[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> here is a look at our primetime schedule. at 8:00 eastern, the nebraska supreme court hears an oral argument in the case over the planned route of the keystone pipeline. on c-span2, "book tv." american history tv with programs on the war of 1812

in the 14 burning of washington, d.c. tonight, american history tour on westward expansion continues with a look at the lewis and clarke expedition from st. louis to the pacific, and in covered wagons. here is more now. >> we see them circling the wagons. rarely if ever did that happen. there were very few deaths along the trail that had anything to do with thinly -- with indians. the indians actually helped the pioneers more than hurting them. but the dangers came in, first of all disease, which hit about 10% of the people west, and also things like drowning and accidental death by gunshot being run over by a wagon.

that happened to a lot of kids who were climbing on the wagon and would fall off in the wheels the wheels would roll over them. it was really kind of an unprecedented mass migration. we're talking about over 300,000 people during methe period in question who passed up everything and went west. >> watch the entire event tonight on c-span. recent job look at numbers released for the month of august. initiatives in the 2014 midterm elections. they talk about the

security of information stored in the cloud, which includes computers and servers that can be accessed by the internet. and your phone calls tweets. live 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. here are highlights for this we can. , former fcc commissioners/ sunday at noon, debates between kay hagan and her republican opponent. and from the california brown and race, kashkari. saturday evening, mike of solace. frances berry.y

saturday, the building of the hoover dam, and sunday night, the anniversary of gerald ford's pardon of richard nixon. let us know what you think about the programs you're watching. tweet, or youus a can e-mail us. join the c-span conversation. like us on facebook. follow us on twitter. on labor day, bernie sanders spoke at a breakfast hosted by -cio.fl co senator sanders is considering a presidential campaign run during 2016 and plans to travel to iowa to host a series of town hall meetings. >> we are going to give you another opportunity to get up and down on your feet.

let me now welcome our friends and a friend of working men and women, the friend of the values that we impress as a labor movement, senator bernie sanders, who was born in brooklyn, the younger of two sons. he graduated from the university of chicago and then moved to vermont. justice whog to a lived up there. if you do not think getting to the polls in november of 2014 is not important, this was 10 votes that put this political career into action. he has been a champion of all

kinds of issues, but most of all, on equity, on making sure that people get a fair shake him and he will take on anybody and fight against anybody who tries to undermanned the middle class in this country. senator bernie sanders. [applause] >> brothers and sisters, thank you very much for inviting me to be with you this morning. i want to thank mark and curt and jan and all of the folks at the new hampshire afl-cio. let me thanktly, and and every member here

trade unionists all over this country who today, yesterday, and decades past have put their lives on the line, have stood up and fought for the rights of working people. i know i want to thank you very much for that. -- and i want to thank you very much for that. [applause] it is no secret right now that the billionaire class and the big money interests are targeting organized labor. theyhe reason for that is understand for first come block themd collectively, they can have decent wages. [applause] that seeillionaires you as their strongest opposition and thank you very much for being just that -- [applause] our job is to not only fight

back against all of those people who want to destroy the trade trade union movement, our job is to preserve the trade union movement, and make sure that anybody who wants to be in a union can be in a union. [applause] i also want to thank all of you in this room for sending jean states to the united senate. i am proud and honored to be the chairman of the senate committee on veterans affairs, and i want to tell you, there are very few people on the united states congress who fight harder for the men and women who put their lives on the line to defend us shaheen.

please send her back to washington. i want to wish andy custer and the governor the best of luck in their reelection efforts. [applause] main point that i want to make this morning, and i will be as straight forward as i can with you, is to tell you that this country faces in or mostly difficult problems, and i would be dishonest to try to push these problems underneath the rug, and i would be dishonest if i did not tell you that in my view the problems that we face today are probably more serious than at any time since the great depression, and if you throw in the international planetary crisis of climate change, they serious.en more

that is the reality. and if this country is going to go forward, we have got to have the courage to look at these problems straightforwardly, analyze them, and ring people together to solve them. from the bottom of my heart, i these problems in fact are solvable, but they will not be solved unless working people come together and have the courage to take on the greed and the selfishness that we are seeing all over this country. [applause] let me really just review where thell economically, and governor touched on some of these issues. let me be blunt and tell you what many of you already know. in a nutshell, the great middle class of this country, once the

envy of the entire world, is disappearing. and our job is to rebuild that disappearing middle class. [applause] my family has the same story that millions of families have in this country. my dad came to this country the age of 17 without a nickel in his pocket. he never made a whole lot of money. but he worked his entire life, was able to send to kids to college. that everytoday is kid in this country should have the right to go to college regardless of the income of his or her family. the people who work hard are ,ntitled to earn decent wages and that the wealth of this country should be fairly

distributed, not only just to the top 1%. [applause] america we have more people living in poverty than at any time in the history of this country. the highest rate of childhood poverty of any major country on earth. and despite the modest successes of the affordable care act, we still have 40 million people in this country without health insurance, and we remain the only nation in the industrialized world that does not guarantee health care is a right, and we have got to change that. [applause] there are a lot of angry people out there, and you see them on tv. unfortunately, many of them are angry at the wrong people for the wrong reason. but whether you are in the

street wall movement or the tea party group, you have a right to be angry given what is happening in the economy today. revolution in a technology, which has made every worker in america more productive, the fact of the matter is that the standard of living for working people continues to decline. 1999, the typical american family, the family right in the middle, has seen a decline in income by over $5,000. incredibly, that family today earns less income than it did 25 years ago. you want to know why people are angry? they are out there working long low wages.

you find kids working, working desperately hard, and they are getting nowhere in a hurry, and that is not where america should be. [applause] and not enough people know this, we are a lot better off than we were when george w. bush left office, went 700,000 people a month were losing their jobs, and the american and international financial system were on the verge of collapse. yes, we are better off because we are creating jobs. but nobody in this room believes that we are anywhere near where we ought to be. the fact of the matter is that most of the new jobs created since the great recession are low-wage jobs, they are part-time jobs, and in fact, they pay 23% less than the jobs

we lost during the wall street collapse era. now, here is that i think all of you know, and you pick up the papers in the morning, they tell you that unemployment in america, official unemployment, is 6.1%. that is official unemployment. real unemployment come including those people who have given up looking for work or those people who are working part-time where they want to work full-time, you want to know what that number is? it is 12%. youth unemployment -- we do not talk about this at all -- youth unemployment today, kids are graduating high school, and to have dropped out of high school, it is 20%. many of you are not paying seeing what went on missouri, where unarmed african-american youth were shot. what you do not know is that

african-american youth unemployment is 35%. and in the st. louis area, is actually higher than that. we have got to put the american people back to work. [applause] and the federal government has got to step up to the plate with a massive federal jobs program rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure. [applause] and i am glad to see new hampshire is doing something. i know vermont is. but unless i mistaken, the government could tell you that you need more federal help. she is right. i want to touch on another issue, when we talk about the economy, and i have to tell you, this is not an issue you see

