of course, the eu, u.s. phase one agreement does not guarantee heathrow's thoughts, gays or other facilities. in fact, public financial filings indicate continental airlines paid $209 million. i.e. over 50 million per slot there to support a single heathrow round-trip flight. free access to heathrow, hardly. what european carriers provide a handful of slots to facilitate the few heathrow flights last summer that supply of slots is not limitless as ba aa content. in fact, that very small pool of thoughts is now exhausted. also, with jfk recently joining the heathrow club as a closer airport with virtually no competitive entry, red flags should be flying high on both sides of the atlantic. ba-aa argued that even if he too is full, competitors can operate from gatwick. it would not have occurred if financial returns were in any way comparable. heathrow has a clear premium as an airport. after all, why put its owner want to keep it, yet agreed to sell off gatwick and other london airports. ba argues that it need

we have worked closely together at the g-20 summit in london, the nato summit, and the eu u.s. summit in prague. i admire her leadership and pragmatic approach to getting things done. she had the german people have welcomed me twice, during the day of summit, and again this month. i am pleased to return the hospitality today. the chancellor shows -- agrees with my belief that no nation can meet the challenges of today alone. the united states and germany will continue to play a leadership role across a range of challenges. we are building on the bold steps we took at the summit by aggressively confirming the global economic crisis. i underscored our commitment to strengthening financial regulations, and i welcome the chancellor's commitment. as we prepare for the summit in italy and look ahead to the g-20 summit in pittsburg, we agreed on the need to avoid protectionism and embrace collective action that creates a sustainable growth and shared prosperity. i reiterated america's commitment to stand with germany and the lead with confronting the energy and climate change crisis.

has a far greater share of the eu/u.s. market. it's vital regulators understand this is not just another al appliance. it is an attempt to stitch up the most important long haul routes from europe's most important eachs. ba and aa together with their protected partners in one world will hold half of the total takeoff and landing slots at heath row. in comparison, virgin atlantic is capped at just over 3%. yes, a striking difference which shows no one can replicate their scale. loose time we said b.a. and a.a. would hold the dominant share of peak hour slots at heath row. nothing has changed. these slots are essential to the competitiveness of transatlantic services. b.a. was gifted many of those when it was privatized. no other carrier can get anywhere close to competing. last time we said that b.a. and a.a. would have an insurmountable lock on key airport pairs, nothing has changed. in fact, their market share has increased further since 2001. at the moment, they compete against each other on six key routes from heathrow, giving

u.s. regulatory structure. it is unlikely that the eu would find the current organized u.s. state based regulatory structure equivalent. this means the ability of our regulatory system to detect offshore risks will be weakened and also means that many of our u.s.-based institutions will be forced to shift significant operations overseas if they hope to continue to do business in the eu. certainly an office of insurance information would be a logical first step to address this. and to address other problems we face in the internaingsiale insurance market. however, oii would rely heavily on the various state insurance commissioners to implement the regulatory policies. without strong preemptive authority over the states, the ability of an oii to enact policies nationwide and consequently the ability of an oii to adequately represent the entire u.s. insurance market would be greatly weakened. i remain concerned that an oii will not go far enough. maintaining solvency regulation at the state level will limit the effectiveness of a potential systemic risk regulator as well as coo

the u.s. and eu working together to engage china and india on global climate change. the g-20 bringing together key asian and european partners to address the global on a crisis. if north korea, i do not have to say much about that. security developments in the pacific such as the developer of a long-range ballistic missiles and backed the debate on missiles in europe. i think this link has been apparent since the u.s. entered world war ii double in europe. the council will continue to flood of boat as well in the pacific. and now want to turn the podium over to the hon. walter slocombe, vice chair of the atlantic council and former undersecretary of defense for policy. he will introduce our speaker and later a moderate the q&a session. he's now with kaplan and was a pillar of the atlantic council. he provides me into the rest of our leadership strategic advice as well as sound legal advice and is still free walking around and have not yet been incarcerated. that is because of wall slocombe. i am grateful for your service, and we're delighted to have a distinguished f

