although we are geographically removed from ukraine it carries tension. he could bring back the past. despite the increased military abilities of the world powers. i thank you. >> i think the representative for his statements. i give it to the representative of jordan. >> thank you, madam president. jordan wishes to ask rest it deep concern vis-à-vis the current developments in ukraine and in the crimean region. we call on all parties to exercise self-restraint not to escalate by taking military

measures or by threatening the use of force. jordan reaffirms the need to respect the authority and independence. we reaffirm the prohibition of the use of force in it territory or any part of the territory or indeed the occupation of the crimean region. they call on all states concerned to respect the terms of their agreements and treaties with ukraine. it is for the memorandum of 1994 as well as the treaty of friendship, cooperation and partnership between the ukraine and russian federation of 1997. russia and ukraine must starts effective dialogue to resolve the crisis between them.

a dialogue that would lead to the return of the crimean region to the control as soon as possible. we call on ukraine to take immediate steps to resolve this of both paternity and to respect human right, and particularly the minority rights in to revoke any measures that were taken which may undermine such rights. at the same time, we stress the need to not interfere in the internal affairs so that the country may decide its own political future. the united nations security council must assume its responsibilities regarding the situation in ukraine. we also supports the mediation efforts by the united nations secretary-general and supports the contact with the various parties in this regard.

we wish to receive more clarifications from the parties concerned regarding the situation on the ground and particularly in the region. this will be helpful. we note the need for the security council to investigate the crimean region and to look into mediation and mechanisms that may be in light of the information provided. and to determine the security council's assessment of whether an act of aggression is being committed on ukrainian territory. we would refer to the united nations assembly which considers the use of armed force a by a

state on the territory of another state to be outside the scope of agreement between the two countries. the same applies. we welcome the steps that were arty taken and to be taken with in the framework of the organization of your in order to do with the current crisis and the establishment by the osce's contact group and a fact-finding mission. we call on them to coordinate their efforts in order to remove the extension and find a peaceful solution, one that preserves the integrity.

>> i thank you for the statement. now the representative of china. >> thank you. china is deeply concerned about the current situation in ukraine. we condemn the recent violent acts in ukraine. we have been urging all sides to peacefully resolve their internal differences within a legal framework and conscientiously correct the rights and interests of all people in ukraine so as to restore normalcy in the country as soon as possible. china consistently stands for the principles of interference -- non interference in the

internal affairs of a country and of respect for ukraine's independence, sovereignty, and territory. there are reasons why infants in ukraine have progressed to where they are today. china will follow closely the developments on the ground and pull on all sides to find a political solution on the basis of respecting international law and principles of international relations and maintain peace and stability. thank you, madam president. >> i thank the representative for his statements. i give it to the representative of australia. >> thank you for this briefing. since they last met on saturday,

russian military activity in crimea area has seriously intensified and there are reports of more russian influence on ukrainian eastern and southern borders, violations of heirs is by fighter planes and reports of russian naval vessels blocking in crimea. we are seriously concerned about escalation of russian military activity. these actions along with decision by the government to authorize the use of force are

unacceptable. russia's actions are undermining the rights of ukrainian people to choose their own future. it is also contrary to international law. they contravene the charger and agreements to which russia itself is a party. the 1975 helsinki final act, the 1997 bilateral treaty of friendship and cooperation tween the russian federation and ukraine. under these agreement, there is a specific commitment to respect the territorial integrity of ukraine and a commitment to non-intervention. and to refrain from the use of force or the threat to use force. the australian government together with the broader international community, which is speaking loudly and with one force has urged russia to stand down and withdraw its own forces, abide by international legal commitment and immediately take steps to reduce tensions. russia must engage in direct dialogue with ukraine in accordance with article seven of its own treaty on partnership with ukraine.

in this counsel, australia has already called for russia to respect you cranes in unity, sovereignty, and territorial integrity -- ukraine's unity, sovereignty, territorial integrity. we make a call not just to avoid provocation but for proactive steps to de-escalate the crisis. we continued restraint. we support the efforts of the new government to do with this crisis and stabilize the situation and its country. the international political engagement we have seen today on this issue has been essential and must continue and increase. it is indicative of the level of concern regarding russia's actions. they must support all efforts toward de-escalation. this means promoting all opportunities for mediation and dialogue.

this will support the deployment of a full mission to ukraine. we are thankful for the security and cooperation in europe for working on this. this would be the best way to address russia's stated concerns about minority rights. we urge russia to consider this. we welcome the news that the osce will begin deploying some initial monitors tonight. we welcome the engagement by the human secretary-general and the visit by the deputy secretary. we urge parties to cooperate. the deputy secretary general seeks to promote dialogue and see for himself the facts on the ground. it is imperative that he be given access to all parts of the ukraine. unprovoked aggression should have no place in our world.

russia should stand down and withdraw its forces from ukraine in accordance with its obligations and the people of ukraine ought to be able to determine the future themselves. thank you. >> thank you for your statements. giving the floor to the representative of chile. >> thank you. we express our deep concern of the escalation of the crisis in ukraine. this must be urgently reversed. we call for the greatest restraint and moderation.

as has been expressed previously, we repeat once again there is obligation to keep the integral integrity of the ukraine. this must refrain from taking actions in contravention of the charter of the united nations organization and international law, especially the use of force or threat. in the memorandum of budapest, they clearly commit themselves to respect the independence of sovereignty and the present borders of ukraine and to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity and political dependence of ukraine. the international community must continue providing support to solution to this crisis. in this context, we support the

efforts of the international mediation including good offices of regional organization in order to help solve this crisis. we thank the osce for sending a service to parts of the ukraine. this supports the good offices of the secretary-general of the united nations and we particularly support the mission by the deputy secretary-general at this very moment. likewise, we call for the russian federation to consider undertaking consultations in the framework of the treaty and cooperation to find a solution to the present crisis. i wish to conclude by pressing the fact that it is up to the people of ukraine to define their own destiny in an inclusive process guaranteeing the rule of law, human rights, fundamental freedoms, and respect for minority rights.

thank you very much. >> i now go forward to the representative of argentina. >> thank you very much, madam president. i am so grateful for the briefing. through him, we would like to express our acknowledgment to the secretary-general for his good offices as well as other officials of our organization in order to negotiate a solution to the situation. argentina has deep concern about the latest developments in ukraine, especially india taunus republic of lamia. argentina has the responsibility of the council to ensure that international peace and security

are maintained within the framework of the principles. we recall the obligations that all states had settle their international disputes in a fashion in order not to engage international peace and security in accordance with the provisions of article 33 of chapter six of the united nations charter. we call on all of those involved to refrain from statements which may escape intentions and find a peaceful way out of this crisis.

the international partners showed solutions to an inclusive dialogue including all social and political sectors of the various regions. we believe it is indispensable for authorities who are responsible for leading in transitional period to have the participation of the forces and the primary obligation to protect its minorities. they can contribute to polarization, the rhetoric of confrontation, and heightening of tensions. argentina is convinced of the need to work for a united ukraine. following the principles of international law and with unconditional full respect for human rights.

