guest: there might be desire to clarify the position on the falklands. some of the g-8 issues and how they see the summit fitting in. certainly, i think they will talk about the nato agenda. both countries are committed to it is that have been developing a way get better value. there will also be some discussion about how the alliance should work with other countries in managing global stability. how should we manage the gains made in libya to help them stabilize their own region without always having direct western intervention? those are some of the types of things i expect to see. host: stephen flanagan, thank you very much for talking to us about u.s.-british relations. our coverage continues of prime

minister david cameron's official visit to the united states. we will be live with our cameras for the joint news conference and then for the arrivals at the white house starting at 6:15 p.m. eastern time, as well. a lot happening in washington today. cameras on capitol hill, as well. the senate foreign relations committee is holding a meeting on sudan and the situation there. expected to be testifying today is hollywood star and activist george clooney. live coverage right now. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> the senate foreign relations committee about together to examine recent clashes between the governments of sudan and

south sudan. actor and activist george clooney will testify. he will be on the second panel. he will talk about an organization he founded called the satellite sentinel project to document the situation in sudan. he is just returning from a trip there. the u.k. "guardian" reports he may be dangerous crossing from south sudan into the nuba mountains region. that is the second panel. the first panel will consist of state department officials, a special envoy, end an official with usaid.

le members of the press, poli ase. >>in first will be the state department special envoy for sudan. >> thank you very much, everybody. i appreciate it. thank you. mr. ambassador, we are delighted to welcome you here today. one of the privileges and responsibilities of our committee is to shine attention

on important issues when they are not part of the daily drumbeat of the news cycle. we all remember the famous moment in charlie wilson's war, when having achieved the objective of driving the soviets out of afghanistan, charlie wilson is stunned to see how quickly his colleagues have moved their attention elsewhere, despite, as wilson said, "the ball keeps on bouncing." we know what came next. tragically, too many policy makers only return their attention to afghanistan after 9/11. i believe our committee would fail the test of history if we allowed attention today to drift from the critical situation in sudan and south sudan. i have the privilege of being in sudan a number of times over the course of the last few years, and particularly, for the

referendum. i saw the expressions of hope for the future and watched the difficult birth of a new nation. i was privileged to be there with ambassador lyman, with george clooney, and john pending breast. we would do well to remember that you can have a vote to have a new beginning for a nation or for any number of things, but you can lose the future when the tough tortiouchoices that folloe denied, when they are deferred, or when collective attention is somehow diverted. that's why at a time when the world faces a lot of competing crises, we need to wrestle with and understand what steps the united states and our partners should take to help sudan and south sudan resolve the complex challenge before them.

make no mistake. it is the leaders in khartoum and juba who must choose between a future of conflict and poverty, or a future of security and prosperity. we must not have to take the important role -- we must not abdicate the important role the united states can take. there are some signs that are cautiously encouraging. on january 9, president bashir made the right choice in allowing the south's referendum. on july 9, he made the right choice in recognizing its outcome, and even i am traveling there to welcome it. yesterday, he announced he would travel to juba for the first time since independence in order to meet the president. for every step forward, there has always been a step backwards with patterns of violence and

repression of sudan's passed. in the last year, bashir has waged war on his own people. he has arrested student protesters. he has rejected viable solutions to outstanding issues in favor of aerial bombardment. the past has again become prologue. for its part, south sudan has established itself as a new nation. the president has named a diverse cabinet and leaders in juba put forward serious proposals. the country has also experienced wrenching ethnic violence. there are allegations that it has supported proxy fighting in the north. in the act that may be justified, but may also be self- defeating, it has cut off the flow of oil. for all these struggles, we cannot devalue the progress that we have seen.

peacefully creating a new state was an accomplishment of historic magnitude. in abyei, peacekeepers have helped to bring a critical measure of stability. it has to be said that a came after an enormous amount of the movement of people in the killing of people and really the cleaning out of the whole population in that area. "the new york times" recently titled an article, "hope for darfur." i would ask you, when was last timeh you saw lastope -- when was last time you saw hope and darfur in the same sentence? the sudanese government and the liberation and justice movement signed a peace agreement last year. i look forward to hearing today whether these steps, if implemented and supported, could in fact become the foundation

for a more lasting resolution in darfur. at a time when there are those who want to cut the international affairs budget, i want to point to sudan and south sudan as examples of the power of diplomatic engagement. the cpa was signed because of diplomatic engagement. the birth of a new nation took place because of careful, sustained diplomatic engagement. we can and must continue to put our shoulder to this we'lwheel,n as we of knowledge the fate of these countries lies with their people and their leaders. sudan must escape its fatal cycle of conflict, not as some next chapter in the arab awakening, but because it's the only way to forge a viable political and economic future for its people. the bombing and humanitarian blockade in blue nile has to stop. south sudan has the opportunity

to avoid the corruption that has too often played oil-rich countries. it has the opportunity to create an inclusive government that encourages ethnic diversity. last december, had the privilege of standing with president kiir here in washington. at that conference, he spoke eloquently about the long road to freedom. i know that journey came at a tremendous sacrifice and blood, sweat, and tears. a long road to freedom. it was never intended to be a trap to perpetual conflict and poverty and violence. it was always a journey to hope and prosperity. that journey continues. two fragile states emerged on july 9. we are all here today because it's in the vested interest of the international community that those two countries become partners in political and economic stability, not volatile adversaries in an

already troubled region. we are also cognizant that this region extends south to the lord's resistance army, somalia, and many other dangerous players, all of which could create confirmation that could even eclipse the longest war which was the longest war in sudan. we're privileged to be joined by the president's special envoy to sudan, ambassador princeton lyman. we know you are just back from ethiopia, mr. ambassador. believe me, for all the members of this committee and for all of us, we thank you for all your tireless service and your efforts to be also welco.

we also welcome nancy lindborg from usaid. i also want to welcome our first u.s. ambassador to south sudan, susan page, who is in the audience today, as well as the senior adviser for darfur, ambassador smith. on our second panel, george clooney and john prendergast will join us. i want to thank both of them. i was there with them last year. i saw the focus and attention that their efforts have brought to this issue. they represent the satellite sentinel project, which has given us a window in to events in blue nile and elsewhere. they are just back today. i am pleased they were able to

get here. i know they will be talking with secretary clinton and president obama and others. i think today we will have a good opportunity to really get some insights. we welcome it. on a note of sadness, as many of you know, congressman john payne passed away last week. he was a tireless advocate for the people of sudan and south sudan. his funeral service is taking place today. this morning, our committee remember sam for his dedication to the cause of peace. senator lugar. >> thank you, mr. chairman. by join you in welcoming our distinguished witnesses. we look forward to their testimony. we appreciate their good counsel.

i join you in a tribute to john payne, who has worked with us on this committee and in the house and has been such a champion in africa. the foreign relations committee has been very well informed about senator and now -- about sudan and now south sudan. unfortunately, due to the amount of genocide and other crimes against humanity, that the tribal conflicts, and now border clashes. the extreme violence and deprivation that characterized much of that conflict has recently been brought home to millions in this country through the viral youtube video that the picks of the cruelty inflicted by joseph kony and the lord's resistance army. the impact of the bloody fighting in sudan and south sudan has been brought, and

another way. the comprehensive peace agreement, signed in 2005, finally achieve the separation of south sudan from the north last july. it was hoped that the petroleum wealth that they share would be deemed too precious for either side to forgo. instead, oil exports have stopped, putting upward pressures on oil prices globally, even though the united states no oil from sudan, oil is traded on the global market. any major loss of supply affects all prices and the crude america imports and they buy at the pumps. that's why i've stressed the importance of improving transparency and governance in oil-rich countries. stability in oil-rich regions

leads to stability in gas prices here. i have appreciated the leadership of senator cardin in that effort. events in faraway lands can affect to the u.s. security situation. besides influencing the cost of fuel that feeds our homes and cars are vehicles, there are conflicts in places like sudan, somalia, or the arabian gulf can place strains on our humanitarian resources and require us to maintain stabilitand civilian capacity io respond to crises. the administration should redouble its diplomatic efforts with the international community, including the african union and the arab league, to help bring about a stable and productive south sudan, and a republic ofsible an sudan. the most egregious violence and

violation of international law, again, emanate from khartoum, as the al-bashir engages in crimes against humanity, including starvation as a method of war. i expect our witnesses today will describe the humanitarian and human rights atrocities that have occurred since the two countries separated in july. i am particularly interested in learning about the displacement of more than 120,000 people from the nuba mountains of southern kurdufan and the blue nile state. i am also concerned about the genocide of dozens of violent conflicts that have erupted in south sudan. this is a country where people fought for years to be free. we had hoped that independence would leave them to set aside -- would lead them to set aside

differences. the united states has played an important but carefully defined role, which must continue. from senator danforth's efforts to secretary powell efforts to secretary clinton's recent engagement at the u.n. thanks cry rarely to the actions of the government in -- thanks primarily to the actions of the government in khartoum. the united states should work to galvanize an international response in conjunction with the arab league and the african union to preclude further catastrophe. this means leveraging our diplomatic -- our diplomacy to press china, sudan's major oil

customer, to live up to its i responsibility as a world power. i look forward to the testimony. >> thank you very much, senator lugar. mr. ambassador, we will lead off with you. i do need to announce -- unfortunately, we just got word that there may be as many as three votes in the senate at about 11:30. we may have to have a small hiatus and then recess and then come back. if that happens, happens. we will try to proceed. mr. ambassador. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. thank you for all your leadership. senator lugar, a great pleasure to see you. for all the members of the committee, thank you very much for the opportunity.

i do ask that the full written testimony be made part of the record. >> without objection, it will be. >> i want to join you in recognizing the passing of don paiyne. we will miss him very much. i want to talk about several aspects of the situation in sudan and south sudan, which you and senator lugar have mentioned. the relations between the two are deteriorated. the continuing violence in southern khartoum and blue nile is continuing. both countries are struggling with internal challenges, to

which you referred, senator lugar. turning to the crisis in southern kordofon and blue nile, since last june, this conflict has taken place and it has created an enormous humanitarian emergency, as well as a serious political problem for sudan and for the relations between the two. you will hear more about the details of the humanitarian crisis from the second panel. mr. clooney and mr. penn digress are just back from that area. let me talk about what we have been doing in the efforts to control this situation. from the beginning, we have said that there is no military solution to this problem.

it has arisen from political issues that were not resolved in the final stages of a comprehensive peace agreement. it will not be settled militarily. the two sides must return to the negotiating table. our immediate concern is with the humanitarian crisis. nancy will talk to the details of how many people have been displaced and how serious the crisis is. since last october, we have been saying to the government in khartoum that this crisis is coming, that you could see that by the nature of the war, the bombing of civilian areas, and all the things that have been taking place there that a major humanitarian crisis was going to occur in this area. we said that the government of sudan must allow international humanitarian access. and that the world cannot stand by and certainly the united

states could not stand by and watch such a crisis unfold if the government did not take action. recently, and this refers to something that senator lugar mentioned, a proposal to the government from the united nations, the league of arab states, and the african union to carry out an international humanitarian program. members of the committee, i can say that since last october, we have contacted virtually every country in the world who would have any influence on khartoum to bring pressure to the government of sudan to allow such a program. we were delighted when the league of arab states, along with the african union, and the u.n. joined in this. we had a unanimous resolution of the u.n. security council. china, russia, and all the rest calling for immediate humanitarian access. we have not received a reply yet from the government.

