dic in iraq was dealing with in 2006 and 2007. he decided he wanted to make a career as a nurse. he was having to come back and start with nursing 101. i mean, he had to start from scratch, as if he did not have this incredible wealth of experience and skill. and so we set out to work with state legislators and cities and others that oftentimes are responsible for licensing, to say, there has got to be transferability and credit for the incredible work that veterans do on the job, so that they do not have to start all over again and take a whole bunch of new classes just to get certified on stuff they already know how to do. and that has been really helpful as well. [applause]

the key now is to get more employers to recognize the skills of our veterans. so michelle and jill biden through their joining forces program, have been able to recruit companies all across the country, major corporations like honeywell and smaller companies, to not just do job fairs, but make concrete commitments. we are going to hire a certain number of military spouses. and hundreds of thousands of folks have come through these programs. the challenge we have still got is that we have got to find ways for veterans to upgrade their skills through this process. and that is where things like apprenticeships, so that folks are not just getting hired at the bottom rungs, but have the opportunity to maybe come in at a higher wage or a higher salary. we have to tie together the education process with the hiring process. sure. >> [indiscernible]

president obama: right. >> [indiscernible] saying if you and a veteran have the same qualifications [indiscernible] i feel like that is somewhat fair, because they put their lives on the line for our country. and they are taking this job [indiscernible] do you agree with that? president obama: i am always careful about not agreeing with bills that i have not read because that is how i get into trouble.

but if there are any state legislators here, this young lady is going to be very interested in talking to you. and the -- lady is going to be very >> [indiscernible] president obama: well, there you go. [applause] that is your representative. your senator is hard at work. but i think the basic concept of making sure that we are crediting the work that is done by veterans is really important. the sacrifices that not just veterans, but their families make our incredible. and i am proud to say that we do much better now than we did in the past. when you read about the vietnam era, it is just heartbreaking how veterans were treated when they came home. i think we as a society -- and

this has been bipartisan -- have really improved. but we still have a lot more work to do. so the veterans health system, for example, is far better now than it was 30 years ago or 20 years ago. demonstrably better. but as we saw, remember, in phoenix, there are still situations where the wait times are too long. veterans are really satisfied once they get in the system, by getting the initial appointment is often too tough. there is too much bureaucracy, too much red tape. we have to constantly keep at this and constantly keep improving it. we have now ended in both the afghan war. we got millions of people, in terms of the combat role -- we have hundreds of thousands of folks who are coming home, and they are going to need help

making this transition. we still have folks in harm's way, dealing with isil, as well as helping to train the iraqi and afghan armies. they are still on rotation. their families are still missing them. they are missing birthdays and soccer games. it is a big sacrifice. thanks for the question and thanks for your service. we have a gentleman -- let's see. a good question to choose from. he has got a veteran's hat on which makes me more biased toward him. this is an example of -- are you when to ask another veterans question? ok, right here. >> mr. president, thank you for coming and thanks for taking my question. i am chris bolin, the student government president. i represent the students in the central region, for ivy tech. we could use a tax credit for books.

the costs on the books are running away. we need some help in that area. and then the same thing with advisers.

addition to the bonds of love, we had the bonds of debt. our network -- net worth was negative because we had all these student loans. basically, for the first 10 years of our marriage, we paid more in student loan repayment than we did in our mortgage. and since we both went to law school, we both remember well the cost of books. and for those -- and then i taught in a law school, so i remember having to assign books. i actually cheated a little bit and put together these syllabi where i would xerox stuff off. make it a little cheaper for folks. that is not always possible. nothing is worse than when a professor assigns their own book. [laughter] because then you know they are getting over it. you know, the book costs are enormous. they are real. one of the advantages of the two-year free college tuition plan -- that does not include room and board and books. but what that does is, it frees up your ability to use spell grants or other programs for books, right?

so it would relieve some of those costs, living expenses and transportation and all that stuff. school still would not be perfectly free, but you would now have the budget to manage that. with respect to advisers, i think this is a great point. we are starting at the high school level. michelle just had an event to celebrate counselors, and she had connie britton -- remember she played a counselor in "friday night lights." you all watch that show? that was a good show. she came to speak. it was celebrating the role of counselors and high schools. the same is true in community colleges with advisers. a lot of young people have a general idea of what they want to do, but do not always know the path to get there.

do not know what the requirements are. do not know what classes they should be taking. one of the big problems that drives a college costs is, young people start down one path, they get about halfway through it. they realize, that is the thing i am more interested in, over there. they switch, but all those credits they took now are wasted, and they have to start all over again. that extends greatly the amount of time it takes to graduate. having more counselors and investors on the front end and is a good investment for the system overall. i have not talked to your president here. about how schools are currently budgeting advisers. certainly, this is something we are interested in. we are going to want to partner with community college is an public universities, as well as with high schools, to see what more work we can do on that front.

so good suggestion. that is why you got elected president. absolutely. all right. [applause] it is the young ladies turn, right here, right in the middle. >> good afternoon. my name is dana phillips. my question is, with the focus being on two-year community college is right now, what focus does your administration have for historically black colleges and universities, for students outside of indiana, where they may choose to attend these institutions with such dire straits that many of them are facing right now? president obama: we have some outstanding historically black colleges and universities. we have some universities that historically served primarily latino students, who do a great job as well.

many of those schools, because of their critical role in serving underrepresented communities under federal legislation get additional dollars to help with infrastructure and maintain their faculties and so forth. many of the problems those schools face are the ones every other school faces. which is rising tuition, students taking out too much debt, graduation rates that are too low. we are working with them on this common set of problems. i will say this. there are some historically black colleges and universities that are not doing a good job with graduation rates. and so one of the things we are doing is, we are saying to schools of all stripes that we are going to develop some measures so that parents and

students can know ahead of time how those schools are performing, so that we can increase consumer education. because what i don't want to do is to have the federal government pay for a hell grant or student loans, and you go to a school where they are taking that money, you are getting into debt, but your graduation rate is low, which means you may end up leaving without a degree. you now are on the hook for this debt. if you can't pay it, taxpayers have to pay for it. that is a problem. so what we are doing is, those schools that are doing outstanding jobs serving underrepresented if communities, we are going to give them some extra help. schools that are not doing a good job, we are saying to them,

we are going to give you the training to get better. but at a certain point, if you don't get better, we are going to start advertising the fact that your graduation rates are too low. we have got to have some accountability in this overall process. all right? good. the gentleman right here. there you go. in the spiffy gray jacket. >> you have been our leader for six years. you have two years left. what would be your number one priority, and what can we help you do to accomplish that? president obama: i appreciate that. my number one priority is to make sure that the american people's wages and incomes are going up, since right now the stock market is going up corporate profits are at an

all-time high, corporate balance sheets have never been better in history -- that is not according to me. that is according to bloomberg and "fortune magazine," not generally my big promoters. so they are doing well. and the question now is, how do the folks who work in those companies, how do we get them more income and more wages? that cannot happen if the economy does not grow. first and foremost, we have got to keep this growth going. one of the worries that we are going to have this year -- the economy is doing well. the problem is, overseas, the economies are not doing so well. europe is not doing well. china is slowing down, because they are transitioning.