discussed on tv too much. and you do not see a whole lot of people talking about, but we have to be honest about it. since 2001 -- hold on to your hats -- since 2001 thousand one come in new hampshire, and vermont, and all across this country, we have seen the loss of over 60,000 factories. and millionsies, of decent-paying jobs. one of theiew, reasons for that is a disastrous ta, cafta, a, naphthf tode policy which has said corporate america, here it is, you shut down plants in america, you do not to play your workers, $15 from 20 bucks another, you can go to china, are a people for a buck or tw$2 an

hour. i have never voted for one of these trade agreements, i'm proud to tell you, and i am right. [applause] now, to understand the american economy today, you can caps on lies it in one way -- caps on capsulize it in one way. the largest private-sector employer was general motors, and they produced real products, automobiles. they work with good unions like the uaw. they paid their workers good wages and good benefits. that was the american economy

then. , the largest private-sector employer in america is walmart. walmart pays wages that are so low that the people in this room end up subsidizing walmart because many of their workers cannot make it on the wages they receive and they have to go on medicaid, food stamps, and affordable housing paid for the the government. the owner of walmart is the walton family, the largest, the most wealthy family in america. in my view, the wealthiest family in america does not need welfare from the middle class in this country. that then pay their workers a living wage. let them pay their workers a living wage. [applause] education, in a

highly competitive global economy, where we need best educated workforce in the world, right now, as the governor indicated, college is increasingly unaffordable. we have hundreds of thousands of bright young people who have so much to add to our country they cannot afford to go to college. another kids who are going to college are leaving school, 40, $60,000 in debt. i recently spoke to a person who graduated from medical school. she is $300,000 in debt. we need that every person in this country who needs a higher education should be able to get that education regardless of the income of his or her family. [applause]

look, here is the reality. the fact of the matter is that in america today tens of millions of families are struggling hard to put food on the table. they are worried whether or not they are going to have the money to put gas in the car so they can get to work, but if they don't get to the work and they lose their jobs, they do not what is going to happen to their kids. it is the economic reality facing this country. butle-class is appearing what the american people also understand, and what really hurts people, is they understand that something else is going on in the country, and that is that while the middle class shrinks and so many of our people are living in poverty, the people on top are doing phenomenally well and the largest corporations in this country are enjoying record-breaking profits. now, let me tell you something that again you did not hear much in the media about. when we talk about distribution

of wealth, what that means, is that the end of your work life, what you have? what do you own? in terms of distribution of wealth, our country today is the most unequal distribution of wealth of any major country on earth, and worse today than at any time since 1928. today -- listen to this -- the 37% of all about wealth in america. who wants to guess what the bottom 60% of the american people own? what do you geuess? the answer is 1.7%. top 1% owns 37% of the wealth in america. the bottom 60%, everybody in this room, together, owns 1.7% of the wealth. 1% 02 over 23%

of the wealth in america. that, brothers and sisters, is not what america is supposed to be about. we are democracy, not an oligarchy. [applause] family -- oneon family -- owns more wealth than the bottom 40% of the american people. in terms of income, that is what theake every single year, last statistics that we have of all newt 95% income generated -- have we seen some recovery in recent years? yes, we have, but the truth for the middle class it does not matter much whether the growth 4%, because 95% of all new income generated since the wall street trash goes to

the top 1%. brothers and sisters, we have got to do a little bit better than that. working families deserve a piece of the action. [applause] aeverybody in this room is concerned about education. we are concerned that in vermont, all over this country, teachers have been laid off, because local school districts do not have the money to pay them. the 24and that last year most lucrative hedge fund managers made more income than 425,000 ebix schoolteachers -- 425,000 public school teachers. that makes no sense to anybody i know. now, i have laid out some of the problems. let me briefly tell you what i think we have got to do. if we had a congress that had

the guts to represent working families and not just billion not justhe first -- billionaires, the first thing we have to do -- and i think jeanne know something out about this -- something about this, we have got to overturn this disastrous citizens united supreme court decision. [applause] and no matter what issue you are concerned with -- you're interested in women's rights, health care, education, job creation -- you must be concerned that a handful of brothers,es, koch and others, are capable of spending hundreds of millions to elect candidates

whose sole function in life is to make wealthy people even wealthier. that is not the democracy that men and women fought and died for. we've got to overturn citizens united, and in my view, move to public funding of election so everybody has a chance to run for office. [applause] as i mentioned a moment ago, if we are serious about creating jobs, we listen to the american society of civil engineers. what these guys tell us as we $3 trillion in our rail system, wastewater plants, schools. when we make that investment, and when we transform our energy system away from fossil fuel and deal with the crisis of climate change, you know what else we do? we create millions of decent-paying jobs. it should be a top priority for congress that cares about

working people. [applause] and when we talk about the economy, clearly, we all understand that the federal minimum wage of $7.25 is not a minimum wage. we've got to wage the minimum wage to a worthy wage. [applause] one of the current phenomenon, honestly, i do not understand it, one would think that if you were the koch brothers and you had $80 billion in wealth, just your wealth increased by $12 billion in the year, under the tyrannical regime of barack obama -- think of what they would do under a republican

administration -- you asked yourself, and psychologists have to do with this, is not $80 billion enough? how much more do you need to take care of your family? >> all of it. right, and it would seem to me if these guys had any sense of decency, they would not be spending huge amounts of money on candidates whose job it is to gut social security, medicare, medicaid. can you imagine having so much wealth, or money that anybody could dream of, and they are spending their money not to improve the quality of life of our people, but to attack working people and the middle class? one of the goals of the koch brothers and others is to lower taxes for the wealthiest people in this country and largest corporations. you should all note that back in

1952, corporations contributed about 32% of the revenue coming into the federal government. today the number is less than 10%. one at a for corporations in this country, possible operations, pays zero in texas. these guys -- in taxes. these guys are slashing their money in the cayman islands with icy to the billionaire class and large corporations come you cannot run away from america to avoid paying taxes and we're your fair share of taxes in this country. [applause] i want to say a word about social security.

