think my honorable friend puts it extremely well. the aim is clear. the aim is to put in place the u.n. security council. that is a cessation of hostilities. it's the protection of lives, the protection of people. it's the prevention of a bloodbath in benghazi. it's to make sure that arms don't get to libya, that assets are frozen, the travel bans, all of those things. those are the aims and we must now pursue. of course, like many other leaders the world over, we have all said that gaddafi needs to go in order for libya to have a peaceful, successful, and democratic future. that still remains the case. it is almost impossible to

envision a view of libya without that. those are our aims. those are the things that on behalf of the rest of the world we are helping with others to deliver. >> human rights and civilians are not unique to libya, but to a different degree, but not unique. should the prime minister develop a foreign policy such as attacks on civilians in other countries because i hope he thought this whole thing through because we may well be involved in a civil war in libya for some time to come? .

>> i congratulate the prime minister and the foreign

secretary and others involved in securing this very tough resolution and the building of a broad based coalition to deal with gaddafi. it will be important in the weeks to come for the country to know this government is also intent on forging ahead with our european partners in keeping the middle east peace process revitalized and going so we can draw all the poison from the well. >> i think my friend makes a good point. i questioned a palestinian leader recently who said we really should secure the long term defeat of al qaeda. those things together will go to the heart of the problems we face in our world. >> as someone who -- the action should be based on the

resolution of the united nations security council. i accept that the situation today is difficult. what the prime minister, nevertheless, despite what he has said about reservations and ground troops -- i take the view that we could be dragged into a war -- a third war in nine years. can you, mr. prime minister, make sure we avoid this situation of a third war? >> i take the point extremely well. i agree with them there should be regular statements. i think we should start with the debate on monday on a motion so members can come and debate that. at the what to propose an amendment, they can.

that way colleagues can have a look at it. the point he makes about legality is absolutely vital. we have a legal basis -- the un coming together and making that clear. what we are doing is legal, proportionate, and right. to take people with us, we have to make those the arguments that it is in our interest to act, but also in our national interest. we do not want to stay on our borders. the point he makes about ground troops and occupied forces is vital. it is there in the un security council resolution. that is not part of our aim at. it is not what the u.n. wants. it is not what the arab league wants. it is not what britain wants. it is a limitation on our ability to act. i think it is absolutely right.

>> may i commend my friend for his leadership on this. can he explain to the house why he thinks germany and spain do not under this resolution? is germinate going to be interfering with us in recognizing the regime in benghazi? >> i thank the gentleman for his support. in terms of the german attitude, the chancellor has been extremely skeptical about this issue. i do not think german will be obstructed. they recognize that the un has voted for this motion on which they have abstained. it is for them to explain their skepticism. of course, there are arguments you can make about if you are acting here, why not elsewhere. it is a case for the world coming to get. >> thank you, mr. speaker.

may i congratulate the prime minister on the actions he has taken. i hope you'll join with me in congratulating president obama who i think by his cautious deliberation has allowed the arab state to come to its own and show proper respect for the united nations. it is given a major boost to international law. >> i think the hon. lady may send an extremely good point. i had a very good conversation with president obama last night. he has shown great leadership on the un which what they proposed in terms of this resolution. to be able to bring that together with the other resolution. in she is right. by allowing the arab league some time and space to come forward and make their own views, it helps create a sense of consensus which the un that we have the ability to act. the clock is now taking and we have the sense of urgency.

we do not want to see a bloodbath in benghazi and further repression and killing of innocent life in libya. >> i join with my friends in congratulating my friend on his brilliant success in the united nations. could he say more about the strategic objective, which others have been very clear about? we are talking about regime change. our ally as president obama in this situation. >> almost every leader in the free world has said it gaddafi needs to go. his regime is ridiculous. there is no future with them in charge. we ought to be clear about what we are involved in.

it is about protecting lives and protecting people and about steps we are prepared to take to isolate the regime and give the country a chance for a better future. we have to restrict ourselves to that aim in how we meet this un security council resolution. we have a desire that i and others have expressed that gaddafi has no future. our aim must be clear. that is how we move forward. >> it is important that gaddafi -- can i ask the prime minister how many countries he wishes to provide military assets and how many of those come from the arab league? >> the gentleman makes a good point. it is the widest allowance possible. it would not be right for me to name the countries considering participation, but there are a

wide number. clearly at the heart of this are the americans, the french, and the british. there are others in the arab league to have spoken about active participation -- about playing a part in this. there is a meeting tomorrow in paris that will bring the widest coalition of those who want to support. i believe that this has such strong u.n. backing but this will have a strong coalition. >> speaking as someone who has watched well-armed bosnian serb units smashed through civilian populations, may i ask my right- hon. friend the prime minister whether the security council resolution under its claws "all necessary measures" are now such to avoid the arms embargo and directly arm of those fighting against gaddafi in benghazi and elsewhere?

>> the first point i make to my of for a friend is a welcome it was that bosnia was sitting on the security council and able to vote in favor on this motion for good historical reasons. in terms of what the motion says, if you help enforce the arms embargo, my understanding is the arms embargo applies to the whole of libya. it authorizes other states to take all necessary measures to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threatened attack in libya. that is very strong language. that does allow you to take a number of military steps to protect people and to harm those that intent to damage civilians. they could not be clearer. let me make this point as well. what -- what i think we should maintain this convention that the government is entitled to have legal advice and receive it

privately, i do think it is right in these occasions that a summary of legal advice should be published so it could be debated. we will make sure it is done well in advance of the debate on monday. >> given the gaddafi forces, what assessment that you made of civilian casualties? >> first of all, it is clear there has been widespread civilian casualties. i quoted the figures in my statement. if gaddafi goes into benghazi, the situation could get worse. the clock is ticking. the time for action is now. in terms of reconstruction, humanitarian aid -- the development secretary will be leading a group to make sure we do everything to bring all our resources to bear, working with

others and making sure we get humanitarian aid to all parts of the country. >> the factors that caused gaddafi in the 1990's to abandon his program of west -- program of weapons of mass destruction was before he was to be inducted for war crimes. he well understands the breach of international criminal law. will my friend and make sure the international criminal court makes it clear that it does not only gaddafi that stands at risk of indictment, but all those around him who are most responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity? >> that is an extremely good point. we are making sure that not only good that the edges of the jet colleague know they are in danger of going before -- that not only gaddafi and his colleagues know they are in danger of going before a tribunal. anyone who thinks of organizing

mercenaries were organizing armed shipments to that regime -- all those people are covered in the same way. >> john mcdonald. >> i support the struggle of the libyan people. i also support the united nations, but i have grave and serious concerns about use of force by western powers in this region. what next? in the short term, is there to be a final offer from the united nations to gaddafi for peace talks? what measures are being put in place to make sure of civilian safety? can i urge that there should be no use of iranian weapons. can i also say that given the change of regime in this region, given what is happening in bahrain, and given the condition

of the palestinian people -- and now is the time to establish a middle eastern conference to establish the long-term security and peace in this region? >> in terms of what the un is suggesting, paragraph one demands the immediate establishment of a cease-fire, an end to violence, and an end to the attacks on civilians. the second paragraph refers to looking at the legitimate demands of the libyan people. if we make this statement in the way the un has made this ultimatum and the gaddafi doesn't respond, it is in those circumstances we say we are prepared to use force to protect civilians with full backing of the un, and with the full backing of international law, and with the arab league behind us.

