problem of trying to explain they are not the bad isis. good going on rearranging your letters. me, as aing point for journalist i am a storyteller by nature. zarqawi familiar with when he was still active in iraq. his importance as a terrorist leader was underrecognized and read what he was able to create was unique. built in organization that became a problem form us. he did it deliberately, even is probably the least suited or qualified person to lead a terrorist movement. he never finished high school. .e was a street hoodlum he went off to fight the jihad

and did not do especially well. he missed a chance to fight the russians because he got there too late he had some unique ideas that al qaeda rejected. following, arful core group that he formed around himself. he became a powerful and strategic force. there is an important story that needed to be told and broken down and understood. it became more important under the isis context. theree without zarqawi, was no isis. he was the innovator of everything we see today. the focus on building the caliphate. it was something he decided in iraq had to be done immediately as a short-term proposition. thesing on building caliphate as a field of dreams.

declare it, it will happen. his successors did it more overly but he was doing it as early as 2005 or 2006. he was the innovator of by sheer objectives brutality. he did not want to be liked, he wanted to be feared and respected. he wanted to make things happen. he innovated the idea of parading men before a camera and cutting their heads off. an important story and one we need to understand if we want to understand isis. the other thing that is that --t to me, i argue would not have existed without a series of missteps. to help general

readers, not just people in our world of being saturated with this. help them to understand all these points we are familiar with. how it came together in an extraordinary way with circumstances, to form zarqawi. and the organization that followed, isis. scientists doial not like to focus on individuals. in your mind, what were the main circumstances that led to the rise of isis? ideological, reaction to the the authoritarian regimes? first, thank you for inviting me to this event. and to me meeting joby.

something about his book, and from the book at the one of the things that joby tells us, the bombing that was carried out initially group, they try to target an adult cinema. bomber was so film, he forgot about his mission and lost his legs in the process. book is somewhat similar for me. i started reading his book on the train. there were mechanical difficulties. to change we needed

trains and everybody lost except me, i was too engrossed in the book until a conductor said, you need to leave. i found myself really enjoying many of these stories and aspects i had not read before. i want to commend you beyond taking us past the early time or i.s. or the group that calls islamic state.wa we have had so many books that flooded the market. --many of them begin with personalities do matter. what we have found through

zarqawi is a different brand of jihad isism. we had become accustomed to the jihadism dominated by al qaeda. perhaps the personalities of ourgeoisll we say bo jihadis. the dangerous dreamers as they are called. thatw a kind of jihadism was about ideals. sacrifice. the need to die for a cause. seeing aawi, we are particular, a different kind of jihadism. they decided they wanted to be

jihadis. we see some of those differences brand, at qaeda's least on the narrative side, and what we are seeing with zarqawi today. fillst respect, the book an important gap. i want to say also, there were , we still have gaps in understanding the foundation of i.s. there was a serious gap in the 2011.from 2006- there is my bias here. studying the leadership of the islamicled isi,

state of iraq from 2006-2010. i do think there is something that has been underestimated about this time. , that islamic state was declared by another person. phase i wouldther like us to focus on. you describe him in your book, when zarqawi emerges. of -- thisame part is a very important time. we saw many groups in iraq. umbrella,d under the

and zarqawi's group was one of many. we saw many serious divides. some of the groups appealing to bin laden. saying, why don't you dissociate yourself from these groups? if there was one report -- i don't know about its authenticity -- it suggests it al-bagdadi who was the leader. when i read his statement, he provides almost, if you like, the theorize asian of what he calls the beheading.

what heheorizing of calls the beheading. we may say there was no state, but the hierarchy and infrastructure, at least on paper. all the suicide operations and other operations mounted and era. this was during this , wonder why the several years 2.5 pages in the book. benjamin: because that is your book. i would like to ask you about your time in jordan. it is what helped inspire this book. it is clear you went to remote

places outside of him on. mman. a i wonder if you can talk about the g ijid. ise the people you met from th m organization. their role in the security establishment and how they can committed positively or negatively to the rise of isis. joby: i think jordan is an essential character. zarqawi was a jordanian. at the same time, as i understand, his real influence was outside the country. it was not part of the jordanian movement. it did not come out of the

muslim brotherhood. he was more influenced by his mujahedinng -- experiences. he did not have a single successful attack ever. the one that was the most famous was just described by nelly. what came out of the story, role and containment of these groups. they recognized they had a serious problem. these afghanth fighters coming back to the country. being radicalized. having military training. getting into trouble. sophisticated containment operation began. they had dealt with factions of

palestinians, but this was a homegrown terrorist problem they had to deal with. quite brutally at times. there was a combination of two things. whichely good nutrition, is easier to do in a small country. -- penetration, which is easier to do in a small country. i have always been impressed whatthey have a grasp of is going on the country. the old organization, the headquarters, has a hard reputation. nickname used -- to be the fingernail factory. they have become a little less rough around the edges but they do what they need to do including keeping people in prison for a long time if they feel there is a threat. the ideological partner to born -- was a core 80

kuwaiti born palestinian who had the philosophy that started this movement in prison. zarqawi was released in the general amnesty in 1999. they saw him as a threat and kept him in prison -- this other man as a threat and kept him in prison until a few months ago. they have been very good and effective at controlling some of these groups. they have a bigger problem now. it is not just the jordanian population but huge numbers of outsiders, especially syrians. refugee camps. problem ofave the isis, literally on two sides of the border in iraq and syria.

their problems have amplified in the last couple of years. they continued to complain to me , noti speak to them about just a resource problem, they feel disadvantaged and shortchanged. they are fighting a challenge that is unique in the region. they are essential to keep isis from progressing further and do not feel they have nearly the support they need to. they come out as being cassandra and also, a tragic element of what is happening to the country. benjamin: from your time in jordan, do you pick up any blowback among the population about the treatment of prisoners? radicalization? that was made,ke and i think the jordanians would

it this, they kept the jihadists together. they had an overcrowded prison population. were hard-core guys infecting the other guys. they put them all together. it opens up with a group of 50 radicals in prison together in a gel that has been abandoned. jihadime kind of a university. there are stories of torture and and it is hard to get a true version of what happened in many cases. it helped drive these guys together and create a more radical collection that existed before. beforan existed before. i think there is more effort,

they are good not just that penetration but human intelligence. you talk to officers, i guess the equivalent of almost more thethen cia, dealing with families of young men going into the jihadist camp. working with parents, siblings. street-level care and attention being paid to potential problems coming up. that is what makes them remarkably, if you look at the region, stable compared to their neighbors. going back toy, isis today, can you help us situate them in the spectrum of islamist groups and talk a little bit more about their difference with al qaeda? nelly: sure.

