these are our values. these are our beliefs. and when we hold onto them, we do great things. what we learn from all our challenges is not that our values are not true, not that our values are not good, but that every generation must commit to them and work to make them real for the challenges of heir time. we have also learned that the catalyst for change has always been young people, just like you. young people who reject stereotypes. who turn away from old ways of thinking, who insist that we an and will do better. now i cannot tell you that your choice to change the world, the way you live in honor and obligation to others, i cannot tell you this will always be comfortable. i cannot predict the exact

results of your actions, but i can assure you, i can tell you today that by working to improve the circumstances of your own particular time and place, you will create ripples of change that will flow far into the future, expanding as they go in ways that none of us an ever imagine. and if you need proof of that, look no further than our own history in this country. now we know that the lawyers and the merchants who gathered in the pennsylvania state house to declare their independence from britain did not have you and me in mind when they asserted that all men are created equal. they were not thinking about us. they had pushed us off the page. but their words have inspired movements for equality ever since. because one does not claim liberty and equality by virtue

of one's gender or race, but by virtue of being a child of god. [applause] and the organizers of the seneca falls convention in 1848 who were trying to get women the vote did not expect to awaken a national campaign, but their example has galvanized and empowered women to this day, because when the full force of womanhood is awakened, nations change, and dreams come true. and the students your age who sat at a lunch counter in greensboro, north carolina, who sat in the basement of my father's church and planned their next move, were not looking to change federal law, but their actions ignited a wave of protests throughout the south that fueled the civil

rights movement everywhere and helped bring about a greater society. because when freedom is awakened in the hearts of a people, it will never sleep again. and the 11 women, some of them former slaves, who started education in the dim basement of an atlanta church, 135 years ago, did so not knowing if their dreams of an education for themselves, for all their daughters, for all of us, would ever come true. but you are here, we are here, because of them. because the power of black women to lean on faith, to make a way out of no way, can move mountains. applauds applauds [applause] graduates, class of 2016, you are the heir to the vision of

the founders, to the courage of those suffragists, to the persistence of the students, and to the determination of those women. each of them sought to improve their own circumstances, but they also expanded the sphere of opportunity, not just for themselves, but also for generations to come. but know this all, as you think about their example, as you think about the legacy they leave, and sometimes the burden that can place on you, they all, every one of them, at one time sat exactly where you sit today, on the brink of moving into a world that they were still learning how to navigate, that they were not sure what open its arms to them and their talents, and they all wondered, as you do, how will i find that way?

what will be my task? and they moved into the world not knowing what impact they would have. in many instances not even living to see the fruition of their effort. but they sought not a title, but a task. they stepped out on faith and wanted to be known for their works. and as you all prepare to leave here today, i urge you to draw strength from that inheritance, to lean on that example, and never doubt the smallest step can create the most sweeping change. i want you to go forth into this world that is waiting for you. explore the sciences that will expand our world, the economies they keep it running, and the walls that set us -- laws that set us free.

but i urge you to never lose sight of our comrades in humanity, on whose behalf we are all called to work with the faith that will sustain us through it all. this is my call to you, to find your change and to live it. and my graduates, my sisters, don't ever forget to lean on the bonds of sisterhood. that will sustain you through your questions. it will support you through your work. it will give you the strength to carry on, no matter how challenging the task. it will be there for you to matter how long you need it. all the days of your life, for year, or just 166 days. and so, today, we let go of your hand, knowing that you will soar, you will fly. not just across the street, but across the world.

knowing that as much as we want to hold you close, the world needs you more. so i want to congratulate you, the class of 2016. thank you for letting me spend a few minutes in your brilliance today. i cannot wait to see what you all achieve, because i already am so much in awe of what you have brought. congratulations, graduates, your families, and all of us who have come here to celebrate these wonderful, wonderful women. thank you. [applause]

>> labor secretary tomas eperes is among the speakers at the national coalition for homeless veterans conference. we will bring you that event live starting at 8:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. c-span's "washington journal" live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. this morning we're live in loredo, texas, on the u.s.-mexico border to talk about immigration issues that affect the country. first, managing and director for brightman texas talks about the flow of imlegal immigration and efforts involved and humanitarian aspects of the issue then local immigration

issue will discuss who she represents and the laws on the books regarding deportation and "dallas morning news" mexico correspondent exams the car tells in mexico plus the violence and smuggling of humans and narcotics. alfredo corchado is the author of a book "a country's descent into darkness." be sure to watch beginning at 7:00 a.m. eastern this morning. join the discussion. >> former pentagon official took part in a discussion on the conflict between israel and the parls. by the jer hosted for a new american security in washington. >> my name is -- i run the middle east -- and welcome to

