and allies. not, dave trachtenberg said it but i could have said this in the obama administration, let me give you a for instance. south korea worried that if morth korea had an icb capability that could reach of the u.s. that the u.s. would not come to south korea plus's -- south korea's defense. we did several things to say that was not true. first we took sight of our missile defense. we said this protects the u.s. but we want to make sure that north korea, not russia or china come about north korea cannot hold the u.s. at risk and that is why this missile defense. also remember the u.s. has been at risk from far more ballistic missiles in its history with allies than we ever will be with north korea. still weeks into deterrence with allies. think about russia. the soviet union has many more and they still were extending deterrence. the part about regional missile u.s.se for allies and for regions has to do with allies not feeling -- especially allies who are reluctant to have their own even c

basing in allied countries. my question is more regarding your thoughts on whether that is likely to be implemented and two , is there anything that allies can do to explain why it is important for the u.s. to be there? not just for allies benefit but for the u.s. benefit. >> carolyn from national defense university. my question is specific to nato. as nato faces divergent priorities by force of geography and domestic political factors, what roles can the u.s. play and what does the alliance writ large have to do with its deterrent policy as it is facing this increased rhetoric from vladimir putin and the media regarding the lower threshold for use of nuclear weapons? what can the alliance communicate and how can the u.s. shape that communication? >> charlie simpson, also british embassy. we spoke earlier about not a -- about a nonnuclear deterrent. ith regard to hypersonic, has been described as a major threat to restriction of movement of carriers in the pacific. threatyou determine the when you cannot mutuall

spending more because allies are spending less u.s. defense spending is a national decision and is determined by u.s. national security and defense needs true or false well i think it's true for every country across the alliance that they need to spend what it is in their interests to spend and that is on adequate sufficient capability and capacity they need to get rid of obsolescent equipment they need to modernize they need to pay to train our troops they need to do what is in their interest for their defense and that's the most important thing tim this is all truth is can pretty important thing and you would think that would be valued a little more in an alliance a military alliance which might take twenty nine countries to war sometime particularly when the commander in chief of the largest force says many country is in nato oh a tremendous amount of money for many years back that simply is not true if we can't even acknowledge that then nato is seriously trouble isn't it i think we have perhaps different views of what the truth is

remains a stalwart ally . it has many challenges in maintaining its current defense capabilities, but is committed to continuing being a strong contributor to the alliance and it doesn't have -- it's not involved in that many european union missions that are going -- going to then be free if brexit doesn't happen as envisioned. with regards that the amount that nato allies pay into the fund, are they paying their fair share, notably? this has been a key point since the beginning of nato. when president truman announced he would make a commitment to the security of those countries he said he wanted to wait over time to see how they were doing in providing for their own defense, but in any event over the last decade after the end of the cold war there was a 20 year sort of decline in european defense spending that hardly reflected the fact that the threat was greatly diminished. there was no threat from russia or any other major country. there was a concern about terrorism that the europeans and u.s. had, not al

i would like to extend my thanks to all the allies. they have put up a lot more money than they have in the past. i was explaining inside that if you look at a chart prior to our getting here, nato spending was going way down. it was just a one-way road down. since i became president, with the help of mike pence and everybody, the difference has been tremendous. it's been a rocketship up. we have to keep it that way. thank you very much. please, say a few words. me andk you for hosting my delegation once again in the white house. it's great to be here. thank you so much for your strong support and your commitment to nato and for your leadership, especially on burden sharing. nato was a strong alliance to get to remain a strong alliance, we have to be a fair alliance. you have a very clear message on that. your message is having an impact. are now starting to invest more. alliesears of decline, are investing more in defense. 2016, they have added more than 40 billion already. by 2020, it will be 100 billion. we expected to continue to g

nato allies must spend more on defense. this has been the clear message from president trump and this message is having a real impact. of the years of reducing defense budgets, all allies have increased a defense spending. before they were cutting billions, now they are adding billions. in just the last two years, european allies and canada have spent an additional $41 billion on defense. by the end of next year that figure will rise to $100 billion. this is making nate heo stronger. that money will allow us to invest in new capabilities our armed forces need, including advanced fighter aircraft, attack helicopters, missile defense, and surveillance drones. this is good for europe and it's good for america. america's nato allies provide important capabilities, including tens of thousands of intelligence personnel and cyber experts. giving the united states better eyes and ears where you need them, from tracking submarines in the arctic, to taking down the cyber networks of isis. and europe provides the u.s. with a platform