would also say that three or four years ago, if you had said that china, russia, the eu, nato, malaysia, india, the u.s., australia, canada, greece, turkey, would all be working together, that is a pretty interesting mix of countries but that is what we're doing because there is a common concern that we all have and i think we are making some good progress there. it is also an international effort. we created a task force, 151 to be a coordinating element for piracy and right now, the task force is being commanded by a turkish admiral, u.s. ship. >> other questions? >> i will spot here. >> has been some talk lately about getting rid of basically the idea or the goal of being able to fight two major conventional wars in different theaters. it is time to revisit the idea. i wonder what your take is on that and should we not retain the capability to fight, say, north korea and iran should they both flareup at the same time? >> i think that is one of the fundamental questions as we work through the quadrennial defense review is to determine what the needs and how do you put in place these force planning co

u.s. and what was happening in the eu. we went from a risk-based approach and a principal-based approach and an economic-based approach and this has been ten years in development with practically every industry that was to be known in europe and from elsewhere, getting involved in consultations about getting the piecemeal. regulators will be able to introduce this on the ground where we will be guaranteeing and looking after policyholders' interests far more than we ever could have done in the past. not in a peace meal way, but in an absolute harmonized way, and i think we're looking at the best and highest in standards. i think i'm arc trade, i must correct the impress left with you that the solvency 2 standard is what you would expect to apply in the u.s. that's not what we're saying either. what we're saying is we've gone this way in the european union and it matches the development that's happening elsewhere in the world. it's happening with what's happening in the iais with 11 countries choosing to go ahead. the unite

u.s. policy back to what it was before 1981, which was that israeli settlements in occupied territories are illegal. that is how the rest of the world, the eu, most of the rest of the world outside israel and the united states, israeli settlements are viewed by definition as illegal. i think president obama missed a real opportunity to put u.s. policy back on the right track on that important issue. host: we have one last call. caller: how are you doing this morning? host: fine. caller: we hear about iranian elections and stuff about that. i think they should have their own election. i'm sorry people got hurt over there. over here we lose jobs so much. the congress and the senate should be worried about getting more jobs over here and get americans more stable and get the american people on air feet. we're getting to be a weak nation. people are losing their jobs and the faith. we lose the jobs and they get shipped overseas. that is my question, i guess. guest: look, obviously this is the time of great hardship economically for a lot of americans. i would encourage you not to think of -- think of it as a choice between being involved in the

u.s. technology release policy. and so there are a variety of issues that can serve as road blocks, whether they will or not, only the future can say. a plausible euscenario, altho, there are many, perhaps, i think that the pace of progress will depend more on india than the united states. the u.s. government, whether it was under the bush administration or under the new obama administration, there's a bipartisan agreement that we want to deepen relations with india. i think that's the view in india as well. but there will be constraints on india and decision-makers and i think the u.s. probably will be prepared to go as fast as the indian government wants to go. on specific issues, i mentioned the end use monitoring agreement which is very important from a united states perspective. it's a requirement of the u.s. statute, the arms export control act that we have an end use monitoring agreement in place. in order to permit verification of sales to india. i think it's also in india's interest to complete it because it enables transfers that otherwise might be difficult to occur. there is a reason for this rule and i think the two governments are g

the eu, has a different view, but i think it is important to note he strongly supports the work that turkey is doing in nato. i believe he is interested in further economic integration. and what the u.s. wants to do is to continue to encourage discussions and talks and a process whereby turkey can feel confident that it has a friendship with france, with the united states, with all of europe, and to the extent it is defining itself as part of europe, that it has an opportunity to be a partner. but again, that is something that will have to move forward not based on what the united states says, but rather a dialogue between the european union members and turkey. in all of this, i think europe and france has a critical role to play just as the united states does in sending a message muslims around the world that we welcome and want their participation in the world community that is peaceful, prosperous, that is economically-integrated, that is developing on behalf of all people and not just some people. and in both france and the united states, we have enormous muslim populations. as i said in a cairo speech, there is no contradiction between america and islam because we have muslim am