joby mention the one-time mentor of zarqawi. landscape,he jihadi i prefer to call them jihadi's. s are groups that use islam as part of their political agenda, but they are willing to have political elections and so on. s upend theadi political process altogether. groups thatncounter came to form isis or i.s. through the lens of the writings , or thee the person who ideologue whose writings provided the foundation of that

brand of jihadism. the jihadism of bin laden and al ofda is the jihadism pragmatism of sorts. one of the early books that became popular among the the religion of abraham." he provides the seeds for that kind of sectarianism that zarqawi would adapt and run with. said zarqawi and others abused his writings. they didn't really abuse them. you go back and read his writings, human night on his thoughts that they did not abuse them. not to get into too much technicalities about this, but the main difference, and this is a difference that was very clear

whenn laden and zarqawi they first met sir, we back in 1999, they did not want anything to do with him because of differences in the concepts of -- these are the social contract, if you wil like, the social contract. with whom you want to associate in terms of believers. and bin laden, they wanted to focus and emphasize the thought you of this. bringing people together. -- the value of this. ringing people together. zarqawi, they were concerned about who to dissociate from. f.ey did not share your believ s

they rejected the shiites. for those who emphasized that on the basis of police, they were disposed to resorting -- when a muslim declares fellow muslims to be unbelievers. mainstream muslims, and even people like bin laden, were careful about that. they would not utilize it. mainstream muslims will tell you what is theides believer's intention. only god knows it. whereas our car we -- zarqawi knew better.

he thought they wanted to cleanse and purify the faith from those believes they disapproved of. on the ideological spectrum, the rootsere we see of that sectarian ideology emerging. out of his writings. the arm thates advances it. disciples, one of the people who was fighting along zarqawi. he died in iraq. he was furious with zarqawi, howard dare you send him to the battlefield. you sent him to the battlefield.

from that respect, we see a clear difference between the strategically oriented to jihadis and those who weresectarian, prepared to sacrifice strategic objectives to appear if i be the tension was always probable. faith.urify the the tension was always palpable. they said they had refused to to the trainingk in camps. that is why zarqawi did not want to join al qaeda. on, bin laden and others

were more pragmatic. him in when he became more mellow bowl. the issues, it is not that the regime only used him. he was also using the machine. jihadis whog the followed his views. it seems, if you look at the prison,ry in and out of it is one where he was willing to make concessions. soon thereafter, we see him being released from prison. >> you want to add anything? question tone more joby.

you described in depth in the book, i think quite well, about the military advance and development of these cells under general mcchrystal. they were highly mobile. they included special forces. intelligence analysis and resources. against thekthrough insurgency provoked by al qaeda in iraq. mind, do you see anything we can learn from isis now? is the air war, that has been going on for more unwinnable without that kind of action on the ground? certainly 40 special operators

in syria are not enough. heading inthat trend any direction because of general success?l's or was that apples and oranges? joby: the united states developed a pretty good operational strategy against to read itovement took them three years to get it up and running, through trial and error. boneheaded mistakes. what brought the movement on its heels was two things. whichbar awakening, coincided with improved tactics. intelligence/special operations group that ran out of mcchrystal 's operation. what was successful about it was bombing at aom distance or large troop

operations to high tempo intelligence capture and kill, and then kill capture. nightafter al qaeda every . i talked to the guys involved in the program, tough guys that you are glad are on our side. they would have breakfast for dinner and go out at night. houses, three or four times a night, night after night. as soon as they hit one, they would collect intelligence and go after another immediately. high tempo, never giving the enemy a chance to regroup or regather. they were effective at taking out second or third tier commanders and eventually killing zarqawi. a couple of problems. had full control over iraq. of the airspace. cooperative government with significant resources. was relatively small

groups could make a big difference, ultimately, in the defeat of zarqawi. i remember sitting with 8 wholigence folks in 200 are convinced al qaeda had been defeated. that didn't happen. they became isis. of special groups operations into the theater. there is some indication they hope to reprise that successful formula using friendly forces like kurds but hopefully with advisers, instructors, that can help locate that experiment. -- replicate that experiment. whether they can do that in syria without full control over her space and the kind of intelligence network we had is a good question.

benjamin: nelly, you are trying to answer that. for q&a.e self andentify your keep your question as short as possible. the gentleman in the front. the microphone will come to you. thank you for your discussion. i want to preface my question with a cynical observation. with the current condition of the u.s. political process, if it were in existence in 1941, we would be speaking japanese and german. since september 11, two administrations have made strategic errors that range from catastrophic to ludicrous. mr. bush failed to ask and what next question.

how do you account for that? is this in our dna? are the problems to tough, or is the political process to difficult th -- too difficult? joe b: that is a million-dollar question. all i can offer is, it is instructive to look at the strategic side. that happen again and again, often because we did not ask the question, what comes next or did not have the strategic vision to see what was i think incorner, the case of the obama administration, they were caught by the arab spring movement that nobody knew what to do with. seeing our allies toppled.

we were pretty hopeful that we could see what would come out behind it, but in every case it has been a disaster. how we can get ahead of it? that is a tough one. i remembered talking to senior folks here. they were convinced it was going to fall. have ase we are going to stable government in this notical place and it did begin to happen. even with all the iranians and americans and everyone there, where does this end? -- we don't know where it is going. we cannot come up with good answers on how to solve it. >> thank you john craig from the center for american progress.

joby, you said at the end that the centers for zarqawi transitioned into isis. i want to ask a question about why zarqawi. both men and joby described the disbandment of the iraqi military is tragic mistakes, but in fact they were in of the neocon agenda. i think they were very deliberate policies pursued by the administration at the time. iraqis thatd to the were affected? why was his r. kelly, not even if an iraqi, and where were all peoplee iraqi military while's r. kelly was organizing military people while is r. kelly was organizing?

wase zarqawi organizing? joby: he was destined to have this fight. the iraq war was going to happen and he was going to be there on the ground. but he dropped it these jihadists who had this vision for fighting the superpower, infidel out of iraq. he very quickly joined forces the locals. suddenly, unemployed military who did not really share the bizarre calories envision us saw a strategic opportunity to join

forces. professional iraqis, bureaucrats and military officers with these fanatical jihadists. that was the combination that made bizarre calories movement so powerful. you have these guys -- that's movement so's powerful. , veryideological views much see the value of isis as a weapon for going after the shiite government in baghdad and reclaiming glory. i think that is the innovation began what does it is today. you are absolutely right as the mistakes. everyone of those decisions was deliberate, including the one i described in some detail in the

book. turn as of trying to our calorie, an unknown jihadist figure in 2000 2003 to the connection. the cia was pretty convinced at the time that's our kelly had no connection to saddam hussein. that zarqawi had no connection to saddam hussein. that became part of the justification for the invasion. iraq priority 2003, most people, whether they believed it or not, it was part of the kind to get intou needed university or to do things. had tremendous influence on those who did not like saddam