that is having some impact on our exports. so if we want to keep the progress that is going on right now, the best thing we can do is to make the investments i talked about in the state of the union to create more growth and demand here in the united states. i will be very specific this time, what you can help on. infrastructure. we know we have about $2 trillion worth of deferred maintenance we need to do in this country -- bridges that are unsafe, sewer mains that are bursting. airports that are out of date. we have got an air traffic control system that does not take advantage of new technologies. if we put in place a new state-of-the-art air traffic control system, it is estimated that airlines could save 30% on

their fuel costs, because they would not be hovering around trying to wait to land. that means 30% less pollution from fuel. it means we could cut delays by about 30%, which i know everybody here who has flown lately would really appreciate. it would be good for business. and the good thing about infrastructure is, you cannot export those jobs. they have to be done here. by american workers. and then those american workers have more money in their pocket. they go to the restaurant nearby, and the restaurant is doing a little better, so they hire a couple more shifts. you get this virtuous cycle. and traditionally, that has been a bipartisan issue. so if we can get republican representatives and senators and democratic representatives and senators here in indiana --

if you guys can push them to say, let's go ahead and move forward on an infrastructure program -- i know the mayor would not mind doing it, right? and convince them, that keeps the economy growing overall. but then there are also some things that i want to do more directly for middle-class families. that has to do with this tax system. as i mentioned before, there was a young woman i talked about at the state of the union. wonderful family. two little boys. one of them is school-age. one of them is still too young in preschool. their childcare is more than tuition at the university of minnesota, or at least close. we are the only advanced nation on earth that does not provide support to families when their

kids are really young. and does not invest in making sure that our child system works the way it should. i put forth an initiative that says, let's consolidate and make more helpful a tax credit for child care. let's boost the quality of childcare, so that parents have confidence when they're putting their kids someplace that the teachers there are trained, and they are getting good early childhood education. let's get more slots. that is something that is concretely helping families right now. and by the way, it is not just the poor family that has trouble here. there are a lot of folks who we do not consider middle-class who have the same problem. it is just hard, especially now that the typical middle-class family, they got two breadwinners.

folks both have to work in order to succeed. and we know how to do this. my grandfather, when he went away to war, fighting patton's army in europe, my grandmother stayed home. she was rosie the riveter, working on an assembly line for bombers. and this country provided childcare, because they knew it was a necessity. if women were in the workforce you needed to have some of the looking after those kids. it is not that we have no experience doing this. we just need to do a good job. paid sick leave, for example. we have got 43 million americans who do not have paid sick leave. we are like the only country in the industrialized world that does not provide paid sick leave. people will get sick.

the idea that in a society like ours, we would force people to choose between leaving a sick child at home, for example, or giving up a day's pay -- that does not make any sense. the way hoosiers can help, the way folks all across america can help, is to let folks in congress know, these things are important. if, as i said before republicans in congress -- mitch mcconnell, john boehner, and the leadership there -- if they disagree with how i am paying for a bigger childcare tax credit, if they disagree with how i plan to pay for infrastructure, if they do not want to raise or close loopholes on the top 1%, or go after some

of these loopholes that send profits overseas -- if they do not want to do it that way, then they should show me another way. your voice, letting them know this is important, not because it is partisan, but because it is the right thing to do for america -- if they hear that from enough people, it will make a difference. it goes back to what that young lady asked about, isabel. i got a good memory. it goes back to what isabel is saying. our system only works when people are involved. when people are involved and informed, taking the time to ask questions and let their opinions be known, ultimately, the government will respond.

when nobody is saying anything the government does not respond, and you get the government we have seen lately in washington which is unresponsive and were not doing enough. you have got to be informed. i am so optimistic about this country. the reason we have gotten out of this recession over the last six years is, in part -- i am going to go ahead and brag a little bit. we have made some good decisions. we made some decisions that saved the auto industry, some decisions to stabilize the financial system, decisions to help local government keep their teachers on the payroll and not lay them off. we made a bunch of decisions to do infrastructure spending. and all of that helped lift us out of the recession we are in. but the main reason was because people worked hard in the private sector and small businesses. they tightened their belts and they made sacrifices and pay

down debt, and dug themselves out of holes. the resilience and the grit and the basic decency of the american people, and our willingness to work hard, our innovation, our willingness to take risks -- it puts us in such a good position. i travel all around the world. i know the economies of every country in the world. i know their problems. i know their advantages. people talk about china. they talk about germany. they talk about india. nobody has got better cards than we do. someone said about america, we always end up doing the right thing after we have tried everything else. i am hoping that we do not have to try every other thing before we do the right thing right now

to help middle-class families get ahead. if we do that, the economy is going to be stronger. businesses are going to do better. consumers are going to be more confident. we will sell more goods overseas. our kids will have the kind of future we want for them. that is what i am going to be working on for the next two years. i hope you help me. thank you, everybody. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> congress returns with a full agenda. the houses back tuesday. host bills next week include the senate measure approving the keystone pipeline. the senate is back monday at 3:00 p.m.. at 5:00, they debate the -- a vote is set for 5:30.

it is likely the senate will try to move ahead on department of homeland security spending. democrats have locked debate three times because of language that overturns obama's actions on immigration. more from a capitol hill reporter. >> it may have seemed like groundhog week in the senate. three failed attempts to bring the department of homeland security to the floor. we are joined by lauren fox. what is the holdup in the senate? >> the holdup is the fact that democrats are united against this piece of legislation, which rolls back the executive actions in 2014 and the doca action in 2012. republicans are not quite ready to budge. they want to continue to put democrats on the record for not being against the president's executive action.