we have some hopeful signs about their reaction to that proposal. we have not yet received approval. should they approved it, action must be taken very quickly. we have a very narrow window before the rains come and make all the roads in passable. if humanitarian assistance is going to come to those areas, it has to come soon. if a program is not carried out, we have ways for the u.s. to provide indirect support to the sudanese to reach the most vulnerable people, but it is not the most efficient way. the most efficient way is for the international access that has been proposed to the government. i would like to turn to some recent events, gentlemen, that have occurred since we submitted the written testimony. in the written testimony, i described the relationships that had been deteriorating between

sudan and south sudan. the conflict in kordofan and blue nile was contributing to that. the shutdown of the oil that has been referred to, because the two sides could not agree on the financial of arrangements. the government of sudan in khartoum began diverting south sudan oil. yesterday, we received word that the two countries decided to step back from the brink. they looked at each other and said, "we are going in the wrong direction. the papers would put on the table will not help the situation. we have to step back." we have to go back to the concept we all claimed we were committed to a two viable states taking care of our mutual security and economic needs. they have set a new path for that would include another summit meeting with president bashir coming to juba.

it would set a new tone for the negotiations. it would set out a new timetable for dealing with the issues of oil, abyei, and the others. while we take a great deal of hope from this, a lot can depend on what happens in the next several weeks. i want to salute the african union, led by the presidents, who inspired the two to take a different approach. i want to congratulate the parties for stepping back from the brink of what was a deteriorating and dangerous situation and began to look again at how each of them has been trying to destabilize the other and each of them are heard in the process. senator, i would also like to turn briefly to the situation in

south sudan that has been raised here. time does not permit me to go into much detail. as you mentioned, there are a lot of challenges in south sudan. while they have made a lot of progress in setting up the government, it's an extraordinarily poor country with very poor infrastructure. there are deep fissures within the society, as was revealed in the crisis, which nancy will talk about further. and the loss of oil revenue only aggravate this problem by depriving the government of badly needed resources. we have to look very carefully and work very closely with south sudan and with sudan to resolve the oil crisis and to help the government deal with those problems. in darfur, in sudan, as you mentioned, mr. chairman, there's a little bit of progress, but a long way to go. as long as there are 1.7 million people still in camps and

another 280,000 in refugee camps across the border, we cannot say we come far from the situation of a few years ago. wholesale violence is down, but there is still a great deal of insecurity. the government signed a peace agreement with just one of the rebel movements. we recognize the limitations of that agreement. on the other hand, it contains a lot of the elements that led to the conflict in the first place. we will see if the government and its partner will actually implement some of these programs. we have talked to the movements that did not sign the agreement. several of the armed movements have refused to do so. they did say that if any benefits come from these agreements for their people, they would be happy to see it. their focus is elsewhere right now. just another comment about the situation in sudan itself. in sudan, they are also facing an economic crisis. a loss of oil revenue has taken

away 70% of their revenue. food prices are rising. foreign exchange is very short. they are fighting on three fronts. southern kordofan, blue nile, and still somewhat in darfur. as we have said previously on many occasions, the fundamental challenge in sudan is the governance of the country. there is still a system where the center dominates the peripheral, where there's a deprivation of human rights, where wars are fought with terrible violation of people's rights and protections. until that changes, until there is a new political situation in sudan that is inclusive, that is democratic, that brings all the people of the country to gather, they will not come out of the problems they have. they will not resolve their differences, not only with the united states, but with many

other countries of the world. that is the task that all the people in sudan have to turn to. that is true of the people who are fighting. the sudan revolutionary front, which is taken arms up against the government -- they, too, have to protecting image of what they want sudan to look like, what they want. until that happens, sudan will be in difficulty. we urge them to rise to this challenge, as well. mr. chairman, i'm happy to answer questions on these and other matters. i hope this gives you a general picture of where we have been working. thank you. >> very helpful. administrator lindbergh.

>> thank you. echo -- the passing of donald payne. the donald payne fellowship was just launched. we are ordered to help foster his legacy. as you noted, only eight months ago, we celebrated the peaceful separation of south sudan from sudan. despite the positive momentum, these two nations, as we knew at the time, faced considerable challenges. a legacy of 50 years of conflict, a set of unresolved issues, the stresses of severe under development in south sudan, which ranks as one of the poorest countries on the earth.

while there has been progress, we are deeply concerned that the conflicts in the region are creating grave new humanitarian crisis. we're focused on the challenges and solutions in southern kordofan and blue nile and abyei. the challenges of sorting out nationality and status after one country becomes two and the not yet resolved eight-year crisis in darfur. i written testimony has details on each of these flash point, as well as some of the challenges resulting from the oil revenue shortfall and austerity measures. for today, in the interest of time, let me focus on two critical issues. the two areas and the rising conflict in south sudan. i would be happy to answer any questions.

in the two areas, heavy fighting between the sudan arms forces and the splm has resulted in 130,000 refugees. in south kordofan, another 60,000 in blue nile. we've seen heavy aerial bombardment and long-range shelling that has terrorized communities and cut off people's access to food, health care, livelihood, trade. the last planting season was disrupted. international humanitarian access has been largely blocked since the beginning of this conflict. sudan the government continues -- the government of

sudan continues to prohibit aid from many people in need. we're continuing to provide assistance to the government of sudan-controlled areas in south kordofan and there is some progress reported there. in the areas controlled by the splm north, the outlook is worsening. current predictions are that up to 250,000 people in those areas now face a serious emergency, which is one step short of famine by the end of april if the violence and the restrictions on humanitarian access continues. it is imperative to have immediate humanitarian access to all the communities affected in south kordofan to stave off an emergency situation for a quarter of a million people in the coming months.

blue nile is facing equally devastating impacts. as ambassador lyman said, we are very hopeful the government of sudan will sign the agreement and allow negotiated access, as proposed by the u.n. and its partners. if necessary, we will examine ways to provide indirect support to ensure the most vulnerable received assistance. if the government of sudan signs, we stand ready to immediately deliver food and humanitarian assistance to those in need. let me briefly highlight the explosion of violence that occurred recently in jonglei in south sudan. these incidents really _ the

fragility and fledgling coalitionation of the new state. we were able to respond with emergency assistance in jonglei state. we're standing ready to provide assistance to those across the south. resolving these issues and complex in the long term will require sustained engagement -- and conflicts in the long term will require sustained engagement by the government of south sudan. without their pledge, donor help will not be sufficient to achieve stability. coming so soon after the celebration from south sudan, this confluence of crises is very alarming to us. there has been progress. just to note, with u.s. assistance and the commitment of many of you on this committee, we have been able to help transform the government of south sudan from a concept to a

government. more than 1 million people now have access to clean water. childrens enrollment in schools is up from 20% to 68%. these are accomplishments to celebrate. the referendum on south's determination was a success and of itself. we're seeing how long it takes to emerge from half a century of conflict. with even a sturdy peace agreement, the pernicious tness that that will continue as we look at what will be a long-term effort. thank you for the focus of this committee for your continued intense attention. it is needed. this will be a long journey. we must stay engaged to enable success for these two nations. thank you. >> thank you very much, madam administrator. let me begin, if i may, by asking you, ambassador, first of

all -- do you have a date or do know when this visit of bashir to juba will take place? >> we're hoping it will be two weeks. we were hoping juba would issue an invitation to president bashir. they do want to do a lot of preparations so the summit has concrete results. they will have to do a lot of work. they will also do shuttle diplomacy during these two weeks. we are hoping it will take place in about two weeks. >> at this point, do you know what the agenda will be, the specific topics of discussion? >> the idea is to ratify two agreements that were signed. one i was very happy to see signed and that is on the

nationality question. that is, the protection of southerners living in the north and northerners living in the south, that they do not become stateless. procedures were set up and agreed to. they signed an agreement on borders and how to deal with that problem. those will be ratified by the two presidents. recognizedgiv the needs of both sides and reach an agreement in that context. how specific those instructions will be has to be worked on. it will deal with oil, but also how to deal with issues like orders. >> given that is a north-south issue, obviously, resolving the old thing would be a huge step. what the southern kordofan and blue nile issue be on that table? >> it will be on the table and two boys. one, because you cannot get to

the atmosphere if they do not make progress in southern kordofan and blue nile. it is simply poisoning the situation. it's forcing them to clash on the borders. both have a security concern in those areas. we have to make progress before the summit to create an atmosphere. then the two have to say, we are both working to destabilize each other. how do we get out of that box? southern kordofan and blue nile is part of it. what we're hoping is that it will lead not only to a quiet scene of the hostility, but hopefully the atmosphere the political talks can start. that would change the atmosphere. >> what more could the international community conceivably do to help convince the sudanese government that preventing a full-blown catastrophe in southern kordofan and blue nile more than it

already has been, but moving to this next starvation crisis, that it's in their interest to do that? is there a strategy under way? do you have a thought on how that can be implemented? >> it has been a tremendous effort on everybody's part to do just that. the government was so angry and bitter over this with their own perceptions of how the war started that it was very hard to get through on those matters. we have urged the african union, the chairman of the african union commission, china, the arab countries, south africa, other countries, the arab league, the african union -- everybody we could talk to -- to send that message to khartoum. >> who do you think would have the greatest impact? >> the arab countries are very important. i'm very delighted the league of arab states is joining in this.

china has become very active but i was in beijing last august. our two governments agreed we would work more closely on sudan. their new envoy is new trap -- is now traveling in khartoum and juba. i think those countries are important, because they are important to both sides, but they have particular importance to sudan. i think another factor, quite frankly, mr. chairman, is the realization, the growing realization in khartoum that there's not a military solution to this problem. going on with the fighting and facing a humanitarian disaster is not in their interest. i think all these efforts have contributed to that. i am hoping that we will get better news in the days ahead. >> one other quick question.