he does need to think about this. you can have all sorts of things i holding you back before taking action. all the questions you should ask would be that this degree of international backing -- if he will not stop the brutalizing of innocent civilians, there is a legitimization of taking action to protect their citizens. >> can i also congratulate the prime minister on his successful leadership. can't you tell us more about the discussions your having about members -- having with members of the arab league? >> the encouraging thing is the arab league came forward so clearly. the contacts i had were that so many were so clear that what gaddafi was doing was wrong. there is a genuine sense of outrage. i think the key now is to try to

encourage the arab league, not just in those words, but also deploy an active participation so the world can see that action is necessary. there are arab planes alongside arab, french -- there are airplanes alongside british, french, and american planes. >> mr. richard burton. >> this is not iraq, but it is an important test of the international community's willingness to protect civilians from the immediate danger of slaughter. given the importance of keeping the outgrowth on board in this endeavor, will the prime minister tell us a bit more about the objectives? >> the first objective is to bring together those arab leaders that president sarkozy, president obama, and i had been

speaking to and discuss the widest possible alliance to prosecute the un security council resolution. as i said in my statement, the logistics activities to take place. we will quicken the contacts we up with all of those arab countries. it will be a visible demonstration of the world coming together to say that this man must not what he is doing and if he does not, there will be dire consequences. >> gaddafi is a dust but with a reputation for international terrorism. -- does espot with a reputation for international terrorism. can the prime minister say which organizations have said they would be willing to play such a part in dealing with a

stalemate? >> there is a danger of stalemate. at that point, there could be a role for organizations like the african union to bring the situation to a close. as we stand today, colonel gaddafi has not seized his attacks on the people in libya. that is the urgency of this resolution, the ultimatum that we will give. of course, if the secedes, there could be a role for the african union and others. >> the prime minister talks about the need to think back the consequences of our action or inaction. one of the possible consequences is gaddafi is left weekend and alienated, but not defeated. when considerations had been given to this scenario? what are the implications for security in the region more widely? >> we have to consider all of these issues.

the reason gaddafi is weakened and insecure is because his people rose up and said they wanted no more of him. they wanted a more open and democratic future. in response to that, we have been right and others had been right to encourage the arab world to move more in a more democratic direction. from a national security perspective, we have to consider all of the situations in libya, the consequences for migration, and the consequences for security policy as well. >> mark field. >> there is already a huge crisis taking place with a large number of libyans having already fled and gone across the mediterranean to north africa, italy and other places. would you recognize that many of us in this house have -- are

equally proud of the very strong use of soft power that our nation is able to utilize and is able to utilize in the difficult weeks and months in. >> i stress again what the international secretary will be doing. we will be dealing with the issues within libya itself. soft power has played -- has had an enormous affect on giving people the sense that there is a better future available to them and they do not have to put up with the regime but that to put up with so long. despite the fact there may be difficult -- difficult days ahead, we should lift our heads up and believe there is a more hopeful future for this region and, therefore, for our world. >> we wish the prime minister

well. there'll be much more complex decisions to make that will affect life -- that will affect life-and-death in libya. we want to see gaddafi gone and everyone in benghazi protected. we are concerned about the russian's abstaining. in many cases, it is the aftershock that devastates the civilian population. >> that is a good point of about custom munitions. we do not use them at we do not believe anyone else should either. all that i would start -- observe about the other countries abstaining, it is a welcome step forward. we are talking about a very tough resolution about what is happening in another country where people are getting

brutalized. in years gone by, we would have expected to see security council leaders. the fact that we have not, i think is a very important step forward for the future of our world. >> william cash. >> those resisting it will lead arms rapidly. my friend did not mention 9 which relates to the arms embargo. it talks about sanctions to allow supplies as paragraph c of that paragraph suggest, to allow supplies to those resisting gaddafi in benghazi. >> i think i am right in saying

that the resolution is clear that an arms embargo has been enforced across libya. the advice others have mentioned would-b be that it would only apply to the regime. >> can you talk about the libyan water and oil infrastructure? >> first of all, in many ways the easy decisions have been made. now the difficult decisions have to be made. the point he makes about libya and resources is entirely right. if it is that gaddafi will not cease his war on his own people and if it is the case that military action will have to be

taken, we have to make sure it is commensurate with international law and we have to avoid collateral damage, civilian casualties, at all of the other things he says. the largest coalition of people in this country and around the world is behind what the united nations has authorized. >> i would like to thank the prime minister for coming to the house so early to make a statement. we take very seriously the deployment of british troops. could it not be debated later this evening or tomorrow morning before the troops are actually deployed? >> obviously, i consider this carefully. we felt the best approach was to give time for the tabling of a substantive motion today. -- if we do that in advance of that, it would give the members

a chance to do that and there can be a proper debate on monday. i considered if it would be better to hold the debate on tuesday so people have more chance to consider what happens over the weekend. we are anxious to have that debate, so we just to debate it on monday. it is the right thing to do. >> resolutions say and what they are interpreted to say to be very different. >> this resolution does seem to be extremely clear in that it has the no-fly zone, it has all necessary measures for a no-fly zone, it has the need to protect civilians, alongside all the other issues like asset seizures. it is a clear resolution and i

am very conscious as we go ahead we want to take people with us. it will inevitably be a difficult part. every action has a consequence. i welcome the fact that the resolution says so clearly that there must not be an occupying force. i think that sense such a clear signal to the arab world, the muslim world, and to the people in our own country that it will not happen again. there are some limits on this. >> can i thank the prime minister for his statements? >> commencing military action is like entering a maze. it is easier to get in than to get out. the libyans will always be at risk what gaddafi is in power.