and the importance of social security, and the fact that probably social security is the most successful federal program developed in modern history of this country. there wasf years ago, a virtually united republican party, and some democrats, and some democrats, who wanted to cut social security. and what many of us in the senate did is we reached out to senior groups come to the trade unions, to veterans organizations, the women's organizations, the disability organizations, and we've rallied millions and millions of people who made it clear to the united states congress that you are not going to balance the budget on the backs of the elderly mama the children, the sick and the poor. -- right now we have pushed them back. the goal right now is not to cut social security or what people

are appropriately talking about is how we expand social security and get the benefits out of the working people who need them. [applause] now, let me conclude my remarks by telling you what we are up against in this election right now. there has been a lot of discussion in the media about the koch brothers, and a lot of people in the conservative movement, people spending hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars of dollars in the campaign. we all recognize that is not what american democracy is supposed to be about. but there has been very little are the n about why koch brothers spending so much mother? what do they want. -- money. what do they want? koch ran for president on

the libertarian party ticket, but the libertarian party established their platform. i want to read you some of what was in that platform, because i believe they have not changed their views. it is important for you and the american people to understand what it means and why these guys are throwing money against jeanne shaheen another decent candidates around the country. what is their vision for a new america? and let me quote word for word from their libertarian party platform in 1980. abolition of medicare and medicaid programs. we favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually aggregate, and increasingly oppressive

social security system. they are not talking about cutting social security. they are talking about eliminating social security. " we urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws in the immediate abolition of the that this product federal election commission." you know what that means? they are not content with citizens united and having to do independent expenditures. i want to be in the give somebody a check directly. here's $50 million. here's your script. this is what you say. and that is now, by the way, but the leadership of the republican party believes in. for all of you who work in the postal service, hear this one -- "we propose the abolition of the governmental postal service." >> boo. and i andow, jeanne members of the house are fighting to raise them minimum wage.

what many have used should inerstand, that republicans congress are not only opposing raising the minimum wage, they believe in abolishing the concept of the minimum wage. this is what the koch brothers said in 1980. "we support the repeal of all law which impedes the ability of all people to find employment, such as minimum wage laws." if you are in a high unemployment. and your employer says i will give you three bucks an hour, and you say, i have no choice, that is it, and no more job protection, no more safety relations on the workplace. they supportay, the abolition of the environmental protection agency, and this is the last point. listen to this one carefully. this is their vision of a new america. "we oppose all government welfare relief projects and aid

to the poor programs. all these government programs our privacy-invading, ritualistic, and the proper source of wealth for persons is the private efforts of individuals. start, but byh unemployment compensation, goodbye telegrams and federal aid to education, all gone. their vision of america is where corporate america and the billionaires have it all. and if you are old and sick among maybe somebody will give you some charity so you can deal with your cancer, but you're not going to have medicare. and if you are poor, maybe a church or private charity will help you a little bit, but you are not going to have medicaid. as is their vision of america. now, what this campaign really is about, it is not just protecting social security or medicare or medicaid or decent wages or federal

education, that is all important, but there is a deeper meaning to what this campaign is about. and let me be very straightforward and tell you what it is. the real issue that we are debating today is whether or not we retain our democratic form of society, whether or not working people have rights and benefits, or whether we move toward an oligarchic form of society in which the economic and political life of this country is controlled by a handful of billionaires. that is what this struggle is about. and i believe from the bottom of my heart that while these guys have more money than you can dream of, while they are prepared to spend hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars to defeat candidates who are standing for working families, i believe when we stand together we win because there are a hell of a lot more of us than there are of them. thank you very much. [applause]

>> here is a look at our schedule on the c-span networks. in the nebraska supreme court hears an oral argument in a case over the plant route of the keystone pipeline. on c-span2, "book tv." american history tv with programs on the war of 1812 and 1814 bernie washington, d.c. -- andy 1814 burning of washington, d.c. tomorrow morning, recent job numbers released for the month of august. initiatives in the

2014 midterm elections. a talk about the security of information stored in the cloud, which includes computers and servers that can be accessed by the internet. your phone calls, facebook comments, and tweets. journal," live at 7:00 and eastern on c-span. returnhouse and senate on monday. joining us is a senior editor at c.q. roll call. kevin mccarthy released a memo with the agenda on white house the house is going to be working on. your paper reported on one of those items and the headline is house publicans plan a vote bergdahlg obama for swap. >> it is a resolution that will call out the administration for not following what were seen as

proper channels in giving congress a heads-up of some weeks before the administration went ahead and swapped a group of guantanamo bait detainees for bergdahl, who was being held in the east. it is a way of embarrassing the intoistration and plank this republican narrative that president obama somehow is going outside the law with anything that he chooses. >> one of the items not on is the house,nda planning for a vote on military strikes against isis, and your paper has an article with the headline the house, senate laying groundwork for war on isis. what do you think is going to happen there, and with the upcoming related hearing with john kerry? >> i think there's going to be a lot of talk about isis in the two weeks that congress is expected be in. hearing some democrats saying that the administration's response to the threat has been

too feeble, too disorganized, and i think in addition to hearing, and having people like kerry coming up today hill, there's going to be some effort made to make sure that the president has proper legal authority from congress should you you anymore bombing strikes. or senate, house what can they do in terms of any kinds of strikes on isis? is there real power there? thatere are some power ultimately rests with the executive, and this will be a form to critique and or defend the administration's effort up until now. the house item on agenda, vote on jobs and energy bills. as your paper points out, that would change the senate. and are the details here, how might house democrats respond? >> this is a package of bills that in no way will be signed into law before the midterm elections. thes an effort to give

republican approach to lower energy costs, and it is a package of more than a dozen jobs bills that they expect to bring up. i think you will probably see pretty much party-line votes. nome democrats ani swing districts might be crossovers. i would expect the senate in democratic and ignore what the house is. >> the senate is looking at a procedural vote on a constitutional commitment to limit campaign spending. why is this coming up now, and what do you think the possibilities for passage is? >> what better to bring up a few weeks before the elections ban something that raises money in politics as an issue. this is an amendment proposed by tom udall from new mexico that comes in response to a series of supreme court rulings that increase the role of money in

politics. it would give congress and states much more of a role in setting contribution limits and in controlling outside spending. this is something that really resonates with people in the real america, but it also runs into potential first amendment issues. in fact, you will see republicans say this will i get troubles on free speech rate it is likely to go nowhere, but it will pick up a nice high-volume debate. >> you tweeted this week about something that could go somewhere. this is the stufopgap spending bill. gop other things on the agenda this week. what are some of these bills coming up? >> we think the only thing that is going to get past before for the midterm is this stopgap spending no that will carry funding into the new fiscal year starting october 1. the question is how many extraneous issues the appropriators in leadership are

willing to allow into the spirit will they feel with reauthorization of the export-import bank. will they deal with the migrant crisis on the southern border. will they make a little extra money to address the ebola outbreak in west africa. and the administration has put forth a wish list of what we call spending anomalies that sort of his like if you want to make some policy changes, here are the tweaks we think should happen, but there is strong incentive for the republicans to r.ke this a clean c. resolution that will expire sometime mid september, and it will be up to a lame duck session of congress before christmas to take the funding where they want to, for whatever they choose at that point. >> you could see a late-night on this holiday season? >> yes. >> thanks for the information.

we will follow your people, cqrollcall.com. obama spokesident at the nato summit in with. he said there must be a meeting nato action to the threats posed by isis and that the goal must be to degrade and ultimately be feet the terrorist group. this is 25 minutes. >> good afternoon. let me begin by thanking my great friend prime minister cameron and his entire team for hosting this nato summit and making it such a success. and i want to thank the people of newport and cardiff and the people of wales for welcoming me and my delegation so warmly. it is a great honor to be the first sitting u.s. president to visit wales. we have met at a time of transition and of testing.