when we chatted a number of months ago and i subsequently chatted with president kiir about the oil shutdown issue, one of the concerns which you raised and others did was this question of what the cost of starting up would be and what the damage might be in the process. have you assessed that? can you share with us what our knowledge is about how difficult it might be to bring that oil production back on line? >> the feeling now is that if you started production tomorrow, by the time you got the pumps going, by the time you sent the oil through the pipeline, made the contract, sent the oil, it would be four months before the first dollar would come in. that is worrisome, because both sides are facing deep economic problems. that is the latest. >> my colleagues may follow up on that. senator lugar? >> ambassador, i just want to

get some sense from you as an experienced diplomat, it's been apparent in khartoum for a long time with regard to starvation that's occurring in the south, maybe even with some of their own citizens. what makes a difference -- and in other words, they have faced for a long time the statistics we for today of tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of people dying in the process. the pressures of that situation have not been adequate, really, to bring about much of a change. although, you give us hope again today that some negotiations may occur. in part because they could have khartoum the revenue have --

they could have the revenue of khartoum itself, quite apart from the south. as it has been suggested, a large majority of funds from both governments come from this oil, which is now stymied, as you say, at best, for four months. when we talk about international pressures, what are the pressures that make any difference here? how can we anticipate any difference in the future, as opposed to hearings we may have this time next year and the year after? >> the immediate situation and the fundamental situation. the arguments and i think the resistance that has come out of khartoum has been that they see the situation and the calls for international assistance as a plot to get inside sudan and eventually take these areas south. they see a repeat of the cpa --

then the international community will come in, that they will set up camps, they will set up a peacekeeping operations, and pretty soon, the government will lose control of more of its territory. i have heard that argument on many occasions. there's a deep suspicion of the motives of the international community. they see this as -- we are not going to go down that path again. we will keep our country together, even if we have to do it militarily. it has taken a lot of time and effort to say, you're looking at it in the wrong way and in a way that will hurt your own interests. to deal with this deep suspicion about motives, to have the african union and the league of arab states joining the u.n. helps a great deal. that part of it. another part of it is this fundamental question of how they will govern the country. how do they treat areas around the periphery, if you could call it that, different ethnic groups, etc.? they have not got their guests. they have not determined how to do that in a democratic, open

way. they see a challenge. they respond militarily. we've had to work against that mind-set, frankly, for a long time and with a great deal of effort. >> our dilemma, clearly, mr. ambassador, we are attempting to be of assistance a lot of places. for example, a great debate rages about our policy in egypt, which has supposedly moved into democracy. suddenly, to pick up ambassador an's thoughts, we are interfering with the evolution of egypt. we have this debate over our own humanitarian efforts now, the efforts of america to be of assistance in this transition.

i raise this not because we can solve this year to date, but it so fundamental in what we're talking about with saddam. americans do want to help. they want -- about sudan. americans do want to help. i feel we are being stymied. there is a debate going on as to whether starvation, someone should not only be allowed or they be encouraged as another form of warfare. this is really a fundamental foreign policy problem we are going to have to face. despite our very best attempts, we are now being rebuffed by those who say this is just interference on your part and we are not one to allow it. if we're going to start, we are going to start by ourselves or starve each other.

having made the pronouncement, i appreciate so much, ambassador lyman, ambassador, for your work on the ground. >> senator cardin. i, too, join in thanking are two witnesses. i also want to thank those on the second panel for bringing a spotlight on this issue that is otherwise difficult. with so many issues in the world, you are helping us focus on this humanitarian disaster. you set this up with three friends in sudan, -- three fronts in sudan. we're dealing with the sudan and south sudan issues and we are dealing with darfur.

as i have listened to the testimony, it reminds me of testimony eight years ago with what was happening in darfur. darfur happen under our watch, which was a failure of the civilized world to take appropriate action and the disaster against innocent people. are we going to go through the same thing and the two areas? basically talk about this for years and see thousands or hundreds of thousands of people 's lives ruined forever. it's very frustrating for all of us. is there a lesson we've learned from darfur that we can use? what mistakes did we make in darfur that we don't want to repeat again? can you help us on this?

there is an emergency. i understand getting humanitarian aid in there. we talk about it and talk about it and talk about it, and people die. >> senator, you've put your finger on the situation. what have we learned and how we prevent them from repeating themselves? it's extremely upsetting and were some. there's a pattern in a way government of sudan fights their worst that produces -- >> could you pull the mic down? >> i think there's an opportunity to bring this war in southern kordofan and blue nile to a close. i think it's there.

i think, in part, because they cannot win a military victory. they do not want, and nobody wants, huge camps of people love moved from their homes. -- people who have moved from their homes. the government sees this as threatening their whole internal security. it has taken a long time for them to see it differently. i cannot promise you that we will get out of this war soon. i think what we did learn from darfur is that organizing and mobilizing the international community early on, a concerted and united pressure, until recently the u.n. security council was not united on sudan. the statement that was made recently it was a very strong united statement of all 15 members. it makes a difference. having the league of arab states, as well as the african

union, makes a difference. hope that we have learned lessons. i share your frustrations. >> i just point out that until we change the way the sudanese government conducts its security issues, there's little hope that we will not see a repeat of these disasters. failure to bring the government to account for their violations of international law -- we're paying a heavy price for that. every time we take a pass on enforcing crimes against humanity, it makes it more likely we will see a repeat of this in the future. one last question. you mentioned the impact as it related to thsudan and south sudan. is the conflict in the two areas also having an impact on what's happening in darfur? >> it does in this way. the splm north, which is

fighting the government in southern kordofan and blue nile, has teamed up with three of the darfur rebel groups to form this sudan revolutionary front. it has become a wider coalition of anti-government forces. they are cooperating more. what is happening with the groups in darfur -- they are focusing more on national issues and, from their point of view, regime change. it is having an effect on the darfur situation and linking the two in the way i have described. >> i join with the chairman in thinking both of you -- in thanking both of you. >> thank you. neither of us could do this job without the extraordinary focus of president obama and secretary clinton on sudan and south sudan.

they follow it very closely and are heavily engaged. that makes all the difference. >> there has been strong u.s. leadership in this region for a long time. still, the humanitarian disasters continue under our watch. >> thank you, senator cardin. >> mr. chairman, i think the testimony has been outstanding. i think senator the first think -- i think the first three senators expressed this very well. i have limited abilities, but one of my strengths is math. i can see that if we continue this, our second panel, like understand have been through a pretty harrowing experience in getting here, will have a disruptive session.sessio i'm going to pass.

thank you for calling it. >> senator thank you very much > -- thank you very much, senator. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i will try to be brief. i will not pass. i do not always have the opportunity to have some of our experts here before the committee. i want to follow up senator up cardin -- up where senator cardin left off. i'm wondering what it is we can do that we are not doing, working with our allies to create the pressures that some of the atrocities that are taking place can stop? when sudan continues to turn to other countries for assistance when they look at the sudanese

pound appreciating more than 50% since mid 2011, that is an opportunity, and economic opportunity in which we can use that necessity to try to change behavior. i do not get the sense we are doing this. what is it that we're not doing that could do, particularly with our allies to change the course of events that the senator talk about? >> i think the opportunity is coming up as a result of the agreement that was reached, because what it focused on, more specifically, was the recognition on the part of the negotiators from khartoum that they have a major economic problem, and the only way out of that is not just an oil agreement with the south because the south can only provide so much. and therefore, what matters, is the kind of assistance they can get from their friends in the

arab world, china, etc.. and what now we can do -- and i think is important that we do -- is work with those countries on the kind of support they offered to khartoum -- that is, to encourage khartoum exactly in the way you say, that you cannot have a big investment and donor program in the middle. but also to give them encouragement if they do the right things and do make the right kinds of agreements, that the support would be there for them to deal with their major economic problems. that is what i think we have to work on a great deal more. a colleague of mine will be visiting the middle east later this month to talk with the countries in that area. i have been in close touch with the chinese government on this. and i think we can do more to bring that part of the international community together because sudan does face

some very serious economic crises and there is no one went out of the. >> offering financial assistance -- to leverage the financial assistance to create a result, the crisis dispute become of the resolution to the crisis? >> you know, they have some interests. some of the countries have stopped giving sudan considerable assistance. so, we have to gauge exactly how they perceive this situation. i think that is one of the tasks we have to engage in the next few weeks. >> finally, let me ask you -- in the sec -- second panel, mr. cooney and mr. prendergast will talk about their satellite sentinel project, to generate a rapid response. it does the state department review this as an opportunity, a model that can be used for monitoring conflicts in other parts of the world in the midst we are in several locations --

in syria, to name one? >> yes, thank you. there is a lot of focus in looking out how we can better predict and understand the possibility of coming atrocities. and there is an initiative that president obama put forth that puts a focus on identifying and whole way of ways in which we can gather information that helps us prevent humanitarian crises, so we are very interested in this as one of the models. >> thank you. >> i am not about to not follow the leadership of our -- i am aware of the long line that formed at 9:00 was to see -- not to see johnny isaacson, but george clooney. [laughter] yet done a phenomenal job. bob corker and i have traveled to darfur, and that want to

acknowledge a special envoy williamson, for the great work leading to the peace agreement. and what that, i will defer to mr. cooney. >> i heard people saying, have you seen johnnie isaacson? >> senator udall? >> i think i will follow the lead also of our republican colleagues and tried to move as quickly as possible, if we can. let me just thank the ambassador for your testimony and leadership on this issue. you have mentioned that president obama and secretary clinton have been actively involved and we also appreciate their assistance. with that, i will yield back. >> we have bipartisan agreement it is time to move on. thank you very much for your service. >> i think we have to schedule this around a really

controversial vote. >> i would not say, all of us, just for the audience -- we have the ability to ask questions of these officials. that is why moving on makes sense. >> before we excuse you, i want to ask if there is anything that you feel you wanted to say and did not have a chance to, or, ambassador? >> highs the committee very much. i do not think the crowds were out there -- were out there to see us, either. >> we are going to work with you as closely as we have. we will try to support you in any way we can. i do think that saudi arabia, qatar, china, could particularly play an increased role here and i hope over the next days we can talk about how to perhaps leverage that a little bit and

see if we can't move on this. i know everybody wants to move -- just one last quick question. do you believe that the signals you are getting and this movement of yesterday, etcetera, is there any indication of a greater willingness to try to provide access to humanitarian assistance and actually get the political solution? >> nancy and i were on the phone this morning with the minister of social welfare asking that. she has said they are meeting tomorrow. we are hoping we can get an answer as soon as tomorrow on that front. once we open the door, once we have food going in, it is going to affect the fighting going on, and you have to protect the humanitarian workers. and that, we hope, is going to create an atmosphere where political talks start to happen. we are hoping that. it has not been agreed yet but

that is the direction we want to go. >> this is a tricky question but an important one -- are there indications of the south's direct support for proxy efforts in that area? >> we have -- from the government of south sudan, the fighting is very dangerous and we can see the results -- retaliation, bombing across the border. and we have had very candid talks with them about it, and part of the reason they are going to this summit is to discuss it frankly between the two governments. so i am hoping that will be on the agenda. >> thank you very much. as appreciative as everyone has said, it is a tough task and we are really happy to have your expertise, you're still, and the commitment of both departments.