the discussion today security system for the two-state lution. now the whole -- i'm going to talk about it for a moment. i will introduce the panel as we go through the discussion. fundamentally the whole purpose of this report is that we took up the conclusion or i did during the last know,s that its raleys will never agree to a permanent status agreements unless their security requirements are met. palestinians will never agree to a situation as long as they feel they are in a permanent occupation. the question is how do you balance these two challenges and try to find some security system that meets both sides' needs and what we have tried do with this report today is develop the most detailed public study on security

arrangements that's ever been put together that meets both sides needs and also -- the reason we call it advancing the dialogue and that's part of the discussion in the report is because this is a set of ideas that we hope can fuel a conversation. now, a number of reasons why we decided to do this now, which you might ask why would you do this now given how difficult the situation is between the israelis and palace and when it seems the idea of negotiations between the two sides seems so far away. but i think there are two central reasons. one is someone who worked in 2013 and 2014 for secretary john cary, the first thing we did with the team of negotiation sincere go outside and exam all the work that had been done prior basically between the camp david negotiations in 2000 all the way through 2013 in annapolis,

and so much has been done externally that made it easier for the me the negotiators to wrap their heads around what the solution might be. so we hope that will continue to push the ball forward even when there is no negotiation. it also is important to do 24 because many of the things we are recommending for the future, you can work back from and see well, what should we be doing today the security front to be ready for that moment? so this helps israelis. helps palestinians and americans who are training palestinians on the westbound as we speak see what the end state looks like and help arrive at the conclusions for today and also we felt it important to try 20 communicate with the israelis and demonstrate that security is possible. that there is a solution through something that's comprehensive and rigorous and technical.

this is how you can do this and we think that's a very important message to send to even but especially to the israeli public which is so 70'stive to this in the aftermath of the withdrawal from gaza and the fear that gaza just that israel to re-deploy from the westbound you would just end up with a situation similar to today. so a couple things about the overall principles about the security proposal then i will turn it over to our discussion. the first is the idea behind this whole security system is the built security system and better relations and much about the border security system and a much better internal security system, the future of the palestinian state but israel maintains -- palestinians will not agree to that necessarily

but israel has taken unilateral action in the past. the united states takes action unilaterally in places like pakistan when it feels its national interests are at stake. but the key is to build this system so the need under is absolutely limited because if -- two-a-days other key principles that we base this work on -- i'm going to need you to read through report if you don't want to go through the 70 pages but there's a lot of things that can be done early that are easier to minimize israeli visibility and remove 2 feeling of occupation the palestinians feel and that can be done early and quickly. ecks change for that there's core 23u7bd mental things israelis need and that can take a little bit longer.

so there's things that can be done quickly and what is going to stake a lot longer. finally, very important. for both sides, the israelis need to know that they will not be deployed from the westbound and then have as i said have it become gaza. not be deployed from the westbound if conditions are not right. palestinianens need to know there's a clear timetable for withdrawal so what we have designed is a condition-dependant and phase area-by-area. it means israelis and palestinians and americans come together and agree on the criteria necessary before an israeli force hands over responsibility in particular an area for the palace and ones all this -- for the palestinianens and once that is there's a process by which there's judgment made on whether that criteria has or

has not been met, there's mediation and if they feet in criteria they have agreed to, they get their timetable but it's also clear toe israelis that certain criteria they have agreed to has been met and that's core to the stoit and to engage our panel in that discussion, so i'm going to do that and introduce them one a at tame and in fact i would argue none of these three need any introduction whatsoever. they are known as security professionals and israelis have been dealing with these issues -- a long time and we are and the general allen here for this discussion. now i want to start with you. before we get into the details of the discussion, i really why?to start with just

why do this study? why especially now at such a difficult time do you think that this is still possible? and for you to spend as much time working on this, given especially it's interesting to hear from you about this given you were the commander or central command and ran the westbound and you were a former military individualsor to prime minister sherron and also led troops and also led forces in gaza. and was a division commander there as well. so from that perspective, why now? and why this? >> good morning. or good afternoon. thanks for this introducing me, you know? i think the -- not doing everything to explore the way

to achieve peace with our neighbors will actually lead us to a much broader peace with our neighbors. so this is something we have to do. it's the duty of anyone who cares for the future of the next generation in the whole region. so that's the reason. but i think the there are so many controversial issues etween us and the palestinians that the security issue the condition for everything in order to move forward you have to solve the security issues. in this research we actually explain that the security solution exists, and not without taking risks. we all know that in order to move forward in that neighborhood, you have to take risk. and i think that the state of

israel is a strong and powerful enough country that can and should take risks in order to achieve peace. now, i am have quite significant experience in this arena of palestinian issue, and i first acknowledge the complicated -- how complicated it is when i came to command the city of hebron in 1996-1997, so it was just after the withdrawal from gaza. also according to the agreement 193 and 1994, after evacuating the palestinian cities in the westbound and everything was taxed because of hebron. nd i was the one together with -- i worked -- they did visit a lot and ask questions and how the cut the deal at the end of