>> i think the gentleman makes a good point. it is always the case, which goes something like -- it may involve you taking so many difficult steps in order to achieve it. it seems there is a stronger argument which is to stand back and do nothing and witness the slaughter of civilians means that it is better to act than to remain passive. we set limits on what we are able to do because we cannot have an occupying force. i believe what we are doing can't help to affect civilians and to bring about a better future for libya. >> barry gardiner. >> i welcome the un resolution. the un resolution is not to secure a no-fly zone, it is an extraordinary authorization of regime change. unless the prime minister

believes that libya's arab and african neighbors lacked the capacity or compassion for the libyan brothers and sisters, why does he insist on putting british military personnel at risk? >> i obviously respect the hon. gentleman's views, but if you have an end, you must also have a will to the means for that end. we must not underestimate our ties. we have one of the finest armed services in the world. we are one of the world was the leading military powers. we have a huge strength in sought power and diplomacy. i think we should play a proportionate part alongside allies like france, america, and the arab world. to say we should pass a resolution like this and then stand back and hope that someone in the arab world takes care of it, i think is wrong.

>> may i also commend the prime minister's statement, his courage, and his leadership? [unintelligible] the use of a sovereign bases -- has this been agreed to? >> i do not want to go into too much detail about deployments. it is an opportunity to make the point to those who have expressed concern about aircraft carriers. if you are undergoing operations in the mediterranean to provide a no-fly zone and terry l. all necessary measures, the fact that there are so many men -- friendly countries, there are plenty of opportunities for basing of aircraft to make sure we can deliver the effect that we need. >> mr. david simpson. >> mr. speaker, can i join my

colleagues in congratulating the prime minister for the success? those of us in northern ireland will share no tears over mr. gaddafi, especially in regards of this supplying weapons to butcher british citizens in ireland? is the prime minister in the position to give us enough in regards to the red cross? will they be active on the ground? >> the people in northern ireland and have every right to remember the heart and the pain caused by gaddafi's funding of the ira, a wrong bet has been properly right did. on the issue of the ride -- red cross, i will ask the secretary to discuss this. >> just yesterday i was voicing

my concern about the situation. potentially, our generations will wonder. i am short this is helped by the chilling words colonel gaddafi issued in his interview. as the security council been able to protect -- detect potential threats or is it anti taught by a tyrant who knows his days are numbered? >> these are chilling words about what he is planning to do to his own country at his own people. i, too, heard the reports about civilian aircraft. even aside from the un security council resolution, every country has a right under international law for self- defense that you can exercise in full. >> will the hon. gentleman agree

that the merit of the operations to liberate kuwait in 1991 was finite and established order and was a disaster of the war in iraq in 2003? after it was one, at first remained to install a government which resulted in chaos and terrorism. will the hon. gentleman assure the house that those lessons have been learned? >> i absolutely give the right hon. gentleman that assurance. we've learned the lessons of iraq and proceed with the maximum arab support. we should also learn the lessons of bosnia where we should not stand aside and witness a slaughter. what falls to cabinets and governments at this time is to recognize and no two situations are exactly alike.

it is different. we have to respond to it and use the right judgment to get a response correct. that is what we are determined to do. >> nicholas bulls. >> mike thank the prime minister for a singular service over the last few weeks. will he joined with me in paying tribute to those to render even greater service, those young men and women whose skills, training, and courage on how do we will rely as we have done so often in our past? >> he is absolutely right to make that point. it is not the people who make the decisions appear at the difficult choices, it is those who got to carry out those decisions. we should be incredibly proud of our armed forces. we should be proud of their ability to take on a path and pursue it with such vigor. it is inspiring to see it happen. we should never take it for granted.

we should never ask them to do things they can not complete. i have full confidence they will perform magnificently as they always do. >> may i add my voice to those in congratulate him the prime minister for what he has achieved, especially with the coalition government. can the prime minister give the house a sense of how long he expects this military engagement to last? >> the gentleman made reference to the coalition government. let me put on record what strong support we have had from members from right across the coalition and right across the house of commons. i think the ministers have done an extremely good job. in terms of -- i do not want to go into too much detail, what could happen if gaddafi does not do what the resolution says --

action would follow relatively rapidly. we will do what is necessary to make sure the terms of the resolution are met. what's may i also congratulate my right hon. friend for the courage is demonstrated in the last week? one of the difficulties we had in relation to the war in iraq is that the -- is the thought that the war was not legal. in order that there can be confidence across the country in the legalities being taken by the government, it needs to deal with the point raised by the hon. gentleman -- to my friend ashore meet this will be the case? >> what i cannot promise my friend is you will see a summary position on this device before the debate on monday.

walt i am never denigrate -- it is all there in the un security resolution. i would recommend reading it to see how strong the legal basis is. >> can i thank the prime minister and the foreign secretary for showing great leadership in this time of need it? we cannot risk the emergence of another failed state exporting terror and human misery. not that the un as agreed on action, will the prime minister make sure the action is swift, powerful, and precise? >> we should do everything that is necessary to bring about the un security council's resolution

to a conclusion. that is what our aim should be. everything we should do it should be proportion -- proportionate to that. we have made the choice to play our part and join in international action to uphold international law, to respond to the calls from the arab countries and arab league, and to do the right thing for the people of libya to what greater freedoms. i think it is in the uk's interest as well. >> what lessons have been learned from applying experience in iraq? >> because our military as been involved in a number of no-fly zones over many years, particular lessons have been learned. i am not attending this is easy.

i never said a no-fly zone is easy to establish or is a whole answer to bring this conflict to an end. i think it is one element of what is necessary to turn up the pressure and say that what we are seeing is simply not right. >> the prime minister has informed the house that we are preparing to deploy tornadoes and tycoons to relevant air bases. would it assist if we had an aircraft carrier in the mediterranean? would it bolstered our positions to reconsider decommissioning those forces? >> if it is not necessary to carry out the operations with an aircraft carrier. other countries have moved aircraft carriers into the area. that is because of the answer i gave. in this part of the world, there are clearly a number of

available basis they give you the basis you need to carry out the operations that are required. it is extremely important to bear that in mind. >> can i start by congratulating the prime minister in -- can i ask him to clarify the position -- will we join france in recognizing the rebels as the leader of the government? >> in this country, we recognize countries rather than governments. making contact and having committed stations with the transitional government and building a relationship with them is the right way to proceed. >> can i also congratulate the prime minister and foreign secretary in leading international opinion on this? can i also welcome his words when he says "we do not intervene except in exceptional circumstances?"