wheat think the secretary and a present for their focus on it. let's try to move seamlessly, if i can. i would ask george clooney and john penn degrasse and john temin -- john prendergast and john temin to come up. [laughter] >> evidently, moving is a very

interesting thing. let alone, sitting. folks, if we could ask the member of press if they would give us room to proceed? thank you very much. john, is there an order you guys have? george? go for it. thank you. again, we are really have to have you here. we know you turned up over night to get here and we look forward to book your testimony. as well, i think you have a video. >> thank you, senators. thank you for the opportunity to appear before you. i understand how busy you are. i will try to be brief and to the of point -- and to the point. i want to set some boundaries and separate what is fact and what is fiction for us. we will start with some of the facts. the government of sudan, led by omar al bushehr -- and the

defense minister, the same three men who orchestrated the atrocities in darfur have turned their bombs on the people. they are not military targets. they are innocent men, william, and children. that is a fact. three days ago when we were in the mountains, 15 bombs were dropped on a neighboring village. we got there we found children filled with shrapnel, including a nine-year old boy who had both of his hands blown off. as we travelled further north, we were greeted by hundreds of villages carrying signs reading, stop the -- as we met with the leaders we were also met with three, 300-mm rockets fired overhead. we witnessed hundreds of people running to the hills to hide in caves. these people are not the cave people of nuba, but they actually live in farms, and are

the old society in the world, but yet they are forced to hide in caves. it is a campaign of murder and fear and displacement and starvation. and that is also a fact. religion is not an issue. in the camps you will find christensen muslims fighting together -- it is ethnic in nature. the indiscriminate bombing of innocent civilians is defined as a war crime in the geneva convention. in january of last year, i was in south sudan with senator kerry for the referendum which gave us the world's newest nation, south sudan. amid all the excitement of self- determination, we warned the world of the danger of leaving the four border regions out of the referendum talks -- darfur, south kordofan, blue nile. the government of khartoum accused us of rhetoric designed to insight and anchored the north, or anger against the north.

we visited in january of 2011 and at the time this place had 120,000 inhabitants -- today, none. they are either dead or bring refugees all because they have the bad luck of being born on the border, being born in wheel- rich land or being born black. that is a fact. these three men are all charged with war crimes further actions in and now they are proving themselves to be the greatest war criminals of this century, by far. so, the average question is, why should we care, what does it have to do with us? we have our own problems -- jobs, housing, debt, and now we see our gas prices going up. as senator lugar said and as president obama said in a press conference last week. he talked about three reasons why we are paying more of the palm -- speculators, uncertainty in iran, and south

sudan shutting off its oil. as you know, the south has all of its oil and the north has a pipeline and refineries. for years, the north has been taking the oil and keeping most of the profits, flying bombs and rockets and using them on darfur, the blue nile, and the nuba mountains. the south shutdown of production to stop it. overnight china lost 6% of overall oil imports, which means that have to go elsewhere, and that raises the price of oil. what happens in sudan matters very much to us now -- economic. that is also a fact. but what can we do? we are not going to use our military. we are not likely to see a nato no-fly zone. that is probably not going to happen. so this is where we all come in. we need to do what we are best at, real diplomacy, starting with china. china has a $20 billion investment in a wheel and the structure in the sudan and right

now they are getting nothing for it. we need to use this opportunity to work in tandem with the chinese to solve these cross- border issues. not by using guilt, not by appealing to a humanitarian interest, but simply for good, solid, economic reasons for both of us. let's send a high-level envoy to china to work together on this. let's use the techniques we learned from chasing terrorists and find and freeze the offshore bank accounts of these war criminals. they are not buying these weapons with sudanese pounds. let us work with the international community to toughen the sanctions and a cartoon a very lonely place. -- khartoum a very lonely place. there is a lobbyist here in d.c. paid to lobby for khartoum, let us make sure he is paid in sudanese pounds from here on. the accountability act addresses many of these subjects and we hope the senate will introduce

an equally robust bill. there is a long list of things we can do that will not cost lives or much money. there are no two sides to these core issues. we cannot gives the lot -- giving the lives that, we cannot replace this young boy's hands, but we can put an end to it if we work together as a nation and an international community. and it can start here. i know this -- if we work together, all of us, we can't fail. that last part is just opinion. i thank you and i forbid the remainder of my time to senator kerry. >> there is a trend here. john -- for better or for worse -- jonathan temin? >> chairman kerry, ranking member lugar, committee, it is an honor for me to be here today. but also express my condolences

to the friends of family of congressman donald payne who was a great friend to the people of sudan. i direct this to dan program at the u.s. institute of peace who has been working on the ground in sedan for 18 years. the views i expressed are my own and not exactly those of the u.s. institute of peace, which took not a policy provisions. mr. chairman, i intend to focus my remarks on two broad issues i believe are critical to the future of these two countries -- governance and economic viability. the reemphasize that the issues already addressed the but especially immediate humanitarian access to sudan and blue nile states should art -- be vitally important -- access to south kordofan. for decades, sudan has had one crisis to another. also, sudan's leaders have employed a model of governance that is ultimately not sustainable. this is not a coincidence. rather, this model of governance is a central cause of sedan's

contina was the stability. it concentrates wealth, power, resources at the center to the detriment of poulson -- purple areas. it is exclusionary and riddled with corruption. under the current government, the model -- to impose arab islamic identity throughout sudan and a result has been a serious rebellion from peripheral areas seeking more equitable sharing of resources and resisting the imposition of identity or religion. the government has often responded to these rebellions with a brutal and this poor senate force. -- disproportionate force. international community has worked decades with some success. but the international community continues to chase the conflicts around the periphery where really making a concerted effort for the sudanese to deform the flawed government model at the center. it is time for that approach to change. it is time for a more comprehensive strategy for addressing saddam that the challenges rather than a piecemeal approach to often

adopted. this will not be easy. the government of sudan has showed little appetite for self reflection of reform but given the dire economic situation, mounting internal resistance and climbing -- climate of change, they may have little choice. one opportunity lies in the process of developing a new constitution. that process is a natural than you for dialogue by the nature of the sudanese state and how to be governed. but the process must be inclusive, four support, transport, the transparent and consensus based. the international community should draw attention to the importance of the process and work to convince a wide array of sudanese political entities of its value. usip have been working to help sudanese civil society organizations. concerning south sudan, it should be noted this out sudanese leader should did an impressive job navigating their country toward independence. but since independence, there has been growing concern about

the government of south sudan that a commitment to good governance and tackling corruption and the ability to stabilize a fledgling nation. the united states has an important role to play helping to arrest and reverse those trends before they are fully ingrained. the united states have been a friend of south sudan for years, and it should continue. but it is now time for south sudan to be held to the same basic standards of governance and transparency of any other independent nation. it while recognizing the limited capacity of the government of south sudan, the united states should be clear and articulating these standards and candid with south sudan when those standards are not met. turning to economic issues, the shutdown -- as the shutdown of oil production continues, both countries are under considerable strain. in sudan, a key question is whether it will receive economic assistance from friendly nations. this will be the sovereign decisions of other countries but the united states should encourage any assistance provided closely linked to

progress in key priorities -- such as fundamental government reform and implementation of the dole hot document for ps new darfur. in south sudan, the decision to suspend oil production had well- received by the subsidies populations of four. but one wonders how it will be viewed in six months or a year if there are substantial budget cuts. it talks of building a new oil pipeline through east africa in 18 months is exceedingly optimistic. the government of south sudan should be straightforward and candid to the population of the implications of the continued shutdown of oil production. the silver lining is the difficult economic circumstances in both countries create leverage for the international community. both countries desperately need on-site assistance. international coordination of an economic assistance will be crucial, so it is clear for both countries that the assistance provided is contingent on certain steps each government must take. i want to again ask -- express my appreciation for the

opportunity to address the committee and i look forward to any questions you may ask. >> thank you very much, mr. temin. important testimony particularly regarding the quality of accountability. and i think it is something we are going to have to think about. george, if i could ask you -- we talked earlier about your trip and what you observed. i know you brought a video, i think, from that. but can you describe and give us a sense of what you really saw on the ground and what you see perhaps from that as the most critical, immediate first step emergency that we need to take? >> in general, what we saw was the nuban people were incredibly vulnerable. the issue the ambassador was talking about, there is a rainy

season coming and there are a great many people who could starve to death. this has been done intentionally. these people usually are forming and would have planted by now. they are hiding in caves. what you see is a constant drip of fear. every single day they fly overhead. these are not particularly particularlybombs among -- predictably accurate, they are big airplanes with bombs and they just throw them out. if they were aiming for you, that is probably the safest place you could be. but what it does is create this environment of fear. every time you hear the sound of those engines -- it takes about five minutes to get there -- and a circle. every time you hear the sound, everybody runs to the hills. it creates fear to keep them from doing anything, really, their ability to do anything. and they are there without any protection. one of the roads we went up recently was taken by the north,

and the splm fought through it -- a lot of dead bodies on the side of the road. we were in one village where we heard in the missile attack. they were standing there holding signs saying stop attacking us, stop. these people every day in their lives have to deal with fear, not just the future in terms of stock -- starving to death but being killed. what we are here to do -- i am here to talk about the dangers of these people particularly and the specifics are that the exact same people who did this in darfur are the people doing this again. and the signs, as the ambassador said, are ominously similar to what happened in darfur. that is the problem and that is what brings us pause.

>> i gather you have a video. are you going to show that? i beg your pardon? i think it is important. i heard your description, and i think it would be helpful to the committee -- that is as first hand as it gets. but it is your choice. how long is it? let's do that. [drumming]

>> you can see where it hit. over here. yesterday, 10:30 a.m. in the morning, 15 bombs. this is an unexploded bomb. that is what you do with unexploded bombs? this is where it hit yesterday. here, here, and here, and they are hiding in there.

this is yesterday? this was taken out of that young man's leg. you are a very brave boy. targeting civilians. these are balloons -- bullet eounds. does she know who it is?

this is not a war of retaliation. this is simply trying to clear people out ethnically because of the color of their skin? and how long have your people been here? >> creation of the world. >> this is a civilian protection crisis. we talk all the time about their responsibilities -- responsibilities. right here is ground zero for responsibility. >> he says he wants muslims to

have a freedom to go to a mosque, he once christians to have the freedom to go to church and those who did not have religious and let them be free to do what they want. -- those who do not have religion, let them be free to do what they want. >> i am glad we did show that, i am glad you brought that. i think it was an important part of the testimony, so i appreciate very, very much you bringing it before the committee. those images are obviously powerful and important. i think it underscores what has been said here today. if i could just ask you -- and

the war around here. you listed a number of things, george, were immediate steps. what they think of the most compelling, and for an immediate step, the united states together with the international community that we can do? >> senator, there is a popular feeling that the shutting off of oil by the south is damaging to both. and there are very good arguments before that. you could argue that if it was the united states and we were at war with canada and sending them oil and it were buying bonds with it, we would probably stop. but the truth of the matter is, what we really need to do is, we can take this moment and engaged with china, i think, for the first time. i have gone to china and tried the version of, hey, you've got an olympics coming, maybe it would not look so good if you are supporting the attacks in

darfur. it does not really work. guilting people often does not. there are economic reasons for both of us. it seems like we could use this opportunity, this window, before it gets too late, by sending a high-level envoy, and i do believe we should absolutely focus on where their money is, because they are spending a lot of it, and they are hiding a lot. even if you cannot freeze it -- transparency itself, we see how it works and other countries, during the arab spring, when you find out how much money they actually have taken from their own people and hidden in banks, it tends to create insurgents inside. i think those of the two major steps that could be done. that is our belief. there are many others. >> senator lugar? >> george, i noted down as you gave your first testimony, the