nato allies must spend more on defense. this has been the clear message from president trump and this message is having a real impact. of the years of reducing defense budgets, all allies have increased a defense spending. before they were cutting billions, now they are adding billions. in just the last two years, european allies and canada have spent an additional $41 billion on defense. by the end of next year that figure will rise to $100 billion. this is making nate heo stronger. that money will allow us to invest in new capabilities our armed forces need, including advanced fighter aircraft, attack helicopters, missile defense, and surveillance drones. this is good for europe and it's good for america. america's nato allies provide important capabilities, including tens of thousands of intelligence personnel and cyber experts. giving the united states better eyes and ears where you need them, from tracking submarines in the arctic, to taking down the cyber networks of isis. and europe provides the u.s. with a platform

nato allies must spend more on defense. this has been the clear message from president trump and this message is having a real impact. of the years of reducing defense budgets, all allies have increased a defense spending. before they were cutting billions, now they are adding billions. in just the last two years, european allies and canada have spent an additional $41 billion on defense. by the end of next year that figure will rise to $100 billion. this is making nate heo stronger. that money will allow us to invest in new capabilities our armed forces need, including advanced fighter aircraft, attack helicopters, missile defense, and surveillance drones. this is good for europe and it's good for america. america's nato allies provide important capabilities, including tens of thousands of intelligence personnel and cyber experts. giving the united states better eyes and ears where you need them, from tracking submarines in the arctic, to taking down the cyber networks of isis. and europe provides the u.s. with a platform

we have seen some allies really making progress, for instance, poland and lithuania.rom russia is an issue which divides nato allies, and nato is not an energy institution, so we don't make decisions on concrete projects like that. the most important thing is that we see that allies are tenning up, and germ -- stepping up, and germany's part of that. germany leads one of our -- [inaudible] in lithuania, and germany's also increasing defense spending as a response to the more demanding security environment that surrounds us. maria: secretary, let me move on to china as this, of course, has become more important in terms of the agenda of nato. secretary pompeo just back recently from europe talking about the china threat, in particular huawei where many nations there, including poland, have the huawei infrastructure which has been said to be really an espionage platform for the chinese government. what are your thoughts on the threat of the rising china situation? >> china is a rising power with a growing economy investing heavily in n capabilities, and we're also seein

seven of the largest world economies in the world are allied countries. six of the largest military ofers are allied countries the united states. these countries are contributing to helping america achieve its security and its prosperity in the world as it becomes more competitive and more dangerous continuing toia try to influence what's happening in the world. china is rising and wanting to compete with the united states for power and influence over global affairs. the one thing that united states has long had that they don't is allies. they have clients. it's a very biggest engine. it's why an organization like nato is so important. it provides the united states with support for its efforts, isis init is countering the middle east or indeed even dealing with countries like china and its influence in europe and around the world, or supporting our efforts in latin america with regards to venezuela. you name the issue and allies are there with us and that is really what our foreign policy has been about, how successful it has been. democratic and republic

the allies had virtually uncontested control of the air. .f i can actually see >> how long did the allies have to rely on the pluto project? >> the pipeline under the ocean. one of the things that has to come across is fuel. you have tanks and jeeps and trucks, but they all use gas. all that had to be brought over. one way was to do that in billions of five gallon jerry cans. they had plans for this. somebody got the bright idea, let's run a pipeline under the ocean. creative,of the other inventive, clever things that the allies tried at normandy, it rade ford of a b- g performance. i have not done the detailed study to know whether the armor could have been sustained without the p.l.u.t.o. in the first week after tankers were able to unload, it was useful. there were a number of these inventions. you think about doing that, running a fuel pipeline under the ocean on to a defendant beach in the immediate aftermath of an opposed landing is a remarkable logistical and engineering undertaking. good question. if you still have the microphone, you can pass it over. you don't. he is right here.