the day. and we constructed finally a for al agreement to sign hebron. we deployed from hebron at the end of 1996. we passed responsibility for 85% of the city. e had very complicated structure of security arrange meant that hold until today. so for me, it was an example on how things can work if there's a good way on both sides. since then, four years later, the second intifada broke up because of the perception and attitude of -- was dealing with peace and -- at the same time and different work 2000 to the second intifada, i'm sure you all know the history and

identicals of this intifada was terrible for both sides and more than 1,000 israelis were killed and the palestinian economy was devastated. both sides were big losers of this intifada. took us five years to suppress this wave of terrorism. and then when i took office as a central command, commander, it was just a month before the koop in gaza. it was the anti- -- a month after i entered office in the central command hamas extend intifada from gaza shooting people, throwing them from buildings, humiliating them. the moment after we set in our headquarters and i talk to my men, look, there's an opportunity to stop -- i can

tell you the -- then we started to cooperate with the i call them the new palestinians because the palestinians i met in 2007 were very different from the palestinians that i met in 1996-1997. i think that they learned the lesson of the second intifada. i think the heads of security peace even d to though, and i can tell you they have a lot of reasons, many reasons to be unhappy with the way that we treat them. but still they do what they need to do. so i believe that's the answer. i believe we are in a unique time with the israeli people and i don't want the talk about how it's a window but we have to do something about it.

>> that's a very powerful message. especially the realization and aftermath of the hamas coop in gaza and i want to turn now to john. and you have led u.s. forces in afghanistan general and been a special envoy further isis fight and international coalition and led men in anbar province. yet i know from the conversations we have had and when you worked on this issue, this is something you care deeplyability and spent so much time on. so again, the question to you is why? why spend so much time on this issue that some say is not as important ads some of the issues you've dealt with in recent years. >> this is the most important 24i7k i've been involved in, frankly. i was raised in a family where the jewish future of the people was important to us and from the earliest moments i can remember stories of my mother and father the jewish people

were raised up as an important focus over who we are as americans. israel, of course, as a jewish state very important to that. so to me, if i'm going to be important to something that supports the jewish people stand long-term viability of israel which is what i really believe is at stake here trying to participate in and be a part of a process that can bring about a two-state solution where israel's security is guaranteed, but also can create a sovereign and independent palestine for the arab people. and in partnership with israel so that both of their security is enhanced by virtue of that partnership, i think that trs no bad time to be fully committed to this. and as you know, i left the government in november. as the president's special envoy for the global coalition to fight isis and the last

conversation i had with john cary walking tout building, should the opportunity arise would i be willing to come back? i said i'll come off the bench the rest of my life if necessary. it's important, because this relationship, israel with the palestinians. the israelis with the palestinians. it's often at the heart of so many of the issues that we find in the region. and by creating an environment where we protect israel's strategic viability and creating an environment where the palestinians believe that their interests have been served by that relationship, i ink we can put pave to a number of entities in the region that use this as a crutch and an excuse to not move forward with peace or relationships with israel and i'm thinking iran in particular which has sought to champion,

falsely champion the values and rights of palestinians, and by doing this, and by working hard for this two-state identical where israel security is guaranteed and the palestinians have a sovereign and independent viable statement and is a security partner with israel, i think we can solve or begin the process of sooveling many of the problems in the middle east. >> thank you, john. that's a powerful, powerful statement of your commitment to 24 issue which i saw personally during this efforts. michele, i will turn to you. you have had extensive experience at the pentagon working on these issues. e7 under the secretary of defense for policy where you dealt with pretty much the most sensitive policy issues we had to with the israelis, and there were many, and the relationship is unique. it is like nothing else in my view, in my time from the state

department side and pentagon side. i thought maybe you could talk about the experiences you have had. michelle: thank you. i think the u.s. commitment to the security and the state of israel is in historic one and it is transcendent. carry through from administration to administration. it is one of the few areas that receives consistent and solid bipartisan support. defensehat, the relationship between the u.s. and israel is unique and a pillar of the relationship. both sides do their best to

insulate the cooperation from the ups and downs. we have agreement on this, disagreement on that. a roller coaster. and having the opportunity to work on this defense relationship, the real governing sensible is the notion of -- principle is the notion of guaranteeing the military edge and to reference something, to ensure israel has the ability to defend itself by itself. people often inc. about it as this thing you attain. we are done, great, we can thought ourselves on the back. but the environment in which israel exists is dynamic. we have seen dramatic changes in the region.

we have seen all kinds of opportunities a merge in and around the state of israel. so it must be constantly evaluated and supported in that dynamic environment. what drew me to this project was assume theof, if you commitment to israel and insecurity will remain with future administrations, and i believe that is the case, how would you ensure security and ability to defend itself by itself in the context of a permanent status agreement. that isa question fascinating and it goes to the greatest concern that israelis have about the agreement. can you reassure me i will be secure in a two-state solution.