envoy to china, and banking sanctions or however we disrupt -- we are starting to start that with iran and with good reason. we had some experience in north korea -- in those cases, nuclear devices they were developing. one could argue this is equally serious for different reasons and the diplomacy with china, is, as he suggested, unfortunately not just humanitarian -- although it ought to be mentioned. for the chinese, the oil is extremely important and they are prepared to fight for it eventually it they can't get its. so, we have somebody to talk to their. i want to endorse your idea and hoped the administration might pick up on the testimony and some of the things today. likewise, mr. temin, although, as you say, it is far fetched to

think of an alternative pipeline in a short period of time, perhaps it is not a pipe dream to think about it fundamentally with regard to south sudan. this could be repeated. even if we move through one crisis. and it seems to me that in terms of our humanitarian effort, it also might be concentrated on an investment record to see really what investors are involved potentially and such an alternative. i just wanted to pick up that suggestion as something that may be fundamental to the economics of it down the trail, and a follow-up, at least, to the temporary or immediate measures we have to take. i thank all three of you for your testimony and for these practical suggestion the policy that i think a very useful. >> senator menendez? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank all of you for

your insights. where you are at, mr. cooney, in terms of seeking a practical economic leverage for a worthy result is i think is what i was trying to elicit from the previous panel. how is it that we influence the behavior of others who can influence sudan? in that respect, as someone who has -- sanctions on iran, actually believe we can in fact use leverage in a way, in this case, for a worthwhile humanitarian purpose. and when the chinese have such an investment that is not being productive, it seems to mean to be how we work with the chinese to both get them to understand their own economic interests, if nothing else, and at the same time, look at that as the opportunity for how do we ratchet down -- you you talked

about the accounts. we do that quite often. i am hoping the president could look at an executive order -- it may be possible under his abilities. we would have to look under the treasury department. but i hope that we will take some of the insight that you talked about, which is how do we create the leverage to change the on the ground reality. i think when the chinese have a multi-billion dollar investment that is not being productive, when you can create economic consequences that will move people to a different course of action after -- out of pure necessity, when they did not do it for a hire calling, those of the ways we can change the realities on the ground. as someone who has been a bit -- big advocate for sanctions for certain purposes, i think they can work. but often the united states has to lead in order to get the rest

of the world to follow. i appreciate those insights and i hope our friends in the state department are listening and that we can take it into action. i certainly will be looking forward to doing that as well. >> thank you very much. i note that ambassador lyman and the administrator still here and indeed listening and they also talk to and worked closely with john pendergast and george clooney. >> i want to thank you again for the attention you bring to this issue and the reality we have seen through the production this morning. those of us who travel to countries like this just cannot bring the attention to what that people like you can, so i thank you for that. i thank you for the suggestions you may not only here but in the

back room and hopefully we will follow up on those. but again, thank you very much. it has been very moving. and for mr. princeton lyman -- prendergast, what you are here, since there has been a discussion about the satellite sentinel project, maybe you can explain to the rest of us and the others here exactly how it works and how it might be utilized in conflict areas like this? >> thank you, senator. it is a partnership between digital global, a satellite imagery company, harvard, and the enough project -- george's idea, frankly, we wanted to try to drive attention to deterring the war crimes before they have been rather than bemoaning the fact that they do afterwards, and to create capacity -- and this is what happened over the last year. if you find, okay, you have

soldiers in a particular area, you have air assets moved into position -- attack helicopters, atinovs and other things -- and we know where the areas are being targeted and we can raise the alarm bells that particular people are vulnerable and we need to have action. and if there is not action taken, then the attacks do happen, at least we have the visual evidence, at an empirical evidence, to present to the international criminal court and others for hopeful prosecution in the future. >> i know the first panel acknowledged this is a useful tool. are there ongoing discussions between you and the state department and other agencies and our government to utilize this more fully? >> it is very important to say as a footnote to the testimony, the at the station's policy and strategy is the right one. we support very strongly ambassador lyman as a special

envoy and think he is doing an extraordinary job. we are in touch of the time. and by the way, a very bipartisan strategy and it has been through the last three administrations on sudan. and of course, congressman payne was one of the incubators of this bipartisan effort, so we wanted to note him as well. but i think there are a few opportunities right now, to put a fine point on what this moment does present, with the cut off of the oil is president obama and president hu will meet soon. this is a chance to put the issue high on the radar screen of the two leaders to talk about how specifically the united states and china can forge this kind of partnership we are talking about. ambassador lyman and others are already having conversations. i think having a high level, real strong endorsement of the

need to deepen the partnership will be really helpful. and also -- and you are going very soon, senator kerry, to qatar to talk to the emir. a lot of these guys are billing these guys out. it is easy for them to be in transit if they are getting soft loans that they will never be back -- it is easy for them to be intransigent. for president obama to say this is not the right time, hold it, and use it for leverage for a comprehensive deal to address all of these problems. and finally to on the unilateral level the united states has, we have plenty of sanctions. it as many know, we are not enforcing them. so getting the treasury department, the office of foreign asset control, the capacity to enforce, having a couple of people on the staff full time chasing the assets. as george said, even if we can

freeze them work in another country to freeze them, by exposing them -- what was the root of the explosion of popular sentiment during the arab spring in the middle east and north africa? the popular resentment against corruption. all of these guys packing the oil well in private accounts, these international companies they are investing, let us find the money and exposing them. it would put them in deeper hot water. it is their own people who at the end of the day will solve the problem. >> mr. cooney, mr. prendergast, and mr. temin, thank you very much. >> to whether much. senator cardin, three votes started. we have about 15 minutes. then i will limit myself to two and a half minutes -- >> i will limit myself to two and a half minutes. let me underscore the point on sanctions. they are important if they can be reinforced internationally.

the united states has to show leaders sit -- leadership -- not only enforce the sanctions but use it as a high priority with their diplomacy. but you are right on the asset issue. the united states can have a major impact because these world leaders are hiding their money. and they come across u.s. banks. so, we can have an effective remedy here. some of us have joined together what is known as the -- bill, over human rights in russia. we think it would be a great way to bring them to justice. bashar was arrested as a war criminal. he is a known abuser of human rights and has violated international standards. the defense minister, an arrest warrant was issued last month

for his arrest. so, these are criminals. i think we are on very high authority to impose the type of financial sanctions which could have a major impact. the government should not be afforded the legitimacy of the international community when their leaders are scheduled to be at the hague to stand up for the crimes they have committed. so, i just really wanted to urge us to keep focused. we cannot allow under our watch another darfur humanitarian crisis to emerge in the same region of the world. >> i don't want you to feel watch -- rushed. senator coons has gone, i will go and quickly vote and come back. >> well then, would you like to

respond to what i said? >> i think your message, mr. cooney, about the importance of international respect for sanctions and the nine banking, the individual is makes the decision. we can deny bashar the opportunity to hide his wealth. it would have a major impact. >> i think it would, senator. the secret to this is just tightening this noose around khartoum, around the people charged with war crimes. they should not be allowed to have a ton of money stuffed in a malaysian bank, which is what is going on. we need to be able to track it down and find it. they are also using the money to buy weapons to hurt innocent people. it is a cowardly act, what we saw over there. these were not acts of war, they

were war crimes, and they are funding it. and they are not funding it simply with sudanese pounds. so i think chasing the money is a very big issue, not just to stop the actual act themselves but to put pressure on them internally. omar al bashir in his home has five tanks surrounding him pointed out word. that is not a very secure leader, quite honestly. we feel as if the more you expose his corruption, more inclined to people in khartoum would be to perhaps have someone else lead the country. pointednator lugar a♪ out, the transparency bill to require these companies to disclose their contract so we can try to track the money. we know the sudanese government

has received a lot of income from oil wealth over the years, and we know a good part of that has been diverted, not going to the people. so, tracking that money, tracking that wealth, would have a major impact on the comfort of their leaders. and it is something the united states can do. it does not require a lot of countries to work with. we are a major banking center of the world. if we of london going along with us -- we can do a lot without worrying about china or wearing about russia. who at times and not always follow our lead on the human- rights front. >> senator issakson? >> when i went to darfur -- there was a gender-based violence against women, rape. is that going on as well?

>> it was a very big issue, still. in the same patterns we sell in darfur. we saw it last year. we saw it used an employed again here in the nuba mountains in south kordofan. you may have more? >> only to say it is still happening in darfur. there are still mass atrocities being committed against civilian populations. when we talk about a holistic solution in the sudan, we need to talk about dealing with all of these problems comprehensively that we have been coming back to this committee over and over again to talk about, rather than stove's piping them individually and playing into the hands of khartoum, which wants to buy the international community. >> on that point, there was

mention the possibility of a tripartite agreement, the u.n., eric league, an african union -- the arab league and african union. is there a possibility he would do the same thing in south kordofan darfur, kicking out the ngo's indiscriminately? >> i think the government of sudan learned its own lesson in darfur, allowing international aid to come in early in the crisis and then become the fact of businesses. saying at the outset -- out said the military preparations, they were not allow witnesses. there are no aid groups operating now, so it is an access crisis for all of the people as the clock ticks inexorably toward the rainy season. in the first instance -- and ambassador lyman and usaid of work hard to get an access agreement, so working behind the african union and the arab

league and with and a proposal, so that is where the attention needs to be on and it is to stop the use of starvation as a weapon of war. it must be ended. >> thanks to all of you for your advocacy. i will turn it over to senator udall. thank you very much. thank you, senator isakson. i can't tell you how important it is, george, for you and john, to have gone over there and brought these images back. i think chairman kerry was right to say i think we should play them and have them up on the screen, because i think as painful as the rtc, and the thing that this does -- as painful as they aren't to see them, the thing it does is give the american people and people around the world to engage, saying we did not want this to happen again.

one of the things that you have mentioned -- and that is what i wanted to question a little bit on -- and i think john mention this, but i am willing to hear from both of you -- the idea that satellite -- satellite sentinel could be used by prosecutors -- i was a former prosecutor so i relish the idea of having bad guys that know something is going to be done to them -- something at the hague. have you visit with prosecutors at the hague, are interested in your technology, have you talked about the kinds of things that maybe can be utilized to strengthen cases and those kinds of things? because if there is anything out there that is going to prevent this from happening again in other places of the world is that people know we have an international justice system that is going to work and eventually bring people like you

described, george, just terribly murderous individuals, bring them to justice. >> i will let you talk about the hague for a second. i do want to say one thing. there is an interesting thing that happens when you get involved in these. you think that the minute people know, then it will stop. your assumption is that everyone just does not know. and the truth is, even when you know, it does not stop. it requires a constant drip of information. it requires you to keep compiling it on. at the very least it can be used later as evidence in a trial. we are trying to continually -- we would like to use this information at the security council, because a lot of the

times what happens at the security council is someone -- we know the players -- will veto any raising of the mandate of protection because they will say, well, this is just rubble in fighting. well, we have imagery that shows -- we have imagery yesterday that shows an atinov flying over plumes of smoke where it bombed village and villagers. that is not rebel infighting. our hope is not just to use it at the hague but our hope is to use it as something to pry the security council toward raising the mandate, trying to move along. and john can speak about talking with the hague. >> the current international criminal court mandate only involves darfur -- crimes committed in.