he had adjudicated inter-ally squabbles. he had supervise the training, ensured the ships and equipment were ready. now it would be in the hands of the operational commanders, not merely the admirals and generals yes, but also and mainly the junior officers and the non- coms and ultimately the soldiers themselves. he left southwick house and went down to the docks and talk informally with the soldiers. we have seen this slide 100 times and it is not that moment, but it is such a perfect depiction now that we know he is talking about flyfishing. and he talked with the troops and afterward talked with a number of reporters. while he was doing so, that and heavy cloud cover that had been present all the previous two days broke, and a shaft of sunlight cascaded down onto the ground. now if monty had been there, he might have made some remark n of austerlitz the , gleam of light that had presaged napoleon's great victory, but because it was ike, he said, by george, there is some sun. that is who he was. thank you. [applause] ian:

i would like you to extend my thanks to all the allies. i was explaining inside that if you look at a chart prior to our getting here, nato spending was going down. it was a one-way road down and since i became president and with the help of mike pence and everybody and a lot of people at this table, the difference has been tremendous. it has been a rocketship up and we have to keep it that way. >> thank you so much, mr. president, and thank you for hosting me and my organization in the white house. thank you so much for your strong support. your message is having a clear impact. investhave started to more. samellies are in the defense. since 2016, they have added more than 40 billion. we expect that to continue to grow. we need to do more and, therefore, burden sharing is a priority for me in all my engagements with different nato allies. we are also stepping up our fight against terrorism. all u.s. alliance participants -- we have made remarkable progress, but the job is not done. it is important that isil is not able to come back. we al

punish the han for what it calls the government's quote aligned ways the top administration and our allies are determined to sustain and expand the maximum economic pressure campaign against iran to end the regimes destabilizing activity threatening the united states our partners and allies and security in the middle east these demands are not just coming from the united states government and many of our allies and partners there similar to what we hear from the iranian people themselves the u.s. imposed oil sanctions on iran in may two thousand and eighteen after it withdrew from what president donald trump called the ineffective iran nuclear deal the u.s. wanted to cut off iran's ability to support hezbollah and who the fighters as well as send aid to governments in syria and venezuela last fall when oil supplies were tight the u.s. gave several countries permission to wrap up their existing iranian oil purchases by no later than may second but now the u.s. says supplies are plentiful and so the five countries still importing iranian crude china india turkey japan and south korea no long

or fighting anti-semitism or supporting our ally israel. mr. deutch: but i also strongly reject -- i strongly reject -- i strongly reject what my colleagues are doing here today. my colleague, my friend from texas, is right. there has been a long and bipartisan history of support for israel. and it has been so strong because of that bipartisanship. this is not about b.d.s. we've seen this play out before. the last time this resolution came up, my colleagues introduced a resolution condemning b.d.s. and anti-semitism and supporting israel and we all voted for it until it was time to actually go on the record and almost every one of them voted against it. this is about politics. this is about trying to drive a wedge into this caucus where it does not belong. that's what they're trying to do today. mr. speaker, the jewish community also has a history of standing up against atrocities like the humanitarian crisis in yemen. my colleagues, my colleagues are traying to block us from standing on -- in support of our human rights and american values to

jumping on the allied static nerve. there had to be some response. they couldn't let the japanese continue on that path. >> rich, back on the floor to your right. >> if henderson field was the reason for guadalcanal, what was the reason for henderson field? how did the japanese come excuse me, how did japanese come to build that field? >> this was in the mix of the planning i talk about. originally occupy australia. can't do that. we have to cut the lines of communication. we have to build about of airfields down from guadalcanal , new caledonia and the fiji's over here. that was the pattern they were looking at. they were very close to opening the airfield on guadalcanal. there was some question on whether they would find the aircraft to support it but they definitely were -bent on opening the airfield and putting aircraft on it. in fact it was within a day or two when the japanese hoped to get aircraft down there when we landed. >> rich, we are going to go up front with doctor carey. >> thank you for brilliant talk. y

on the matter of the allies, i agree every time the allies talk, they say we need the u.s. to be there and be strong. but allied navies have shrunk by two-thirds. since 1990, where there's only one-third of the frigates or submarines they once did. we did some studies on that when i was still in the think tank world. how do we encourage the allies to pony up to their part of the bargain as well? to both of you. >> small question. >> yeah. for the allies, if i had that answer, i would probably be the und undersecretary now. and the reason i say that, the united states has been hammering on the allies since the beginning of nato to do more. the united states has always felt that it had done a disproportional amount and that the allies needed to do more since the end of the cold war. their military capabilities have fallen off the cliff. the problem is, how do you do that? the president has done it in his own way, sandpapering them every time he sees them, maybe it's had some effect. certainly spending has gone up, although it started before this administration. i wish i had a