it is a great contrast to the situation in iraq in 2003 where we now have a legal opinion by the attorney general that has been signed off on by the united nations. >> i wanted to make sure with this cabinet meeting this morning that we were able to read the un security council resolution and the attorney general's legal advice. i think it is important. there will be difficult days ahead. these things never go according to plant. there are difficult days down the road. it is important that the cabinet makes a decision and then does what is necessary to achieve the goal i think the whole house wants to seat, which i take is the enforcement of this u.s. security council resolution. >> next, an update on the situation in japan. first, we will hear from prime minister kan.

then we will hear from the brookings form. then, president obama's remarks on libya. tomorrow, joshed oregon has the latest on libya and the world's response to the situation there. geoffrey freeman talks about the trust the traveler commission. washington journal, a light at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. -- live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> catherine while heads a nonprofit partnership for new york city. -- kathryn wylde this a nonprofit partnership for new york city.

what's the rest of the interview sunday night on c-span's "q&a". >> japan's prime minister is calling on the nation to unite in rebuilding the country from scratch. in a television address, he encouraged fell to 7 cents to not be discouraged and to carry on with working hard. -- he incurs fellow citizens to not be discouraged and to carry on with working hard. this is just over 10 minutes. >> the prime minister is sharing a message for the people of japan. one week has passed since the disaster.

for people whose family members are still unaccounted for, he offers his condolences. the prime minister says that over the past week, the japanese people have dealt with the situation calmly. he says the japanese public has placed an emphasis on community ties and is working together to overcome this disaster. the prime minister says that he respects the way the japanese people have behaved. he says that the country faces two major challenges.

one of them being the damage from the major earthquake and tsunami. the other challenge is the nuclear power plant crisis which was caused as a result of this massive earthquake and tsunami. prime minister kan said there was a great deal of decision around the delivery of relief supplies. however, obstacles are being overcome. he says he believes the relief supplies will be delivered to the disaster zone. as for recovery efforts in

japan, the prime minister says that japan, as a country, will overcome this tragedy and it will recover. as for the power plant crisis, the prime minister says that the situation surrounding the accident is still very grave. in order to overcome this crisis, the police, fire department, civil defense forces, and other groups are working together, putting their lives on the line in an attempt to resolve the situation. the prime minister says that he

is determined to overcome this nuclear power plant crisis. he is determined to resolve the issue. the is committed to working with the japanese public as well as all of these stakeholders involved to overcome this crisis. the prime minister says that he is committed to bringing back reassurance for the japanese public. with that resolve in mind, he says that he will continue to move forward. many nations have offered their condolences. 117 countries and regions and 29 international organizations have extended a helping hand for providing support and aid.

they're supported activities are taking place on the ground. we are much appreciative of this. after world war ii, japan is facing the largest crisis, but we are gaining global support. encloses of all of this, we do not have time to be pessimistic. -- inclusive of all of this, we do not have time to be pessimistic. we need to have resolved. we must move forward to overcome this difficulty. for the evacuees who are living in evacuation centers, i know it is very cold. there is not enough food or water and you are inconvenienced by the shortage of water. i would like to extend my condolences and sympathy to --

to those who are suffering this hardship. people all living together in the centers. the prime minister says he hopes each and every one of them will help each other and hand in hand overcome this hardship. the government will provide food, blankets, and not only relief goods, but he says the government hopes to provide support so that people will be able to live with reassuring sentiment in their minds that we are putting all our efforts into doing so. prime minister calls on the people who are living in evacuation centers -- he says he knows the evacuation will

continue for some time. he hopes they will take good care of their health and, hopefully, they will be able to move to a place of living where they can feel a little bit more safely. he hopes the people will persevere and continue to exercise their patience. he says he will make this point again -- for the japanese people, this is a great test of all of the people of japan. he says in the past history of japan, this small island nation has made it miraculously economic growth. thanks to the effort of everyone of the japanese citizens. that is held the nation of japan

was built. -- that is how the nation of the japan was built. -- that is held the nation of japan was built. there is no room to be pessimistic or dysenteries. we cannot do so. we are going to create japan once again from scratch. that is the strong resolve that we all must share. he says that he hopes that all of the japanese people will face this challenge together. the prime minister calls on each and every citizen of japan within their family, within the local community, within their workplace, and within their schoolmates -- they will work hand in hand and do what they can. he hopes they will think about what they can do to make a contribution and keep their wishes to get there and be

united so that we can overcome the crisis and it can rebuild and recover. the prime minister says he has that resolve any will work hard. he says that this is the message he wanted to convey to the people of japan in marking the seventh day after the earthquake. this is a question from the media. regarding the fukushima plant -- the local residents not only are concerned, it is giving and anxiety to the whole populist. there is this just spreading among the citizens about the way the government is releasing the information. how dangerous is it? hal richard can we be?

what is the forecast? can you give a specific example? please give us that information of what you think? >> with regards to the recent accident at the nuclear power plant, the fact that i know as prime minister and also at the facts that have reached the chief cabinet secretary, everything has been disclosed to the japanese public. we have shared at what we know with the international community and i would like to stress that point. >> the current situation with the nuclear power plant accident is that it is still very grave.

i will share that quite honestly. this situation must be resolved with every effort and to this end, the tokyo electric power co., the defense forces, the police, all institutions involved are making the utmost effort, putting their lives at risk to result -- to respond to this disaster. today, activities were continued at the number two reactor. the situation is still very grave. in the not so distant future,

the overall situation will be controlled and we will be able to emerge from this crisis. it is towards this direction that we are making every effort. that is what i want to tell the public of japan. >> now, japan's ambassador to the u.s. speaks about the nuclear crisis and recent natural disasters in the country. his remarks came at the brookings institute forum in washington, d.c. this is about one hour and 15 minutes.