so basically, as the arrest warrants have been issued for three of the key regime leaders, they are greeted internationally with lots of skepticism. there are still in number of government to believe a lot of the evidence is manufactured and there are still a lot of divisions internationally about whether the crimes are is terrible as they are alleged to have been. so, part of the purpose of having the satellite sentinel project is to create their tight evidence for future arrest warrants and prosecutions based on the crimes being committed now, which are the same kinds of crimes by the same people orchestrating them as was the case in darfur, so it is creating the evidentiary base for future prosecutions and we hope that at least the three that have already had been indicted will actually come to justice one day. >> i know that there are others who are involved with you who

are your partners and you may want to mention them in terms of who has worked with you -- >> on the satellite sentinel? the biggest if we got was the satellites themselves -- digital globe, for no other reason than the goodness of the heart, donated millions of dollars worth of imagery. it is hard to explain how important it is because there is only really one satellite company that is in that area that can do this for us. they have been an incredible partner to us and continue to be. we have gotten shots of mass graves, we have gotten shots of tank movement and truth movement and all of these things. remembering and understanding for the reason this can work is because of the typography. this would not have been that if -- as effective in the condo because it is harder to see from the sky with all of the trees.

harvard? >> and once he gets the imagery, you have to have an analysis of it. there is a team at the harvard humanitarian initiative dedicated in real time to analyzing the imagery, producing independent nonpartisan reports about what they are seeing and what they are assessing these images to mean in those reports get put out and we try to generate the attention of around them in order for them to act as a deterrent. >> and they stay up all night working did they are young people and they are doing it -- all heart, those good kids. >> thank you. it has been very, very helpful. >> thank you, senator udall. i think you have time to go over there. senator coon? >> thank you, senator kerry, and for your discipline than engage

the leadership on sudan and what do all you have done around a challenging issue. i would like to thank ambassador lyman and administrator, and for george, john, and to john, thank you for what you have done to give some of focused, engaging, and effective attention on the challenging issues of darfur, the nuba mountains, and the ongoing and strategic challenges we face an engaging people in paying attention to the real challenges in bringing peace and development to south sudan and the whole region. later today, senator isakson and i on the africa subcommittee will be joined by senators to introduce a regulations -- induce a resolution that specifically supports the efforts all of you have talked about today and it calls for the government of sudan to allow immediate and unrestricted access to south kordofan and

other areas and calls on sudan and -- in the north to enter mutual agreement to end their conflict. it is just one thing we should be doing to continue what long has been a bipartisan tradition of engagement leadership on these issues. george, be closed by referencing the folks who stay up all night, the energetic young people who process the images from the satellite project. just in the past few weeks, we have seen a flood of interest in the kony 2012 campaign, and be enough project has been working with invisible children on that. you have both been very effective in getting americans and folks around the world to pay attention to this great team monetary crisis and is fairly remote corner of the world. what advice do you have for all of us who want to sustain engagement of americans and folks more broadly in actually continually to be concerned about a humanitarian crisis such as exist in darfur, such we see

emerging in the nuba now, the jungles of the drc and central african republic with joseph kony. how do we get people of all ages excited and engaged? we rarely hear millions calling for more engagement in africa. what should we do about it? >> john will have some ideas. he has been doing it a lot longer than i have. i would say -- we are going to fail a lot. we will fail in our attempt to help people in these very difficult regions and we will fail a lot in trying to keep attention in a certain area because of other news stories are going to bump us off -- there is going to be an arab spring and we will not be paying attention to what happens. and a lot of people use that as a moment to do some pretty terrible things. the trick is going to be coming in sustaining it, is to be able to find moments that you can point to and say, this is a

turning point, good or bad, and let us and amplify it. and finding several of those a year, to be able to keep it up -- you cannot have a constant drip every day on television because no one would care, quite honestly. there is not just donor fatigue, but there is misery fatigue, and people get tired of it at some point. our job is to find those moments -- 100 days before these people vote for their referendum for their own states -- so, let us focus on that. there is an election. let's focus on that. there is a brand new state. there is a good possibility of people starving to death in the next couple of months. let's focus on it. part of our job is to try to pick through all of the news cycles, find areas where we can keep it up. but young people and church groups have been the real -- they have been doing all the

hard work for us. they have been carrying this thing for years. they were -- they have been keeping the message out, fundraising, keeping the pressure on, quite honestly, all of us in this room. so, i would not worry too much about the sustainability inside the hearts of all of these young people and all of these church groups because that just continues. it is just more about finding moments we can draw attention to move the pin forward a little bit. i find that to be the issue. >> the only foot nude -- but -- footnote i would add is the good news is this is such a bipartisan event -- venture so we do not have real opponents, except indifference or ignorance -- we just don't know. what i find exciting about the first 10 years of the 21st century of activism is the chance through social media, and

other forums, to create real partnership between all of these wonderful non-governmental organizations who are working so diligently on these issues. they partner with groups in africa -- because remember, it is on the front lines in place of light sudan and combo and northern work and try to resolve these problems. we can only come in on the margins and try to help them. members of congress like yourselves -- senators who have taken a stand, one time after another, in supporting positive engagement around the world. that helps to give political support to the administration, whatever party is in power. for president obama, the way he engaged in advance of the

referendum in the latter half of 2010, every person we talked to said that was, perhaps, along with china's support, the most important international aspect in getting a free and fair referendum in 2011. it is that change. it starts on the ground. women's groups and others, struggling to get the word out. partnering with you guys who then gives support to the administration. when i started in the 1980's doing this kind of stuff, that did not happen. it is a very exciting moment. having george, frankly, can make that larger. having the invisible children video, despite the different opinions about it, makes this kind of partnership even more real or possible. >> if i could, just in closing, i am grateful for your sustained

engagement in this. there are lots of six groups of all backgrounds. there are lots in africa, the united states, and around the world who do the work on the ground. making the world aware of these crisises. the one challenge here is sustaining support for america oppose the use of diplomatic and developmental resources around the world. the united states has a lot of power. military, diplomatic, developmental. making sure they have the resources for us to be engaged in northern uganda, in south sudan, in the region. in providing the framework for peace, progress, development. that is very highly contested here in congress just for the past year. i urge folks may be paying attention or tuning in for the

first time that that is something on which there are sharp disagreements. i think we should continue to invest 1% of america posted total budget to make sure we have the resources to beat an affective voice for justice. i am grateful -- to be an effective voice for justice. i am grateful to you. >> i want to thank you for your tremendous commitment. terrific. senator? >> thank you. thank you all very much for being here. i want to follow up on his questions about how to sustain interest and get action that will help bring that international pressure to make a difference in south sudan. whether you are contemplating, or anyone you know of is

contemplating a "stop kony"-like video, or whether there are other ways, that kind of energy really makes a difference. and for any of the three of you. >> we landed yesterday. we were gone for eight days. in that time, the kony video hit. by the time we landed, everyone was asking about it. i did not know what happened. it is an incredibly effective tool. social media can be a big deal now. youtube, twitter, all of those elements are a way to keep young people involved. we're going to put the videos and the things that we put together, we will make that available to people. the sudan, in general, has an infrastructure that is better

for most charitable organizations. there are groups 7 working a long time in this area. -- there are some groups that have been working there a long time in this area. we will continue to do that. understanding that in an election year, political will is the most important thing you can get. what i think is so terrific about being here today is this is truly one subject matter that both sides agree on, but have actively worked hard on. they have had successes and failures. they understand one another. this takes a little less political will. this is one where you do not come off on the wrong side doing the right thing.

we feel heartened by the idea. we felt heartened that this is something that is not a polarizing. yes, you need political will. we will continue to push as much as you can to get as many people as you want involved. the louder it is, the harder it is for these people to commit atrocities. we also thank you, here, for your sustained involvement. and know that not only do we appreciate it, we are well aware you will continue. >> i think, including the first panel, you have made the fact that this is a bipartisan effort and it needs to be. that has been very important.

i do think that as the senator has pointed out, public support for international assistance and our foreign aid budget, which is important to address and what happens on the ground in sudan, is not always that bipartisan and not always as robust. i guess i would urge, as you are thinking about social media and getting people to act, thinking of out how to address that foreign aid piece as part of that action. that will be critical as we sustain the efforts we make on the ground. thank you all very much. >> thank you, senator. a couple quick questions and i think we will close out. jonathan, you have talked about political reforms in the north.

just the very quickly, if you can, how you see that? i mean, these guys are not exactly as reformers, number one. how you envision that? >> thank you, mr. chairman. it is an uphill battle. i do not want to be a pollyanna about this. 1/3 of their country just voted unanimously to leave. they are under unprecedented economic stress right now. there are signs of internal dissent within the leadership that we have not seen much in the past. those are things that could add up to some sort of change. as i said, there's not a lot of evidence of it so far. i also think that the alternatives are ugly.

>> i agree with you. certainly, the conversations i have had with members of the government, we have tried to make the point that this really is a major opportunity for them to move in a different direction. i worry that the three some that has been well-named tier, linked to darfur, seems to be moving in a totally different direction. that makes all this much more compelling. we really need to refocus in a lot of ways. if i could ask both john and george, quickly, the southern part of it. you have made it very eloquently clear here and compelling about the need to deal with the -- to avoid a disaster.

the long run here is the need for a political solution. what do people share with you or express to you about that political solution through those two areas? >> well, i think the difference is that people learned from darfur that if they allowed their region to be isolated for a bilateral deal between the government sudan and them, in the long run that is unsustainable. there needs to be a deal that addresses the big root cause of the problem in the sudan, which is the problem john was talking about. a problem of governance in the center. so, for the first time, we have really seen in the north, in sudan a broader effort, armed

and unarmed. it has sort of formed an association of a number of these unarmed groups. by the way, the darfur actors who were so divided are now under the same umbrella and working together. and then there are on armed groups that have their own objective. the bottom line, people want to see a democratic transformation. i think that is one of the things for the united states can be helpful in providing support to some of the unarmed groups are struggling every day to try to figure out a way. i know the discussion is internal in the administration. how can we be helpful here?

i think there are a lot of things we could do to help facilitate power. to a certain their democratic rights in the future. >> well, we are now starting on a second vote. this is on a 10 minute boat. up.e going to try to wrap -- 810 minutes -- a 10 minute vote. let me say to you endorsed how much we appreciate what you have done here. this is a tremendous example of a citizen activism. obviously, george you have lent your celebrity star to this initiative, which has its risks. but it also is critical for the

ability to get people to focus. we thank you for being prepared, nevertheless, to just engaged. take eight days, go over there, and not without its risks, i might add. i was an activist before i came here to be a senator. i vowed i would stay an activist senator. i am proud to have people on this committee who feel the same way. so, i can tell you that we are going to absolutely stay focused on this. continue to work with you. do everything we can to try to leverage the outcome we would all like to see. i am an optimist, but i have learned around here not to be naive about it.