that earned an almost immediate invitation to join pending the approval of the other twenty nine allies. they didn't waste their time they didn't drag their feet and that's remarkable for an organization of twenty nine members so i think that eats not just our desire to join it's how nato has dealt with the challenge of enlargement that shows that this is a strong forward looking and dynamic organization scope hopes the alliance will prove this anniversary year seventy is the new thirty. nato secretary general and stoltenberg is due to give a speech in this hour we will cover that live ahead of that let's talk about the states a feel going to zation with a mock up of a house is an analyst on transatlantic fast from the german institute for international and security affairs here in berlin and also with the washing cars correspondent all of a silence there is outside the u.s. congress are welcome both let's start with you mark over house how would you sum up the nature of the condition of this it's seventy thousand of us are well there are supposed to be a party going on because it's the

allies or potential u.s. allies, as well as adversarial countries. there is a very different demographic situation that existed in previous times in which there was not peace or potential for war. whether aging demographics rapidly demographics in some cases whether just booming demographics with young men between the age of 18 and 25 years old. does that dynamic impact how you think about this and how it should play out over time? >> very good point. over the medium-term it does bear on the prospects especially in regards to china. it is in the midst of graphic and mike transition. because the one china policy, china is entering a period in which the number of people outside the workforce retire will increase in the number of people will have to support them in the workforce will decrease. that has profound economic consequence. a book of a few years ago had the title, will china get rich before gets old? but it also has foreign policy implications because as you know, wars are fought by young men. there will not be as many young men in china or in

that we have strong allies. i want to help nato to achieve objectives. whether it was in terms of defense, whether it was in terms of arms control or in terms of diplomacy and dialogue with other countries around the world. that would not only serve american interests but make the the better and safer place. donald trump has not seen nato in that fashion. he has looked at it as a coalition of states where the only measure that matters is who spends what on defense. and if countries do not spend enough on defense, they are not worth being allies. there's no interest beyond what we spend on defense. he has called nato obsolete. he did so during the call pain and even after he was elected. he refused for many months to endorse article v, the fundamental collective defense provision ask called into question whether the united states should remain a member of nato. so in that sense, my former colleagues as he was ambassador to nato are right to point out that we are entering a new era. now i should add this is only -- >> we hear at the chicago council and glo

and other allied countries of its systems in order to maintain change its profits and its power and its influence in washington so having a nato country like turkey turn down our or using russian weapons is a very very bad precedent and they certainly don't want it to happen and in fact the u.s. . it's not turkey that's in trouble here it's actually the u.s. over the f. thirty five jet which is vastly. over over budget and vastly expensive one hundred million dollars a pop if they can't sell this jet to their nato allies and other allied countries they are in trouble indeed all their eggs are in one basket here i just want to talk about the timing of assaults and as well because aside from. the seriously it's not a great to have a president assad on his policies lost control of ankara. dense cities as one of the local elections do you think it could be out of money or washington trying perhaps through the situation to its advantage you know one cycles government is at a weak moment. i'll course the u.s. would look for any weakness in turkey's position however i think turkey will sta

is also here miscalculating because iran is not a small country iran is not a weak country run has allies across the region from the himalayas to the mediterranean from the red sea to central asia and iran has a very powerful presence in the persian gulf region so if the americans escalate the iranians will have no option but to escalate as well by them and asymmetrical fashion but mohammed what the u.s. is saying is that you may have stood by the letter of the deal but not the spirit that there is much more to be negotiated is there much more to be negotiated in toronto points of you know there's nothing to negotiate because the united states is not abiding by its current to commit by its current commitments. how can we negotiate anything else when what we've already negotiated for roughly a decade is to have been thrown out the window well who's to say that in future any agreement hypothetically that is reached will be abided by by the united states if the nuclear deal actually wasn't the americans didn't abide by the nuclear deal either under obama either from day one they began violat

egypt strongman is ruling with an ally and faced on the sidelines from his allies is deafening us was perfectly happy to trade off the march for sea for security while western leaders turning a blind eye when even the citizens have for them victim to his repression executions torture censorship is not acceptable and you won't hear such strong words from let's say berlin or paris or london in cairo on al-jazeera. is there and here's her line of her main stories this hour the u.s. has added iran's revolutionary guard to its so-called terrorist list the first time washington's such a label to another country's armed forces iran's responded by giving the u.s. military the same designation. and the state department is blocking sixteen saudi citizens from entering the u.s. over the murder of journalist jamal khashoggi thank ludes patani who's accused of organizing killing on the or. others of the crown prince mohammed bin solomon. and the main airports in the libyan capital tripoli have shut down up to airstrikes by the war. forces the un's envoy for libya says the attack violates internati