that is where the holdup is. what we're looking for is whether or not republicans are ready to start the negotiating process here and whether or not democrats will accept anything less than a clean department of homeland security funding bill which at this point it looks like they are not willing to do. >> ahead of next week's action a piece said here is the gop's actions to end the stalemate. are some of those options? >> republicans continue to bring this bill to the floor and make democrats to vote on it. we do not expect the votes to change. the other option is republicans could accept a clean department of homeland security will, could pass it. that would upset a lot of the republicans' right flank individuals who have said that they would like to make the

president's actions the centerpiece of the dhs funding bill. another option that has been floated, senator collins introduced an amendment that would take out the controversial piece decrying the president's action rolling back doca. democrats, even those who said in november when the president made his immigration actions that they did not approve the way he did it, they do not appear like they are willing to vote with republicans. if they cannot get on to the bill, senate republicans want house republicans to send in a new piece of legislation, and that puts john boehner back in a precarious situation where he has to fight off his right flank

and pass something else that the senate can pass. none of the options look good. it is going to be between mitch mcconnell and house speaker john boehner to work out. >> let's look at the house, because they will take up a measure that passed in the senate. the senate passed the keystone xl pipeline bill. they will take up that bill instead of going to conference. why that choice? >> it would reduce the amount of time. they want to get this on the president's desk as fast as possible. they want to have that confrontation asap. >> joined by lauren fox who covers capitol hill for national journal. you can read more on twitter. read more online at national journal.com. thank you for joining us. >> thank you. >> a republican congressman from

mississippi has died. a spokesman said he died in his hometown of two below. he had a stroke while surgeons were removing a brain tumor. he was too ill to go to washington to be sworn in. house leaders let him take the oath from a federal judge in mississippi. he was 56. >> next, next national security and foreign policy. after that a discussion on the international effort to combat iscusses president isis. ambassador rice outlines his foreign policy priorities and

agenda. this is about an hour and ten minutes. >> good afternoon everybody. it's my great pleasure and honor to welcome all of you here. with respect to our guest of honor, ambassador rice i want to welcome her back to this premises. she is a former colleague of martin index and mine both here at the brookings institution and in government during the 1990s. and special welcome to her mom, how about that? her mom has come out -- [applause] ask

international system that will, among other things, bring rule-based order out of violent chaos of the sort raging in eastern ukraine and in the self proclaimed islamic state. that's a goal of a new initiative that martin and his colleagues in the foreign policy program which is susan's alma mater here at brookings will launch next week. we hope, susan, our efforts here at brookeings and those of other think tangs will reinforce the government eight efforts that you'll be talking about today. the podium is yours. let me tell all the tweeters

here can follow and report on what susan has to say under the #2015nss. susan, thank you. [applause] >> good afternoon, everyone. thank you very much for that very kind introduction. and thank you to everyone here at brookings. as strobe said, this was my home for six very peaceful years, and truthfully i miss it. and thank you especially for saying such kind words about my mom, lois rice, whose ties to brookings goes back many years. looking around i am grateful to see many friends who challenged and encouraged me throughout my tenure here at brookings and

continue to generate some of the best ideas for america's foreign policy. so, broadly speaking in every respect i'm very glad to be here. this morning, president obama released his 2015 national security strategy. fundamentally it's a strategy to strengthen the foundations of america's power, political economic and military. and to sustain american leadership in this new century. so that we can sur mount the challenges of today and capture the opportunities of tomorrow. our strategy's guided by the same four enduring national interests that we laid out in the 2010 national security strategy. security prosperity, values and a rules based international order. our interests are enduring, but in many respects 2015 is a whole

new ballgame, much has changed in the last five years. as a nation we're stronger than we have been in a very long time. since president obama took office we repaired the biggest collapse in world trade since the great depression and 2010 unemployment in the united states was almost 10%. today businesses have added more than 11 million jobs and unemployment is down to 5.7%. in 2010, our deficit topped $1 trillion. today we've cut that in half to less than $500 billion. our kids are graduating at higher rates and millions more americans have healthcare. we unlocked domestic energy boom that's made us the world's

number one producer of oil and gas. strengthening our energy security with huge ripple effects for global oil markets and g.o. politics. we brought home almost 170,000 american troops responsibly ending two long and costly ground wars and pre purposing our strength so we can better respond to emerging threats and crisises. the diverse and creativity of the american people fin to be a well spring of american power. driving innovations that are revolutionizing everything from the way we hail a cab to the way we treat disease. by fortifying our foundational strengths, america is in a better position to confront current crises and sees the

opportunities of this new century. yet, few know better than we, the complexity of the challenges that america faces. every day i start my morning with a briefing that covers the most sobering threats and the difficult problems that confront us around the world. these include the fallout from the arab uprisings russian aggression ebola cyber attacks and the more diffuse terror threats. too often what is missing in washington is a sense of perspective. yes, there is a lot going on. still, while the dangers we face may be more numerous and varied, they are not of the existential nature that we confronted in world war ii or during the cold war. we cannot afford to be buffetted

by alarmism and nearly instant taeupb news news cycle. we must dot hard work of seizing opportunities and of winning the future for our children. strong and sustained american leadership remains as essential as ever. think for a minute where the world would be today without decisive american leadership. ebola would be spreading throughout west africa and likely to far corners of the world. instead america galvanized the world to role back this horrible disease. without us russia would be suffering no cost for its actions in the ukraine. instead the ruble is in a pre fall and russia is playing fearly for tphrouting the rules.

without us there would be no military campaign or 60 countries encounting the advance. and no prospect for a global deal on climate deal and no pressure for iran to be at the negotiating table and no potential for trade that meets a higher standard for our workers and our businesses. nonetheless, there is a loud debate in washington about american leadership in the 21sts century. but the issue is not simply when we should have started arming the syrian rebels or whether we should provide lethal assistance and weapons to ukraine. it's about the nature of u.s. leadership for the future. with this national security strategy we stakeout a much larger role for america in

shaping the world while anticipating the challenges to come. before i go through the elements of this strategy i want to note how our approach may differ from what others may recommend. we believe in the importance of economic growth but we insist upon investing in the foundations of america's power. education and healthcare, clean energy and basic research. we'll always act to defend our country and its people but we aim to avoid sending many thousands of ground forces into combat in hostile lands. we have renewed our core alliances while also building partnerships with emerging powers and neglected regions. we're committed to fighting terrorism and stopping the spread of nuclear weapons even as we ral lit world to meet the

threats of tomorrow. malicious cyber actors and deadly pandemics and climate change and competition in space. we focus every day on the crises in the middle east and ukraine but we are simultaneously rebalancing to the regions that will do more to determine the course of the 21st century. east asia and india africa and the americas. so with that in mind, let me outline the four-ways that we are advancing our core interests. the first element of our strategy is to secure the united states, our citizens and our allies and partners through a dynamic global security posture in which we employ our unique capabilities, forge diverse coalitions and support locate the partners. this approach builds on a more

secure homeland and a national defense that is second to none. president obama is committed to maintaining the best trained best equipped and best led military force the world has ever known. while honoring our premiseses to our service members veterans and their families, to ensure success we call on congress to work with us to support responsible investments in our national security including by ending sequestration. to counter today's threats, we're implementing a comprehensive counter terrorism approach that takes account of how the enemy has evolved. as al-qaida has been decimated we've seen tkeuf fusion of the threat to al-qaida affiliates, is sill and local militia and