but who had to be part of the party. that is why the new regime lost many talents who could have been part of the new government. they were excluded. because they were just baptist. bathist. and of them are fighting forming groups, it natural to fight a long with his zarqawi. once they started getting to know him better, we find there was an enormous divide between his zarqawi and the former bathi sts and others. it was one of obama's first statements. ists toed on the bath

join. particularly those in the military, he called on them to join the islamic state of a rock is so long as they could have actually, some basic knowledge of koranic verses and so on. he is the one who did the outreach. he reached out to the kurds in his public statements. that earlyear outreach by czar callery did amazing things early on. the first big attack in 2003 against the u.n. compound, the jordanian embassy, the major shiite facilities, were all using improvised bombs made from iraqi aircraft munitions. there was help providing

equipment, intelligence. here is a guy able to have intelligence that worked pretty quickly. to plan coordinated attacks and have powerful, locally produced munitions to attack. points to participation and attack from well-placed iraqi sources. [indiscernible] in the recent years we have seen the increasing islamic activity and afghanistan and other areas outside the region. what evidence did you see of the

isil, are they providing money,ple or is there leadership advisors? do you see evidence of a greater link than just being a and example? joby: i have been convinced it is mostly by inspiration and example. sometimes they communicate with propaganda and speak to each other through their own facebook postings and tweets and things like that, evening and encouragement from the sibling organizations throughout the region. it will be interesting to see what happens. turns out to be bomb, theoduced question is, is that something a local isis affiliate would together or was it something

that was directed and somehow equipment, supplies, no-how came from central isis? i do not know the answer but it will be telling to see the answer and the extent to which centralizes has command responsibility to some of these organizations. i think right now you see the beheadings and placing flytrap afghanistan a couple days ago, in libya, you see echoing going on but it is not impossible to logistics. >> let us take three questions from the back. .> ken meyer the prevailing opinion among the syrians and iraqis is that the united states is behind the islamic state. the u.s. treasury decided to look into how the islamic state

received those hundreds of toyotas that used in the takeover of northern iraq? what do you think they're going to find? >> in the corner? >> sorry. >> british embassy. it strikes me, when dealing with an adversarial or enemy the idea of giving them credibility is dangerous. by calling them the islamic state or isis whiffed on that. have we reached the point of no return and how they are branded and how that gives them the credibility they desire? >> far corner? >> hello. sorry. thank you for being here. i wanted to ask if you could talk a little bit about

recruitment. jihadist recruitment. how isis has influenced al qaeda's ability to recruit jihadists and how their recruitment processes have changed as a result. >> nelly, i will ask you to start with the question. islamist-isis the branding, talk about perhaps who communityamic world has some credibility about condemning, and kobe writes about the efforts to get various clerics to speak up against them, but how is that working? where is that going? i will ask joby and general about the u.s.-iraqi contribution to the rise of isis

which i think stems more from they have taken over a lot of basis and equipment that are from the iraqi army. we thought they were better trained and motivated then and turns out to be. so, let's start with you. nelly: that let me start with this question about what we call them in the issue on that ability. , one issue to do with naming and using religion, i think when we analyze groups is and so on, it is important to understand how religion matters and, more importantly, when it does not

matter. this is lacking in the analysis. because sometimes we see religion as paying a medium for a position. something different than theological issues. this is where theology and the efforts to bring in the clerics and give us a three-hour lecture on the islamic tradition and so on is not going to appeal to the young person who is not to motivated simply because of spiritual reasons, but because they really want to do something. this really talks about the recruitment part. here, -- you know, i to work outneed really what is behind that to recruitment strategy and to understand the phenomenon. my colleagues are doing a broad study of out foreign fighters, looking at a very large database

on open source and hopefully that will give us, at some point, some meaningful answers so on.hy people join and roughly, we are seeing, for my own perspective, we are seeing a different kind of people who are is.ing to begy does not seem critical. many young people are converting to join is. ask, isn't islam? is it a ticket to become becoming jihadi rather than jihadi teeing a ticket to become muslim? this is very important and cannot be stressed enough. say, whatcall it, you do we call them? it is not up to us. the islamicgroups,

states, is best described by al announce it.ey al qaeda called it, the group that called itself the islamic state. is a group that is not in and of itself a state. this is a more accurate description. i am cynical about isis, isil. they all contain the islamic state. it does not do it. i would rather call them, the group that calls itself the islamic state. the sensea state in it is not seeking a seat at the united stations, nor does it want it, nor is it going to have a seat on the united nations. is onthink, you know, it some of these things we need to knowledge how groups define themselves. we cannot decide how they define themselves. when we study them, we have to of knowledge that hard.

at the same time, we have to stress the other aspects as well. leave the army, you can create a new acronym that they are quite successful at. joby, final words? iny: you can forgive people the region for having conspiracy theories, including the notion that isis is somehow u.s.-funded or backed in some way. i am always amazed at some pervasive -- at how pervasive some of these theories are. there are educated people, people who follow the news, who are convinced that isis is a creation of iran. others who think the united states is backing isis in some way. it is a pickup argument. it is remarkable that western equipment, in this case, , all of thisks,

left behind by american contractors who imported these toyota trucks. it turns out the security contractors who ran the bases, did the food preparation, did -- this legit -- just logistical stuff, did not take it with them. there was a huge parking lot left. isis liberated them and took them for themselves. you have old divisions worth a of humvees, jeeps, tanks, you name it. best armed,ly the best equipped terrorist organization the world has ever seen. we had this money because we want so much as a country about giving arms to syrian rebels, because god for bid of some of those would fall into the hand of isis, instead, what they did was they raided our own former bases in iraq and took the things for themselves. >> any other burning questions? last one.

>> thank you for this discussion. i am alex him and is. i work for the voice of america. my question is about the foreign actors. west too came from the join isis. my question is whether or not you have any information on the possible connection between isis and radical organizations in the west. othersome rightist or medical organizations. i do not know about this. i mean, in terms of trying to suggest they are infiltrating is from the far right, i think, ideologically that would be

very, very difficult unless they s, i doing to penetrate i not see how there could be any kind of ideological sympathy between far-right groups in the west and i.s. i cannot see any sympathies. it at that.eave i think this has been a productive discussion and i have closing recommendations. book and follow nelly on various social media. [applause]