not thee can crack that create a lot of potential once negotiations resume. securinghat is part of population andi the palestinian people for the long-term. >> thank you. we have not spent much time sitting in the broader relationship. start divingt's into some of the specific details of the reports and different proposals out there. i want to start with internal security because that is most important. the first argument you hear it is this idea of the west bank, if we leave the west bank it

will become gaza. hamas will take over right away. palestinians cannot take care of themselves. what kind of system can you build that you think can prevent that outcome? to do you think about that ensure israel knows that is not going to happen in the do not feel their territory is controlled. gadi: it is an insulated system, not are from the israeli borders. if you take for example the east, security border starts at the border of jordan with iraq.

because of the great conflagration. you have peace with more countries in the region. step.et's go back one controversial issue. that theytell you will probably accept many willible] -- neverthat occupation has ended. way, the need a multilayered system so we will effective support an

counter of terrorism in turn only by giving a very strong cannotnian force that pose any threat to the state of very effectivebe in turn police supported by the u.s. and supported by others. supported by israel. a joint system of intelligence-gathering and sharing of information. will enable that israelis, palestinians, monitored by the u.s. to present in the region. the issue of the jordan valley, if you want me to

elaborate. we will leave the jordan valley out. havenk the palestinians proven that when they want to fight they can do it. that is what has been happening in the last year or so. when we passed the andonsibility to the city's the citizens have a high level of motivation, that is what is happening today on the ground. between the palestinians that has enabled us to transfer even the most sensitive intelligence in order for them to take action. that is what they do. so i think all of this together, the coordination that we already have on the ground will be

developed and in the peace time, all of this can create a good solution for the internal -- rity of one issue we have to follow up on is gaza. how do you solve the problem? this is something that -- gaza will have to make certain conditions in order to be part of this. to be part of the solution not in the initial phase. it is something i think the report addresses. host: i am going to continue to follow on this point. building on this. one of the things the report gets into is the idea of taking force, a small force and

training them to the level equivalent of a swat team of a major american city. an elite counterterrorism force. of threatening israel, but doing a good job and internally in a system that goes initial point of action through the port system to the holding facilities to --e sure that we do not basically the palestinians have this unique capacity they do not have today. so maybe you can tell us a and alsot about that building from that, how you get there and how you train that force. john: it is an important point, about the security of the border

and the potential state of palestine. i think the approach we took ,hen i let the process was to again, look very hard at the trilateral process in a regime of cooperation where we would fusionintelligence capacity were all three parties participated which one hand off the developing intelligence 2 a.m. operating entity which would be the palestinian counterterrorism capability, a swat entity of some form or another. i don't want to go through the detail, but then go through the process of building the intelligence and in a target package locking -- launching in the mission. and that goes to your point about having not just the capacity to run the tactical operation but having the capacity to run the judicial

process that follows to hold people accountable and having the capacity to detain them in a credible way in a detention process that does not enhance the inherent increase of terrorism we frequently see in detention process is. it is not an uncomplicated and we can see from one and two another from the development of the intelligence until the person is ultimately in car serrated. -- incarcerated. we can see the function and junction and the end of the judicial process with the process of incarceration which would also include some aspect of deep article is reintegration into society. it was not just a casual process. aspect is virtually all the we did was comprehensive.

it was not as portrayed in the media as a high-tech knowledge approach or a single dimension to the approach. -- it integrated technology, structure, organization, and relationships toa comprehensive way achieve at a synergy to give us the outcome we chose. my conversation with very senior israel he officials and my palestinian counterparts who were very is coming the entire time i worked with them on being a partner in this process, i told them this process is a dynamic process and that the plan that to ultimately would be produced, if the israeli and palestinian side were to come together in be able to, without our help find the final outcome they were seeking with respect to a sovereign state of palestine and a secure israel, then there would not be the need for an american plan.

but until trust is developed and a willingness to take risk is embraced by both sides, the plan may is intended to bridge that. to create a long-term relationship with israeli and palestinian partners if they are willing to do this. a multinational training command a end number of states have demonstrated a real interest in helping to train palestinians. to create this environment which over time would bridge the differences to give both sides the confidence necessary to take the risks and ultimately come together on their own. that is very important. what can be done today? i know part of the study talks about that. it is not in the study but i can tell you that in conjunction with the work i did, we commissioned a very detailed assessment of the palestinian

security forces. it was directed the seven security chiefs participate actively in it. it was seven months long. forces at institutional need. it is not military in the end, it is law enforcement and security. what would be needed to build capacity in the ministry of the interior? what organizational changes would be needed for the palestinian security agencies? and what else would be necessary? in combination with the senior leadership. that study out of that can be done today that would improve organizational capacity to be more efficient, to better support the organizations in the field. to improve medical support, career training, access to schools.

be done todayan and do not increase the risk to israel. the palestinian capacity to be better partners and in turn increases the security of israel. we can do that today even if there is no political conversation in that as well documented. reportnot release the because we saw problems emerging in gaza and we did not want the subject of the report to be taken part and pieces of it used inadvertently. it there is great work that could be done inside of that report. ilan: michelle i want to turn back to you.