home grown violent extremists. this reduces the risk of a spectacular attack by 9/11 but raises the probability of the types of attacks that we have seen in boston, ottawa, sidney and paris. to meet this morphing challenge we're combining our decisive military k5eu7 abilities with local partnerships with the financial tools to choke off funding and the international reach of our law enforcement and intelligence agencies. we're strengthening the capacity of weak states to provide for their people. while countering the corrosive ideology of violent extremism. fighting terrorism is a long term instrumenting. there will be setbacks and there are no one size fits all solutions. we have to work across multiple

lines of effort in diverse context to be effective. to degraded and ultimately defeat defeat is sill we are training iraqi security forces and supporting opposition to encouraging political reforms in iraq that foster greater inclusion. together we've taken out thousands of fighters and destroyed nearly 200 oil and gas facilities that fund their tearer and pushed them out around baghdad sin jar and the mosul dam. this was defeat in the month long siege. and the horrific executions, is sill should know that their

barbarism only fortifies the world's collective resolve. our counter terrorism strategy is still at work in afghanistan where we've ended our come tpwat mission as planned. now we're focused on supporting a sovereign and stable of an an afghanistan that is an safe haven for terrorist. even as we develop afghan security forces we'll continue to put pressure on al-qaida through capable counter terrorism mission. american leadership remains essential. not only to tackling today's threats but also to addressing the global challenges that define the nature of security for our children and grandchildren. and here too we have to lead with our heads and enlisting partners to work alongside us. american leadership is

addressing the danger of nuclear proliferation. no threat poses as great a risk to our security as a potential use of nuclear weapons. that's why we continue to secure nuclear material and strengthen international norms against the use of all weapons of mass destruction. moving us closer to achieving the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. american leadership rallied the world to toughen sanctions against iran through diplomacy and sustained economic pressure we open the progress of iran's nuclear program and rolled it back in key respects. now we must give diplomacy a chance to finish the job. if diplomacy fails it will not be for lack of good faith by america or the p five plus one

and then if necessary, we would be stronger in leading our partners to dial up the pressure and in making sure iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon. american leadership is addressing the dangers of pandemic disease. our agenda to improve health security and global health security doesn't end with ebola. it strengthens the capacity of states and international institutions to prevent detect and respond to future outbreaks before they become deadly epidemics. american leadership is addressing the very real threat of climate change. the science is clear. the impacts of climate change will only worsen over time. even longer droughts more severe storms, more forced migration.

so we're making smart decisions today that will payoff for generations like our ground breaking climate commit wplt china that will limit both our greenhouse gases and bend down the global emissions curve. american leadership is addressing the pressing need for enhanced cyber security. as more of the world comes online, we're leading an international effort to define the rules for how states engage with one another in cyber space while ensuring the internet remains a powerful tool to drive advances. at the same time we have new resources to bolster security and the infrastructure kph government networks and other stems against cyber threats. second, we will expand

prosperity by using our renewed economic strength, resurgent economy and energy security to bolster the advanced system and advance economic order and reduce inequality and poverty. with the world's top universities premiere research facilities and a culture of entrepreneur entrepreneurship america already has the keys that will drive our knowledge economy through the coming century. with critical investments in technology and innovation, will keep sharpening our technological edge to keep the american economy at the forefront of innovation. we're opening more markets to american businesses workers and farmers. while forging trade agreement that's set high standards for fair wages, safe workplaces and environmental protections.

and to make sure new trade and growth benefit people around the world will continue to pursue a sustainable development agenda, grounded in our commitment to end extreme poverty. we'll work with congress to pass trade promotion authority so we can finalize the transpacific partnership thus securing a flee trade agreement with many of the world's fastest economies and working to make rapid progress on the european union. expanding what is already the largest trading relationship in the world and committed to renewing and enhancing the african growth and opportunity act to further deepen our investment in that promising region. africa is primed to become a major center of global growth.

we ramped up our commitment across the continent, including through the president's power africa initiative, to connect millions more people through reliable electricity. through our feed the future program, we're helping farmers plant better crops and raise their incomes while also improving the food security of the region. and last august for the first time ever, president obama hosted some 50 african leaders to chart ways our nations will do more together and sees opportunities for u.s. businesses to investment in africa's future. third, at a time when citizens in every region are demanding greater freedom and more accountability from their governments, our strategy is to defend democracy and human rights and combat corruption and promote open government and

stand with civil society. we do so by living our values at home, by growing the reigns of capable democratic stakes and defending universal rights. we'll help countries in transition like berm pha, tunisia and sri lanka to become more democratic and inclusive societies. we'll support democracies that are in danger of backsliding. we'll at the same time president obama has deepened our commitment to that basic american val aourbgs equality. we believe everyone should be able to speak their minds and practice their faith freely. we believe that all girls deserve the very same

opportunities as boys. we believe that all human beings are created equal and worthy of the same love and respect including our lesbian gay bisexual and transgender brothers and sisters. these beliefs are fundamental to who we are. advancing equality is both morally right and smart strategy. if we reduce disparities which lead to instability and violence we increase our shared security. reams of impure cal evidence demonstrate how countries do better across every metric when they tap the talents of all their people. so we champion the rights of vulnerable communities, those targeted by abuse or excluded by

societies and encounter cycles of hatred that can spark violence. mass killings threaten our common security and diminish our shared humanity. we affirm that governments have a responsibility to protect civilians. we'll continue to lead global efforts to prevent atrocities and hold accountable those who commit the worst abuses. we're also reaching out to populations that america can ill afford to neglect. with more than half the world under the age of 30, our strategy invests in and empowers young people through educational exchanges and on the trepb in yourship. our young leader initiatives in south asia identify and mentor the next generation of talent to grasp opportunity. and because

we seek to lead by example, we'll keep working to make our own laws more inclusive to sustain our prohibitions against torture, to protect civil liberties and privacy and improve transparency on issues like electronic surveillance. we have reduced the population at guantanamo by nearly half and while there are very tough challenges ahead we mean to keep going until we finish the job. finally our strategy leverages american leadership to uphold the liberal international order which is served us and the world very well for 70 years. by reinforcing the rules of the road and strengthening and diverse identifying in every region of the world.