>> wednesday, a special veterans edition of washington journal. rausch oflude bill the veterans bureau who talks about various veterans and military issues. dr. cameron at richie of the washington that be a medical center. it begins live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> two things are very different

today. we have a justice system. these trials were not held to what we consider as modern law. innocent until proven guilty was not yet in place. no one had a defense lawyer. there were no lawyers at the time. unruly place.an we do not happen to believe in witchcraft or prosecute witchcraft today. sunday, on q&a, we talk with an author about witchcraft. --merchants were cruised of merchants were accused to be witches, homeless five-year-old girls were accused of being witches. not all of the victims were

women, we also have mail. we did not burn the witch is, we hanged them. there was so much encrusted in myth. i thought it was important to dispel. >> sunday night at 8:00 pacific. q&a.span's c-span has coverage on the road to the white house 2016. your questions. taking thewe are road to the white house coverage into the classroom. giving students the opportunity to discuss what important issues they want to hear about from the candidates. follow the student cam contest and the road to the white house on tv, radio, and online at c-span.org. >> is really prime minister

benjamin netanyahu is in washington for two days. part of the reason for his visit was to mend relations with democrats after his opposition to the nuclear deal with iran. he met with president obama and the oval office yesterday. today, he met with members of congress. this picture was tweeted out today. today, mr. netanyahu was at the center for american progress, where he talked about the israeli-palestinian conflict. this is one hour. [applause] >> mr. prime minister, mrs. netanyahu, welcome.

thank you for coming to the center for american progress to engage in a dialogue on a range of issues including many areas of concern to progressives as well as all americans. we have disagreed on some issues, including the iran nuclear deal. we also believe deeply that the u.s.-israel relationship is vital. that relationship is critical to both our countries, particularly as the middle east becomes a more unstable and dangerous region. we believe strongly that conversation like this one are an important opportunity to strengthen the relationship. scholars at the center have studied the region closely. we believe please can and must be found for israelis and palestinians so that both people can live with real dignity and security. it will take hard work to build mutual confidence and negotiate difficult compromises, and we really understand that. as prime minister, we thank you for taking questions here, because the choices you make matter profoundly to israel's future and the future of the

region. we believe that matters profoundly to america. would you want to make a statement? prime minister netanyahu: thank you. that reminds me of the israeli ambassador who came back and said do you have anything to declare? he said, yes, i'm happy to be back home. yes, i'd like to make a declaration. i would like you to understand that i have a sore throat, but i'm sure you will discover, have not lost my voice. secondly, i know that my visit here has been a source of some controversy, so i doubly appreciate the invitation. everything you said is something

that is crucial and important. third, i came here because i think it is vital to understand how important it is for me that israel remains an issue of bipartisan consensus. [applause] it is crucial. the relationship with the united states, all parts of the united states and the american people, is a strategic asset to our national security and our future. that is the third reason why i'm happy to be here. the fourth reason is something else. i would like to talk to a

progressive audience about progressive values. i think israel is, at the very least, misunderstood. if you look at all the values and all the rights that you deem important, talking about the rights of women, the rights of gays, the rights of minorities, the rights of arabs, the rights of jews, the rights of people -- these are enshrined in an imperfect society. israel is not perfect. i don't know anyone that is. the one that is facing incredible off with incredible successes. i would like to talk about those values. i would like to talk about our quest for peace. and i'd like to talk about why that quest for peace is not yet it achieved. and i hope you will ask me questions on all of these things, and anything else, if you want. i have a rule when people come to interview me. i broke my rule because i did not have it here -- it is not my office. in my office, i put out a white

board. everyone who asks a question, i write it down, and i go to all the questions. if i don't want to answer, i say i don't want to answer, i want you to know i am fudging that one. at least everyone knows that i am answering a question or not. hopefully i can answer all of your questions and thank you for the invitation. >> thank you. i will follow-up on some of the issues you raised for sure. obviously, you had a meeting with the president yesterday, some disagreement between you and the president. i hope you can share with us a bit of the flavor of the meeting and what concrete tips -- steps came out of it. prime minister netanyahu: it was a very solid meeting. i an not saying it as lip, it was a very good meeting. president obama and i have had over a dozen meetings. more meetings with me then any other leader. i appreciate that. the time he has invested, the importance he attaches to this relationship, is unique. we have had this disagreement particularly over iran, which is

clear, but we have no disagreement now about what we need to do moving forward. three things. number one, holding runs feet to the fire, make sure they abide to their obligations. two, worked to block iran's terror in the region. there are others in the region that practice terror and aggression, like isis. we should work to counter both. third, worked against iran's international terror network that is now spreading to. the president focus yesterday on an mou that is a long-term understanding between israel and united states. american military assistance to israel that is critical to

us. i appreciate his willing to move on tod on that as well as the military age. as you know, there are countries in the region receiving a tremendous amount of military assistance, and it is very important that israel always has -- edge totive age defend itself against any threats. that is a principle the president has repeated many times. appreciated at all times, especially at this time. minister, you mentioned is he values and democracy and the fact that there are arabs who live and work and are citizens of israel. we appreciate that you came here to talk about tough issues. one incident that struck a nerve

with many progressive was statements made during the recent election. said, you said, air about voters were coming out in droves to the players. they were taken aback by that. what do you say to progressives in the united states who worry about that and what it means for israel? prime minister benjamin netanyahu? -- prime minister benjamin netanyahu: that was an error. you may check this, but they voted for me and considerably larger numbers than they voted for the labour party. i was not referring to going to vote, i was speaking about a specific list that was imposed. it should not have been set. a few days later, i called in the arab leaders. arab leaders, to the prime minister's residence, and i said, i am the prime minister of

each of you. statementot want that to go uncorrected. i corrected it and made sure they understand it. what about deeds? what about deeds? you know, i will tell you what happened when i first was elected prime minister in 1996. this is my fourth term. a flood. if lead in israel. there is an arab area that got flooded, because they do not have these tunnels. not tunnels, but sewage tunnels. yes. the whole village was underwater. i went to see it, in and i said, god, that looks awful. like this?is is they said, it has always been like this. i don't know,in,

30 or 40 million shekels and i built this tunnel and there is not been a flood since. and they said, but prime minister, they are not going to vote for you. in die said, so what? in diapers seated in my administration's to give billions of shekels, aliens of shekels, to the arab sector to reduce the infrastructure, reduce the gaps cap -- to put it in infrastructure, reducing gaps, put transportation inside the arab villages. they cannot get to work because there's no internal transportation in the arab communities. it is unbelievable. i changed that. i put in a lot of money. i put in programs so the arabs can enter the high-tech sector. i did this personally. we did all of that. after the election, this is now my fourth term, we put in close to one billion shekels.