what skeptics will say is, americans trained forces in iraq. a change them and afghanistan. those forces fell apart. how do we know we are not going to just have a repeat of that? you don't really know and you just can't trust them. michele: if you look very closely at the record, the record is much more positive. for a couple reasons. bests they tend to be the forces available. it is also true we almost always sustain a relationship and we continue working with them. so even in places like a rock -- iraq andtan those stay very professional in defective in continue to serve very well.

the key lessons for me are you have the relationship over time. not just for training but to politicization of the force. what happened in iraq which cause the politicization to fall leadership,e senior prime minister maliki at the most prominent division commanders out of the force and put his cronies in. he politicized it and you had units that would no longer fight and die. political hacks work completely incompetent. with the force, when you stay engaged, we would be making a long-term commitment to partnering with israel and the future palestinian state with the, as john described it, at the core of this we would be

partnering long-term to ensure only the force had not equipment it needed but also the continued relationship mentorship to ensure it does not he come politicized or that was happening, were able to see it and raise the political issue. record is the track better the end and looks and i think it is clear enough that we could learn from lessons to apply to and sharing we could successful. >> obviously this will be a continuing conversation. uponch of it is dependent people, not just technology. that is one of the reasons that a pictureer you see

of israeli and palestinian security forces because at the end of the day, asked on a upgrades and facilities are important but the single most important is human capital. so i want to turn out to the issue of the jordan valley and the border and this time i would like to start with john to talk about the details of how you feel about order security as a whole and some of the works we do. john: we do not have enough time for me to lay out the level of detail i think everyone needs to hear but i will tell you that those who have read other reporting in the media on the assessment of our plan, first of all, anybody reporting in the media has not seen our plan. so they really do not know. but i will tell you that i would

say that there are very few of my counterparts in any of these countries involved here who have actually traveled all 93 kilometers of the jordan river to where itd see passes out of what will become the palestinian state aunt looked at every meter of that ground to ensure that we could control that ground in one way or the other. it is a comprehensive approach. first and foremost, it is a time-faced approach where the israeli forces overtime will reposition and overtime would diminish in a time-faced approach with milestones that would be previously agree as to before the forces would depart. that is the first thing. the process is over years. not just in months. over years. i will not talk about the number

of years by i will tell you we were coming towards the center in the conversation but it is a matter of years. but it is more the and that. training command with established down to the details of the individual subunits of the training command that would work closely with palestinian entities to build their capacity to the standards we talked about to work then closely with their american trainers and advisers over a long time. decades. a long time to ensure that both there is a continual professional uplift and to be present in the event of crisis and to do that in partnership with our israel he partners said that over time, as israel jordan rivern the valley, jordan river, and ultimately repositions back into the israeli borders that the kinds of residual force along the river still provides a level of security.

in conjunction, very detailed barrier plans with multiple ayers and that area plan and sensor system which provides for the capacity to look in all directions to ensure we can see air threats, to ensure we can see moving parts on the ground and then of course, as we talked about, having joint border coordination centers, one in jordan, one in palestine, jointly manned by all four parties involved so that we have on then visualization great wall of those operations center so that it is seen in israel, it is seen in palestine, it is seen in jordan, and probably seen in an american part somewhere. this is time faced, standardized, standards-based, supported by technology and most

importantly a highly well-trained palestinian force worthy of her time with american and israeli assistance if that the to work, to be replacement force on the ground. but again all of that is to be negotiated. but the details of the plan exist today and could be implemented relatively quickly. >> compared to what sits on the border today, do you see that as a sick again upgrade? john: definitely. there is some fencing on the border right now but in the end it is the infrastructure that would be built. the barriers. palestinian and american units, eventually. an entirely new system. the sensor system would be new and highly quality. proven sensors they use in a lot of places where works out well.

comparison with what will be produced versus what is on the ground today. to include the border coordination centers, those are important. it will create habits of cooperation each wing palestinian's who will lead in the new palestinian state with their jordanian counterparts across the river and the same with americans, jordanians, palestinians. createthem, it will habits of cooperation which will divide for strategic security in the end. >> i invite you to follow up on that. questions, any additional comments on the overall system john is describing there? i know you spent a lot of time and thought very carefully about your questions. to follow up, despite all of these different systems, there

is still this question about who long-term is that force sitting on the river? you know? the report offers a number of different options but ultimately comes down and says that american forces probably the adjustable.ally either on their own or together with the palestinian force. that is obviously a major issue in israel and a major concern so maybe then start with that. >> i think it is impossible to do it and reach an agreement with the palestinians. by the way, we have the same dilemma when we left the gaza strip. the corridor which is the border between gaza and egypt. a short corridor, about 12