russians aggression against ukraine is haeupb news affront against long standing reforms. in lock step with our european allies we have built a coalition of partners around the world to impose steep political and economic costs on russia in contrast to cost invasion of georgia and turn up the pressure unless russia decisively reverses course. at the same time we're providing vital economic support to help the ukrainian people write a better future for their country and strengthening our enduring alliance with europe by reassuring eastern europe and modernizing nato to meet emerging threats. as we update our international system, our strategy is to enhance our focus on regions that will shape the century

ahead, starting with the asia pacific. our rebalance is deepening long standing alliances and forging new partnerships to expand cooperation. we're investing in ozzie on, the east asian summit and strengthen their capacity to enforce regional norms and respond to crises like natural disasters and resolve disputes peacefully so the asia pacific remains a region of growth and opportunity. with china, we're building a constructive relationship that expands practical cooperation across a wide spectrum of issues from global health to non proliferation. even as we confront real differences over human rights and economic espionage and the use of coercion

trip to india strengthened and other critical relationship that will emphasize benefits for both of our nations and help uplift the lives of more of their billion people. i am pleased to announce today we have invited prime minister abe of japan and president xi jinping of china for state visits and look forward to the welcoming of other asian leaders, including president park of south korea and the president of indonesia. at the same time, we seek a middle east that is more secure, prosperous, and where democracy can take root. that is the ultimate vision we are working towards with partners throughout the region.

we will continuously strengthen the unique bonds that unite the people of israel and the united states. our commitment to israel's security remains enduring and unshakable. we refused to give up on a peaceful resolution to the conflict between israelis and palestinians. we will keep investing in the ability of all partners like saudi arabia, united arab emirates to deter aggression even as we deepen cooperation. since libya, syria, and yemen present persistent violence and instability, we must protect our people, work with partners to shrink terrorist safe havens and support those working to achieve political and social reform. to be sure, this region's challenges are many, including a

generational transformation, citizens' legitimate demands for political and economic reforms, ethnic and tribal tensions and iran's destabilizing influence. we will continue to draw on all sources of our influence, not just a military and we will work to foster a process that endures. closer to home, there is a region that has experienced rapid growth with a large and growing middle class and it is grappling with issues like transnational crime and trafficking that have serious implications on our own security.

thanks in part to our opening with cuba, turning the page on 50 years of fruitless policy, we now have new opportunities to strengthen our partnerships with our neighbors. we are investing particularly in central america, to improve governance, citizen security, to address the root causes of mass migrations like we saw last summer. across a range of issues, with an array of partners, the united states is proudly shouldering the responsibilities of global leadership. as president obama made clear during his state of the union address, the question is not whether america leave in the world, but how, and the answer is we are pursuing an ambitious, yet achievable agenda worthy of a great power. the president's budget directly supports his strategy.

our national security leadership is united around this shared vision and agenda and we are eager to work with congress to restore the vital bipartisan center to u.s. foreign policy. our unparalleled leadership is grounded in america for all enduring strength and guided by a clear sense of purpose. we approach challenges using all levers of our power -- diplomacy, broad-based development, economic leverage technological advances, talent diversity of our people, and where needed, our military might. we rally partners to enact sustainable solutions when challenges arise. we strive to set the highest standards by our own example and we lead with our eyes fixed firmly on the future, alert to opportunities to make the world

safer and increasingly just. president obama has two years left in his term and that is plenty. this is a blueprint for what we plan to get done over the next two years -- from degrading isil and opposing russian aggression to fostering a world that can more effectively meet the dangers of climate change and disease, cyber threats, and extreme poverty. if we run through the tape america will be better and more sustainably positioned to continue to lead on the issues and in the regions that will shape our future. one thing i can guarantee you, president obama is going to leave everything on the field and so will the rest.

the challenges ahead will surely continue to be many and great. progress will not be quick or linear. we are committed to seeing the future that lies beyond the crisis of the day and pursuing a vision of the world as it can and should be. that is our strategy for sustaining the leadership that future generations deserve. anything less would not be worthy of the american people or of our great nation. thank you very much. [applause]

>> thank you very much, susan. susan has agreed to have a short conversation with me. then we will open up to questions from >> i want to say something that doesn't get said enough. i have seen the pressure you are under and you have been slaving in the vineyard sports six years now. i just want to say thank you thank you for your service. [applause] >> what i heard in your presentation, and the documents i had a chance to read this morning, essentially the headline seems to be america is back.

we are going to lead. but we are going to lead in a different way. the emphasis on the troops coming home of the focus essentially on issues that don't get the usual attention of headlines, except when ebola strikes pandemics, cyber security, a focus on africa. these are things that seem to be things which they report does emphasize. the relationships with major powers -- certainly the mention there was mentioned in the speech, but it does not get the attention that someone say they deserve given what has happened in the world, particularly with russia. i'm wondering if you can explain

to us how relations with major powers continue under this broad national security strategy? >> firstly, thank you for your kind remarks. apologies to everybody. i am grateful that my voice has held up the us far. i'm uncertain how long it will continue to do so. i will continue to do my best. in the first instance martin, this is a multidimensional strategy. it recognizes in short we have to walk and chew gum at the same time. we have to deal with immediate crises and threats and at the same time have a long view and be prepared to seize opportunity. we have to focus on the regions that have traditionally consumed american attention and energy like the middle east and europe, particularly now with an aggressive russia, but at the same time we cannot neglect or leave untapped parts of the world that have not less attention, particularly in recent years. we have to do multiple things

simultaneously and believe it or not, we can and we are. that includes dealing with great powers and dealing with very proximate threats that we are very well aware of that we face. i did spend a good amount of time in my speech and also in the strategy itself on a relationship with china, which we see is one of the defining relationships for the 21st century. complex, one of both cooperation and competition, but it is very much a part of how we view the world. we also look at emerging powers that have great potential and there, too, we are investing and the president's recent trip to india, coming three months after prime minister modi, an example of another large power relationship we intend to invest in. russia is a particular challenge

and there is no question that a great deal of our effort and attention and our resource will be devoted to dealing with a russia that is now acting in a very aggressive and threatening fashion. if you read the 2010 national security strategy, it has a different perspective and a different orientation towards russia. at that stage, there still seem to be prospect of a more cooperative and collaborative relationship. now we have to deal with the realities we face, and that means we will continue to reinforce our partners and allies in nato. we will invest the resources and posture ourselves to be sure there is an adequate defense and we are calling on them to do their part as they are increasingly. and we will push back and impose costs for russia's aggression.

we have made clear unless russia reverses course we will look for ways to continue that pressure and we will do so in partnership with our european allies and others around the world who share that concern. so, that is the reality. of course, the second piece of it is the issue with upholding arms-control obligations to collaborating with p5 plus one with respect to iran. we have managed to work together, and to the extent that that remains possible, even in the context of these other challenges, and even as we necessarily increase the cost and deter the effects of russia's actions, we will continue to cooperate where we can. >> you said in your speech and now that you will increase the

pressure on russia until they reverse course and ukraine. in the document itself, you say you will help ukraine provide for its own defense. the big debate whether arms should be provided to the ukraine. can you respond to that question? >> yes. i am well aware of the debate. as he only says, he has done a very good job with friends and colleagues of putting forward thoughtful recommendations on the way ahead. we are very much looking into a partnership with our european allies, what comes next? what comes next with respect to economic pressure and other forms of russia. we are already providing military assistance to ukraine. we have not taken the decision yet to up that, and the nature

of that assistance. it is something under consideration. it is a significant step and we will want to do so in close consultation, adding coordination with our partners who with us thus far have been a core element of our strength in responding to russian aggression. >> china, what you said in this document about the way you'll cooperate with china, welcome its rise, but compete where necessary and build up relations with traditional allies in asia . but the language in terms of india is different. it talks about, the document talks about "strategic convergence" with india, with india's east policy and america's rebalance.