it is a funny way in which the ukrainian people could find a democratic way out of the crisis affecting their country. they must focus their efforts on supporting such a process in order to cooperate and achieve political agreement which will present to the current crisis which ukraine is facing. thank you very much. >> i thank the representative argentina and look forward to the representative of nigeria. >> madame president, what began three months ago as a political process has taken on a dimension which today which would be best described as precarious.

we call on all concerned to abide by the provisions of the human charger, particularly two which calls on all member states to settle their disputes by peaceful means and to refrain from the use of force. the current situation in ukraine, especially in crimea represents an important threat to international peace and security. we would like to see the de-escalation of tensions and hostile rhetoric. the concerned parties must embrace dialogue as a means of resolving the crisis and facilitate an expeditious return in ukraine. the opposite for this is mediation.

others before me have pointed out we therefore call on the international community, it particularly those who can exert instructive influence over the concerned parties to intensify in the crisis. we firmly believe that the use of preventive diplomacy tools let such a time represent the most expedient and effective option to bring about a peaceful resolution. we want to reiterate our concerns to abide by the provisions of the 1994 defense memorandum. we guarantee the sovereignty and integrity of ukraine. we note that the provision calls for the one. this is even more and represents an opportunity to peacefully resolve the current crisis.

we are encouraged by indications that government of ukraine is taking steps to ensure political inclusiveness in the governance of the country. we believe this is a prudent way of addressing one of the underlying causes of the disputes and an early return to peace and stability. this remains relevant under the circumstance. we urge all concerned to refrain from provocative action that will precipitate now and in the future. >> i think the representative of

nigeria for the statement. i look forward to the representative of the republic of korea. >> thank you, madam president. the republic of korea remained deeply concerned over the situation in ukraine particularly the escalation of tensions in the crimean region. given the situation, we call on all parties to exercise maximum restraint for the crisis through dialogue. unity, independence and sovereignty of ukraine be fully respected in accordance with the u.n. charger. they hope the situation does this in a peaceful matter. we support and mediation efforts. we hope the visit to ukraine will have to ask laura all possible responses to the situation.

we'll have to explore all possible responses to the situation. thank you. >> thank you, madam president. china is deeply concerned by the serious turn of the situation in ukraine. despite the many appeals the part of the international community for action and for dialogue. the charter has stated any conflict between u.n. states should be dealt with in a peaceful way as part of the

u.n. charter and with respect --peaceful way as part of the u.n. charter. and peaceful settlement of disputes. given the deteriorating situation in ukraine, chad reiterate this appeal for restraint, calm, and calls upon the international community to undertake a mediation so that the world died -- so that there will be dialogue between the parties. in this respect, chad supports all efforts of mediation by the international community, seeking to bring the parties concerns to settle their disputes in ways that fall under the charger and with respect for -- charter and with respect for different agreements.

>> i thank the representative of chad. i will now like to make a statement in my national capacity. luxembourg is deeply concerned by recent developments in ukraine, in particular crimea. opposition is reflect his in the conclusions of the council of foreign affairs to the eu has just adopted today. we vigorously condemned the violations of sovereignty and territorial integrity of ukraine. this was taken by the council of the federation of russia to authorize the use of russian armed forces on the territory of ukraine. these actions are in flagrant violation of the u.n. charter and the helsinki acts. i would like to echo the appeal to withdraw without delay in such a way it would meet its commitments under the agreement of the 28th of may 1997 on the status and conditions for the

presence of the black sea float in ukraine. -- fleet in ukraine. this must be resolved by peaceful means. an essential first step would be for russia to accept the offer of ukraine to hold without delay consultations. regarding security guarantees for the ukraine by the ukraine ek, russia, and u.s. it is called for in the treaty of friendship and partnership signed on the 31st of may 1997 between russia and ukraine. we would like to believe it is still possible to avoid the worst. luxembourg has unfortunately been ill placed to understand the risks of military escalation. we must start a de-escalation through concrete actions.

we resolutely support the efforts that are ongoing within the u.n., and particularly the role of good offices of the secretary general who took the decision to dispatch the dsg to ukraine. the principles of the u.n., the whole reason for being of the u.n. are at stake. we call upon all the international community to support the efforts made by the u.n. we asked to bring about a political resolution of the crisis. we welcome the idea that has been mentioned of establishing the observers mission to make an impartial investigation. a solution to the crisis also requires an inclusive lyrical

dialogue, keeping in mind the diversity of ukrainian society and the need to respect the rights of all ukrainians. luxembourg supports new governments in the parliaments of ukraine which have taken steps to promote this inclusive political dialogue. we would encourage the ukrainian authorities to bring in the expertise of the council with respect to the protection of minority rights. in conclusion, we welcome the restraints exhibited by ukrainian authorities, particularly in crimea. it is vital for all parties to respect unity, territorial integrity, independence and the sovereignty of ukraine. thank you very much.

i resume my functions as president of the council and give the floor to ukraine. >> madame president, distinguished members of the council, dear colleagues, i wish to begin by thanking all members of the security council for having given me the floor and for your important remark. i heard lots of support for my country. the ukraine counts on the security council to exert all possible efforts on the international level in order to guarantee the protection of the ukrainian people in the sovereignty of my country and

the territorial area. >> we had the meeting of the russian federation with great attention. unfortunately, we still have not received any answer to the simple question why are the military forces occupying crimea and brutally violating international law and bilateral agreements. i would like to remind you that according to the budapest memorandum on security assurances, between ukraine and other states, my country has gotten rid of its nuclear arsenal to russia in this in

view of a dutch in using metaphors. in this regard, it is underlying. it is undermining the regime general. it is was in the ukraine. reportedly wary, rocks and mentally 60,000 russian troops have been deployed in crimea by the helicopter tours, cargo airplanes in the neighboring territory from the russian federation yuri u russian heat taking the extent to block and control crucial governmental and military objects in crimea. the means of communications, military bases, headquarters of this in crimea. all roads are blocked.

this clearly indicates russia's cooperation with a possible military intervention in the ukraine. ukrainian armed forces have exercised restraint and are freed from resistance. -- refrained from active resistance. although they are in full operational areas. this is performing the operations in the outermost part of crimea as well as other divisions. they are aimed at discrediting legitimate authorities of

ukraine and misleading public opinion by calling this a peacekeeping operations. the minister of interior of the ukraine, tonight they are planning to attack the possibly kill russian soldiers. this is going to be used as an excuse for the ongoing intervention by russia against ukraine. they are concerned of human rights and freedoms of the ethnic russia. i would like to inform you that this is the obligations of other government, of other people to care about that. we do need the external help. we agreed with our minister on the minorities. it is to provide mission in crimea. once again, we are calling upon council members to authorize international mediation to crimea as well as to monitor the situation of human rights of russian ethics and russian speaking persons.