>> today's panel is intended to give us a chance to discuss a major event that is both in the headlines and, of course, very much on our minds. also to discuss the challenges that this event poses to our political leaders, to their ingenuity, their fortitude, and wisdom. but today's if that actually goes beyond that. it gives everyone in this room and everyone who is watching on television or listening on the radio or following the proceedings on the web, a chance to inform and intensified our compassion for the brave and grievously stricken people of japan. the japanese people and the japanese government are very

ably represented in the united states by ambassador ichiro. he is a very close friend to a number of us here in this room. that makes it all be more fitting that he should be representing a country that is a close friend, a partner, and allied to the united states. all of you can imagine what the last week has been like for the ambassador, for his wife, and for their family. he has been working literally around the clock with numerous agencies of the united states government to coordinate as much as possible in the american and international support for the japanese. he is continuing that important work today. we are all very grateful to him

for taking a few minutes after that very busy schedule in order to be with us to make a brief opening statement. i want to stress that because of the urgent, onerous, and important work he is doing, he can only be with us for a few minutes. after he speaks, i am going to ask all of you to keep in your seats. you have a very good panel to listen to after he leaves. this message is directed particularly to the media in the back of the room. i do not want to see anybody do anything that will impede his departure given his busy program this afternoon. i will accompany him out after we have had a chance to hear from the ambassador. mr. ambassador, the lectern is yours. [laughter] -- [applause] >> thank you very much,

everyone. thank you very much especially to strobe talbot for offering me this opportunity. this has been unprecedented. there was an earthquake, tsunami, and a nuclear accident as well.

your experts are working with our nuclear experts as well. we are working in washington and tokyo. every hour to try to find a

better solution. it is not an easy situation, but as president obama and prime minister, we should overcome this situation and we will overcome this situation. again, we are grateful to american people for your solidarity and being with us at this very difficult time -- moment. at thank you very much. [applause]

>> good afternoon. welcome to brookings institute. i want to add my words of sympathy and condolences to the japanese people on this occasion of such a horrendous disaster. i have with me four brookings scholars. to my right is richard bush who

is the director of the center for north east asian policy studies. he has distinguished degree air in the government to -- he has a distinguished career and government as a director of the american institute in taiwan, which handled america's diplomatic relations. he has authored many books on east asia. his latest book is called "the perils of proximity." next to them is a senior fellow in the economics program and the global economy and development program.

his research focuses on economic growth in developing countries and is the author of many studies in this area. he was the director of the president's council on price stability is back in the 1970's. he has taught at berkeley and at harvard. next to him is the director of our internal project that focuses on humanitarian affairs and the impact of natural disasters. her latest book is the politics of protection, the limits of humanitarian action. isally, on the far rights,

the director of energy security initiative, who is an expert on a whole range of security issues. he is an expert on nuclear energy issues. i wanted to start to first by having a conversation between the catalyst and then we will -- between the panelists and then we will dive into your questions. i will ask you to give us a sense of the nature of the natural side of this disaster, the earthquake and the tsunami. what impact has it had on the japanese people, at the issue of displacement? perhaps you can put it into some kind of comparative perspective

for us so that we get a sense of just how much of the disaster this is? >> thank you. i am sure that many of you has been following the television images relentlessly. the stories of the earthquake followed by the tsunami, the story of people forced to leave their homes, people killed, missing. rescue missions. the numbers are daunting. as of this morning, there were close to 7000 confirmed dead, over 10,000 missing. we expect those figures to go higher. they always do. about 400,000 people have been displaced, evacuated, leaving in the evacuation centers. millions without water, electricity. still over a million people without electricity. serious humanitarian needs remain. a country like haiti, which has

experienced and less severe earthquake in january, had 300,000 casualties and 3 million people who were directly affected. released in japan -- released in japan has been complicated trade complicated by the number of aftershocks. there was a report that there is spent 262 aftershocks in the last week. the terror that causes to people staying in shelters, which are often dark and cold, damaged roads have hampered the delivery of relief supplies. they have done a terrific job of getting us up and operational. fuel shortages have been a major issue in complicating the delivery.

trucks and a glorious the gasoline to be able to deliver the supplies even when he rode the been repaired. the national response has been impressive. we study these things and we look at indicators of good strong government response, you have a high-level interagency japan has that within the prime minister's office great their disaster response teams are ready to go and went about the country. red cross mobilized 134 response teams that had planned were to go, what kind of services would be needed. a very impressive national response. the international response has been strong. particularly in the search and rescue missions, the u.s. military has been active. sot of the ngo's have done through japanese counterparts.

that is the way it should work. the government has says they want to determine what is needed before allowing many international ngo's to set up operations. we have, in contrast, in haiti, where tens of thousands have setn -- thousands of ngo's up operations without coordination. another point that japan indicates is that prevention pays off. in 1995, there was a serious earthquake or 7000 people were killed. at the time, there was criticism of did it -- building codes and regulations. since then, japan has led the world in developing earthquake resistance architectural structures. not only inside japan, but has said that expertise with countries around the world.

a report found that to -- that 100 casualties were the result of the earthquake. the rest were from the tsunami. 100 from the earthquake. remember that figure of 300,000 dead in haiti. japan has led the world in disaster risk reduction. that is an amazing accomplishment. i must say the nuclear shadow is overshadowing everything else. this is a whole new ballgame for humanitarian actors. in the past, problems of humanitarian -- has been the result of damaged infrastructure resulting from natural disasters. or the result of armed attacks on workers. but never before have humanitarian agencies had to think about radioactivity or how close to get to, what kind of

danger staff may be placed in when they're trying to carry out their humanitarian mission. in article in today's new york times said that some 10,000 people have left their homes, not to evacuate, either direct result of natural disasters, but because of fear of radiation. those are entirely -- those are internally displaced persons, something to watch for. when people are frightened, when they are uncertain, they seek safety elsewhere. >> just as a follow-up, 400,000 have been displaced. where are they? >> they are living in shelters. schools, shrines, office buildings. the idea is that they will live there temporarily until some kind of temporary housing can be built.

put that in perspective. japan's population is over 120 million. even though it is a large number of people, and the percentages are smaller than places like pakistan or haiti. >>, a displaced in haiti? >> about 1.9 p -- 1.9 million people displaced immediately. at a population of 9 million. >> interesting. charles, let's talk about the nuclear disaster. >> thank you, martin. >> can you give us an update of where things are? your assessment, please, of just how much of a disaster this actually is. >> i have some recent reports, released at 5:00 friday tokyo time. you may have heard that the overall evaluation of the

incident has been raised to one level toward the chernobyl disaster. in reality, that should not be seen as a worsening situation. it reflects that we now have more information about what happened previously. it looks as if the major number two hat reactor. the radiation levels, they were measured at levels that would be roughly 240 yards, have the equivalent of receiving a cat scan. i do not mean to minimize this. the situation can change very quickly. but it does appear that that is the major problem. it looks as if we still have a

major problem with fuel rods and storage pools are not covered to treat it looks like they are still -- they are still 5 feet below where the water level needs to be. the significance of that is that the heat build up. eventually, it begins to melt. if you get up to 2400, you begin to have a series meltdown of the reactor core. it does look like one of the neighboring utilities is bringing in a power line as rapidly as possible. it may be up and running by tonight japanese time. that will be a significant because commercial power can then be brought to restart the diesel pumps that were knocked out.