that seems to be a pretty clear indication that you are going to be working with india in this region, not necessarily against china, but where necessary to balance china. is that a fair read of the strategy? >> i would not put it that way. i would say that these are two very important relationships and we are committed to building them, but they are very different. obviously our relationship with india, as the world's oldest democracy in the world's largest democracy, has the potential to be different in important respects, with respect to shared value, and perhaps a broader sense of interests, but it is not about pitting one against the other. it is about building the potential of both these important relationships to the extent possible.

and let's be pragmatic. even with india, obviously, we have had differences in the past. india has enormous and very real development challenges and it has a history and the international system that makes it different than our own and where we can expand the scope of for cooperation and i think we , have demonstrated that potential is now greater than ever, we will do so, but i would suggest they would be without -- i would not suggest it would be without some moments of disagreement. >> last question before we go to the audience. on iraq and syria, the national security plays out in terms of dealing with the challenge of isis in iraq. in syria, it talks about the

notion of some sort of political rearrangement there that will be necessary. it does not really sound like a plausible strategy. it may never be possible to have a plausible strategy in syria given the situation. but how do you deal with the fact that this is a phenomenon -- there is no border anymore. do you have a way of dealing with it in iraq -- it does not so much we have a way of dealing with it in syria? >> martin, there is no question the challenges in iraq and syria are different and by necessity we have to approach them differently. yet, it is a region where the violence is spilling, not only between iraq and syria, but other nations in that same region. in iraq, we have the prospect of working with the government in a

fashion that provides hope and a nonsectarian way, and inclusive way to give us a partner on the ground that, however weakened, it is established can be built up. that is exactly what we are doing with our coalition partners in the iraq context. we are building up, assisting the iraqi security forces, providing active support from the air, and as a consequence, pushing at numerous contested areas. in syria it is different. we have a government that has violated all of the norms and lost its legitimacy to govern. it has implemented horrific violence against its own people. that is not a partner, for the united states or any other member of the coalition.

but at the same time, we need to not only take the opportunity to degrade and defeat isil from the air and cut off the financial flows and cut off the support -- we ultimately need partners on the ground, and they are building from a lower base, no question. we have committed and we are working and have been to bolster the moderate syrian opposition. but obviously that opposition is weakened and under strain. so, the process of working with our coalition partners to build that capacity will be longer and more challenging. even then it is in iraq. >> great. let's go to the audience. i would ask three things. identify yourself. ask a question. and number three, please let's

focus on the national security strategy that is the focus of this meeting today. yes, please. yes, the lady. >> [indiscernible] the hostage policy of the u.s. in terms of national security. there was news today about a hostage. >> in the first instance, we are obviously very concerned about the reports that have common in recent hours. we do not at the present have any evidence to corroborate isil's claims, but obviously we will keep reviewing the information at hand. we have a broader policy with respect to hostages around the world. we don't make concessions to terrorists and hostage takers. we don't pay ransom.

we adhere to that policy because it is our strong view and our experience that when you make concessions and pay ransom, you are only generating greater incentive for additional acts of hostagetaking and you are providing resources to fuel this continued operation and horrific attacks. so, in the broader sense, that is how we approach this. we are in the process of doing a review of our hostage policy -- not with respect to the no concessions aspect i have outlined, but with respect to how we can support and be more responsive to the needs of -- for example, the families that are suffering so enormously when a loved one is in that circumstance.

frankly, this is an area in which the president believes we can do better. at and we are trying to learn from the experiences of other partner countries that have similar approaches to the united states and we are in close consultation, for example, with united kingdom on this, and we try to learn from the experience of families themselves. part of the effort is to be in broad communication with them and ask them, what is it you have experienced? what has not worked for you, and how might we do better? >> yes, please. >> thank you. my name is martin. i'm the ambassador of switzerland. i did not have a chance to read the strategy, but from what you have explained, multilateral institutions, multilateralism does not play an important role.

is this impression right? >> it's wrong. >> it's wrong, ok. [laughter] >> obviously, it has just come out. i commend the strategy. but, no, multilateralism remains an important element of our approach. it is treated in some depth in this strategy, as it was in the 2010 strategy. i think throughout the document, you will see a great emphasis on partnership, alliances coalitions, and collective action. some of that will be best conducted through existing international institutions. there is emphasis on international order and norms, the rules of the road. but also, updating these

institutions for the challenges of the 21st century. i think you will find that team is well treated. >> thank you very much. thank you for encouraging messages. this really brings back the united states as a world leader. my question is about our part of the world. we have a very large scale crisis around the ukraine. to my knowledge, in moscow there are talks on a possible new deal. according to the leaked information, i do not know to what extent this information is

correct, the subject of the talks can be ukraine's neutrality, or a cease-fire along the new contact line inside the ukraine state. if it is done, then we are talking about freezing of the conflict zone. also, we are trying to get the ukraine and friends to drop orientation. and agree on russia's terms. how do you think this strategy which is very nicely developed and design, can act quickly and efficiently? and to protect freedom of choice of those in the neighborhood of russia? >> i think it is way too soon to

make judgments on what may be on the table in moscow today. our german and french allies are in moscow. i have been in close contact with their national security advisers today and yesterday and earlier in the week. what they are bringing with them to moscow reflects their agreement with the president yesterday in ikiev. they are not out there unilaterally cutting a deal with putin at ukraine's expense. that is a misconception. we have to see how this evolves. certainly, it is -- and i do not prematurely expect a success or an uncertain outcome.

in the broadest sense, our approach to your region is to stand strongly by our allies. and make clear that article five of nato is inviolable, we need to uphold our obligations in the most serious way. we are building the capacity of nato, not only to defend its own territory, but to support and grow its relationships with other countries in the neighborhood. including your own. this strategy is about strengthening and deepening. our oldest and most fundamental allies in europe. and to make very clear that aggressions in the 21st century will come at great cost, and will not be tolerated or upheld.

as i said in response to martin's question, we are continuously revisiting with our european allies how to best approach this challenge and how to support, not only the people and government of ukraine, but our partners throughout eastern europe. >> we're running out of time. two questions from two of your former colleagues. >> uh-oh. >> susan, it is great to see you back on our stage. i just had a chance to glance through the document. you talk in here about five his story -- the stork -- hostoric transitions going on in the world that the united states would like to influence the trajectory. one of which is the struggle for power underway in the middle east. this includes the struggle

between citizens and governments to redefine their relationships. it strikes me that throughout the document, there is a connection between domestic governance and strong institutions, transparency responsibility, security. in the middle east, we face a challenge balancing the short-term security imperatives with long-term recognition of the relationship between good governance and inclusion, and rights respecting governance and security. i think my question is how does the united states intend to address this consistent dilemma between short-term and long-term imperatives in the middle east? at a moment when our partners are saying this is not the time to push for change and reform, this is the time to trying keep control. thank you.