i am also a russian speaking person but i do not need any support. this is still a respective member. do not underline authority with confidence in the universal body. i know we have some russian companies. we will continue in russian. >> i would like to congratulate all russian christians with this and call on all of the leaders of the church to pray and to consult and to listen to us. in your attempt to explain, the reason for the presence of russian troops as peacekeepers unfortunately, and we have heard this from many who spoke today these are seen as aggression. provocation of large-scale conflicts in the ukraine. it is one of the guarantors of

our sovereignty and the territorial integrity under the budapest agreement. moreover, a permanent member of the security council which

fishers with other member states a very important function to support peace and stability throughout the year. -- throughout the world. these can be condoned from the support of the u.n. charger. all the arguments made on protecting the russian population at which supposedly condoned military intervention. this is totally the internal purview of the citizens of ukraine, its government and should be done under a constitution of citizens regardless of their ethnicity. it is the only ukrainian parliaments. do we need military assistant to handle such humanitarian questions?

we do not need that type of assistance. you continue to reference the 21st of february for a settlement at the crisis in ukraine. we are deeply surprised by this type of reasoning. the russian side, together with our partners with european countries, it refrain from the principle of signing this agreement and not even recognizing it in this way. moreover, in your opinion, how could this be implemented if one of the major players left the capital and refused to implement his constitutional functions. you continued to call what happened in ukraine as a coup

d'état. in the democratic world, there is a more exact definition: a revolution of dignity is what happened. we have different understandings about human rights. in november 2013, people of all nationalities went to protest in

the streets without any officials telling of any political party on what to do. it is all without any pressure from the west. people in november are out to defend the rights in a right to a dignified life against a system which has bought the poverty in the areas in the center in the south and upper unemployment in the west. in so doing, the former president, lived in luxury. the whole world solid in ute. you reiterated what was said already. to the effect that the former government used legitimate means in using this. this means on the night of the 30th of november, overnight that the peaceful protesting students

who were beaten by the police violated the right. now they are being accused of violating rights. one law which limits their constitutional right for freedom of speech, freedom of association, laws which limit the right of the mass media and in public opinion spoken. it eliminated that. i think you are saying that something is wrong in your country.

i am sorry that you told something untrue about the church. all denominations have been part of this including the ukrainian orthodox church. it is related to the moscow patriarch. once again, there has been an appeal to christian russia to stop in to pray for ukraine. stop killing citizens. the russians recently made a decision on the military intervention. the minister of foreign affairs was appointed contrary to the constitution. he is not a legitimate leader of the administrative territory. we are a unitary state in

ukraine. this is a number of the federations without the central government saying the troops can come in from russia. we see it as aggression and unauthorized. even in crimea is not supported by other people. and following the secretary-general, bring the people from the east into the government's ministers who were born in russia in the current membership. some governors in the region are people and leaders of the eastern regions that are also russian speaking. in spite of the existing economic difficulties in the country, the government of ukraine is continuing to give assistance to crimea.

they gave support to the crimean bank. 400 million grievances were given. unfortunately, i have to know of an unfair game of russia and the information space that is helping destabilize the country. many examples the last few days have been giving that i do not wish to reiterate. we would like to take the opportunity of this meeting to once again call on our russian partners to stop spreading untrue information.

i would like to express my sincere gratitude to all members of the security council, and particularly to those who expressed support of ukraine who support the necessity to resolve all the problems by the diplomatic and political measures and to stop aggression. i thank you. >> i thank the representative of ukraine for his statement. you have the floor, sir. >> thank you, madam president. first of all, i would like to welcome my ukrainian colleagues. we have been working quite a while at the u.n. and i congratulate him with the fact that today he spoke not only in english and french and russian and that is his first speech in russian as i recall.

he wanted to say, better late than never, and i hope we will hear other speeches for my ukrainian colleague in russian. although as we heard he is very confident in english and french. during the statement, i heard a number of strange and surprising statements. i would just make some comments. first of all, the ukrainian colleague and the french and english colleagues if i've are member well, they presented things like russia is trying to put pressure on ukraine. we are saying that we have to have a normal constitution process. one that takes into account the interests of all regions. isn't that democracy we are calling for? we are calling for democracy. you are trying to make it look

like -- what you're saying is not the definition of democracy, what we are saying. he came back to the tragic events that sincerely -- we express our condolences and these are dramatic and tragic events of three months. there is no doubt. do not think that russia has any doubts of the fact that the basis of these crises -- that we are happy with what the resident did. somewhere along the way maybe after this break up of the laws that were adopted and you criticized these a lot and you repeated it. they exist in many other countries. at some point we could not cross the road during a demonstration. and you criticized them a lot and you repeated it. there were some points that you

couldn't cross the road in demonstrations. french law in 2009, if i'm not mistaken, it's not possible to wear masks on the streets during peaceful political demonstrations. so maybe there are other things going on. but, in fact there are many elements have come together and many things that exists in democratic countries. that's not the important thing. the thing is the principle. why is it, colleagues, why have you decided now in ukraine there's democratic governments. and morer is give talked about this. but we have a history -- we remember what happens in -- what happens in 1970 when there's a democratic revolution and then a dictatorship. so we have a feeling right now in essence that the kiev government has national radicals

in it that the government could be putting in different people who might be more presentable for the west. what motivated them? what motivates them are the people behind them who through their actions came to power, brought these people to power. so let's not be deceived that any change of government, especially if it's violence, needs leads to democracy. some of our western colleagues seem to think that's the case. but we would like for the process that is continuing in ukraine lead really to a real democratic victory with genuine democracy in the country. my u.s. colleague referenced the need to respect the constitution of the ukraine. we believe that that is important. and i'm trying to imagine where if president oh what went to california, let's say, and then the ones who -- the white house

and then the -- the -- whatever -- if the congress around all procedures called to impeach him when he was not in the white house. how would u.s. public opinion view that? would that be a manifestation of democracy? and that's what happened in the ukraine. why did he leave? he was -- he had a -- he was scared. he was scared. he left kiev and now he said that we intimidated -- somebody intimidated him after signing the agreement on the 21st of february. then there was a threat. if the -- the building were not deliberated, then we would storm it. the building would be stormed. no, that's not democracy. that's not a respect for the constitution. in crimea, a very difficult situation. the autonomous republic of crimea has a start and there's a concern of the actions in kiev there was a concern that there would be something similar, a

violent capture of the administration there. if someone came to power in crimea and took some vigorous actions, he subordinated himself to all of the defense agencies and now the people are making it look like only the russian arms forces are there. there you have as well the ukrainian armed forces that are part of the new -- they swore to the new government so the commander of the ukrainian fleet is also based over in the east and swore allegiance to the new government. so then you have a number of people for self-defense and there was a concern that there might be some kind of violent action. so then people went over there from kiev and they were armed and they were promising to look for friends with militants to restore the appropriate governments. and there you'd have the black sea fleet people. so interesting figures.