let me just say one final thing on the technical issues. i think it is very important given a lot of the information that is coming out of the international media, the reactor technology has not failed. it failed at chernobyl. there is no question about that. some operators make errors. reactor technology closed down at the time of the earthquake as it was expected to do. the tragedy has arisen because the tsunami came and knocked out the diesel pumps for backup water power. one can argue about the design of the plant. it has not been a failure of nuclear technology. i say that because around the world, we have certain voices arguing that this is the end of nuclear power. longer-term, i think we need to

start thinking about it what the implications would be if we even that slow the development of projected nuclear power. this has not got a lot of attention in the media. the near-term impact in countries like china, india, south korea would be for much greater foot -- fuel consumption. this would be devastating if the chinese were to say, to reduce their program by a third in terms of the amount of coal that would be released in the atmosphere. a lot of people have not rationally thought about what the overall implications of using this incident might be. >> we will come back to that. can you give us an answer -- is the nuclear plant under control?

are we likely to see -- >> i do not think it is a meltdown. it is not under control in any way, shape, or form. the numbers on the primary containment says that 70% of the container was knocked out. that leads to a major buildup in pressure and a massive meltdown that could potentially affect the other plants in the region, we could look at the catastrophe. it does appear with more workers now be able to be there, these are the most courageous people in the entire world. it does appear that the situation is getting better than the might of been 24 hours ago. as i said, is not that something new has happened with the primary core of being shown. we now know that is what we're fighting. i would hope that if the situation -- i would hope that

the situation will improve. you cannot rule out a much more serious event. >> one more question about what we all saw on television, helicopters dumping water on the reactors. my reaction to that, that is a sign of desperation. does that actually have any effect? >> it has effect. it is very difficult in that part of japan where the weather is very windy at the moment. a lot of the water from the helicopters mr. the sites. the good news is that we had evidence -- missed the sites. a lot of this team that came up, the water did indeed hit some of the plants and improved the situation. if we're talking about water levels 5 feet below where they should be, you are not going to solve the problem with helicopters. the economic about implications for the japanese

economy and for the global economy. >> the economic challenge is extremely manageable. that is not the problem. they should be focusing on the human law and the social cost of this great this is a manageable economic problem. we've had a lot of historical experience with this before. it takes awhile for things to get going. japan is probably the most experienced group of people in trying to do with the economic -- for reference, the disaster was estimated to be a loss of about $100 billion. this one looks like it is going to be in the neighborhood of 200 to 300 billion dollars. if you are talking about 4% of

the gdp, 1% of japan's well, it is not a great number that you get. in the short-run, the effects will be the infrastructure has been disrupted, transportation is being restored within a few months. there was a huge loss of housing. you still have to move these people somewhere in japan to find them temporary housing. those are all solvable problems. there will be a supply side disruption. it looks like the industries that are most affected were electronics. they were in the northern part. most of japanese industry is in the south. it is south of tokyo. they were largely unaffected. i think it over -- this is not the big problem. in the short run, it will have a effect on the japanese economy. second quarter growth may be- with all disruptions.

in the longer term, it gives the country that is in trouble a chance to show a can do better. there will be a big stimulus. japan is a very rich country and it is easy for them to afford the rebuilding cost. in the short run, that will end up having a stimulative effect on the japanese economy. it will give them some energy over the next year or two. i do not think the economic problems are substantial. there is a couple of weird things going on. the strangest one -- who would of thought is a country had a disaster, the demand of the currency would rise? that seems a little hard to understand. i think economists are little puzzled as well. there is a little bit of experience -- the explanation back then was that the japanese

insurance companies have invested abroad. they had to bring money back to try to get funds inside japan's pay off. also, you see the bank of japan issuing lots of yen. that is just liquidity. we would all rush to the atm. that is what has happened to japan. the bank of japan quite easily, it is evidence that it is working. you see no signs of rising interest rates. also, i think what has happened on the exchange rate is that they are thinking this money is going to have to come back from abroad. i think it is exaggerated. if i was in japan, and i was writing the japanese company, i would not liquidate.

just carlitz in japan greg is your rate of interest. -- just borrow a in japan. it is a zero rate of interest. it is easy for them to do. i think it is driven by speculators. i think japan was concerned about it and this is an easy gesture for the united states and the other allies to make. why not? it is painless to do. the intervened. and it is a very thin market. it was pretty easy to overcome it. i would also argue that it is the right thing to do economically. i do not think that is of much consequence either. outside japan, there will be some of these very isolated supply shortages.

>> are we a book -- are we going to be able to get to the ipad2? >> bemis attached to a certain kind of formula. that is a sellable problem -- babies attached to a certain kind of formula. that is a solvable problem. this is not a bad economic crisis. this is manageable. people are focused on the tremendous loss of life that has occurred. >> what about debt levels? >> japanese debt -- they will look to themselves. they can handle this either by issuing some are dead to their citizens or by raising the taxes -- rate -- by issuing some debts to their citizens are raising their taxes. it is not an international debt holding for japan. most of our debt is held abroad.

not in the case of japan. it does mean that the japanese will probably continue to run large budget deficits for a couple of years. i would raise taxes to pay for this. the emphasis on trying to sustain large deficits is overdone. it is about time to be more restrictive on their fiscal policy. >> will lead to growth in japan have a negative effect on the global economic growth? >> we're talking something that will probably be less than half of a percentage point. japan has lots of problems. the economy has not been doing well for years.

this crisis adds to that in the short run, but in the long run, it is a wash of some stimulus effect for the economy. providing job opportunities for people that would go the other way. i think we're still worried about japan. the japanese economy has lost a lot of its energy. but that is nothing to do with much of what has happened. >> thank you. richard, tell us about the political forum in tokyo and the foreign policy implications. >> i am a little more pessimistic about the situation than barry is. i do think that it represents a serious challenge the japanese political system. everything that barry said, i think we still have to be -- we

have to recognize that before the earthquake, the parameters governing japan's trajectory were not great. it has a declining working age population and a growing elderly population and so they're big questions over the long term how caring for the elderly is going to take place. that is of the base of gross 200% of gdp. at we of rapid growth of japanese power. that poses twin dilemmas. how would japan maintain its economic competitiveness? how is it going to preserve security? i think that over the long term, the recovery from the recent