after more than a decade, nato's combat mission in afghanistan is coming to an end. russia's aggression against ukraine threatens our vision of a europe that is whole, free, and at peace. in the middle east, the terror threats from isil pose a growing danger. at this summit, our alliance has summoned the will, the resources, and the capabilities to meet all of these challenges. first and foremost, we have reaffirmed the central mission of the alliance. article five enshrines our solemn duty to each other. an armed attack against one shall be considered an attack against them all. this is a binding treaty obligation. it is not negotiable. here in wales, we have left no doubt we will defend every ally. second, we agreed to be resolute in assuring our allies in

eastern europe. increased patrols over the baltics will continue, rotations of additional forces throughout eastern europe for training and exercises will continue, naval patrols in the black sea will continue. and all 28 nato nations agree to contribute to all of these measures for as long as necessary. third, to ensure that nato remains prepared for any contingency, we agreed to a new readiness action plan. the alliance will update its defense planning. we will create a new highly ready rapid response force that can be deployed on very short notice. we will increase nato's presence in central and eastern europe with additional equipment, training, exercises, and troop rotations. and the $1 billion initiative will be a strong and ongoing u.s. contribution to this plan. fourth, all 28 nato nations have

pledged to increase their investments in defense and to move toward investing 2% of their gdp in our collective security. these resources will help nato invest in critical capabilities including intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and missile defense. this commitment makes clear nato will not be complacent. our alliance will reverse the decline in defense spending and rise to meet the challenges we face in the 21st century. fifth, our alliance is fully united in support of ukraine's sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity, and its right to defend itself. to back up this commitment, all 28 nato allies will now provide security assistance to ukraine. this includes nonlethal support to the ukrainian military like body armor, fuel, medical care for ukrainian wounded troops, as well as assistance to help

modernize ukrainian forces, including logistics and command and control. here in wales we also sent a strong message to russia that actions have consequences. today the u.s. and europe are finalizing measures to broaden our sanctions across russia's financial, energy, and defense sectors. we strongly support president poroshenko's efforts to pursue a peaceful resolution to the conflict. the cease-fire announced today can advance the goal, but only if there's follow-through on the ground. pro-russian separatists must keep their commitments, and russia must stop its violations of ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. beyond europe, we pay tribute to all those from our isaf mission, including more than 2200 americans who have given their lives for our security in afghanistan. nato's combat mission ends in three months, and we are

prepared to transition to a new mission to focus on training and assisting afghan security forces. both presidential candidates have pledged to sign the bilateral security agreement that would be the foundation of our continued cooperation. but as we all know, the outcome of the recent election must be resolved, so we continue to urge both candidates to make the compromises necessary so afghans can move forward together and form a sovereign, united, and democratic nation. finally, we reaffirm the door to nato membership remains open to nations that can meet our high standards. we agreed to expand the partnership that makes nato the hub of global security. we are launching a new effort with our closest partners, including many that have served with us in afghanistan, to make sure our forces continue to operate together, and we will create a new initiative to help countries build their defense capabilities, starting with

georgia, moldova, jordan, and libya. i also leave here confident nato allies and partners are prepared to join in a broad international effort to combat the threat posed by isil. already, allies have joined us in iraq where we have stopped isil's advances. we have equipped our iraqi partners and helped them go on offense. nato has agreed to play a role in providing assistance to those on the frontlines. key nato allies stand ready to confront this terror threat through military come intelligence, and law enforcement, as well as diplomatic efforts. secretary kerry will now travel to the region to continue building the broad-based coalition that will enable us to degrade and ultimately destroy isil. so taken together, i think the progress we have achieved in wales makes it clear our alliance will continue to do whatever is necessary to ensure

our collective defense and to protect our citizens. so with that, let me take a few questions. i will start with julie pace from the associated press. >> i wanted to go back to the situation in ukraine. if the cease-fire does appears to be holding, would you and your european counterparts back away from these sanctions you say you have prepared? or do you feel it is important to levy the sanctions regardless of the cease-fire agreement? can you say specifically what u.s. contributions will be in terms of troop numbers and equipment? is it beyond the proposal you announced in warsaw? >> with respect to the cease-fire agreement, obviously we are hopeful. but based on past experience, also skeptical that the separatists will follow through and the russians will stop violating ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity.

so it has to be tested. i know the europeans are discussing the final shape of their sanctions measures. it is my view that if you look at president poroshenko's plan it is going to take some time to implement. and as a consequence, for us to move forward based on what is currently happening on the ground with sanctions, while acknowledging that if in fact the elements of the plan are implemented, then those sanctions could be lifted is a more likely way for us to ensure there is follow-through. but that is something we will consult closely with our european partners to determine. i do want to point out that the only reason we are seeing the cease-fire at this moment is because of both the sanctions

already applied and the threat of further sanctions, which are having a real impact on the russian economy and have isolated russia in a way we have not seen in a very long time. the path for russia to rejoin the community of nations that respects international law is still there, and we encourage president putin to take it. but the unity and the firmness we have seen in the transatlantic alliance in supporting ukraine and applying sanctions has been a testimony to how seriously people take the basic principle that big countries cannot just stomp on little countries or force them to change their policies and give up their sovereignty. so i am very pleased with the kind of work that has been done

throughout this crisis in ukraine. and i think u.s. leadership has been critical throughout that process. with respect to the rapid response forces and the action plan we have put forward, in warsaw i announced $1 billion in our initiative. a sizable portion of that will be devoted to implementing various aspects of this readiness action plan. we have already increased rotations of personnel in the baltic states, for example. we have the air police activities taking place in the baltic and the black sea. but this allows us to supplement it.

it allows us to coordinate it and integrate it further with contributions from other partners. what is signified is nato's recognition that, in light of these russian actions -- we want to make it crystal clear. we mean what we say when we are talking about our article five commitments, and an increased presence serves as the most effective deterrent to any additional russian aggression we might see. angela king, bloomberg. >> what are your specific expectations for what regional actors like saudi arabia, yemen, and jordan can legitimately provide to a coalition against the islamic state? is there a role there for iran as well? secretary kerry said he expects the allied countries to coalesce around a specific plan by the end of september. do you agree with the timeline that he set out?