now. just now, with the leaders of the same arab party. so, i am the prime minister of all of israel. those who voted for me, those jews,d not vote for me, arabs, muslims, christians. the words and the numbers for themselves. i think it is worthwhile, since you have scholars, to investigate that. look at the relative investments of different governments. in and, you will discover the truth of what i am saying here. i think that is important. it comes from the political philosophy you would be surprised to hear that i follow. especially the teachings of a man who believed in the idea of an egalitarian state. he said there, in the jewish the son of flourish

arabia, the son of nazareth, and my own son. that is what i believe. i turning to the feature, would like to ask you how you see israel in two decades? do you and vision israel will continue to occupy the west think? will control gaza in 20 years? how do you see the future? prime minister netanyahu: it depends on what is happening in the middle east and in the world. there is a great convulsion. that convulsion is of monumental proportions. it is really a battle between modernity and early medievalism. i was going to say medievalism but my father was a great scholar of the middle ages and this is early medievalism, a a very primitive and violent

the arab and shape muslim world. so far it is taking primarily muslim lives in syria. dead, millions displaced. i cannot tell you what will happen. i think, ultimately, medievalism loses and modernity wins. that is usually the case in the great battles with these fanatic ideologies. naziism lost. but before it went down, it took 50-60 million people. one-third of my own people. militant islam would go down, i'm quite confident. i don't think it could compete with the desire for freedom or the technology of freedom, even though we are using it right now, using the internet, other things against the other forces.

but ultimately, they are in the business of constraining choices, so i think ultimately they will lose. what will happen in the next 20 years, i do not know. but we have to make sure ultimately we are around. it gives us no suck or nor in courage meant -- it gives us no encouragement to have militant islam defeated in a jewish state disappear. we don't want to go through a repetition of the other tragedy. we have to make sure the state of israel is strong and robust. i was prime minister on the 50th anniversary. i may very well be prime minister in the 70th year anniversary, two years away. i will tell you what happened

over the last 20 years. israel has turned into a technological powerhouse. growth.n a century of israel is growing by design. we have created a very friendly economy for this growth. we have, this is a number i always give because it is striking. in 2014, israel received 10% of the global investment in cyber security. in 2015, the number doubled. we are seeing 20% of the investment over the world in cyber security, that is an astounding figure. it also shows exponential growth. i think we will continue that trend to ensure israel grows technologically, the future belongs to those who innovate. another example, water.

we solved our water problem, even though rainfall has roughly been halved since our year of independent. our gdp per capita has grown 40 times, yet we have water surpluses, because we are the number one recycler of water in the world. we recycle roughly 90% of our wastewater. the next runner up is spain, 25%. we have the capacity to shape the future. here is what is happening as a result. because nations understand that the future belongs to those who innovate, we are getting alliances, a lot of alliances. this may not be understood in western europe, but here is what is happening. i am so isolated, as prime minister, i don't have time to see my own can as it members, my own faction, or the other politicians because i have diplomats and heads of state coming from asia, africa, latin america, and they all want three things.

i am talking about small countries, like china, or india, where i will be going soon to visit, or japan. 20 african states that have come and said, come back. come back. come back. countries in latin america. they all want three things. first, israeli technology. second, israeli technology. third, israeli technology. this is a fundamental change that will accelerate in the next 20 years. israel, in the knowledge century, is uniquely poised to multiply its capacity. can we get peace with the palestinians, which is what you are asking me. it depends, one, we are going to talk about that more. i just wanted to get my commercial in.

how great an investment israel is. remember the joke? how do you make a small fortune in israel? start with a big fortune. >> apparently they have not heard this one. prime minister netanyahu: the important thing is, how do we change our fortune with our palestinian neighbors. why is it that we do not have peace. why? well, is it this government, is it me? there were five other prime ministers since this process began. how come they did not make peace? the reason they did not make peace is because the underlying problem preventing peas is not israel's willingness to make a territorial compromise, even a very generous one.

it is that, after gaza, israelis asked the question, do we get a state that lives in peace with us, or do we get a state that seeks to destroy us and fires thousands of rockets at us? israel went through the book. it went by the book. it left gaza to the last square centimeter. it took away all the settlements, took them apart. it even disinterred people from their graves, handed the keys over to abu mazza, who promptly lost it to hamas, even though they were only 3000 strong then and you had 15,000 troops. and you had 15,000 troops. they kicked them out. they have fired 15,000, 16,000 rockets from gaza. the same thing happen with lebanon. lebanon toe left

the last squre inch. now we have another proxy in iran, hezbollah, and they fired about 15,000 rockets at us. so israelis ask visible question. if we were to set up a palestinian state, how do we make sure that that state does not become another gaza and is not committed to our destruction and does not work toward our destruction? the answer to that falls into two categories. and these are not conditions for entering talks. i have no conditions for entering talks. you should invite abu mazza here. that is what you should do. invite him and me. i am sitting here, i'm willing to wait. we will see if he comes. i am willing to enter the talks without any conditions. for the last seven years, abu mazza spoke to me for six hours, that's it. how can you make progress on the issues on about to talk about, if you do not talk?

that doesn't mean the charges are not leveled at us, but they always are. these are facts. in order to avoid another gaza, which is the opposite of peace, you need two things. first, you have to make sure that the palestinian state that is formed is not committed to israel destruction. that it ends all demands, recognizes israel, and does not seek to flood it with descendents of refugees, anymore than i would seek to flood a palestinian state with the sentence of settlers. do you agree, mr. abbas? refuses to answer. that is what we mean by a nationstate state of the jewish people. palestinians go there, if they choose. jews go to israel, if they choose. can we have that each will recognition of two nationstates? the second thing is, what happens if things go awry?

what happens if this territory is taken over, like the way gaza was. then we need a long-term security presence to ensure that does not happen. right now, i don't see any other force. i don't see any other force. i mean, who is going to do it? austrian peacekeepers? we tried that in the golan heights. these two conditions of mutual recognition and security arrangements, i think, do we see that likely right now in the immediate future? no. is this the right form, down the line? yes. will it happen? i'm not sure the palestinians will accept it by themselves, but because of the change that is happening in the region, because there is a huge change happening in the region, it

might be that leading arab countries might encourage future palestinian leadership, or even this one, to accept that kind of deal. if that happens, israelis would go for it. they would go for something that they thought was mutual recognition and that was secure. >> with respect, i think, -- a lot of progressives think, in the u.s. and around the world -- that israel is not currently acting neutrally, that it has been acting vis-a-vis peace, and acting through the advancement and expansion of settlements, the idea that there has been a steady growth of settlements that are strategically placed, understanding that they are placed to make the palestinian state more difficult, or that it has that result. what do you say to those concerns, that the settlement expansion is actually something that is making peace more difficult?

prime minister netanyahu: two things. first, factually, there have been no new settlements built in the last 20 years. even before i became prime minister the first time. the additions are in existing communities. the map does not materially change. by the way, google this. this is repeated ad nauseam, so it assumes that it is a self-evident truth that they were gobbling up land. the total amount of built up land is just a few percent. and the addition, if you look over time, it is maybe a fraction -- maybe 1/10 of 1%. maybe 3/10 of 1%.