kilometers. very short. but still, a lot of problems. division of gaza in the height of the conflict with the palestinians, with hamas in 2003-2004. rockets, producing ied's, everything. it is true that after disengagement from gaza and why the egyptians did not pay enough attention to the border, hamas ammunition and people to train and syria and kicked up their capabilities relatively quickly. it is true. todaytill, the situation

is the same as 2004 and i was in gaza. it could have been much worse had we stayed in the corridor. much worse than it is today and [indiscernible] -- it could not be understand by those who do not understand military strategy. by the way, he was the one who decided to open that election in jerusalem, and that election hamas won. are you going to ask them, are -- so, gaza iss the problem. part of the be solution in the future, that is how you should see it so going back to the jordan river. same thing. we have a very committed jordanian force. i hope that we have an american

force. that experience with international forces, that is the way of thinking. but if you really look carefully into it, take the example of lebanon for example. lebaneseght the it better or is worse? we're enjoying a time of quiet and lebanon and hamas is deterred. the plan that general alan did, it is a very -- plan but at the end of the day it is not the right can do itible] -- we , at the endto leave

of the day, we have to leave the palestinians with the feeling that our sovereignty is there. otherwise, so i think an american force -- the american conduct and commitment is very appreciated by the israelis. good solution.y a small, capable of american force working side-by-side with the jordanians. of about a mile and a half from each side of the river that jordanians, u.s. , and the palestinians are sharing. everything on that zone. can lead to a good solution now.

[indiscernible] similarot designed for missions. and weaker with equipment the mandate they were given. so now they found it difficult butope with the threats that is not how you want to build in american force if an merican force would be -- so i think this is something that can be addressed. we did not do this plan for the the --ent, we did it for host: one follow-up. really, the focus with the

jordan river here, and i think it is important to talk about it, it a two kilometer zone on each side. very them visible to the palestinians which is critical. there is a lot of argument for, we need to hold the entire valley which is much more in face of. it has a lot more to do with conventional military threats, especially in invasion from the east. which seems a lot less likely at this point. abouto you say maintaining the entire jordan river valley strategically? >> it does not exist now. can it evolve in the future? yes. originalnk with the structures, as you talked about. jordanian commitment.

with an american commitment to the security of jordan. that is, when you talk about the system, that is the idea. letters of commitment, leaders of partnership. i think the commitment, at the end of the day israel is a willeign country and if we see that something is threatening the existence of the state of israel, we will act. you see what is happening in lebanon today. the russians are there. when we need to operate in lebanon or in syria, we do. it never restricts us. international forces never restrict israel from operating when there is a need to do it.

answer.nk that is the i hope it is the answer to your question. ilan: that absolutely answers it. michele, i want to turn back to you. reporttalking about the recommending 300-800 troops who would do the border security mission and also do the partner training. the training could also be done internationally with a lot of other forces who were already there and already committed to the training. implementation and monitoring would mostly be done by americans. the israel-american relationship is strong enough to respond to that challenge? is it something the israelis worry about? thet something here that government or american people or the president's willingness to

enforce -- michele: again, when you look at history, when presidents have gone to the american people and made a compelling force about why the troops needed to be likelled to go forward germany, the cold war, south korea and the uncertain termination of that conflict or as balkans to keep the peace the conflict died down and secure the future of the state of former yugoslavia, i think when that case has been made the american people show themselves willing to support that. if you imagine the context we are talking about here, the totext is we have gotten achieve this, we collectively, have achieved this historic agreement that is going to secure the state of israel

long-term, insurance international recognition legitimately, and end the occupation, creating valid by -- a viable palestinian state. in that context, to ask for a small american commitment to ensure that is successful? i mean, i think this is not a hard strategic case for an american president to make to the them -- to make to the american people. a small investment for a positive impact in the future of the region. >> wells said. >> i would be ready to make that case. question and one other issue that pops up a fair amount of dialogue today. concerns about either tunneling. not the border but we talked

about the border with jordan and we have not talked much about the border of the new palestinian state of israel. people look at tunneling threats and also, for example areas around the airport and how you deal with those types of challenges and even with rockets and things fired from gaza so i want to throw that out there is to get issue to address your perspectives. we took those very seriously. what was unfolding during the gaza conflict at the time we are doing the negotiations and some of the horrific activity that occurred in what was known as subterranean warfare. israel today probably leads the world in doctrinal thinking

about the implications of subterranean warfare and how ultimately to face and deal with that threat. also they will tell you we are looking at it as well so that will be an important part of the negotiation and conversation. the conversation with the three parties or multiple parties on how do we secure the for israeln order and palestine at the same time we are securing both the airspace.l border and the three are intermingled and interrelated and we need to make sure it is a comprehensive view and do not take our eyes off the underground piece of this. i think i will leave it at that. >> as john said, i think we're about to break through in technology. we cannot talk about it too much here but i think that, you know, in the last year the

comprehensive cooperation with united states to find solutions issues.eling it is a complicated issue. about nopt is talking one single silver bullet to solve the problem. a wide spectrum of technologies to deal with this in a different arena. not like lebanon, not like the west bank. it is different and will cost a lot of money but we can't can do it. it is only a matter of time. it is about how committed people are. [en the egyptians decided -- i hope it will be the same for the palestinians. more complicated.