what concrete commitments are you leaving this summit with from other nations that are here? >> let me start with a general point. there was unanimity over the last two days that isil poses a significant threat to nato members, and there was a recognition that we have to take action. i did not get any resistance or pushback to the basic notion that we have a critical role to play in rolling back the savage organization that is causing so much chaos in the region and is harming so many people and poses a long-term threat to the safety and security of nato members. so there is great conviction

that we have to act to degrade and ultimately destroy isil. that was extremely encouraging. beyond that, what we have already seen is significant support from a variety of member states for actions we have been taking in iraq. we have done 100 strikes in iraq today that have had a significant impact on degrading their capabilities and making sure that we are protecting u.s. citizens, critical infrastructure, providing space for the iraqi government to form. our hope is that the government is actually formed by next week. that then allows us to work with them on a broader strategy. and some of the assistance has

been in the form of airlift for humanitarian assistance. much has been providing additional arms to the peshmerga and the iraqi security forces. there has been logistical support, intelligence and surveillance support. and so a variety of folks with different capabilities have already made a contribution. i am confident that we can build on that strong foundation and the clear commitment and have the kind of coalition that will be required for the sustained effort we need to push isil back. now, john kerry will be traveling to the region to have further consultations with the regional actors and players. and i think it is critical that we have arab states and, specifically, sunni majority states that are rejecting the

kind of extremist nihilism we are seeing out of isil that say that is not what islam is about and are prepared to join us actively in the fight. my expectation is that we will see friends and allies and partners of ours in the region, prepared to take action as well, as part of a coalition. one of our tasks will be to build capability. what we have learned in iraq is, yes, isil has significant capabilities and they combined terrorist attacks with traditional military tactics to have significant effects. part of the problem also is that we have not seen as effective of a fighting force on behalf of the iraqi security forces as we need. and we're going to have to focus

on the capable units that are already there, bolster them, bolster the work that the peshmergas have done, and support them from their. ultimately, we need a strong ground game. we will also be the sunni tribes in the area, we need them to recognize that their future is not the fanaticism that isil represents, so they start taking the fight as well. that will require the sort of regional partnerships that we are talking about. in terms of timetable, we are working deliberately. if you look at what we have done over the last several months, we have taken this in stages.

first stage is to make sure we were encouraging iraqi government formation. second stage was making sure that we were building on the intelligence assessments we have done, we were in a position to conduct limited airstrikes, protect their personnel and critical infrastructure, and engage in humanitarian activities. the third phase will allow us to take the fight to isil, broaden, the effort, and our goal is to act with urgency, but also to make sure we're doing it right, that we have the right targets, that there is support on the ground if we take an airstrike. we have a strong political coalition, a dramatic effort that is matching it, a strong strategic effort. we are discouraging people from thinking that isil represents a state, much less a caliphate. so all those things will have to be combined. and, as i said, it will not

happen overnight. but we are steadily moving in the right direction. and we are going to achieve our goals. we're going to degrade and ultimately defeat isil, the same way we have gone after al qaeda, the same way we have gone after the al qaeda affiliate in somalia, where we released today that we have in fact killed the leader of al shabaab in somalia and have worked to degrade their operations. we have been very systematic and methodical in going after these kinds of organizations that may threaten u.s. personnel and the homeland. and that deliberation allows us to do it right. but have no doubt, we will continue. i will continue to do what is necessary to protect the american people. isil poses a real threat. i am encouraged that our friends and allies recognize that same threat.

julie davis. >> thank you. i want to follow up on what you were saying about isil and ask if you think that the objective is to destroy and degrade them. are those the same things in your mind? secretary kerry said there is no containing them. is the goal ultimately to annihilate them? you talked about the importance of expertise on the ground and building up the capacity on the ground. since airstrikes will not do it here, if action is needed in syria, can you expect a free syrian army to do what is needed on the ground to destroy, not just push back, isil? >> you can't contain an organization that is running roughshod through that much territory, causing that much havoc, displacing that many

people, killing that many innocents, enslaving that many women. the goal has to be to dismantle them. and if you look at what happened with al qaeda, you initially pushed them back, you systematically degrade their capabilities, you narrow their scope of action, you slowly shrink the territory that they may control, and over time, they are not able to conduct the same kinds of terrorist attacks that they once could. as i said in my last press conference, given the nature of

these organizations, are there potentially remnants of an organization that is still running around and hiding and still potentially plotting? absolutely. and we will continue to hunt them down the same way we are doing with remnants of al qaeda, the same way or we are doing with al shabaab. but what we can accomplish is to dismantle this network, this force that has claimed to control this much territory so that they cannot do us harm. and that is going to be our objective. and as i said before, i am pleased to see there is unanimity among our friends and allies that think that is a worthy goal and they are

prepared to work with us to come pushed that goal. with respect to the situation on the ground in syria, we will not be placing u.s. ground troops to try to control the areas that are part of the conflict inside of syria. i do not think that is necessary for us to come pushed our goal. we're going to have to find effective partners on the ground to push act against isil, and the moderate coalition there is one we can work with, we have experience working with many of them, they have been to some degree outgunned and outmanned, and that is what it is important for us to work with our friends and allies to support them more effectively. but keep in mind when you have u.s. forces, other advanced nations going after isil and putting them on the defensive

and putting them on the run, it is pretty remarkable what then ground forces can do, even if initially they were on the defensive against isil. so that is a developing strategy that we are going to be consulting with friends, our allies, our regional partners. but the bottom line is we will do what is necessary in order to make sure that isil does not threaten the united states or our friends and partners. ok? one last question. colleen nelson. >> some senate democrats facing tough races in november have had difficulty with immigration. do you see any downside to delaying any action until after the election? >> i have to tell you this week i have been pretty busy, focused

on ukraine and focused on isil and focused on making sure that nato is boosting its commitments and in following through on what is this is certainly 21st century challenges. jeh johnson and eric holder have begun to provide me their proposals and recommendations. i will be reviewing them, and my expectation is that fairly soon i will be considering what the next steps are. what i am unequivocal about is that we need immigration reform, that my overriding preference is to see congress act. we had bipartisan action in the senate. the house republicans have sat on it for over a year. that has damaged the economy.

it has held america back. it is a mistake. and in the absence of congressional action, i intend to take action to make sure that we are putting more resources on the border, that we are upgrading how we process these cases, and that we find a way to encourage legal immigration and give people some path so they can start paying taxes and pay a fine and learn english and be able to not look over their shoulder, but be legal since they have been living here for quite some time. so, you know, i suspect on my flight back this would be part of my reading, taking a look at some of the specifics that we have looked at, and i will be making an announcement soon. i want to be very clear, my

intention is in the absence of action by congress, i am going to do what i can do within the legal constraints of my office, because it is the right thing to do for the country. all right? thank you very much, people of wales. i had a wonderful time. >> british prime minister david cameron also discussed recent tensions between ukraine and russia and called for a peace plan between the two nations. this is 25 minutes. >> good afternoon. this summit has shown a real sense of purpose, resolution and unity. everyone can see what nato stands for and why it matters. it is about, here at home, our national security - and the security of every family in britain. this is an alliance that is strong and united. that knows what the major challenges are and is determined to overcome them.