that is the land that is being gobbled up. that should not be something that is debated, and yet, it has become an axiom that we are in gobbling up land, but that is not true. here is what the actual statics is of construction are. 5000 units a year, 1800 units a year, olmert, 1700 units a year, my government has built 1500 units a year. that is a fact. ok? that is not subject to question. statistics, in our case, are not in any way influenced by political manipulation. this is an independent authority and was quoted in one of the papers that most supported me "haaretz." it is a fact. ok. so, the settlements are there. the growth in the settlements has not affected the potential

map for peace. third, it is an issue that can be resolved, but i don't think it is the core issue. coreeason it isn't a issue. my grandfather always said this. the conflict was back to 1920. my grandfather came on a boat in 1920, landed in jaffna, went to the immigration people in jerusalem. that office was hit a few months later by arab attackers. they killed six or seven jews, including a great writer. brenner. then we had riots in 1921, 1929 in the ancient jewish community , 1936, 1947, and 1948. there was no settlement. then this continued into 1967.

deathe had a noose of placed around us. this is 47 years, 1920 until 1967. half a century. there cannot be territories because there were not any. now we get in there. they keep on attacking us. i am telling you that the real issue is a -- the palestinians are divided, one have living in gaza, overtaken by militant islamist, and the other half in the west bank refuses to confront them. and when i say to abu mazza, for god's sake, recognize the jewish state already, as i recognize the palestinian state, and for god's sake, let's talk about long-term security arrangements, so we have those two acres for real peace. he will not do it. the settlements could be resolved in that conflict easily. easily. well, not that easily, but not that hard either.

>> i think one of the issues is, you say there have been 1500 a year. i hear there are less. but why continue with them? prime minister benjamin netanyahu: people live there. they are human beings. you do not say all the firstborn, throw them on the other side of the green line. they are living there. they are living in three blocks primarily. that is where most of the construction is taking place. i know it is common to say that this is the belgian congo, but they have been living there for 4000 years, and so do arabs. i don't say, we will throw you out. there is massive arab construction that is against all slow -- it is not important right now.

nobody says, how come they are building in disputed land? there is this ethnic cleansing idea. what is this business? why do we have arabs living in the galilee, everywhere in the knesset, in the supreme court, full civic rights, not a perfect society. but in the middle east, the only ones that enjoy the rights of a democratic society. nobody questions that. we don't question that. certainly i don't. yet the idea of a palestinian state, it has to be human rights, it has to be clear, there cannot be any jews there. what is this? what kind of standard is this, that the world accepts, and progressives? you don't want that. i think you should ask these questions to the courts. i see gays for gaza. or, i don't know -- gays for iran.

the people who do that are the people who would murder them. hang them. your fate is sealed in gaza. host: we are not making equivalents. prime minister netanyahu: forgive me for being so clear. i think there is something fundamentally wrong. we have made enormous sacrifices for peace. statements the "two people" speech, he has not gone to his own people. we are not going back. and israel is here to stay by right. i did and no prime minister has done it before. he would not come to the table. i did other things which were harder.

like releasing prisoners, which was probably the hardest decision, it did not help. it did not help them get to the table. it didn't helpt launch the negotiations we want. absolve me. in the middle east, what is driving the conflict is the battle between modernity and early medievalism. it is not the palestinian-israeli conflict. that is a larger civilizational

battle. between the israelis and palestinians, what is driving the conflict and still driving it is the persistent refusal to recognize a nationstate for the jewish people and boundaries, that remains the problem. if you want to solve the problem, address the problem. do not address what is not the problem, address the problem. it is not settlements, it is the refusal to accept the jewish state. if you have a willingness to accept the jewish state, you will solve the settlement problem. host: i want to follow on comments in the region and ask you about what is happening in syria, the recent actions by russia, the nature of the region, hugely unsettling but i would love your views on that topic. prime minister netanyahu: it is a very complicated tapestry.

i think you should ask mr. putin why he is doing what he is doing. but, i think he said that he wants to bolster that regime, he says he wants to prevent islamic fighters from going back to us. -- back to russia. i went to see him and i said, the first thing we have to make sure is our fighters do not start turning on each other, or we shoot down your aircraft batteries and he said, i agree. so we agreed on this horrible

jargon, de-confliction. i think it was the same procedure two weeks later between the american military and russian military. second thing i said, look, i have not intervened, is really has not intervened. principally because i'm not sure which intervention is preferable and if i'm not sure, i don't do it. if syrian territory is used to fire, we fire back. and we put our army and position more than once. secondly, if iran wants to establish a second front as it has established in lebanon, we will take forceful action, as we have. third, if iran and hezbollah want to use syrian territory to transfer arms, very lethal arms, from syria to lebanon, we will take action, as we have. fourth, if we do not see it, we

could take action against syrian arms, but we do see it. if it went through, it does not prevent us -- if we did not see it going into lebanon, we could take action in syria to degrade the inventories that could be passed in the future. so he heard that. and i think it was a clear conversation. and this is the policy we are following, as far as syria is concerned, i cannot tell you. if you can put humpty dumpty back together again, i doubt it. if there is a solution out there, that restores and stops carnage, that is fine with us, newwe want to make sure the

syrias with an "s" are not used against us. host: you have made the point and you are right, israel is a rare democracy and a dangerous neighborhood. democracies around the world agree that no one is above the law. i want to acknowledge that we very much condemn the heinous knife attacks targeting israelies that continue today in recent weeks. we were all taken with the recent story of the israeli-american working for peace who was attacked and he stand against acts of violence, as the president said yesterday. so we stand with you in that area. innocent palestinians have also been killed, extremist killed three members of a family and an

arson attack in a village this summer. including an 18 month old baby, they have not been prosecuted. people have questions about that. i would love for you to explain what is happening. prime minister netanyahu: sure. when you had that attack, which is uncommon, but is horrible. i went to the hospital. i went to the baby boy, the baby palestinian boy. aid that we would shoulder any expense to take care of the family. unfortunately, the parents died. i did then something that israeli prime minister has done, i issued an administrative detention on israeli citizens, hat is, you actually can put them under arrest without trial.

because i thought that this was such, something we have to fight with, such ferocity, that i was illing to break this precedent and we did. the problem with this is this is not an organized network. typically the way you discover terrorist attacks or criminal angs is that they have hierarchies and they have communications, so modern state, israel is a very modern a. it cracks that sometimes quickly, sometimes over time. when you encounter something that is not structured at that level and you can have 15, 16-year-olds, you're not sure. but you don't communicate.

they are very clever and obviously have been, you know, have figured out whatever the achilles heel is and just avoid any communication, then it's very hard to catch them. we have cracked lesser crimes, somebody did damage to a church in the galilee and we cracked hat. we cracked, actually others, but this is the most violent act. that's the reason we haven't cracked it. i don't want to get into a discussion of our measures but they are legion and it is difficult precisely because it is not structured. that's the problem. ost: there is a concern that secular violence has not been prosecuted, that the vast majority of cases against palestinians have not been prosecuted, what do you say to that?