but i still do believe, i think the ambassador believes this to, there is an avenue. but we do need to increase the leverage. we do need to reach out to china, saudi arabia, others, and get them to share some of this sense of urgency. and frankly, humanitarianism. a compelling rationale -- humanitarianism is not always a compelling rationale around the world. i think we have a great affect around here. your sense of timing about where those moments are that you need to kind of pushed is important and well taken. i express the gratitude of a lot of people. we have a lot of work to do. there is a long way to go. but this has been helpful.

i just would say to you and others who follow this who are interested in it, and i hope the sudan embassy -- in to ensure they are following it, i hope they realize that there is no easy out. there is no we hear that we're not going to continue to stay engaged -- there is no way here that we are not going to continue to stay engaged. it has made it impossible to do that. is is really his choice -- their choice. they will decide, to some measure, where we are going to go. we are prepared to offer open opportunities to go on a different direction. i know that president obama and the folks -- his security advisers and secretary clinton are greatly focused on this.

you have an opportunity to meet and talk with them the next day. all of us need to work, as we have, in a very cooperative -- across party lines, across branches of government lines, in a constructive way to try to get the job done. thank you of helping us today to do our job better. if i could ask everybody here to just let them come back. ambassador, and administer, but we thank you all for coming. we keep the record open until one week close of business on wednesday march 21. we stand adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> here on c-span we will take you live to the white house shortly with the joint news conference between president obama and the prime minister david cameron. c-span 3 is live all day with an economic summit on fixing the u.s. economy. participants include federal and state officials as well as economists from the private sector.

also, on c-span2, there will be live tonight as time warner chairman speaks to the economic club of washington. talking about the digital revolution of media. that is live on c-span to at 7:55 eastern. contentn's 2012 local vehicle video to work takes our book tv program on the road. march featured shreveport, louisiana with a book tv at the memorial library. >> this belong to a man who lived here most of his life. he started accumulating books when he was a teenager. over his lifetime, heat accumulated over 200,000 volumes. if we have a gem in the

collection, it is probably going to be this one. it is one of the books i am most proud of. it is in the original binding. it was once owned by a very famous scientist. you can see he has written his name, i. newton. we are not pulling it out so much anymore because it is starting to fade away on the title page. >> american history to be looked at several civil war practices. >> pioneer medicine is a long stretch from what it is today. you consider that. the things we take for granted today when we go to the doctor. things like the is reince being as a germ-free as possible -- you things like -- things like the instruments being as a germ- free as possible.

they would just learn as they went. >> our to work continues in march 31 in little rock, ark. on c-span2 and c-span 3. >> this is a live look at the rose garden at the white house. president obama and prime minister david cameron will be holding a news conference shortly. we will hold it like for you once it gets underway. in the meantime, from this morning's washington journal. host: stephen flanagan is on our set. talking about u.s./british relations. as david cameron is about to arrive at the white house, what is on the agenda?

>> it is a big agenda. i think afghanistan is going to dominate the agenda because the two countries have been in this effort from the get go. it is the second major contributor to the stabilization force. but iran, syria, a number of issues are going to be on their plate. leading up to things like the nato summit which will be in chicago in may. >> let's stick with afghanistan

guest: the public -- both the president and the prime minister of our experiencing growing frustration because of the war effort. last week, articles were published right to say why the fight was worth it. prime minister cameron has been steadfast about this and what he wants to do is to come here and get agreements with president obama that they can see through this strategy. they agree to it, in the end of 2010, which was a gradual transition over the period in up to 2014 to the afghans taking full control of security situations. in the meantime, to work to train the afghan security forces in maintain stabilization in the areas where u.s. and british and other troops are still deployed. host: lots of debates here especially following the civilian killings on sunday that perhaps the administration is coming up with plans to withdraw from afghanistan faster than originally thought. is that something that the

british prime minister will be on board with? guest: there has to be a transition and this was the plan from the get go. there was confusion because announcements were made by president sarkozy about how french troops were coming out in 2013. the combat troops. some other uncertainties about the timetable. but, both the president and prime minister made clear that both governments will transition their troops in 2013 from a combat role to an advisory role. after that, this is the key question to decide, what about after 2014? will there be a presence? particularly if you see the frustration with the notion that we do not like before and people telling us what to do, try to run the country for us.

host: do they differ on what happens then? guest: i do not believe so. they agree there should be an advisory presence. something akin to a training mission with additional support because they know this will be a long-term transition in afghanistan. everybody knew that from the first place. clearly, the afghans coming from the basis they were caught it would take longer than 5 to 10 years to manage their own security and deal with the insurgency they confront. host: we are going to look it nato numbers. you here come a lot coming from the united kingdom and u.s. when it comes to nato's strategic forces. what will be the role of nato?

>> all of that conversation in our video library on c-span board -- on c-span.org. we take you live to the white house now. >> again, it is a great honor to welcome my friend and partner, prime minister david cameron, to the white house for this official visit. another was a lot of focus on last night's game. some of us how it came about. i want to set the record straight. during my visit to london last year, david arranged for us to place some local students table tennis. as they would say in britain, we got thrashed. i thought it would be better if we just watched. that said, i am still trying to get david to fill out his bracket. we just finished a very good discussion. it is a reminder why i value david's leadership and

partnership so much. i appreciate how the alliance between our country is a foundation not only for the security of our two nations, but for international security as well. through rapid change, the leadership of the united states and united kingdom is more important than ever. we feel the future we seek is only possible if the rights and responsibilities of nations are upheld. that is a cause we advance today. at a time when too many of our people are still out of work, we agree that we have to stay focused on getting people back to worked even as both our countries make difficult choices to put our house is back in order. we have the largest investment relationship in the world. we have instructed our team to explore ways to increase investment. i appreciate david's investment on the fiscal situation in the

eurozone were both our countries, our economies, our businesses are deeply connected. we move on to discuss afghanistan where we are the two largest contributors and forces to the international mission and where our forces continue to make extraordinary sacrifices. the tragic events of recent days is a reminder that this is a very difficult mission. obviously, we both have lost a number of extraordinary young men and women. what is undeniable, though, and what we cannot forget, is that our forces are making very real progress, dismantling al qaeda, and making the taliban momentum slowed down so they can take the lead and come home. that transition is already underway. about half of all afghans live in areas where security forces are taking responsibility. today, the prime minister and i

reaffirmed the transition that we agreed to with our coalition partners in lisbon. specifically, in the upcoming nato in -- this it in my hometown in chicago. this includes shifting to 2013 and afghans taking full responsibility for security in 2014. we're going to complete this mission. we're going to do it responsibly. nato will maintain an enduring commitment so that afghanistan does not become a haven for al qaeda to attack our countries. we also discuss the continuing threat by iran to not meet its obligations. we are fully united. we're determined to prevent iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. we believe there is still time and space to pursue a diplomatic solution. we will work closely with our partners. at the same time, we will keep

up the pressure with the strongest u.s. sanctions to date and the european union in paris -- preparing to impose an embargo on oil. they must understand they cannot escape or evade the choice before it. meet international obligations or face consequences. we have reaffirmed our commitment to support the democratic transitions under way in the middle east and africa. i want to commend david personally for the leadership role he has played in mobilizing international support for the transition in libya. we also discussed the horrific violence that the assad regime imposes on the people of syria. we've agreed to keep increasing the pressure on the regime. mobilize the international community. provide sanctions. cutting the urging's revenues.

isolating politically, diplomatically, and economically. just as the regime and security forces continue to suffer, the opposition is growing stronger. i will say it again. assad will leave power. it is not a question of if, but when. to prepare for that day, we will support the legitimate aspirations of the syrian people. more broadly, we have committed ourselves, our leadership to the goal of global development. along with our international partners, we have saved countless lives from the famine in the horn of africa. david, you have done an outstanding job in bringing the international community to somalia. at the same time, we are renewing our commitment for preventable deaths of children

and the beginning of the end of aids. let me say, as a tribute to david's leadership, the u.k. will be playing a leading role in the global partnership upon which human rights and development depend. finally, i am very pleased that we are bringing our two militaries, the backbone of our allies, even closer. i can announce that next month we intend to start implementing our long-awaited defense trade treaty with the uk. this will put advanced technologies in the hands of our troops and it will mean more jobs for workers in both our countries. we're moving ahead with our joint initiative to care for men and women in uniform. for decades, our troops have stood together on the battlefield. now we're working together for them when they come home. partnership is to help our wounded warriors recover and to support our remarkable military

families. so, david, thank you as always for being an outstanding ally, partner, and friend. as i said this morning, because of our efforts, our allies is as strong as it has ever been. michelle and i are very much looking forward to hosting u.s. cement at tonight's state dinner. i look for, as well, to offering -- to welcoming you to camp david. david, welcome. thank you. >> well, thank you very much for that, barack. thank you for last month's sporting event. i thought there was a link between that and table tennis. i remember it well. i know america does not like being on the losing side so i'm trying to make up to you with a gift of a table tennis table. >> which like to play this afternoon? >> i certainly need practice. one delegate back by explaining

back intoy i'll get with a cricket match and i will explain the terminology. it was great our teams joined those talks as well. brock, thank you. there are some countries whose allies are a matter of convenience. ours is a matter of conviction. we're united for freedom and enterprise, working together day in and day out to defend those values and devote our shared interests. that has been the fundamental purpose of this visit. we have made progress on efforts you are vital areas -- afghanistan, economic growth. first, afghanistan. recent days reminded us just how difficult our mission is and how high the cost of this war has been for britain, america, and afghans themselves. britain has fought along america

every day since the start. we have 9500 men and women still serving there. more than 400 have given their lives. today, again, we commemorate each and every one of them. we will not give up on this mission because afghanistan must never again be a safe haven for al qaeda to launch attacks. we will not build a perfect afghanistan, but let us be clear. we are making more tangible progress with more markets open, more health centers, more children going to school, more people being able to maintain a basic standard of living and security. we can be sure that they're capable of their own security without the need of large numbers of foreign troops. we're in the final phase. that means completing the training of afghan forces. they can maintain the security themselves. that is well underway.

next year, the president said, in 2013, this includes shifting to a support role as afghans to take the lead. this is an advance of afghan forces taking full responsibility for security in 2014. as we have always said, we will not be in a combat role after 2014. at the same time, we back the president in working towards a political settlement. second, the united nations security council on libya. we believe we must maintain our support for the people of the arab world as they seek a better future. let me just say in response to it you said, i am very proud of the action that britain and france and other stock. let us be clear. none of that would have been possible without the overwhelming support and force of the united states -- that the united states provided in the early stages of that campaign. you did exactly to promised he would do to make that

intervention possible and give that country a chance of prosperity and stability and some chance of democracy. in syria we're working to get humanitarian aid. at the same time, we must properly document the evidence so that those guilty of crimes can be held to account, no matter how long it takes. above all, we must do everything we can to achieve a political transition that will stop the killing. we must maintain the strongest pressure on all those who are resisting change and all costs. but we are ready to work with russia and china for the same goal, including a new united nations security council resolution. which should be clear. what we want is the quickest way to stop the killing. that is through transition, rather than revolution or civil war. if it continues, revolution or

civil war is the inevitable consequence. third, we have discussed iran's nuclear program. the president's tough, reasonable approach has united the world behind unprecedented sanctions against iran. britain has played a leading role in helping to induce an argot -- an embargo. this is increasing pressure on the regime. the regime has to meet its international obligations. if it refuses to do so, then britain and america along with our international partners will continue to increase the political and economic pressure to achieve a peaceful outcome. the present and i have said, nothing is off the table. a fourth, growth. both britain and america are dealing with massive debts and

deficits. the measures we take in our economies reflect different national circumstances, but we share the same goals. delivering significant deficit reduction over the immediate term and stimulate growth. the eu and the u.s. together account for more than half of all global trade. foreign direct investment between britain and america is the largest in the world. it creates and sustains about 1 million jobs. it provides a strong foundation for bilateral trade. the deepening trade and investment between us is crucial. barack and i have agreed to prioritize work on transatlantic trade and investment flow. we have had some very important discussions this morning. i'm looking for 2 hour talks at the -- forward to our talks at the g8 and nato summit.