first, there has been a clear message sent out from this conference to russia that what president putin is doing is indefensible and wrong. while we meet here in newport, a package of sanctions is being finalised in brussels that will further increase the economic cost to russia for its behaviour. we stand firmly behind ukraine's right to make its own decisions, not to have them dictated by russian tanks rolling over the border. and we will continue our efforts to support ukraine, including by providing financial assistance to improve their command, control and communication capabilities. nato members right across europe - particularly in central and eastern europe - have been reassured that this is an alliance that will meet its treaty obligations to any member under threat. noone will leave here with any doubt that our collective security in nato is as strong as it has ever been. the alliance is firmly committed

to providing ongoing reassurance to our eastern allies. the uk will contribute 3,500 personnel to exercises in eastern europe between now and the end of 2015 as part of nato's effort to ensure a persistent presence on our eastern flank. we have also agreed to step up nato's ability to respond quickly to any threat with a new multi-national spearhead force which is deployable anywhere in the world within 2 to 5 days. the uk will provide a battle group and a brigade headquarters and i hope other nations will set out their plans too, backing communiqué words with concrete action. second, nato needs to be even stronger. britain is one of only four countries that currently spends 2% of its gdp on defence. but others will now do more. with today's wales pledge every nato member not spending 2% will halt any decline in defence

spending and aim to increase it in real terms as gdp grows, and to move towards 2% within a decade. but it's not just the amount of money that matters; it's also about spending on equipment you can actually deploy. so we have agreed that a fifth of defence budgets should be dedicated to major new equipment. here in britain we have the second largest defence budget in nato; we have the biggest in the whole of the european union. we have taken long term, often difficult, decisions to put our defence budget on a sustainable footing. and the fruits of this are now coming through. we are equipping all 3 of our services with the best and most modern military hardware money can buy. on wednesday i announced a £3.5

billion contract for scout armoured vehicles for the army, the largest such order in over three decades. the royal air force is getting new fleets of joint strike fighter and voyager refuelling aircraft as well as 22 new a400m transport aircraft - the first of which has just arrived. the royal navy is receiving new astute hunter killer submarines and type 45 destroyers, including hms duncan here in cardiff bay. there will also be new type 26 frigates too. all of these decisions have been made possible by taking the difficult long term approach that i've spoken about. and of course we have our brand new aircraft carrier - hms queen elizabeth - that was named by her majesty in july and has now left her dry dock and is being

fitted with her combat systems. she will be the mightiest ship the royal navy has ever put to sea, able to protect and project our interests across the globe for decades to come. and today i can announce that the second carrier - hms prince of wales - will also be brought into service. this will ensure that will always have one carrier available, 100% of the time. they are an investment in british security, in british prosperity and our place in the world, transforming our ability to project power globally whether independently or with our allies. now third, we were clear about the new threats we face, principally islamist extremism. everyone remembers the divisions around the world over the iraq war ten years ago.there were no real divisions here. the nato alliance is clear about the threat that we face. the scale of that threat and the fact that we must use all the instruments at our disposal - humanitarian, diplomatic and military. we have agreed to offer a nato training mission for iraq as soon as the new iraqi government is in place. the fight against isil must be led by the iraqis themselves. but we will continue to encourage countries in the region to support this effort and we'll continue to work with our partners on the ground to take all necessary steps to squeeze this barbaric terrorist organisation out of existence.

this will take time and it will take resolve. we will proceed carefully and methodically, drawing together the partners we need, above all in the region, to implement a comprehensive plan. now fourth, as our troops return from afghanistan so it is right that we do all we can to support them and their families. we are the first british government to write the military covenant - the deal between britain and her military - into the law of our land. we have doubled the operational allowance for our service personnel introduced free higher and further education scholarships for bereaved service children. invested £200 million in helping our service personnel to buy homes. increased the rate of council tax relief. signed up every local council in our country in support and given unprecedented support to military charities. today we have taken this covenant internationally; with every nato member signing up to

a new armed forces declaration to honour and look after those whose work and sacrifices have delivered our peace and security over the last 65 years. and there's a commitment there for all of us to work together to ask what more we can do in future years to honour, revere those who serve us, and their families. so we leave celtic manor today united in purpose and with a stronger nato, better able to keep our people safe. i would like to thank everyone who has helped to make this summit possible. but most of all, the people of wales who have welcomed the world and i believe done our united kingdom and nato proud. thank you. very happy to take some questions. >> do you take the cease-fire in the ukraine seriously, the offer from put in?

and the reaction to it? and are you accepting the partition of our country? >> we are not accepting a partition of the ukraine. we should respect the ukraine's territorial integrity. that is why you have seen such unity here in nato today. the announcement about the cease-fire is good news. i think we need to look carefully on if it is a cease-fire and if it includes a commitment as i understand it might to make real progress on a proper peace plan. and we need to look at the detail of that to make sure it happens. they will go ahead and put them in place. if the cease-fire and proper peace plan or put in place, it would be right to look.

the cease-fire, yes, good news. >> you said the ukraine should not be dictated to by russian text. isn't that precisely what has happened. >> we shouldn't except the

partition of the ukraine. i challenge that the eu, the west, america have somehow been weak in response to what has happened. the russian economy was growing and is now shrinking. the banks have problems raising money. they move together in these things of the latest round of

sanctions and if they go on destabilizing this country, they know they will face more pressure. resolve between america and the countries to keep up the pressure if there isn't a fair outcome. >> isn't part of dealing with islamic state or part of what you need to do going to have to involve dealing with the situation on the ground in syria? can you tell me what your thinking is on that. are you tented to come to some new deal with president assad? >> let's do with the assad issue first. my view is that president assad is part of the cause of the problem because it has been the brutality with which he has attacked his people that has led

some of the sunni population to in an extremist movement because they have been so brutalized. it is very important that we -- that we don't start doing deals on the basis that it would not be the right approach. clearly if you're going to deal with the problem of i sill, isis , we have to deal with it right across the board. that stuff at home is stopping .ires going to fight it involves a new iraqi government. it involves the same thing in syria as iraq.

in syria, we need a transition to a government that can represent all the people in that country. part of that argument is that you need that mixture of intelligent politics, diplomatic inher, long term engagement the comprehensive land as well as the potential for military or other aggressive action. we need all those things in order to solve this problem and that will be the case with syria and iraq. this gentleman here. >> you have been asking other countries to pledge to go back to the defense spending. the think tank says britain's defense's pending is on course predict 1.8% of gdp next year. did you make any commitments? >> we are above 2%.

for four out of 28, we have stayed above 2% even at a time when i inherited one of the biggest budget deficits anywhere in the world. looking at what the declaration says because what is her mark of all about this, there has always been the 2% clinch in nato. and has never been set out as clearly as this. it will be a leaders declaration and it is very clear that it makes it differentiation. they aim to continue to do so and very specific about those people that year after year have not been spending at 2%. level willw this hold any decline in defense expenditure in real terms of gdp growth and aiming to move

towards the 2% guideline within the decade. it was hard-fought. a genuine rapid reaction force, proper capability and training missions that will go to countries like georgia and iraq. a really important breakthrough in terms of getting other countries to bear that sort of that they have been bearing. 35 billion pounds, probably atop five defense budget anywhere in the world. it is we may difficult choices, we have the aircraft carrier.