disaster will only make those problems are daunting for japanese politicians. it appears that the earthquake, the tsunami, the problems at the fukushima nuclear plant have already worsened the japanese public's low confidence in their government. they are reminded over the last week of weaknesses in terms of crisis management, the dysfunctional relationship between the elected politicians and unelected bureaucrats and economic entities like tokyo power. there is the problem of lack of transparency. it was his lack of confidence that led voters 18 months ago to throw out the liberal democratic party, which had ruled for 50 years. and votes in the democratic

party of japan. the political class is somewhat on trial here. in the short term, the crisis encourages a certain amount of political stability. 10 days ago, the prime minister was viewed -- he was going to leave office within months. now he may get to 2011 -- 2012. last week, there was little or no cooperation between the democratic party on the other. the fate of the head of ministration -- the head of the administration -- the opposition parties will not dare to oppose for the sake of opposition. we still have to ask the question, how long is this cooperation going to last? the danger is that japan's

political class will go back to business and politics as usual. the opportunity that this crisis presents is that political leaders can use the crisis atmosphere to address more fundamental and longstanding issues. national data, where the workers will come from, overregulation, re-engineering of the national government to make it more responsive and effective. will the political class rise to the occasion? on the foreign-policy side, the near-term consequences have generally been good. there are can -- countries have reached out to japan in time of need. china is really interesting. it probably has the worst relations in japan of any country in the world. but you have the chinese red cross and a great deal of different provinces sending aid to their sister prefectures in

japan. sister cities helping each other. such generosity may meet the strong negative feelings that japanese have toward china. the united states is a special case. the ambassador described the ways in which we're trying to help. that is what a good alliance is all about. i am a little bit worried about these divergent assessments of japanese government and the u.s. government about the severity of the crisis that may lead to a certain amount of resentment in japan. we lack confidence in their institutional capacity. if one looks at -- beyond the immediate situation in the speculative way, to the extent that any country is going to be helping japan, which one is it?

i do not think it is the united states beyond we are already doing. we do not have the financial capacity. china, on the other hand, has resources. china has a strategic interest in we in japan away from its reliance on the united states. encouraging tokyo to be a more accommodative to its interest. the big question is whether china's leaders will have the political will to exploit the earthquake for strategic -- the question is whether japan would choose to go into that direction. my guess is that china is unwilling to play that game. chinese nationalism is a factor. the fact that the strategic opportunity even exist should remind us that we are on trial as well. thank you. >> i want to clarify one thing. there seems to be a little

tension between the efficiency of the japanese government responsive to the disaster. -- japanese government respond to the disaster and your own suggestion that the japanese people have some question about the effectiveness. is this a question about the way in which they handled the information flow rather than the way in which they handled the actual disaster relief effort? >> i think it is partly that. it is also that to japan learned the lesson of the last earthquake crisis. they are certainly doing well on the shop. the tsunami -- shock. the tsunami appears to be something they were less prepared for. the nuclear problem you get the impression that they are really scrambling.

the information problem is severe there. >> of the japanese -- what is behind that concern, the sense that they are not being open with their own people? >> my guess is that tokyo power is not being totally honest with the bureaucracy that regulate it. the bureaucracies may not be totally honest -- forthcoming with the prime minister's office. then you have certain cultural aversion to being blunt about the reality. the japanese are a lot more skillful in interpreting the and we are. certain instances, you would like -- you appreciate clarity. >> let's go back to these questions that you raise a the end about longer-term role of

nuclear energy. let's start with japan. japan is 30% reactors? >> 54 plants in operation at the moment. >> do expect that this will -- they will shut down other plants now? will be a change in energy policy in japan? >> i do not foresee any change in energy policy for the simple reason that japan has to import fuel the side nuclear power. i think they are so concerned about energy security, when there is a somber moment to reflect, they may put in much greater redundancies. these were very old reactors.

i cannot to the japanese changing their view towards nuclear power. it is an important export industry for the country. that would add a double whammy as well. >> what conclusion are we likely to draw about nuclear energy in the united states? >> all the people that opposed nuclear power have come out of the woodwork. they are all back. it will have a negative impact in the united states. when i thought we were not going to have a great nuclear expansion before this incident, largely because of the cost of nuclear power in the united states. a new plant costs nearly $10 billion. there are very futilities -- they're very few utilities that would make that move. that number may be cut in half. we may see some moves in the congress to cut back some of the

proposed loan guarantees that were there for the next generation of plants. that would not be good for the domestic industry. >> how many are we building now? >> we have about 20 before the nuclear regulatory commission for licensing. but we only have to that are actually under construction. they are a result of the energy policy act of 2005. they are being built by the southern company. >> if i could make one final point, the resilience of the japanese people has been startling. they were having rolling brownouts to try to deal with the crisis. the ask people to conserve. overnight, japan cut its consumption by 25%. just like everybody responding to the national charge to help your fellow citizens. that is an extraordinary accomplishment. can you imagine how that happening in the united states?

during march madness? it would not happen at any time in this country. but when we talk about the tension between the japanese people and their government leaders, on that call for them to conserve, they rose to the occasion quite dramatically. >> i note from a japanese friend of mine. he described this as the worst crisis that japan have faced since world war ii. he also expressed a deep confidence in the resilience and the perseverance of the japanese people to meet the challenges like this. maybe not as much confidence in government'. there is a feeling that this is a very strong society. it can overcome. >> i have to speak up on behalf of the american people. i think he underestimates our

willingness. we have to be asked first. >> i was also struck by the lack of looting. if i could ask a question to charlie. you seem to assume that things will be ok in a few weeks. don't you? if something terrible happens, wouldn't that change the balance of support for nuclear power? >> the only problem i see is that when you get to -- when you realize the implications of forgo nuclear power, 14% of the world's electricity. the near term answer is fossil fuels. if we hope to have anything come out of the climate change negotiations, china and india said they were going to burn more cold. we - one not worry on what we do

on fossil fuel consumption. we will have climate change. people do not realize the degree to which you are not going to replace the nuclear plants with wind and solar in the near future. you're talking about a fundamental change. it is the upward pressure on petroleum prices. this would not be good for the world economy. >> let's go to your questions, please. i would appreciate it if he would wait for the microphone. identify yourself and ask your question. >> thank you. what do you think about --

reducing the japanese government -- >> and richard, do you want to start? >> i think any government confronting a nuclear accident should be as fully transparent as possible. there is enough reason for people to panic, a lot of misinformation or lack of understanding of what really happens in radiation. and different types of radiation. for goodness sakes, you do not won any question that the utility involved is not being fully transparent. it is a disaster. >> sir? >> thank you. diplomat.er japanese

i have a question to richard. you mentioned in terms of which country can contribute most to this incident. you argued that the united states or china and so forth. in the long run, may be separate in the short-run, i have no doubt that there is only one country. that is the united states. when the incident occurred, i was still in japan. i immediately thought that this is a golden opportunity to show the fundamental alliance. why? on one hand, there is an important -- it is clear that that >> with the earthquake and

tsunami, there is an opportunity that the marines in okinawa have a totally different role to play. supply and blankets, food to all those in the area. there is a sense of gratitude in japan. i can help wondering -- i cannot help wondering, is a the maximum assistance which your military can provide to us? i may be wrong. i may be wrong. in my view, the extent of the assistance -- they have not shown enough to the television

screen. it has to have two sides. real assistance. the marines can play a totally different role. do you think that there is cooperation -- do you think is this something the japanese media? the united states military plays a totally different role. >> i have no question that the united states is doing whatever it can to be helpful in the situation.