16,000 military are there in the russian black sea are there. but what we have in the black sea fleet, it could be up to 25,000 from russia there. so as part of our presence there. so they're acting that they need to be there to -- they're saying that they're protecting their sites or preventing the extremists from acting that might damage the lives and health of civilians. maybe ukrainian colleague believes this is too much excessive. but at least, i agree with the authorities of the crimea. and also i was surprised to hear verbally something from my -- from my colleague ambassador power that all of these concerns are fabricated, made up. so these concerns are -- that really surprises me. because i have the impression

that ms. power is using her information from u.s. tv. in fact, if all of the information she takes only from u.s. tv, then of course, everything in ukraine is beautiful, a wave of democracy. and then the bad guy, you know, yanukovych made it all bad when he came to power. then there was -- then there was the -- the -- i from russia but the ambassador of ukraine tried to portray things in a good way. but is it -- from the reports of the american ambassador and our information, i'm sure that the media of ours and many other countries -- what -- what wave of violence went through the ukraine? what about that in when the administration buildings were hit, when the major people were taken from that building and put to a pillar and they were mocked? is that democracy when that was done to someone?

normal political process? in chicago would we see that, for example, someone dragged out there? or -- or, i don't think so i don't think in any democratic country that would be allowed. but what happened in kiev, what was that? was it a made up concern? attempts to take over the building? and in the eastern part, it's not made up. that's a group of armed people who invaded and tried to remove the governments and set up their own undemocratic illegitimate authority in the eastern part of the country. so now i'd like to get to one of the central key points that's -- i'd like to highlight. this concern -- it's not just ours, it's not important that we have this concern, but it's a logical -- it's been logically used by people who are living in southeast ukraine.

and i go back to it. you know, ambassadorer is give, and i already used the term that unfortunately the -- the rightist forces have been very strong. they cannot take, they cannot stand russians, russian citizens. just how their leaders do you remember how they fought under the hitler banner against soviets -- the soviet governments against the soviet union. against the red army, the anti-hitler coalition. this is the ideology, and these people are unfortunately very close to power and in fact they have supported it on the shoulders of others. and this is the feelings that people have of the people who live there. millions of people have those feelings. 1.5 million in crimea feel that way. the main issue in kiev sheer do you really think that russia could allow a repeat of what happened in central and eastern

ukraine, allow it there where eastern russians live. the u.s. example took over grenada and we're defending american citizens who reside there. 1,000 people. 1,000. there's no threat too great from grenada to the citizens. we have millions living there and there are concerns -- yes the colleagues say how can international institutions -- okay, these institutions might be used. we don't deny that. they could be used. but we understand. we understand that the u.n. were working and this is an international institution. there was no institution. the nato forces went in. what did they do. what do they do in 2004 to stop the regression that took place,

the attack that took place where many thousands of serbs had to leave the area. nothing was done. you want this observer mission to go there and get rid of the radicals the osce mission that they don't want to -- the radicals don't want to listen to the osce or they're not -- it would take months to prepare to observe. so who knows what would happen there in the meantime. and also a very important point that i wanted to just touch on. do not perceive today's meeting -- we called it. don't think that we did it to give a fuller picture from our standpoint of what is happening really. because the two meetings before were a little spontaneous and we wanted to -- but i did want to repeat that the decision of the president that gave the mandates that the federation for the u.s.

of force in the territory of the ukraine, that decision is not been taken. so it doesn't mean it will be taken just because we called for this meeting. but in order for something not to take place that we don't want to take place, it's very important for -- the -- that -- important conclusion be drawn by those -- those who are controlling the situation in the ukraine, left power and is supported and someone who might put influence on him. first of all, we have to let them understand and let them explain to them there must not be any communication of the policy of fact finding of the -- of the forcible use of violence. we talked about defensive language rights, yes. that will be -- that will have to have a lot of work done there. and possibly participation by international agencies. but let's understand one thing now. we must refuse -- refuse from any plans or any habit violently

to establish authority to establish philosophy, culture, their own world view on other people. since it's not democratic and it could lead to a very difficult consequences in ukraine. and now in a practical sense -- one of the creepings said that it's not possible to talk about the agreement of the 21st of february because the -- -- well so what if you -- when you -- do we not understand that he's not coming back? he left. he will not be running the government. and he will come. we continue to believe for the reasons which i was explaining that right now he is legitimate president of ukraine. his fate like the fate of any ukrainian politician must be resolved by the people of ukraine. but the question is not whether it's yanukovych or not.

it's if you have the democratic parameters set for how to get out of the crisis in ukraine. the democratic parameter must be set. there has to be a constitutional way out, not just putting together, cobbling together different laws to a significant extent. there has to be a political process, a regional process, the different forces, political forces. the party of regions got afraid and we think they don't exist. they exist. they have a lot of use, the regions. the eastern part of the country is the industrial ukraine. that's what's at stake. that's what needs to be done. and also refrain from violently handling the problem. so i guess i could stop there. thank you, madam president. >> the representative of the united states of america asks for the floor to make a further statement. she now has the floor.

>> thank you, madam president. in response to any russian colleague's comments, i would just like to make a couple of points. first, i would like to address his point about the legitimacy of president yanukovych. and his point about the february 21 agreement which he's made several times. to be clear, we commend the work done by france, germany, and poland to mediate and negotiate that agreement with russia very much in observance. and we would have been prepared to support the completion of that agreement. under its terms president yanukovych had 24 hours to sign the first piece of action pursuit in erata, changing the constitution pursuant to the february 21 agreement. not only did president yanukovych not sign it, but as my russian colleague reminds us, he left the city, he fled the

city. he packed up himself and he left the seat of the presidency vacant for two days while his country was in crisis. he left vast evidence of corruption vast evidence of the amounts he had stolen from the ukrainian people. and in that context with 371 votes, the democratically elected rata voted yanukovych out of office with his own party turning against him. that's the history. but to the present, what we've heard today with the exception of one member of the security council, the russian federation, we have heard overwhelming support for the territorial integrity of ukraine and peaceful dialogue. there are so many options available to russia to safeguard the rights of ethnic russians and to address the concerns that have been made, so many options short of military action. so the very simple questions for russia today are why not support

international mediation. why isn't that part of your remarks today? why not support an observer mission? why not engage directly with the ukrainian authorities who want to resolve this crisis peacefully? why not pull back your forces instead of sending more? why not? when military intervention in the face of a crisis like this is the first resort, it is hard to avoid concluding that russia does not want peace and does not want a diplomatic solution. why choose military action when the consequences could be devastating? only someone who fears the truth would be fearful of monitors who are deployed for the specific purpose of identifying and reporting the truth. that is all, madam president. >> that the -- that the -- do we

say nothing could be deployed? >> i have a request from france. so i will give the floor to france. he wanted to make another statement. >> thank you, madam president. 4 1/2 years ago, i joined this council. and i have had the honor of working with the distinguished representative of the russian federation for 4 1/2 years. and for 4 1/2 years, i've heard the representer of the russian federation of not interfering with the internal affairs of another country for 4 1/2 years. the representer of the federation would immediately jump up and say there should be no interference in the affairs of another country. i just heard a discourse which is of interference within the internal affairs of ukraine. and so i -- everything that russia has just said is