>> we will just take the last one from tom. tom rice. >> thank you. you spoke in the speech, but also in the document, about how russia is not an existential threat. it has committed crimes in ukraine, and then an aggression there. vladimir putin very much sees himself in a cold war with europe. i was just wondering what specific challenges posed like a major power like russia over the next five or 10 years. what things worry you about what they might do and how it might escalate either on the economic front and how should the u.s. respond?

>> two easy questions. >> let me start here and come back. i think first of all, that is not exactly what i said. the broad question about how we deal with russia -- there is no question that and aggressive russia is taking territory from its neighbors. it's of grave concern and it's at the forefront of our agenda. having said that the tools that we will employ to counter and try to will back that aggression are not necessarily in every respect military tools. in this case we have relied on alliances and partnerships to impose costs to support ukraine itself which is a vital element

of our strategy and to recognize within the 21st century where the vast majority of nations stand for upholding basic international laws and norms and find it outside of those laws and norms to roll in and take portions of your neighbor. russia is paying an enormous cost. and over the long term if these choices are sustained the cost will mount. i think it's hard to dispute that in reality even if in the term russia's behavior has not demons -- trably changed the economic impact is having a major effect on its economy and having a growing and major effect on its economy. and the variety of thools we --

tools that we have at our disposal economic and otherwise are once -- ones that we will continue to use along with our traditional tools to reinforce our collective opposition to this type of behavior. but i don't think it's correct to suggest that you can minimize the concern of this. but it is -- it is one that we will address through a variety of things. i mean, there's no question that in the middle east we are challenged by short term and long-term to wrestle with in tandem. when the president spoke at the united nations in 2013, he talked in very direct terms about other core interests in the middle east and he outlined

four and colleagues didn't really like that because it didn't give in your estimation -- i don't need to put words in your mouth sufficient emphasis on promotion of democracy and human rights. it focused on countering terrorism and weapons of mass destruction and upholding the security and integrity of our partners and allies and showing energy security and the free flow of energy. many of his speeches have -- including i think in that one as well. but the point being that we -- we do have some overriding core interests. but that is not to say and i think i said this in my remarks that we don't need and seek and wish to help support and build a middle east that is far more democratic far more respectful of human rights and one in which

women and all of the citizens of the region are able to enjoy the same rights that we hold dear. that is the objective. we think such societys that are respectful are more stable. they are more just. they're better partners. they're better able to confront the kind of security challenges that we face today. but it is a very difficult thing as we've seen over the last several years to succeed in those type of transitions while at the same time dealing with some very real both internal and external security threats. i think any of us would be oversimplifying to suggest that there is an easy one-size-fits-all answer. we have seen this from egypt to bahrain to saudi arabia. but that does not suggest that we have less commitment to or

have jetson's -- jettison or very real answer to establish democracy in this country like everywhere else in the world. many of these transitions and many of the changes we seek to implement will not come quickly and nor will they necessarily be linear and we're going to have to manage these tensions as a practical matter as policymakers for many years to come. >> susan it's been five years since we've had a document like this. >> lucky you. you guys now get to dissect it. i remember how much fun i had with other people's national security -- >> putting forward a paper like this will provoke debate and discussion. and we're grateful to you for that. and we're grateful for you for

launching it here and discussing it here today. >> thank you very much. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy.visit ncicap.org] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015]

>> next remarks by the high commissioner for human rights. after that, a discussion on international efforts to combat isis. then president obama in indiana talking about college costs and the economy. >> on the next "washington journal" executive director of defense 1 on efforts to combat isis. and talking about the rise in measles cases in the u.s. and

the movement against vaccinated children -- vaccinating children you could join the conversation on facebook and twitter. "washington journal" live at 7 a.m. on c-span. >> here is some of our featured programs for this weekend on the c-span networks. on book tv saturday night at 10 p.m., washington bureau chief for the sunday times of london on the british efforts from 2009 to stop the taliban and advance while awaiting u.s. marines reinforcements. sunday at 10:00, the senior editor on the u.s. senate torture report and white his company decided to publish it. on american history tv, interviews with former korean war pows. this sunday at 10 a.m., an army sergeant who is captured in the chinese and held as a pow from 1950 hyman 1953.

-- 1950-1953. you can find our complete television schedule at c-span.org. let us know what you think about the programs are watching. call us. e-mail us. were sent as a -- or send us a tweet. join the c-span conversation. like us on facebook. follow us on twitter. >> u.n. writes officials speak about isis. he says he was filled with anger and disgust at the recent killings of hostages by isis and that it was a betrayal of islamic tradition. from the georgetown university law center of human rights institute, this is 30 minutes.

>> thanks for coming. i would like to introduce to you the u.n. high commissioner who took up office in september of last year. i won't say any more. i will go straight to the commissioner himself. thank you. >> good morning. my remarks -- i am filled, fii

lled with anger and disgust at what they did to my compatriot. to the two japanese captives. to the british and american captives. to the men, women, and children, and many others in the form of burning, beheadings, and raping. sometimes of children. the perpetrators who have committed these monstrous crimes to the defenseless -- in defense of what exactly? who would want to live in their so-called state, a state that crucified, turns, and buries children alive? let us be clear -- killing and

torturing defenseless cap this is -- captives is a betrayal of the islamic tradition. it is forbidden and customary law. it is forbidden and humanitarian international law and geneva conventions. in human experience, it is forbidden. period. what virtue or courage is there in beheading someone defenseless? raping a young girl? does a person who calls themselves a fighter believe this is the definition of courage? these people of annihilated conscience are so far outside the human experience, the young

seeking to join them must know whatthat to join is not adventure. it is a road to an utterly criminal existence. if you're looking for meaning in your life, do good deeds. that will be your salvation. this is the first official trip for a high commissioner for human rights to washington in eight years. it has been important for me and my office to reengage with the administration and with members of congress, particularly during these troubled, deeply troubled times. i hope to be back for more visits, of course to cover

issues. this is a preliminary visit. not surprisingly given what is going on in syria and iraq, somalia, and elsewhere, the main focus of that discussions has been violent extremism. this was brought into's dark -- into stark focus when showing the gruesome video killing. it overshadowed virtually every one of my meetings. i had serious discussions of this and related issues and with many of the senior state department officials whom i met as well as members of both the house and the senate from both parties. as you may be aware yesterday