i think we moved very quickly. we have demonstrated again that we're the only country in the world that has this kind of capacity to move quickly. i expect that the united states is not getting enough credit yet. for our assistance and for our desire to assist. that does not surprise me because i think that the japanese people are most focused on the tragedy that has occurred and and what is going to happen with the fukushima plant. i hope that once the immediate crisis has passed, that japanese political leaders will remind the public but although the japanese people make the primary effort, the united states help

the lot. i also agree with you that the united states is the most influential in the short term. china does have opportunities in the medium-term and long-term that we should be aware of. >> the second parts, are we doing enough to show our support? is it visible enough? >> i would rather the japanese leaders be the ones to -- i expect that we are not doing enough. i think that there is a media overload at this point. we can take credit later. i hope japanese leaders give us credit. >> is there something else that we should be doing? >> there are teams there a better assessing the needs and looking for the gaps that can be felt. there is a possibility for an outpouring of support from the

american association's once we know what the needs are. just to remind the people, the most desperate need come later. six months after the -- sometimes that sustained support and have more impact. >> like what? >> the food and shelter, you are talking about. >> help with long-term reconstruction might be more effective. >> on the economic front? is there something that the united states should be doing that we are not doing? >> i do not really think this intervention is of any great significance, but i understand why the u.s. did it. is perfectly appropriate. there is no big challenge on the economic -- the challenge is on the human side to deal with the people elect been displaced.

-- the people who have been displaced. >> let's take another question. >> i am a historian of japan. there's been criticism of the democratic party of japan for its handling, but it seems to me for there to be long-term implications of the democratic party of japan, a comparison needs to be made great people who are unhappy, but did they think that they would have done a better job? it seems to me that they have to think they would be better in order for the democratic party of japan to lose out seriously. >> the jury is not out on that question. it is still out. i'm sorry. [laughter] i think the prime minister and his government have tremendous opportunity to prove that they are capable of being a ruling

party that is as good or better. if, on the other hand, they fail to meet that challenge, the sentiment grows that maybe they're the only ones that we can rely on. >> i have a friend who is a supporter -- i think she is comparing their reaction to the earthquake with a notably inaction to the earthquake for example. i think that she feels that they are at least trying to do better in terms of getting information out. although they had been heavily criticized. would you agree with that? >> i am not close enough to the situation to know. but i appreciate the difficulties of getting the information that is needed in this very complicated situation.

>> thank you. >> yes? >> as i understood, you see this as they watched as far as the impact on the economy in the long term. a decline by half a percent in the short term. could you address the border problem? the resiliency and growth of the japanese economy, the need for restructuring greater competitiveness and a greater enthusiasm in the economy. what would be the impact there? >> i guess you might say, let's give them opportunity a little bit to see if the government will come up with a policy that works for them. you could maybe use that as a

base for moving on. i think the problem in japan is a deep one. it is not like people sitting outside the united states have lots of ideas about how to solve the japanese economic difficulties. i think the concern here is growing that we are headed down the same road. we are facing a lot of the same stagnation problems after the financial crisis here that japan had and adjusting to the one the 1990's. they do need some leadership. they need to develop some economic program about what to do and some stability of the fact that would come from this. -- steps -- stability of the fact that would come from this. i did not hurt anybody come forward with a real successful idea about how we get the economy growing again at a rapid pace. we are puzzled by what is the fundamental problems that hold

growth back. i think the remarkable thing about japan is the 25 years ago, everybody pointed to japan because it's incredibly high rate of savings. they now save less the american household. but the offset on the other side is that japan invests less money than the united states. in the last two years, physical investments have been negative. households do not save any more, but corporations do. the money just piled up. they do not use it for purposes of reinvesting. they just hang onto it. that is what people mean. there does nothing to be any energy in the japanese economy where people are actively investing in new ideas. there is not a very strong

japan.anymore inside a lot of people are stagnant in terms of new business ideas. how do you get that going again? >> is it possible that these disasters could stimulate that kind of energy, a sense of rejuvenation and rebuilding? >> it is possible. leadership is required. good ideas are required. incentives are required. i hope that the political leadership will seize that opportunity, but i see the danger of going back to business as usual. >> i think there was a question on this side. >> the context of the question that -- on the impact of the security alliance. >> identify yourself, please.

>> clay fisher. the impact that this will have on the defense policy, the very same forces that are directly involved in the disaster relief operations with the mainland to the current crisis. it has been difficult to judge tangible progress from the government of japan on this large realignment initiative. do you anticipate that this crisis is a catalyst to reproach the secretary of defense and the secretary of state in the upcoming months or two to rewrite the security alliance, the current agreement, and clean the slate and start all over? what is the impact? >> it is a great question. my fear would be that the japanese government would be so

focused on issues related to released reconstruction that they would not have time to face what is politically controversial question in japan. we had the road map agreed to five years ago. very little progress has been made. there was a setback. ambassador referred to the use of assets on okinawa for the american contribution here, at that is probably not trivial. i hope that it improves the environment. americans have learned in the last couple of weeks that it is better not to say too much about the canal at all. -- a canal at all.

-- okinawa at all. >> the first thing that president obama >> my question, what will that do to the energy policy of usa and europe respectively?

this crisis -- thank you very much. >> charlie, do you want to talk about energy policy? >> europe corp. already have -- in europe, it will have a strong impact. chancellor merkel has said that the whole german nuclear program should be phased out over time. you've seen negative responses in sweden, in italy where they were just beginning to reverse longstanding anti-nuclear policy and restarts i think the u.k., you will see continued -- and restart. i think in the u.k., you will see continued use. they cannot meet their climate change goals. change goals.