interference in the internal affairs of the ukraine. secondly, the presenter of russia says that the russian armed forces, the decision for them to enter ukraine has not yet been prevented. ha everyone knows the russian army is controlling crimea. this is a fact. there's no need to enter ukraine. they were already there. the russia is currently occupying ukraine. this is a fact. international television says russian soldiers are not hiding the fact that they're occupying ukraine and surrounding the basis of the ukrainian army. currently, there's a a long-standing habit of always dealing with his opponent as a nazi before getting rid of him. this is something that the soviets would do. but, no, all of the demonstrators in kiev, not all of them are nazis and the immense majority, they are not members of the far right or

nationalist radicals. and if you want the evidence of this, it's quite simple -- elections may take place on may 25 under international supervision. under the supervision of the osc. let's let the ukrainians say -- they will decide under intervention or rather monitoring what future they want. i'm very moved by the attachment of the russian federation of the agreement of 21 february, an agreement that they rejected at the time. yes, they rejected it and they refused to endorse it. now they're bringing it as a point. i would call on them to return to the part of wisdom. >> thank you for the statements and now give the floor to the representer of the russian federation. >> maybe i shouldn't comment on

such small thing, but the statement of my u.s. colleague, if sounds like we were against something -- no, it's not clear what we're against. we're not excluding the role of some international agencies or bodies. i explained why it is that it might not be enough to do so. but -- then the important one, i'd like to ask the french colleague not to engage in hyperbole. we don't need hyperbole. and secondly, i didn't say the majority of those who protested on the streets of kiev were national radicals. i didn't say that. the minority of the -- the problem is that they were the ones that set the tone but they played the instruments for the orchestra. and so they took -- they've taken government authority now in kiev. so with this provocation, they're sending it now to the east and to the territory of crimea these provocations.

maybe that's enough, thank you. >> i thank the representative of the russian federation for his statement. the representer of the united kingdom has asked for the floor to make a statement. you now have the floor, sir. >> madam president, i don't want to prolong the debate but i must take issue with some of the things that the russian ambassador has said. let's be clear about the facts of what's happened in crimea. they've taken over military and civilian airports, infrastructure, set up roadblocks pressurized ukrainian leaders to defect. they gave other ukraineian units ultimatum to sur right-hander. they blocked the ports and have increased forces all along the russian-ukrainian border. there's no justification of this action in international law or in the agreement between ukraine

and the russian and black sea fleet on the territory of ukraine, article 6 of that says very clearly. and i quote, military formations shall respect the sovereignty of ukraine. shall abide by ukrainian laws and shall not interfere in the affairs of ukraine. what agreement justifies the military action we have seen russia taking in the crimea. the russian colleague said now that the russian federation is not engaged in the oh monitoring mission to eastern ukraine and crimea. can he confirm therefore that the russian federation accepts the deployment in the next few days of such a mission? >> i thank the representative of the united kingdom for his statement.

do i see further requests? yes, the representative of the russian federation on the floor. >> we're not talking about osc. i can't talk about -- we're not talking about osce. that's their -- they do their own functions, what he said, we support his mission. the osce, that one has to be discussed. but that -- i would like to support what they have said, that there's too much disinformation going on. too much. too much -- too many statements. statements that are not realistic. i -- many of the -- many of the -- much of what the english colleagues said about what's going on in crimea is not in line with reality. thank you. >> i thank the representative of the russian federation for this statement. the representer of ukraine has asked for the floor to make a further statement. >> thank you, madam president.

i will speak russian again in order to be properly understood. >> i support what -- what ambassador cheken said. that we had to be extremely honest and speak honestly. and i just want to clarify a few things that were stated in his statement, i'll be clear. first, the occupation or threat of occupation of the monastery in kiev which -- which is in canonical relationship with the patriarch -- we received information when there was unrest that there might be some kind of provocation against the monastery. the monastery made a statement. that same day and then repeated

it the next day to the effect that the monastery outside of it was being guarded by people from maidon simple people so as there would not be any provocation. that's the answer, the entire answer. people who were demonstrating, they defended this monastery from possible provocations. the black sea fleet. i have something to -- i have -- just an amendment. in the treaty it says our agreement -- it says that the number of fleet -- the american strength is 11,000 people including about 2,000 marines. about 5 300 other military from the russian armed forces,

11,000 -- now, attention, in december last year, our ministry was notified by the russian side in december that the black sea fleet will be maintained at the numerical strength of 11,000. now i would like to go back to what the jordanian ambassador said. he quoted the document ss of the g.a. a resolution where they defined what is aggression? there it said any of the situations described there will be aggression. so, one of the paragraphs said, in the territory of a country, the ukraine you have agreements armed units of another country, russia.

the black sea fleets. and it says how many and the place where they go and if there is a violation of where they go and how many without the agreements of the receiving agreements, that's aggression. and i'm not even saying that the number of armed forces that has infringed the air space in ukraine at that time about 14 military helicopters came that should not be part of the black sea fleets. many transport aircraft that's infringed our space. so there's a larger number, then, an increase in the number of military -- russian military in violation of all of our agreements and that is aggression. on language and much speculation. and i explained to the -- to the

press and colleagues, we explained. in 1990, that's the first law on independence. and we have something there about national minorities guaranteeing equal rights and equal protection of national interests in any ethnic group including ethnic minorities in the first law. in 2012 the law that he took which was not procedural, it was adopted under pressure. it was adopted by the former government. in 2012, that law didn't take into account the 2,000 amendments and the opposition didn't vote. we didn't need that legislation because it was enough -- it was enough to have 1992 law in the constitution. and i would just remind you that when the ukraine went to the u -- we took on an obligation to sign and to ratify a charter on

minority languages. so bear in mind -- >> minority languages not languages of minorities, but minority languages. >> the minority language. the former governments redid the charter. it's redoing it and they're saying that it should apply not to languages like crimean that need to be protected by should apply to all languages of national minorities that are protected by law. now getting rid of that ball, the government said that the parliaments will look once again at ratification of the charter which we undertook to ratify. we signed and ratified. and the russian federation, by the way, did not ratify -- did

not ratify the charter up to now. we are ratifying it for languages that i don't have a territory, i have no official definition, will defend those languages that would disappear because not many speakers of them. the party of regions. unfortunately, an untruth was set. the party of regions, the former party of government was a large caucus of the current parliament. moreover, one of the leaders of this caucus said he would run for president. so nobody -- the official parody of -- called mr. yanukovych what he is, a traitor.