so looking perhaps the new ally in the process. 50 part looking perhaps the new ally in the process.guess, is the north korean leader sending a message to washington saying, i do have other powerful friends? well i think that is right. i think certainly there was an awful lot of signalling going on by both sides stop yes, kim jong—un looking to send a message to washington as you say, that russia is a potential close ally in its diplomatic efforts over the north korean nuclear programme. i think vladimir putin wa nted programme. i think vladimir putin wanted to send another message as well, the sort of old russian game of saying we're here, we are a global power, we need to have a say on the big issues of the day and of course, the issue of nuclear north korea is one of those very big issues. so i think russia wants to reinsert itself into the diplomatic process and i also think russia has a different approach to north korea than, for example, donald trump. donald trump is all about maximum pressure, suddenly a slightly more nuanced approach. russia has not signed up for sanctions ag

you know when you really know that there is a lot of this agreement among european allies on that and yes we absolutely shouldn't be naive but i don't i don't want to make the argument that we need nato only because of russia time has moved on we're no longer in a cold war and nato has been doing many things other than you know just the offend against russia there are many other threats out there it's a scary world i made my list claudio china cyber threats terrorism hybrid warfare and migration i don't know what you have to add so that's how continuously continue to defend successfully nine hundred and thirty million people from twenty nine different countries against all bugs for its. my first my first reaction white surprise too but i think the precondition to actually think about successful defense is sticking together as a political union because only if you have all countries agreeing that you need to do something nato remains relevant and then you have to think about what's the short term problem and what's the long term problem so in the short term or middle term you obviously

analogy what we need those allies to do we need those allies the pressure iran and say look we are your ally comply and actually which nation wants and if you look at the very sad events over this recent weekend the terrorism of religious sites look at the impact that's had the global community does tend to rally when it comes to a global bully and what iran really wants what they want to become is they want to become part of the global community what do you need to do to become part of the global community comply with the demands of this administration and stop the terrorism and stop the halting of funding of such terrorist groups like hezbollah etc yes and now finally we have like a really interesting report out from halliburton saying that they expect international offshore drilling this year to rise double the estimates of slumber jay. fourteen percent actually so right now i think u.s. is trying to reduce its dependency on foreign exports but we're currently importing about a little less than ten million barrels of oil a day so is there actually a dent being made by the offshore dr

the western allies saw a need to contain the soviet union and mount a swift defense against a potential soviet attack the principle was that an attack on any nato member would be seen as an attack against all. the fall of the berlin wall and the soviet union's breakup brought a fundamental shift in the geopolitical situation. nato excepted eastern european and baltic countries as members of the threat from asymmetrical conflicts and terrorism worldwide forced the alliance to revise its strategies. u.s. president trump has injected uncertainty into the nato alliance how does the future look for nato. orica when we talk about the future of nato who in essence at this point in time who all watch is the enemy is it in essence vladimir putin and vladimir putin's russia. as if it is always the case the answer is more complicated than that no i wouldn't say that the main enemy is russia i don't think that that's the situation at the moment that being said you know in terms of actual military threats yes i do think that europe is still somewhat threatened militarily by russia and that's why it

action against his like sanctioning his plans political allies there is no doubt sanctions have already hurt his but for the live in a state not to be affected it will need to distinguish itself from his bill are the u.s. considers hezbollah as an arm of iran's revolutionary guards while it may have been created by the guards decades ago it has since embedded itself in the lebanese state. hezbollah this misses the effectiveness of u.s. sanctions and calls them a form of war its leader hassan nasrallah in early march urged the portress to donate money that call was not seen as a sign of desperation but more of a message to hezbollah's followers to embrace austerity measures. hezbollah's role in government allows it to use resources to fill the gap in services it used to provide directly to its own constituency the group may survive but lebanon is in the middle of the us iranian confrontation threatening its fragile stability senator bayh what. they're calling it quick scientists believe they've recorded the first seismic tremor on another planet. rumble on the red planet was picked up by