as brock has said, the relationship between the u.k. and america is the strongest it has ever been. together, i am confident that we can help secure the future of our nations. thank you. >> thank you, david. we have questions from each respective press corps. we will start with npr. >> thank you, mr. president. given the extraordinarily difficult circumstances in afghanistan in the last few weeks, i wonder what mr. coffin said two years from now to leave it will be better than it is today. and i wonder if you can talk about the pace of withdrawal. whether you see something more gradual or speedier. and mr. prime minister, you and the president take different approaches to economic growth. you have more austerity measures. the president focuses more on

stimulus measures. i wonder why you think your approach will create more jobs than the president's. >> first of all, on the afghanistan, i think both david and i understand how difficult this mission is because we have met with families whose sons or daughters or husbands or wives made the ultimate sacrifice. we visit our wounded warriors. we understand the sacrifices they have made their. as i indicated, we have made progress. we are seeing an afghan security force that is getting stronger and more robust and more capable of operating on its own. our goal, said in lisbon, is to make sure that over the next two years, that afghan security force continues to improve. it will be prepared to provide for that country's security when

we leave. we also think it is important that there is a political aspect to this. that all the various factions inside afghanistan recommend -- recognize it is time to end at 30 years of war. the president there has committed to a political reconciliation process. we are doing what we can to help. altman, it will be up to the afghans to work together -- ultimately, it will be up to the afghans to work together toward peace. we cannot be nice about the difficulties that are involved in getting there. if we maintain a steady, responsible transition process, which is what we have designed, then i am confident that we can put afghans in a position where they can deal with their own security.

and we are also underscoring what we anticipate to be a strategic partnership before we get to chicago that the united states, along with other countries, will sustain a relationship with afghanistan. we will not have combat troops there, but we will be working with them both to ensure their security and to assure their economy improves. there will be multiple challenges along the way. in terms of pace, i do not anticipate, at this stage, that we will be making any sudden, additional changes to the plan that we currently have. we have already taken now 10,000 of our troops. we are slated to drawdown an additional 23,000 by this summer. there'll be a robust coalition presence inside afghanistan during this fighting season to make sure that the taliban

understand it will not be able to regain momentum. in conjunction with all of our allies, we will continue to look at how we affect with this transition that does not result in a steep cliff at the end of 2014, but rather is a gradual pace that accommodates the developing capacities of the afghan national security forces. although, u.s. did to david, i want to make sure that is coming quickly on the economic issues. -- although you asked it to david, i want to make sure that i can't quickly and economic issues. we have been asked this for years. the united states and britain are two different economies in two different positions. they're banking sector was much larger than ours. their capacity to sustain debt

was different than ours. as a consequence, each of us will be taking different strategies. our objectives are common. witches, we want to make sure we have governments that are -- which is, we want to make sure we have governments that are lean and effective to our people. and we want to make sure that, ultimately, our citizens in both countries are able to pursue their dreams by getting a good education. being able to start a small business. being able to find a job that supports their families and allows them to retire with respect. so, this notion that, somehow, two different countries are going to have identical economic programs does not take into

account profound differences in position. but the objectives, goals, and values, i think, are the same perio. our businesses, our workers, our system of higher education, we are both countries that are incredibly well positioned to succeed in this knowledge? -- knowledge-based economy. >> there are differences because we're not a reserve currency. we have to take a different path. i think it would be wrong to taint -- to think that britain is just taking measures to reduce its deficit. we're taking serious measures to grow. before coming here, we took measures to try to grow our housing market. we cut corporate housing taxes. we are investing in apprentice ship.

back.rentice sheship we're both try to head in the same direction of growth. if you look at the u.s. plans for reducing the deficit over coming years, it is steeper than what we're doing in the uk. different starting points. different measures, on occasion, but the same destination. and a share of understanding. i have joey jones from sky news. >> can i ask you both to get any information this afternoon? and on the general, why do you think it is that people feel you talk a good game, but they do not buy it? why is it that the british and american people look for a situation that they think is a mess. they see terrible sacrifice.

they see two men who are unable to impose their will. they're not persuaded by your argument. >> first of all, on what has happened, a very early details are still coming through. we're still examining and investigating exactly what is happening. the security of our people, our troops, the security of both our nations forces is a priority. if there are things that need to be done in the coming days to keep them safer, then no doubt, we will do them. on the border issue of afghanistan -- on the broader issue of afghanistan, if you compare where we are today with where we have been two or three years ago, the situation is considerably improved. i think the u.s. surged an additional u.k. to sweep within has a transformative a fact. the level of insurgent attacks

are down. the level of security is up. the capital is now fully transitioned over to afghan lead control. the markets are open. you're able to take part in economic activity which simply was not possible when i first visited several years ago. it is a very difficult situation. there are many challenges we have to overcome. what is happening in afghanistan today is quite different than the situation we had years ago. do i think we get to the end of 2014 where we have a larger afghanistan army which are on track and that with the afghan government, they can take care of their own security in a way that does not require large numbers of foreign troops and that country is not a threat in the wait was in the past in terms of terrorism? yes, i think we can achieve that. it has been hard work. the sacrifices have been great.

we have to remind ourselves and everybody why we are there. what we are doing. we have to go back and remember that the vast majority of terrorist that were affected people in the u.k. or the u.s. came out of that country and that region. that is why we went in there. that is why we're there today. it is not some selfish, long- term strategic effort. it is simply that we want afghanistan to look over its own security with its own security forces so that we are safe at home. that is the key. that is the message we keep explain to people. what we're trying to do by 2014 is achievable and undoable. >> i concur with everything david said. don't think i would add, you asked why the poll numbers indicate people are interested and ending the war in afghanistan, it is because we have been there for 10 years. people get weary. they no friends and neighbors

who have lost loved ones as a consequence of war. no one wants war. anybody who answers a poll question about war saying enthusiastically that we what were probably has not been involved in one. but, as david said, i think the vast majority of the american people and british understand why we went there. there is a reason why al qaeda is on its heels and has been decimated. there is a reason why osama bin lawton and his lieutenants are not in a position to be able to execute plots against the united states or great britain periods there's a reason why it is increasingly -- or great britain. .here's a reason it is because the space has shrunk. the capacity to operate has

greatly diminished. as david indicated, this is hard work. when i came into office, there had been adrift in the afghan strategy. partly because we had spent a lot time focusing on iraq instead. in the last few years, we have refocused attention on getting afghanistan right. my preference would have been that we started some of that earlier, but that is not the card we were dealt. we're now in a position to make progress. i believe we will be able to achieve our objectives in 2014. >> thank you, mr. president, mr. prime minister. mr. president, switching to iran. >> can i just point out that somehow he gets to ask the question on behalf of the u.s. press corps, -- were you upset

about that? what is going on with that? c'mon. it is a special relationship. >> on iran, to believe it represents a last chance for the country to avert a military action? and prime minister, on syria, how are you approaching the russians to get them on board for a security council resolution? and if you believe the president will be tried as a war criminal -- and do you believe the president will be tried as a war criminal? >> as david said, we have employed the toughest sanctions on iran. we have mobilized the international community > we have ever seen. those sanctions are going to begin to bite even harder this summer.

we are seeing a significant effects on the iranian economy. they understand the seriousness in which we take this issue. they understand there are consequences to them continuing to reject the international community. i have sent a message very directly to them publicly that they need to seize this opportunity of negotiations to avert even worse consequences for iran in the future. do i have a guarantee that iran will walk through the store that we're offering them? no. in the past, there has been a tendency for iran in these negotiations to delay, to stall, to do a lot of talking but not actually moved the ball forward. i think they should understand that because the international

community has applied some sanctions, because we have employed so many of the options that are available to us to persuade iran to take a different course that the window for solving this issue diplomatically is shrinking. and, as i said in a speech just a couple of weeks ago, i am determined not simply to contain iran that is in possession of a nuclear weapon, i am determined to prevent iran from getting a nuclear weapon. in part, because of reasons that david mentioned. it would trigger a nuclear arms race in the most dangerous part of the world. it would raise non-proliferation issues that would have a

significant risk to our national security interests. it would embolden terrace in the region who might believe they could act with more impunity if there were operating under the protection of iran. this is not an issue that simply in one country's interest or two countries interest. this is important to the entire international community. we will do everything we can to resolve this diplomatically. but ultimately, we have to have somebody on the other side of the table. i hope the iranian regime understands that. this is their best bet for resolving this in a way that allows iraq -- iran to join and prosper and to feel secure themselves. >> thank you. on syria, when you see what is happening in homes and elsewhere, i think we need to appeal to people's humanity to stop the slaughter to get aid

and assistance to those with an affected. and to ratchet up the pressure on this bridging. in the case of russia, i think we should appeal to their own interests. it is not in their interest to of this bloody, broken, brutal regime nightly on the television screens. the people in syria often felt that the russians were their friends. many in the west there were more suspicious of. now they see people in the west wanting to help them. raising their issues, calling for the world to help them. we to make sure russia helps with that. it will take a lot of hard work. i think it isn't brushup's interest that we deal with this, interestin russia's that we deal with this. what is being done in homes. i have spoken personally to one

of the photographers who was stuck there when he got out to the u.k. what he witnessed, what he saw was simply appalling and should not be allowed to stand in our world. that is why we send people to the turkish border to document these crimes and write down what has been done. so that no matter how long it takes, people should always remember that international law has a long reach and a long memory. tom from itm. >> mr. president, it is great you agreed to learn about cricket. it is going to be a long trip. [laughter] on a serious subject, syria. the city wants assad to go. you wanted gaddafi to go for a long time, but he did not. have you discussed a no fly

zone? have you discussed how you might implement it? have you discussed any of those issues? >> what i would say is that our people are incredibly close together on this issue. the focus right now is trying to achieve transition, not trying to foment revolution. we think the fastest way to end the killing, which is what we want to see, is for assad to go. the way to bring that about is to provide diplomatic pressure. that is where our focus is. of course, as i put it, push the system, asked the difficult questions, where the other options? it is right we do that. but they're not without their difficulties and complications, as everybody knows. the focus is transition and all the things we can do to bring pressure to bear. that has been the focus. >> i think