not said about the parliament. the parliaments legally and for a long time elected and not in a revolutionary way. it has all of the power it needs to appoint the government. it has full range of powers to conduct elections. today it was said that on the 25th of may, there will be presidential elections. so let's give the opportunity for that to work for us, to learn how to live together, how to govern -- i agree that we need assistance -- assistance so that we can get past the crisis going on for year, help the country build a future in a way that people will not be ashamed to live there. we need that assistance. that's to form a civil society. and, of course, we invite all to come and help and look how we're doing it but not to bother us

when we don't ask for it. thank you. >> i thank the representative of ukraine for his statement. there are no further speakers inscribed. the security council has >> the annual conference of the american israeli conference was held monday and john kerry spoke. this is 40 minutes. >> norm, thank you. thank you very much. thank you all, 14,000 strong or more. howard friedman and executive director, incoming president bob cullen, incoming chairman, outgoing chairman lee rosenberg, and ambassador dan schapiro.

i know where our ambassadors are. [applause] let me tell you, it is really an enormous pleasure for me to be able to be here, it is a privilege. it is good to see so many friends, 14,000 of you. it is frightening to see me on such large screens here. last time i spoke to aipac i joined your national summit in napa valley, by way of satellite, and you were in the vineyards, i was overseas, a different kind of figure. today i am getting the better end of the deal because i'm here with you in person, and your wine selection is limited this time.

[laughter] i had the pleasure of speaking to aipac back in the 1990's, a great honor, and every time i come here, when i get a chance to talk to a smaller session this is a remarkably inspiring gathering. people from every corner of the country coming together to demonstrate our deep support as americans for a strong u.s.-israel relationship. [applause] and it is no exaggeration, not just words, to say every single one of you brings here such a special passion to a cause that you so fiercely believe in, and let me tell you something, unequivocally, after almost 30 years in the senate, i can tell you that is precisely why aipac's work is in the best

traditions of american democracy, and i thank you for practicing it. [applause] i want you to know in my judgment these democratic values are stamped in the dna of both the united states and israel but we also share something much deeper than that. like no other two countries on the planet, against the deepest odds, both america and israel confidently, purposely set out to be examples to the world. think about it. from its earliest days, israel has always said it is not enough just to be one of many in a community of nations. israel has strived since isaiah's time to serve as a light unto nations. [applause]

and that -- that responsibility sounds absolutely unbelievably similar to something that we as americans know is part of who we are, too. my grandfather, 10 times over, in other terms, he was a man by the name of john winter. he came to what was then the new world. and he came in search of freedom. freedom to worship as he wished. he was a minister. he and his congregants were outcasts. persecuted. no guarantee even of survival. he and his congregants were outcasts. persecuted. no guarantee even of survival. and on his way here, he delivered a now fairly famous sermon at sea in which he called his community to great a city upon the hills in their new home of america. whether you call it a city upon a hill or a light unto the nations, it actually means the same.

will being a model to the world, having a home that sets a standard. a standard of dignity and freedom so the foundation of the friendship between the american people and the people of israel was actually laid centuries before. set under the u.s. capital. and looking around this room tonight, it is clear that our friendship has never been stronger. [applause] i will tell you why. because today, as israel faces serious challenges to the future, it is america that will stand firmly by her side. i will tell you -- [applause]

with the leadership of president obama and you can look it up you can measure it. it is not exaggeration but a matter of fact. there's been a complete unmatched commitment to israel's security. the record of this administration in providing aid and assistance and consultation and weapons and help, standing up in various international forum, i am proud to tell you is unrivaled. the bottom line has been making sure that israel has the means to defend itself by itself and defending israel's right to do so. [applause] that is what we have done. security. security is fundamentally what president obama is committed to. and so too is he committed to using the full force of our diplomacy to resolve the two

great questions that matter when it comes to assuring the security of israel. dividing a nuclear iran and ending them israel/palestinian conflict. let me start with iran. i know there are many questions. many people, there has been a healthy debate about the approach. we welcome that. let me sum up president obama's policy -- 10 simple, clear words. unequivocal, we will not permit iran to obtain a nuclear weapon. period. [applause] i -- [applause]

i added an 11th word for punctuation. i want you to understand is there are no if's, and's, or but's. this is real policy and we mean the word. the word of the president and the united states that iran will not get a nuclear weapon. as we said at the outset and i say it again, our diplomacy is lighted by a bottom line. no deal is better than a bad deal. we absolutely will not accept a bad deal. [applause] we are committed to a deal that gets the job done. why? because we get it. we understand it. as president obama said, no one can question why israel looks at the iranian program and sees an

existential threat. we get it. we understand in our gut. we also know something else, this is not some favor that we do for israel. this is something that is also in the interest of the united states of america. it is in the interest of countries surrounding israel. a nuclear bomb for iran would threaten the stability of the region and will produce an arms race among the surrounding countries. there is no way the world is safer and he where in the world with a nuclear weapons in iran and we are not going to let it happen, and of story. [applause] now -- [applause] to do that, to achieve this all-important goal, and protect america's security and israel's,

it is crucial that we seize what might be the last best chance to be able to have the policy work and may be the last chance for quite some time. the reality is only strong diplomacy can fully and permanently achieve the goal. those who said the strike and hit need to look at exactly what happens after you do that. whether that properly eliminates the program or opens up all types of other like iran leaving the nuclear treaty. not allow inspectors in or living under the international regimen. only strong diplomacy guarantees a nuclear program goes away for good instead of going underground and becoming more dangerous. only the diplomacy can justify options if you have to take them

in the end. we say, president obama and myself and others, let's sees the diplomatic moment and that is what we are trying to do. the truth is, it is strong diplomacy that has made this moment possible. we needed to give it the space to work. we need to make sure this opportunity were to resume, it is not because we are the ones that close the window. now i understand the skepticism, 29 plus years as a senator became chairman of foreign relations committee, worked with most of the members of the board and aipac and proud to tell you during that time i had a 100% voting record for israel. [applause]

i am not coming here to stand up in front of you and tell you that i know that iran is going to reach an agreement because i do not know. i do not know what they will do. i didn't know if they are able to make some the tough decisions they will have to make. i know the united states is going to be able to look the world in the eye and say we have to do something, we have exhausted the possibilities available to us for that diplomatic, peaceful resolution. let me make it clear -- our approach is not ronald reagan and the soviets, we are not looking at it and saying trust but verify our approach. ours is a much more complex and dangerous world, it is verify and verify. that is what we intend to do. [applause] there is very good reason for the sanctions to exist in the first place.