>> john kerry was very forthright in his views of how to tackle them. himnder if you agree with on three specific areas. . that he would like to see qa and and third, itin would take real military commitment from the air and coalition partners. >> i agree with the sorts of points he has been setting out. the issue about the time this will take, i would not put a specific time on a specific problem like so-called islamic state. it arose very rapidly. i believe it can be squeezed effectively.

i would not want to put a time on that. but i have said many times this is a generational struggle. we have been fighting against islamist extremism around the world. one thing i tred to get across at the conference is i think it is wrong to think the cause of the problem is the particular fracture in a country like syria or iraq. the cause of the problem is the poison of islamist extremism. wherever there are fractures, civil wars, conflicts, it bubbles to the surface. that is why you have seen it in somalia, nigeria, afghanistan when it was controlled by the taliban. and tragically in syria and iraq. the struggle we are involved in is a generational struggle. in terms of the u.n., i think the more the human can say to

back and support hopefully a new iraqi government and condemn islamist extremism, i think the better. in terms of military commitment, solving this problem has already taken military commitment. britain has been dropping aid out of military planes. we have been flying over iraq. we have been supplying the peshmerga with arms. clearly military commitment is required. anything we do must be part of a comprehensive plan. we must be working with allies. we must help those on the ground involved in the fight. i would put front and center the need for an iraqi government that can represent all its people because the heart of this problem is in iraq itself. if you ask who is responsible for running an iraqi state that is not extremist, that is not backed terror, that supports all people, that is the job of the

iraqi government. you cannot overestimate how important that is as part of the comprehensive plan to deal with this problem. andy? >> is it your understanding the 10 countries at the core coalition, that they are the countries prepared to take military action? if they are not, what does this amount to? >> at the danger of repeating myself, there was great unity at this conference about what needed to be done, about making sure we are backing those on the ground, helping the locals in the region and the rest of it. for britain's part, we don't rule anything out. we will act in our national interest. the sort of decisions you're talking about, we are not at that stage yet. i think it is important we do it as part of a comprehensive plan.

one more. why don't we have at the back over here? >> in two weeks, scottish voters will be deciding whether to stay with the u.k. or leave it. how will you explain to your partners in nato if there is a yes vote that one of its major allies is breaking up? can i ask whether the pledge would mean an independent scotland would have to agree to the 2% target as a condition of entering nato? >> i will be consistent as i have been throughout this campaign that all questions for what a separated scotland would have to do are effectively questions for alexander to answer. i don't think he has answered them effectively at all. for the united kingdom, i can answer this. on nato questions and the rest of it, you have to ask him. there is total confusion about whether a separated scotland has

a place in the european union, nato, or the rest of it. in terms of the last two weeks of this campaign, what i will be wanting to stress is what a vital and important question this is. it is a question for voters in scotland to consider for their future. but i take a very clear, loud message from the rest of the united kingdom, which is that we want you to stay. we care passionately about our family of nations. scotland can make a different choice. the scottish people are sovereign in this matter. this should be no doubt that the rest of the united kingdom wants them to remain part of our successful family of nations. when you reflect on the dangers in our world, i don't think there is any doubt with live in a dangerous and insecure world. i would have thought one of the strongest arguments those of us who want to see the united kingdom stay together is to make

in that dangerous world with terrorist threats, isn't it better to be part of a united kingdom that has a top five defense budget, some of the best security and intelligence services anywhere in the world, that is part of every alliance that really matters in the world in terms of nato, the g-8, the g-20, the european union, a permanent member of the security council of the u.n., to have all those networks and abilities to work with allies to keep us safe, isn't it better to have those things than to separate yourself from them? those are some of the arguments we will be making in the weeks to come before this vital vote.

let me stress again it is a decision for the scottish people. but i want them to know that as they make that choice, the rest of the united kingdom cares passionately about our family of nations and wants them to stay. thank you all very much for coming. i hope you have enjoyed being in wales as much as i have for this summit. let me say again, a big thank you to everyone, the police, our armed services. i think they have performed brilliantly. above all, to the people of wales who have given such a warm welcome to the world and have done the united kingdom absolutely proud, thank you. >> british foreign minister david cameron, one of several nato leaders speaking to reporters as the nato summit wraps up. >> and oral argument in the planned route of the keystone pipeline. on c-span two, book tv. authors who have recently written notable books. american history tv, programs on the war of 1812 and 1814 burning of washington dc.

the tour westward expansion, settlers that migrated west in covered wagons. here is more now. >> a lot of times, we see them circling the wagons. there he rarely if ever did that happen. very rare did it have anything to do with indians. the indians actually helps the pioneers more than hurting them. withhe dangers came in disease that killed about 10% of the people that went west. likey colorado and things browning's, accidental death by gunshot, being run over by a wagon.

there is a grim side to this mass migration. a really kind of unprecedented mass migration. >> tomorrow on washington journal, looking at recent job numbers for the month of august. and the washington post on ballot initiatives in the 2014 midterm elections. and the center for strategic and international studies talked information stored in the cloud.

your phone calls, facebook comments, and tweets. live saturday at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> here are some highlights for this coming weekend. saturday at 6:30 p.m. on the communicators, former fcc commissioners michael coxon michael andell -- democraticwell with senator kay hagan and her thillis.n opponent tom gonzalez and how he thinks republicans can make gains for the hispanic vote. and sunday at noon on in-depth, the three-hour conversation and your phone calls with the former chair of the u.s. commission on civil rights. therday on railamerica, building of the hoover dam.

and president gerald ford's pardon of richard nixon. find the television schedule ust www.c-span.org and tell your thoughts on what you're watching. send us a tweet. or you can e-mail us. like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. >> a group of foreign-policy experts discuss the israeli-palestinian conflict at an event hosted by the middle east institute. we heard remarks from both sides and the latest conflict in gaza. this is an hour and a half. >> take you all for joining us this afternoon. >> after 50 days of war, israel and hamas reached a cease-fire

on august 26. the office for the coordination of humanitarian affairs reports 2104 were killed including 1004 hundred 62 civilians, 495 children and 253 women. the tabulation is ongoing. the key question is what will it take to transmit the current truce into a longer endeavor.

how can we avoid getting here ?gain the center for the middle east policy at brookings and a founding board member of the american egyptian rule of law association. deviously serving as an advisor and permanent status negotiations with israel from 2004 to 2009. michael is the program director at the institute and a current participant at the atlantic council. officerforeign surface a book thatlishes you should all read. middle east and north africa division, an expert on middle rights issues.

the bimonthly middle eastern magazine report -- to set up the discussion here, first i would like to go to howard and michael to discuss some of the domestic political dynamics among palestinians and among israelis that have been driving the events of the past few weeks, the reconciliation agreement between the palestinians. go to joen and i will with comment on international humanitarian law and questions raised by the conduct of both sides during the gaza war. take it away. >> inc. you, matt.

thank you all for being here. i was asked to talk a little bit about the impact on palestinian domestic politics. on the surface it seems pretty , superficially, the main impact is that thomas has hamas hasonger -- become stronger. politically, it has been strengthened. he was seen as marginalized in the process and seen as being ineffective. seen theou may have recent poll by the palestinian