an event hosted by the holocaust memorial museum, i laid out some ideas about how we should and shouldn't attempt to deal with the spread of extremism and violence carried out by the groups such as isil, boko haram al-shabab, and others. of course, it is not simply syria and iraq, but also an increasing number of countries especially in the middle east. all across the northern part of africa. libya is is an extremely alarming state. yemen is deeply troubled. the central african republic --

south sudan could plunge into religious and ethnic violence. boko haram is rampaging across parts of northern nigeria and now increasingly in cameroon and's littering -- and slaughtered and laying waste to towns and villages. i have suggested that a security response, armed response, is clearly not enough. we have been responding in that way for more than a decade now. and yet these groups have simply spread and grown like some particularly cancer beating off our efforts to containment. i also point out that i soul -- isil is quick and clever and how it gages our reactions and mistakes. you must be extremely careful

not to allow them to drag us into betraying our own core principles mainly the preface system of human rights protections that we have built up after world war two and when we do, it helps the recruitment with the killing machine. if there is one small silver lining in all the horrors we have seen in recent weeks, it is that we are starting to understand that later this month, the united states will convene a summit on violent extremism designed to delve deeper into the complexities of dealing with this increasingly lethal phenomenon. i hope and believe that we will develop more sophisticated ways to undermine isil and other

groups. simply bombing them and down sending them -- and announcing them is not enough. we have to fight their ideas with better ideas. stop undermining our own worldwide system of human rights. it pushes us to do so. tackle the hopelessness and the solutions that is providing them with a parent and the stream of young men and even young women soft and by their parent success in confronting a world that is in some way offering them too little hope. we are in a grave period confronted by phenomenon we have failed to comprehend. how we handle or mishandled these issues the effect us an increasingly unpredictable ways for many years to come. i thank you for your attention. i will be happy to answer any questions you may have.

>> could you identify the organization you work for? >> [inaudible] >> as i said in my statement that i just read out, i think for all jordanians, the killing was so shocking, but in no way less shocking them what they have been doing, it has galvanized the jordanian public into realizing that these people must be resisted. the arguments that many of us

are making when looking back over the many years that they have been operating across many parts of the world, is that it would seem that the armed action taken against them is simply not enough. our attempts of course to seek out the funding mechanisms that keeps them going. we also believe that there must be a new battle line in the form of an ideological battle line that response to what it is that -- the letter issued by hundred 26 muslim scholars back in september is an initiative i think that is worthy of support

if the muslim world muslims take it upon themselves to answer back to the idea that they hold, that this will be the first step in terms of unwinding what it is that they seek instead of promote in terms of their ideology, i think this will be good. >> [inaudible] we wish to commend you for taking on this formidable and very important host. we know your office is concerned with universal human rights. is there an obligation or governments on all levels to foster the recognition of these

rights? >> it is a very good point. the declaration was. did buy that general assembly soon after it was written up. from the declarations a number of key treaties and conventions were developed whereby governments took it upon themselves by except these treaties certain obligations and it is there to remind governments that these obligations are not simply for clarity, but obligations that must be implemented at all stages. even with the passage of the years, or should be no diminution in the support given to them.

we believe this is absolutely the right way to proceed. in particular, when you look at certain treaties such as the convention against torture, it is a self-executing treaty. it is applicable in your law. it is a very clear convention. very clear convention. there are no exceptions. no exceptions that can be provided as grounds for reaching the treaty. that is very clear. when governments undertake these obligations, we hope and expect that they will abide by them. what we are worried about is in an effort to overturn extremists violence that we see governments feel inclined at

times to -- and they would justify it as temporary measures, to reach some of these treaties. but we are saying is that these obligations relate to treaties that were developed as a response to wars and torture that have been part of human experience for the past few millennia. the treaty attempts to -- the experience is through human wisdom and a law that reflects that experience. there should be no grounds for justifying any breach of them. i hope this is something we will continue to press upon them.

>> my name is [indiscernible] i work in the health sector were. there are principles of rule of law and governance to assist and implement other obligations. it is my observation after being in this field for over 20 years that too often governments do not know how to actually operationalize their obligations under the law. i note there are some materials i have read your thinking about the work you were setting out to do. you're also looking at the health sector. we could look at education. the court system. any number of institutions within government that are probably failing and a lot of laces where terrorist are rising up.

in recent years i worked in afghanistan where just a few days ago i read about that talent than construct and -- to hear cases and disputes between people. i wonder if in your thinking and perhaps premature in your tenure if you had some thoughts around how to operationalize and to assist countries to operationalize their obligations so that institutions can be rebuilt or built a new so we could provide this level of support for citizens. thank you. >> yes. excellent question. 6 million of our youngest people, little people, people between the ages of one-day-old and five years of age, die every year from preventable causes.

in many instances, as you so rightly pointed out, it is because the authorities that are normally responsible are delinquent in the discharge of their duties. 6 million is the equivalent of many average sized countries. it is quite amazing. if we were to say that isil was killing 6 million people a year, can you imagine the reaction? why is it that we are not as determined when we say 6 million people die as a result of preventable causes and they are very young that we are not more determined to do better? i even said it had some cases it must amount to criminal no digits. -- terminal negligence -- crimin

al negligence. you're absolutely right. if people cannot see government stand up to their obligations in respect their health and education, a create spaces for those were extremely ideological bent to exploit this. that is what we had integrate into the discussion on countering violent extremism. i agree with your opinion. >> anymore questions, especially from journalists present? >> a follow-up question. in regards to setting society to stop pushing for exceptions during times of war or violent extremism, how do you suggest that governments encourage and foster these ideas at the most

basic levels of society? >> it's important that governments take a comprehensive view of this. understand that societies feel excluded. in societies at the fringes r.o.k. with allowing for alienation -- if societies at the fringes are okay with allowing for alienation -- we'll have young people attach themselves to philosophies or ideologies of the more extreme. human experience especially in the 20th century come is filled with the violent drama which we really do not want to see replayed in the 21st century. we do not want to go back to the

horrors of the 20 century that passed. we have to take stock and learn what it is that can should be did -- contributed to the spasms of violence that led to the deaths and knowing the people violently. understand we cannot put ourselves in situations where we cannot change the trajectories -- it is important for governments to view not just the people from or through a security prison, but security terms that ser curity paradigm is not

just physical protection. it is security in terms of food, health basic rights for all parts of the population. if you can have that come you immunize yourself better against the forces of extremism. societies that are open to scrutiny that are willing to accept scrutiny are better positioned for the long-term. and so, we are reminded we will be uncomfortable when the you this.