good reason we have kept the architecture of these sanctions in place. and we continue to enforce it even as we negotiate a comprehensive agreement. in the last weeks will announce additional sanctions with respect to individuals who have attempted to go around it. we have not changed one piece of the sanctions architecture. and yet, we are able to negotiate. our eyes are wide open. this is not a process that is open ended. this is not a process that is about trusting tehran, this is about testing tehran. you can be sure if iran fails this test, america will not fail israel. that i promise. [applause]

we have taken no options off of the table, but so far, there is no question but to tough sanctions and a strong diplomacy are already making israel and america safer. the first step agreement, not an interim agreement, a first step agreement, the agreement in force today did not just called the advanced -- halt the advance of the iran nuclear program, it has rolled it back. we all remember how prime minister netanyahu highlighted the 20% uranium enrichment at the united nations. iran is reducing its stockpile of 20% and without the agreement in force today, the stockpile would have grown even more dangerous and the amount of breakout time that they had

would have grown smaller. because of the agreement, iran will soon have to take its entire stock of 20% enraged -- enriched uranium to 0. 0. you do not have to be a math major to know israel is safer. that is what we have achieved. the same independent inspectors who also tell us that iran had halted advances on heavy water reactor. with out agreement in force today, we cannot have stopped them for making progress on the heavy water reactor. iran has stopped enriching uranium above 5%. it has given inspectors daily access to the facilities. you have heard about it.

that underground facility that is a secret for so long. we never had people in it. because of this agreement, we have people inside every single day telling us what is happening. [applause] none of these things would have happened without forceful diplomacy by the united states and our international partners. now, we have to finish the job. like i tell my staff, there are not any exit polls in foreign policy. it is results that count. final results. that means we have to let forceful diplomacy people working in order to put this test through iran. right now, we are carefully and i mean carefully, negotiating an agreement. we are consulting with our friends in israel. constantly.

the minute under-secretary sherman finishes her last set of meetings the other day, she went immediately to israel. briefed a really on the talks and then went to saudi arabia and ue and briefed our european partners. you may be asking if no deal is better than a bad deal, what does the united states consider a good deal? you have my word and the president's that in the united states will only sign an agreement that answers three critical questions. first, will it make certain that iran cannot obtain a nuclear weapon? can it continuously ashore the world that iran's program remains entirely peaceful as it claims? willie the agreement increase

our visibility on the nuclear program and expand the breakout time so that if they were to go for a bomb tom a we know will have time to act? those are the tests, our standards for any comprehensive of agreement. it is that simple. those objectives if not met, there will not be an agreement. make no mistake. [applause] make no mistake. we cannot resolve the questions, it is up iran to prove to the world its program is peaceful. in the world will hold iran accountable. if it turns out that iran cannot address the world's concerns, i guarantee it will face more pressure. iran will face more pressure. more isolation. congress will introduce a more tough sanctions. let me assure you.

i am sure you -- it will take about two hours to get it through the house and senate and it will not be delayed and the congress will have to do nothing more than schedule the vote. because president obama and i fully support the sanctions under those circumstances. [applause] in the meantime as i said earlier, we are enforcing every letter of the existing sanctions. i have instructed every state department bureau around the world to watch vigilantly for any signs of the sanctions being spurted. and to any country that wants to trade with iran within these sanctions firmly in place, the united states will tell them exactly what i have told foreign leaders and in no uncertain

terms -- iran is not open for business until iran has closed for nuclear bombs. [applause] now, strong diplomacy is also an terms -- iran is not open for essential to a threat to israel's security -- and in the conflict with the palestinians. and in doing so, preserving the jewish and democratic nature of israel. [applause] i have had some folks ask me why i am so committed to these negotiations and why i am so convinced peace is possible and why does john kerry go to israel so often. i think i have heard that hoyer said he has been there 12 times. i have been there more times

than that in the last nine months. [laughter] and i have been in the middle east more times even than that in the past month. a part from the question, a part for my affection from israel that dates back to my first visit, my first visit in 1986 -- and, at it strikes me that is the question of why i go. this is not about me but the dreams of israelis and the dignity of palestinians. it is about reconciling 2 people who want to live normal, secure lives in the land that they have fought over for so long. it is by answering king david's timeless call that we seek peace and pursue it. it is about fulfilling the

fervent prayer for peace that the jews around the world recite. it is about parents who want to raise their families that accept the nationstate of the jewish people is here to stay. it is not news to any israeli to hear me say they live in a difficult neighborhood. israelis know that better than anyone. no one needs to explain the important of peace to a mother who just sent her daughter to the army or a son who was waiting for his father to come home from another mission. no one knows the success or failure of those who will inherit them for generations to come. i have seen all of these realities and so many different ways in my travels in israel from the rocket casings to the shelter that i visited years ago

where children had to hide from potential rockets. i have seen it. my friend, i believe we are in a point in history that requires the united states, israel's closest friend, and the preeminent power to do everything we can to help and this conflict once and for all. that is why america -- [applause] that is why america helped bring the parties back to the table. let's be honest. israelis and palestinians have difficult choices to make. no one understands just how complex those choices are and how emotional that are better than the leaders who have to summon the courage in order to make them. i have sat with netanyahu four hours and hours and days and days. we have become good friends. i believe -- [applause]

in fact, he should be charging me rant. i have seen up close and personally the grit and guts of the man and his love of country. and i can tell you with absolute certainty without question prime minister and say i will has demonstrated -- netanyahu has demonstrated in pursuit of peace. [applause] he knows that it is the only way for israel to be a jewish and democratic state, not a bi-national state. [applause] as president obama said in the oval office today, and i quote it. "prime minister netanyahu has approached the negotiations with a level of seriousness and commitment that reflects his leadership and his desire of the

israeli people for peace." president abbas and i know and i've heard the arguments, there is no part of peace that abbas will be there. both sides say the same thing about each other. that is what we have to get through here. very small needles to thread for the trusted deficits. president obama has demonstrated and wants to be a partner for peace. he is committed to trying to end the conflict and all of his claims. how he can do that? let's be candid. some of you doubt it. as it israelis security officials will a test, -- attest, abbas has been against the violence. i have also spent many hours

with president abbas. i believe he clearly understands both the tremendous benefit of peace and the great costs of failure. he understands that in terms of his own people, his own grandchildren, the country he hopes to be able to lead, and in terms of the history that be leakers -- beleaguers all. he know the people what never have the self-determination without ending the conflict in a solution that delivers two states for two peoples. and so this prime minister netanyahu when he looks me in the eye and said i cannot accept a deal with the palestinians

that does not make the people of israel safer. we agree 100%. [applause] but i argue, there is a distinction between a unilateral withdrawal from lebanon where nothing is resolved and a phased withdrawal that is negotiated where everything is at least an agreement resolved. i learned about israel's security of many different trips over there. one stand out. i had been a pilot since i was in college. i was on a trip over there and i was having a luncheon at the airbase with the israeli air force and the colonel in charge had phoned. he was an ace from the six.

were having lunch and i had been badgering to let me go up and fly. finally he comes back and says senator, i hope you do not eat it too much. we go fly. i said, great. went out and drove out to visit jet. he trusted me. we put on our helmets. the moment we were off the ground -- it literally, we took off. i took the stick. we are flying around. next thing i know, he is saying you should turn faster, you are going over egypt. i turned very fast and i asked if i could use some aerobatics. i turned upside down and did a big loop. i was coming down and looking upside down. i said to myself this is perfect. i can see jordan and all of israel below me.