i did way, over there, international problem is -- this about flexibility because of the fact that we do not have too much time. [indiscernible] itn the border is 500 meters is a virtual time to react and you much -- you must be more flexible and agile. this is something of interest. , weairspace, the maritime also adjusted an hour our for. it is a direct way to coordinate. at the end of the day, i think the people have to have some overriding capabilities because size of this region.

it is like delaware, you know? three air domains in this one piece of land or airspace. i think we have the best expert sitting with jordan and then there are solutions for everything. ilan: a point to emphasize when we turn to questions is so much ultimately this report is written by americans and israel is because security is such a core issue for israelis and it is also about what the united states can provide. but it was also in cooperation palestine tond make sure there borders are not affected.

there should be microphones in the room. first one with the microphone, please identify yourself before asking your question. i encourage questions as opposed to statements. we will go right back they are. >> good afternoon. my name is doug samuel son and i am president of a little consulting company here in town. kind,egotiations of this how do you assure any agreement against any possible problems of political change within the parties. agreementy in the could at the next election or other event take a different tack on things. how do you secure against that source of volatility. it comes down to on the palestinian side, you end up with a hamas government and but if you end up -- >> that is different, let's put

it that way. don't get any more specific than that. [laughter] >> fair enough. i can open it up to any of our panelists. like to do.ks would >> i do not want to kick the ball in the grandstand here but we said at the beginning, israel is no part of the agreement will ever eliminate the ability of israel to defend itself and to take measures necessary. the hope would be that as the process goes forward, that it will stabilize the political greaternot create political instability said that an extremist organization or in extremist ideology will not find its way into the leadership position. the greater the stability, the more likely and stronger the relationship would be between

israel and palestine and would be an enhancement to stability, not a recipe for greater instability. with that said, if the process for the establishment of the thestinian state and preparation of the palestinian security forces moves forward in a manner as suggested by this report, i think we would find be a very would still professional approach by the palestinians and close and clear partnership with the israeli security forces and i will simply tell you from my own experience with the palestinians and migrate respect with the ones with whom i dealt during the 15 months i was doing this, they were unambiguously and utterly committed to finding a solution to this. there were details that were difficult and details that needed to be fixed but they chose to depict themselves as what they hoped to be. an island of stability and a region where much of the rest of

it was inspired before their very eyes. they wanted to be a good security partner for israel because it enhances their own sovereignty and stability. if well trained and well advised and there is still an american partnership, that would be a break on the likelihood we would form of an extremist entity move into the leadership. ilan: i wanted to emphasize that appointment how they see as aelves in israel partner to the united states and how the united states feels. they recognize they are pretty small but they want to play that role and be positive in that way . we're a question in the corner. >> a number of the panelists said it comes down to people and

in some ways, perception. clearly what you have articulated is breakthrough and shows promise. morele's question, are you secure in israel and elsewhere. , butre just rolling it out maybe the leadership can speak to this more, the issue of how it is perceived. as you roll it out, what is your assessment as to how it it will putting aside the elections, with the populace and with the new israel he leadership? ilan: how is the israeli public likely to see this given the, you note -- face the problem that israel has been divided into a few groups, ok?

unorganized, illogical, right wing controlling a lot. political issues in israel. very weak.group is almost nonexistent. the most important group in my view is the center which are different, he in different, and live in their -- in different and live in their comfort zone. been my crash course in the world of indifference. i hope we will be able to, you know, to wake up some of them fightinge it is not

that will wake us up. i hope the public will do something about it. we are doing our best. we are here. we are here with a group of 200 or more generals and senior is people who are supporting. it is still difficult. but you know, i believe we should do it. we should put it to paper. we should put the offers to be used someday. but you have to remember that the conditions, you know, to use these things is not to keep changing the realities on the ground. if you change the realities on the strength today is, you know, i don't really

know, i think there is a good understanding among the israeli leadership that this problem has to be addressed, that we have to achieve a two-state solution. [indiscernible] that was what was said yesterday, i believe that. [laughter] day these ideas, i know the level that was invested in this plan. we need a solution for our security and they said, ok and a huge group as your

americans know how to do, you know? [laughter] and numerous airplanes and they made a good job. people are that committed. we were talking earlier about the west bank. i think most israelis understand that at the end of the day we will have to live side by side with the palestinians forever so we have to find some kind of solution. israelis, you know, i have -- who just joined the military. his mom is very nervous. onelways hoped our children day would grow up and we would not have wars anymore. that is what i was told. that is my wife told my son. that is what she taught my son and we would really like to get done with it.