-- you never know the full name. the palestinian center for research. hamas went from being very weak. from being quite strong, even within gaza, it holds true. s's reality is that hama resistance has been more effective than the approach focuseds been centrally on the diplomatic process. he has been ineffective not just in gaza but you have to look at it in context of the broader

middle east peace process which is his bread and butter. he is all about his credibility and the legitimacy of negotiating a two state solution. it has not gone all that well. even the broader goal of national liberation. certain extent, at least momentarily, they have been able to restore some sense of palestinian pride and it is important to not underestimate the importance of these intangibles for both. the symbolism is very important for a national liberation movement. , the newfound popularity might

be fleeting, but i think it is what abbasre than has going for him. his credibility rests almost entirely on the negotiations process and bringing about a two state solution which is dependent upon the u.s.. surface, i think the picture is a little bit more complicated. hamas, the at within lines between them have been blurred over the years. if you look inside, you see internal cleavages with both camps. i think those have been exacerbated by this conflict. you have this division between the leadership inside gaza and outside, which is classic palestinian history. the distinction between

leadership in the territory, palestine -- you also have the military political split which i think was exacerbated during the war. in various moments, it wasn't clear who was calling the shots. to think ofher ways it in terms of radicals and pragmatists. the internal cleavages have been intensified by the conflict and they need to be worked out. the same is true on the other side of the political equation in palestine. plo are notoriously dysfunctional politically. there is chronic dysfunction in these institutions. fatah itself, it has been true for a long time. more specifically to the gaza

seen -- iwe have wouldn't call it isolation, but -- he is becoming a little bit more alone since he is personally committed with the negotiations process. that is dependent on the united states and others in the inner circle of the plo/pa leadership are beginning to realize that that is a dead-end. so he is sort of the last remaining holdout in terms of the american-led peace process approach. so that is part of the equation. and fatahd, howamas have grown stronger or weaker vis-à-vis each other but both have been weakened in absolute

terms, in terms of the broader palestinian political arena. it's problematic because we don't currently have viable alternatives. and we have not yet seen a credible or viable third wave or however we want to term it. we have to look at palestinian politics in terms of broader politics. the trends within very much reflect the trend in the broader arab world. specifically political dysfunction. the same sorts of contradictions that led to the arab spring or alsowas the arab spring exist in palestinian society. crisis in the leadership and this is true across the region.

there are dysfunctional or nonfunctioning political institutions in the case of the palestinians both the pa and the plo. you have this generational divide where a new generation of hasers or a new generation a very different set of demands and their elders have allowed for. all of this does not necessarily bode well. you do need political forces to sustain ae able long-term uprising or mass mobilization of that sort. you do need a credible organizational structure on the ground. or one reason or another, the two main groups are not

necessarily interested in much more narrow parochial ways that would be needed for mass mobilization. were still advising the palestinians, which i'm not, but if i were, i would say that the notrity now needs to be on negotiations or resistance, but on fixing the palestinian house and putting the palestinian house back in order. first and foremost, because i think gaza depends on it. i think it's impossible to envision any sort of reconstruction much less improvement to the situation without genuine and practical hamas-pa conflict on the ground. we see that reflected in the cease-fire talks and in the terms of the cease-fire where it is clear now and before the war that there needs to be a return

to gaza to allow the borders to be open. active artistic patient and support. essential for them to be grow.o survive, much less it is also true because in the , it depends on not just institutions, but i wouldn't expect to see elections any time sooner. it might actually complicate things. is the actually needed

palestinian national consensus. i think it is probably equally true. palestinian on politics. palestinians need to rethink their basic assumptions of their national aspirations. i will end on this note. they are important old and new palestinian constituencies that were exasperated or intensified by the gaza conflict. thes the cradle of movement. in the west elite and the gulf and elsewhere. and also, palestinian citizens

of israel. a sense of pan palestinian solidarity that i think was awakened by the gaza conflict. both of those constituencies will need to be accommodated in one form or the other. it may be in the context of israeli politics for palestinian citizens of israel. that certainly the diaspora has in the rethinking of internal palestinian politics. bearing in mind that gaza is, in many ways, a cross-section of palestinian -- the global palestinian community in which it is made up of 60% or 70% descendents of refugees from 1948.

>> michael, just to set things up a bit, the recent poll that we saw showing hamas having benefited by the war. it was overwhelming public , one was the stated goal of diminishing and not crushing them. also shown that netanyahu now finds himself in trouble with competitors to his right like bennett and lieberman. can you address that? >> thanks for putting this panel together. i think it is useful when thinking about israeli politics in the contacts -- context of

, beforermath of gaza the gaza war and where things are now. they have real challenges of the , the serious nature netanyahu personally. in many ways, it has been the invisible man. more vocal opponents are actually in the cabinet. the view was firmly in can -- firmly in control. it did not create any political crisis for bb. first, there were low

expectations across the political sector. in fact, many people did not want them. really did not present much of a challenge domestically. another factor was the sense that the situation for israel, despite many warning signs on the horizon was not quite dire and they are forced to make a move. it was a focus on how maas -- hamas, before the war, at its weakest point. they assume this was a situation that was going to continue. much of the discussion was

focused on the pa and focus on abbas, despite the fact that these talks have collapsed. then we moved during the war and there was a huge out pouring of support. any time there is fighting in .srael it still shapes the israeli psyche in ways that have changed possibly forever. israelismajority of will not tolerate any type of rocket fire going to israel. while rockets are coming in, netanyahu really had blinding

support to deal with it. the kidnapping and murder of the added toaeli teens what was already overwhelming support for a military campaign against hamas. netanyahu really use this to his advantage. he sort of had a free pass initially on the shifting goals, depending on if the goals were to eradicate hamas, restore tunnels, theyte shifted as the war went along. as the war went on, it went from a high of about 82% down into the 30's. there was an approval rating of 3% at one point, and a drop of

50% is still not something that any israeli leader likes to see. in 2012, the israeli operation was relatively quick. crucially, the rocket fire continues. has it rejected, broken, or lapsed, they realized pretty quickly that they had no long-term strategy. airstrikes were not going to be enough. and so, there was a sense toward the end that netanyahu had not handled things in the ideal way.

is over,the war netanyahu's position is a bit less stable. politicians are pushing things much more to the right. they now have to deal with challenges, both of him his own party. if you look at the polls that have come out over the last few days, it is clear that the right in general has benefited from the fighting in gaza. have anywherels between 29 and 31 seats accrued. at the moment they controlled 31 but 11 of those seats, they are used -- [indiscernible] they made a deal before the election. seats of their own, somewhere between 29 and 31.

they currently have 12 seats and toa poll, anywhere from 18 20. they are anywhere from 9%-12% and labor has stated the same and if an election was held today, you would probably have 120where between 80 out of going to parties on the right. with in it, there's serious pressure on netanyahu and his position has never been great and the u.s., people think of netanyahu as far right and he is certainly right when the but not on the far right. as odd as it seems,