this is the perfect way to see the middle east upside down and backwards. [applause] i understand it. [applause] just to tell you -- i cannot tell you about me being up there and almost turning, you get this sense of the rocket from there and the threat of war and to understand, it is impossible to ignore. how vulnerable israel can be and why israel's security is our first priority. do we understand that? that is why my friends president obama sent a four-star general, one of the most respected minds and united states military to do something we have never done and all of the history of administrations negotiating for israel.

that is to work with israelis and jordanians to make the jordan river border as a strong as the strongest borders on earth. that is what makes his effort different from what we have done before. with a combination of the best military experience america can offer and the best technology that we can deliver, we believe we can deliver security that israel needs in order to make peace and president obama is committed to doing that. we have no illusions. we saw what happened when we withdrew unilaterally from gaza and lebanon. we all learned lessons i hope. that's why and negotiated agreement is so important. the security arrangements that we are helping to design would need to be operationally proven. we are not doing this on a whim and prayer.

we would never let it turn into a nether gaza. [applause] my friends, we understand that israel has to be strong in order to make peace. we also understand that he's will make israel stronger. [applause] any peace agreement must guarantee israel's identity as a jewish homeland. [applause] as was said on this data last year, a two state solution is the only way for israel to stay true to its founding personals to remain above the jewish and democratic. at the last year's aipac, he said statehood is not a favor for the palestinians. let me affirm he is right. it is not. israel also needs he's in order to great greater prosperity.

all of you here know the great economic benefits of peace. all of you have seen what is role has already been able to build with the forces of the region against them. just imagine what they will be able to build with palestinian neighbors. i met in the foreign minister of the surrounding countries, a very wealthy country and a very smart prime minister said to me, if we make peace, under the initiative and committee that is following everything we are doing very closely and supporting and they said if we make peace, israel will trade more and this community with in a few years that a trade with europe today. that is what we have available to us. i believe we need to stand together with a single voice to reject any of the arbitrary, unwarranted boycotts for more

than 30 years that have loudly opposed boycotts of israel and i will continue to oppose those boycotts of israel's. that will never change. [applause] every time it was subjected to attacks on legitimacy whether under the united nations or from an a nation, the united states will use every tool to defeat those efforts and we will stand with israel. [applause] finally, peace and demands that israel fulfills his destiny not only as a nation but also as a neighbor. that begins with the palestinians and an extensive to the entire arab league. the initiative can open the door

to peace and normalize relations with 20 additional arab countries and a total of 55 muslim countries. the upheaval in the middle east has shown us all that arabs and israelis share some of the very same security concerns. without the palestinian conflict, these common interest can grow into real relationships and transform their standing in the region. i just invite you -- i promise you these conversations take place. i have had of them throughout the gulf region and middle east where increasingly, those countries and begin to see the possibilities of mutual security interest coming together through all of them against iran and terrorism and religious extremism. this a commonality that's a new

threat in the region and i believe it brings the potential of new possibilities. it is also important to remember that ending the conflict means ending the incitement to the president abbas has called incitement a germ that must be removed. he has fought in order to deal with the problem. i can tell you that with any final agreement, it will also include a larger to help people on both sides move beyond the painful past and promote a culture of peace and tolerance. after all of these years, it is really no mystery what he and game really looks like -- the end game really looks like. i know what peace looks like. when i talked to prime minister netanyahu, everybody shares the consistence. it is not new.

after camp david and annapolis and all of these efforts, what did he end game like is straightforward. security arrangements that leave israelis more secure, not less. mutual recognition of the jewish people and the nation state of the outstanding people. and in and to the conflict and all claims. an agreed solution for palestinian refugees. one that does not diminish the jewish character in the state of israel. and, a resolution that finally allows jerusalem to live up to its name as the city of peace. it will take hard work. i am not pretending any of the answers -- these are all narrative issues, tough issues conduct any issues. but there is a vision of peace. it takes tough choices on both

sides especially over the coming days. i guarantee you that america president obama him and this administration will be there every day, every step of the way. we'll stand with israel's leaders today. and the leaders of the future. we will ensure that our light shines not only throughout the nations, but throughout the generations. i will leave a guy's last name out and keep took part in a exchange program they bring israelis and palestinians to gather to talk about their histories and hopes. his grandparents fled europe. he was born and raised in jerusalem. he served in the idf and work as an entrepreneur in the tech industry. this is what he said in that program. "we respect our past but we do not want to live it.

we are young enough to dream and believe that change is possible and that fear can be defeated." i think guy is right. change is possible. fear can be defeated. those are charts is we have -- and those are choices we have to make now. a few months ago, i landed in tel aviv and it was the 18th anniversary of the assassination. i went straight to the prime minister's daughter at the site of her father's murder. we stood steps away from where the greater general sang the famous lyrics. "do not whisper a prayer, sing a song of peace. do not say that they will, bring that today -- come, bring that day."

that is our mission. in what ever capacity. our mission is to raise our voices for peace and we also need to listen. we have to listen to those who first gave voice, voices that still echo thousands of years later. i think it was the first time i went to israel. i spent a week there. i went all over the country and like many first-time visitors, i climbed the -- i climbed it with a guide. some of you may know him or or heard of him. our group debated what happened on the top of that mountain. the accounts of what happened 2000 years before we were there.

after we had this long debate, we all voted to determine did it happen as he recounted or was it different? we all voted unanimously it happened as he recounted. he told us to walk to the edge of the precipice look across and to shout, to shout across the ancestral home of the jewish people. as we stood were every new israeli soldier begins his or her service by swearing an oath to honor that, if he instructed us to shout all at the same time -- we shouted. i have to tell you, at calling -- echoing across and the unforgettable way were these haunting echoes. i will never forget hearing the

words bouncing off of the mountain. it is literally like we were hearing the voices of the souls of those who had perished, sacrificing their lives. and we were affirming those words, the state of israel lives and the people of israel live. we have to listen to those voices. those long-ago who encouraged us to build a city on a hill to be a light unto the nations and an example to the world to ensure that israel survives. we have to listen to the voices of young people whose future depends on the choices that we the leaders of today, make. it is for their future that we will give a new strand to the u.s./israel partnership like aipac does.

it is for their future that we will come together breaking greater voice and we will remember for ever those words and be driven by them -- generation upon generation and to the future because of the that israel survives. work you do the work we will do together. thank you all very much. an honor to be with you. [applause] >> president obama will be at washington, d.c. elementary school to talk about his budget are in t. and about 45 minutes, we will be joined the washington post political reporter to discuss the president's proposed budget and the republican alternative. at eight p.m. eastern, latest on

the situation in ukraine and harry just was the ambassador from ukraine from 1998-2000. "washingtonhost: the morning. tuesday, march 4. after another winter storm in washington, d.c., the house and senate are set to can -- reconvene at2 2:00 with the house set to consider a bills. while both ends of pennsylvania avenue continue to keep a close eye on the unfolding crisis in the ukraine, the annual federal budget process gets underway today with the white house set to deliver the 25th team plan to capitol hill. this morning, we will