lan: a question over here. >> thank you. i am from partnership for secure americans. my question is, do you ever see inas as part of the solution the future? i know they are part of the problem now. think it is important to differentiate between the palestinians on the ground living in gaza and the people living under hamas as an entity? todo you see a way differentiate between the citizens of gaza and to the people running the strip and that is hamas? or should number one is, do you ever see hamas as part of the solution and i say this because i do not want to, as a palestinian, i do not want to negotiate with you. i want to negotiate with the

ones who do not want to make peace and this is what i was taught in negotiations go. gettingver see them invited to the table to vote in the process because sooner or later, they are palestinians and they are there to stay. my question to the entire group is how do you restore hope in at theple who suffered hand of the israelis and the people who suffered at the hand palestinians? how do you tell them there is hope and there will be a day when we can live in peace together? >> so a question on specifically gaza and hamas control and on how to restore hope in the situation right now.

>> i said, at the end of the day, i think hamas should be part of the solution. hamas is a deeply rooted movement in the palestinian district. i have some friends who do not like hamas at all. i know that. that at the end of the day, there are one million, maybe 2 million people who live in gaza and they are all kind of captives of hamas right now. so in order to address this issue i think first and foremost , it should be worked out somehow. second, there are certain conditions that israel put a long time ago. hamas has to be dissolved. capabilities,

technology, you know, the conditions. if hamas accepts all this. so it is not -- hamas can be a partnership. we have a relationship with hamas. we talked to the people. go to visit hamas leadership and i could do it today also. it is not a problem. 121, -- to one level, one-to-one political issue. i think that now we can start with the west bank. we can start talking about gaza. part of thise system unless hamas acknowledges and accepts all of those conditions.

it is not the same hamas anymore. it is different. i guess they won't change their they would be able to change their name if they accepted those conditions. michele: in terms of the question how to give hope, actions speak louder than words. is,ink they're, you know, there are a set of actions and maybe the general can speak to the work he and his group have been doing, but there are some actions that could meaningfully improve both israel's security and the plight of the palestinian's that is an agreement. there are steps that could be taken to meaningfully improve people's situations that would still be consistent with where you think an ultimate, final status agreement could end up.

so not unilateral steps that --ld make that agreement and impossible. it would be consistent with where you would likely end up and i think that for each side to take some of those steps would force the other to say, might be aly possibility to rebuild confidence. maybe there is a possibility of a change of heart or a change of situation. maybe we should keep a more open mind. so to me, it is figuring out what is the set of actions each could take to rebuild confidence in a way that is consistent with ultimately getting to an agreement even if that is not a near-term possibility. john: i think the issue right now is there is little to no trust and when trust begins to

become a feature in the process and trust generates the willingness of one or the other or both sides should take a risk , to take a risk on the other, when that occurs we can move forward. i would have folks and conversations during the time i was doing this job say, palestinians will never have the will or they just will not be committed and my response would be, how do you know that? how do you know that? how do you know that if on the horizon near is the real possibility for a two-state outcome where one state become sovereign and independent and stands on its own, how do you know they would not be more committed that you can possibly imagine to their own security which by the way works to the benefit of israel's security because now it is a sovereign state? they have said, we want to be the island of stability in the region. how do you know they will not have the will or commitment?

haven't we seen where other people who are freshly independent have the will and commitment to enforce their sovereignty and be proud of who they are and demonstrate the will ultimately push mark now, nobody knows for sure. that goes to the trust and it goes to the issue of risk. that is the issue we have to explore. the outer edges of trust and risk. we have to do it with a kind of underwritten security plan that provides confidence to both sides that they could move forward and a way that builds trust and makes them willing to take risks so that both sides could be committed to each other. ilan: very well said. we are going to move onto our second panel but i wanted to first think michele. [applause]

announcer: labors secretary thomas perez is among the speakers today at the national coalition for homeless veterans annual conference. we will bring in that live starting at 8:00 a.m. eastern on c-span two. today, a look at the societal effects of climate change looking at the localized impact communities.s and that is live at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span3. >> madam secretary, we proudly votes tof our delegate the next president of the united states.

[fireworks] ♪ applause] announcer: live today on c-span, washington journal is next. at 10:00 a.m. eastern, a discussion on the potential u.k. exit from the european union. and at 7:00 p.m., the iraqi ambassador to the united states speaks at the council in washington. coming up and 45 minutes, washington journal is that the u.s.-mexico border in laredo, texas. brandon darby of breitbart texas on the illegal flow of of

immigrants in the area. immigration lawyer on laws related to citizenship and deportation. at 9:15 a.m., a discussion on the mexican drug cartels. ♪ host: good morning, everyone. "washington journal" is live fat the u.s.-mexico border laredo, texas. all of you get to ask questions. we start today with immigration at this location in laredo locally known as bridge one where mexican and american commuters cross back and forth for work and travel. we will also discuss illegal immigration.