prime minister netanyahu: it is not too. -- not true. we do not have a policy with them. look at the violence. we had this horror for this particular family, but we've had families burnt, molotov cocktails a woman walking with her husband and two children, the husband is knifed to death, the woman tries to rescue her hildren, she is assaulted. i've seen drive-bys where rocks are thrown into passengers in thed my tholve jerusalem and the guy dies, goes into a ravine. i have seen horrible things. there's no comparison. you can't hide violence. it's not as if they go in and kill someone and it is a secret. we are a country of law and a country of transparency, so there's no comparison. it is not symmetrical or equivalent, but what is illegal is illegal. we prosecute even if somebody

paints graffiti or takes down olive trees, it is a crime. but i would not put it on the same level as duma. duma is real. nd there are many dumas on the alestinian side of the ledger. they try. they do not succeed all the time. so i do not think there is a symmetry. there is no symmetry in israeli and palestinian societies, we do not teach our children to -- we don't send them to suicide kindergartens and camps, we do not teach them that we have to obliterate palestine. we do not name our public squares after mass murderers. when we had, on the few occasions we had mass murderers like geeled steyn, we excoriated, we all condemned him. from the right to the left.

but the public square in ramallah is named after a killer who murdered hundreds of innocent jews. there's a difference in values. they glorify these people. e don't. so there is an asymmetry that produces this glorification of terror and right now what we see is a layer above that, or below that and that is the internet is meeting militant islam in the hearts and minds of children and teenagers and driving them to believe this fantastic fabrication, we will tear down the mosque, build a second or third temple. it is insane. you say, how can people believe that -- they believe it. if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes true.

this false is propagated in the minds of the people. when we have young minds poisoned, we take action. if we haven't taken dum -- if we haven't found the duma people, it will take time but we'll get them. i'm much more concerned about how to get to palestinian young minds, want to disabuse them of these -- one, to disabuse them of these lies and second to get them to accept the idea that we have to live side by side in this small piece of land. and we're going to have to do it in peace and prosperity. that's a tough order. i don't think their political leadership is ready yet to embrace this. it's the toughest obstacle there ishost: we will go to questions, i will ask one last one. everyone should identify themselves and question should be short and to the point.

i'll ask one last question. there is many areas, but i will focus on one, where israel has -- where we can learn lessons from israel, the military has been rrrr -- been very inclusive for a very long time. prime minister netanyahu: you have don't ask, don't tell. we have, we don't care. host: and for women as well. are there lessons in that space hat you can share with us? prime minister netanyahu: i think that israel has women fighter pilots, navigators, in aircraft. israel has women combat soldiers. and they've proven themselves under fire. a number of times. including, by the way in the police. unbelievable.

including this last rash of knifings. -- tremendous courage and help me out. what the young david had against goliath. resourcefulness. tremendous resourcefulness and courage. host: neither ambassador had that. prime minister netanyahu: i am very disappointed here. [laughter] prime minister netanyahu: amazing capabilities. i will tell you i got, where i was deeply moved, i went to the mossad. you're not going to meet these people. and they showed me this cyber stuff. ok. and there's a 26-year-old young

woman there. and i said, tell me about yourself. she said, well, i'm, you know, i aduated, she could be very wealthy. but she's working in the mossad. i said why are you doing this? she said, because i believe in this country and this is what i can give. i'll have enough time later this woman is probably responsible for saving more lives than, well, than anybody can even imagine, ok. this is something that we encounter, this human resource. i don't want to talk about it just in terms of intelligence prime re's something, as minister you see this. you see it in special units, you

see it in the police, in the a moral point of view it's the right thing to do. from a utilitarian point of view, you have to be crazy not to do it. i think israel is very sane and very moral in having this inclusivity of women in every part of life. there was a woman prime minister, as you know. host: we may test that pop sigs ourselves. i think we have time for questions. can you identify yourself. >> i just want to ask, you went in june 20, 13, hershel's fwrave who you venerate as every israeli does, you said the current situation is not good for israel. israel wants to be a state.

it doesn't want to become a binational state. obviously the preference is a negotiated outcome. i think everyone agrees to that. but what's the plan b, mr. prime minister, if there, for the reasons you say that the palestinians aren't willing to reach that, what's israel's plan b to remain a jewish state and not become a binational state? prime minister: let me come back to that, think about it. no, let me answer. that works less well than a negotiated solution. in any case, the main problem that we have is the acceptance of the principle that israel ill take kear of security in

the areas, basically west of the jordan. this is the main problem. the problem in gaza when we left gaza, we left not only the, we not only took the settlers out, we left no security. as a result, gaza has become a security threat not to the ommunities adjacent to gaza, it's now become this poison thumb, this poison dagger that sends rockets well beyond tel aviv. it can reach a long way. so unless you have an israeli capability to actually prevent the use of territories that we vacate in a civilian sense, hand over in a civilian sense, that we can patrol from a security point of view, then you have, that's where you get into trouble. and there's another issue that

came up, wasn't around in 2006, that would complicate things a little bit more. tunneling. there's tunneling from gaza into srael. and the west bank. any delineation of the border would be hundreds of kilometers and there'd be thousands of tunnels. these tunnels are where terrorists can emerge, take people hostage, kill them, squirrel them back. you've got enormous problems. the only way to deal with that, the only way is to ensure that from the security point of view, israel has for the foreseeable future, until you prove otherwise if there's somebody else who can responsibly take that territory, israel has the security control. i don't see the palestinians agreeing to that, ok. they'd say, well, how can we be, you know, fully sovereign state if we don't have security control of it?

how can we leave the skirt presence of israel for the indefinite future? said, well, ever here hear of germany or okinawa, or south korea? you can if you need to. no israeli in his right mind, the reason i'm here for the fourth time is just about any israeli believes in what i'm about to tell you. any orangement, binational or negotiated, must have israel maintain the ability to defend itself by itself against any threat including from territories that are ceded. ok? that's the most important provision. that is something that i don't see the palestinians accepting now. maybe they'll accept it tomorrow. maybe arab state wills accept it. maybe the international community will accept it. if they do, then i think we'll be able to ensure that we don't

incorporate palestinian populations in our midst. be able to separate from them. yet at the same time mane teen security in our land. that's -- that's the real test. i'm not sure that -- i think we have to talk about that more. i think we have to get into -- get that into the international bloodstream. that's basis of a practical solution. the middle east as it unfortunately will be for the ext few years. >> i am the chair of the board of j street and i wanted to ask about your negotiating advice, that you will negotiate without preconditions, but in negotiations, you want these two issues to be settled before you talk about other issues. or negotiate them.

i wonder whether you would consider as a way to convince arabs and palestinians and others about it to do two things. to give a sense of the generous borders you're willing to offer if these things are settled, conditions on them but make clear what it was. and second, show the palestinians that they can have an autonomous existence even if they don't control the security arrangements by beginning to allow them to have it now on the west bank. prime minister netanyahu: on the question of territory in borders, this is about 95% of what israel has to feed. on the question of recognition, recognition of a jewish state, nation state of the jewish people and the security arrangements and so on, that's what we need on the other side. there's a question of the jewish

land, the temple mound, i think it's -- i don't see right now a solution for that. i think it has to remain under israeli sovereignty and that's the only way to prevent this from exploding. but on these two issues, israel is asked to give virtually 100% of its negotiating position without receiving a concomitant return. nd i don't negotiate that way. but it's a point of fact that my predecessors who did negotiate differently fell off a cliff. they got nothing. because they didn't really breach that rejectionism. palestinian rejectionism. which has been around since the 1920's. it has lately been fused with militant islam. which makes it even worse. but in point of fact, i think these things should be put on

the table together. and that was basically the position that people tried to have. but it's become more difficult with the current palestinian eadership. nevertheless am willing to say i'm willing to meet him, my late father used to say, i translate this, he said conversation fertilizes thought. conversation fertilizes thought. so you can generate new ideas if you actually sit down and talk. i can't get this guy to sit down and talk. and it's, you know, i suppose i uld say today, my throat has become hoarse from inviting him to meet again and again and again again and he refuses.

but you're right to draw the distinction between the willingness to sit down without preconditions and what i believe are the two foundations, the two bill lars of any potential deal, neutral recognition and long-term security arrangements where israel is able to defend itself. he doesn't need to have me accept them to sit down. get on with it. conversation fertilizes thought. o sit down and converse. >> prime minister, i am greg rosen. i'm chair of the commarble jewish council. i want to thank you for being here today in the spirit of reconciling americans of both parties to focus on the shared

values that unite us with -- in support of israel, not policy issues -- disagreement we was that could divide us. my question concerns economics and trade relations. as we know from the famous gefilte fish emails, it's not easy to import products if israel to the united states and sometimes it's not that easey for israel to import from the united states. does your administration have plans to streamline trade relations between the two countries in order to create a more robust exchange of goods nd services in the future? prime minister netanyahu: i am minister of the economy for the next two weeks, so i will make sure that we put into effect, ook, i'm an open trader. i do not know if you're aware of

his, in the midst of the attacks and they occur every few hours, there have been calls for me to effect closure on the territories. and i said, i think it's very important to focus on the knife wielders and on the molotov cocktail throwers but not inflame the rest of the population. so about 140,000 palestinian workers, i think that's the number, work in israel every day. we kept that open. similarly in gaza. is is one of those amazing factoids, so here's a fact. gaza right now has had more than one million tons of reconstruction material,

humanitarian aid, economic fwoods, those have been passed almost exclusively through israeli land border. very little of it has gone through the other borders. from the sea, we don't want them to come through the sea. not because we care about pass am, but we care about weapons nd you can smuggle them. here we have containers that are scanned. in egypt, they don't encourage heavy flow into gaza. but we do. so we screen for weapons but we have increased the flow. we used to boast we would have 250 trucks passing thru gaza daily. t's now 900. if we get scanners from germany and hollande as i've asked the leaders of those countries to supply, it can go higher. my position is, let the thousand

economies blom. i think that's actually, it's not in lieu of a political settlement, but it helps. it hetches. it helps that people in the west bank and people in gaza see that they're not living at the edge of a precipice. that they have the wherewithal to have real life businesses. that's easier to do on the west bank. part of the reason the west bank has been relatively quiet. you know. it's worth it to ensure that that continues. they look around and say do, we want to be like aleppo and sir yasm to we want to be like yes, ma'am snn do we want to be like libya? or do we want to have a real life and a potential for a real solution down the line? i don't know if we can solve the political problem right now. i think president obama has his own doubts as well, but i think we should work, there are three

components here. there's political component, the political solution, there's security, and there's prosperity. at the very least we should work on security and prosperity, as we are, and if we can also advance the political solution. for that, we're going to have to sit down and talk. the unilateralism that was pointed out, i suppose that's possible too but it would have to meet israeli security criteria and that would also require, i think, a broader international understanding than exists now. host: thank you. i think we are over time. i really want to thank you for your remarks. are there any final remarks you'd like to meet? i know your throat. prime minister netanyahu: i'd like to make a lot of remarks but i have something to declare. i have a sore throat. host: we are happy that the throat, your throat lasted. this issue came up of hosting

you, we all wanted to move forward because we believe progress is impossible without dialogue, as you said. so we are grateful for you to be here and take questions on a whole range of issues. prime minister netanyahu: i'd like to make another discussion. invite me again. thank you very much. thank you. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, please remain seated as the prime minister and his delegation make their exit. thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> coming up, former president george w. bush talks about

helping military veterans find jobs. then a look at the origins and history of the terrorist group isis. later, benjamin netanyahu talks about the israeli-palestinian conflict at the center for american progress in washington, d.c. wednesday, a special veterans day edition of "washington journal." our guests including bill russia of the iraq and afghanistan veterans of america who talks about veterans and military issues. then a look at the mental health of america's veterans with dr. harold kudler of the veterans ealth administration and colonel ritchie of the maryland veterans -- of the veterans center. "washington journal" live starting at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> c-span has a full lineup of

veterans day program for you. join us starting tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern. on er first lady laura bush hiring our heroes. on wednesday, veterans day, c-span's "washington journal" with the latest on veterans issue and your input from calls, tweets and facebook postings. and then conversations with freshman members of congress, beginning with seth moulton who served four tours in iraq. then representative steve russell, a former army ranger whose unit helped track down saddam hussein. and then live coverage of the wreath laying ceremony at the tomb of the unknowns at arlington national cemetery. then at noon, more from freshman members of congress. representative sinnkey talks about his various d -- zinke talks about his experience in

iraq. watch all of c-span's veterans day coverage on tv or online at -span.org. >> in june, former president george w. bush spoke about job opportunities for post-9/11 military veterans and helping veterans reenter the private sector and also their need for mental health care and addiction treatment. we'll hear from former first lady laura bush and labor secretary perez. this was hosted by the u.s. chamber of commerce. [indiscernible]

>> have joined together today to address the critical issues around employment. but first, i want to thank all of you who are currently serving or have served in our military. thank you for volunteering to where our country's uniform and to protect the freedoms that make our country so great. and thank you to your families, too. well everybody join me in giving them a round of applause. [applause] has rightly bush said, our country can never fully repay our veterans, but we ought to try. and because of the support that president and mrs. bush, we here to talk about how to do that. and i think them both for their leadership. today, we brought together leaders from the public, private, and nonprofit sectors to discuss where progress has been