are bearers and there are writers. must acknowledge that each of us has both a role and value to contribute to the society to the people in dubuque, iowa, are praying that we demonstrate today. eu, afteri apologize these two great speakers that this is what you get for sitting in the back of the class. >> i have great hope in the "millennials." signsare buildings with that said no blacks, no puerto ricans, no dogs. this current generation, i have a 20-year-old and a 12-year-old. maybe in urban areas like ours where they grew up with diversity, particularly public education, kids like mine who are puerto rican, cuban, jewish, russian -- what are they? they embrace diversity and ways. they don't tolerate it. they are race at. tolerance is a horrible word. i tolerate pain. we use that term a lot. that has probably been a right word to use. diversity, maybe. i think newer generations embrace it. it's all they know. that's why a lot of young people coming back to south florida because they like it. i'm hopeful. >> everybody, thank you so much. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> election day is just over two months away and we have a couple of debates to tell you about. on wednesday, coverage of a north carolina senate debate between democratic incumbent challenger hagan and tom tillis live at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. next thursday, california governor jerry brown and challenger neil cache kari -- neel kashkari will have their only debate live on c-span. at a news conference today, president obama said russia is responsible for the violence in eastern ukraine. that is next on c-span. then a debate from the u.n. on the conflict between ukraine and russia. former pentagon and state department officials discussed the growing strength of the terrorist group isis in iraq and syria. this weekend on the c-span networks, friday night, native american history. then on saturday, live all-day coverage from the national book festival science pavilion. saturday evening from bbc scotland, a debate on their upcoming decision on whether to end the political union with england. sunday, cuban day with the chief justice of the second circuit court of appeals. he shares his approach to interpreting laws passed by congress. at 8:00 p.m., in with former congressman ron paul. of they live coverage national book festal from the history and biology -- biography billions. 9:00 p.m. eastern, afterwards with william burroughs talking about his book, the asteroid threat. on c-span 3, friday, a nasa documentary about the 1969 apollo 11 moon landing. saturday on the civil war, william tecumseh sherman atlanta campaign. a look at election laws in the supreme court case of bush v gore. find our television schedule at c-span.org and let us know about the programs you are watch us. call us. #c123.ter, or e-mail us at comments@ c-span.org. like us on facebook. follow us on twitter. next, president obama talks about the violence in iraq and syria. he takes questions about the violence along the ukraine-russia border, the economy, and immigration. this news conference's 30 minutes. >> good afternoon, everybody. i want to say a few words on a number of topics and answer questions. first, beginning with the number one thing most americans care about, the economy. this morning we found that our economy grew at a stronger clip in the second quarter than we originally thought. companies are investing, consumers are spending, and over the last 10 years our businesses have created 10 million new jobs. as everybody knows, there is a lot more we should be doing to make sure that all americans benefit from the progress we have made. i will be pushing congress hard on this one when they return next week. second, in iraq, are dedicated pilots and crews continue to carry out the strikes i authorized to protect americans and the humanitarian situation on the ground. as commander-in-chief, i will always do what is necessary to protect the american people and defend against evolving threats to our homeland. because of our strikes, the terrorist of isil are losing arms and equipment. isil poses an immediate threat to the people of iraq and people throughout the region. that's why our military action has to be part of a broader, comprehensive strategy to protect our people and the partners taking the fight to isil. that starts with iraq's leaders building on the progress they have made and forming an inclusive government and strengthening security forces to confront isil. any successful strategy needs strong regional partners. i am encouraged that countries in the region, countries that don't always agree on many things, increasingly recognized the primacy of the threat isil poses to all of them. i asked secretary kerry to travel to the region to continue to build the coalition needed to meet this threat. as i said, ripping out a cancer like isil will not be quick or easy, but i am confident that we can and will working closely with allies and partners. secretary hagel and are joint chiefs of staff have compared a range of options. i will be meeting with the national security council this evening as we develop that strategy, and i have been consulting with members of congress and continue to do so in the days ahead. finally, i just spoke with chancellor merkel of germany on the situation in ukraine. we we agree if there was ever any doubt, that russia was responsible for the violence in eastern ukraine. the violence is encouraged by russia. the separatists are trained by russia, armed by russia, funded by russia. russia has deliberately and repeatedly violated the sovereignty and territorial integrity of ukraine. the new images of russian forces inside ukraine make that plain for the world to see. this comes as ukrainian forces are making progress against separatists. as a result of these actions russia has already taken, and the major sanctions we impose with our european and international partners, brush is already more isolated than at any time since the end of the cold war. capital is fleeing, investors are staying out, and the economy is in decline. this ongoing incursion into ukraine will only bring more costs and consequences for russia. next week, i will be in europe to coordinate with our partners. in estonia, i will reaffirm our commitment to the defense of our nato allies. at the nato summit in the united kingdom, we will focus on additional steps we can take to ensure the alliance remains compared for any challenge. i look forward to reaffirming the unwavering commitment of the united states to ukraine and its people. with that, i will take a few questions. i will start with somebody who i guess is now a big cheese, who has moved on. but this will be his last chance to ask a question. i want to congratulate chuck todd. >> thank you. let me start with syria. the decision you have to make between, first of all is it an if or when situation about going after isil in syria? how do you prioritize that assad has lost legitimacy to lead and defeating isis could help assad keep power? talk about how you prioritize those pieces of your foreign policy. >> first of all, i want to make sure everybody is clear what we are doing now. because it is limited. our focus is to protect american personnel on the ground in iraq, protect our embassy, our consulates, to make sure critical infrastructure that could adversely affect our personnel is protected. where we see an opportunity that allows us with modest risk to help the humanitarian situation there, as we did on sinjar mountain, we will take those opportunities after consulting with congress. but our core strategy right now is to make sure our folks are safe, and to do an effective assessment of iraqi and kurdish capabilities. as i said at the last press conference, in order for us to be successful we have to have an iraqi government that is unified and inclusive. so we are continuing to push them to get the job done. as soon as we have an iraqi government in place, the likelihood of iraqi security forces being more effective in taking the fight to isil significantly increases. and the options i am asking for from the joint chiefs focuses primarily on making sure isil is not overrunning iraq. what is true, there is a violence that has been taking place in syria that has given isil a safe haven in ungoverned spaces. and in order for us to degrade isil over the long term, we have to build a regional strategy. we will not do that alone. we have to do that with partners, particularly sunni partners, because part of the goal is to make sure sunnis in syria and iraq feel they have an investment in a government that actually functions. a government that can protect them. a government that makes sure their families are safe from the barbaric acts we see in isil. right now, those structures are not in place. that's why the issue with respect to syria is not just a military issue. it is a political issue. it is an issue that involves all the sunni states in the region, and sunni leadership recognizing that this cancer that has developed is one they have to be just as invested in defeating as we are. so to cut to the chase in terms of your specific concerns, chuck, my priority at this point is to make sure that the gains isil made in iraq go back, and that iraq has the opportunity to govern itself effectively and secure itself. when we look at a broader strategy, that is consistent with what i said at west point, at the national defense college -- clearly, isil has come to represent the very worst elements in the region that we have to deal with collectively. and that's going to be a long-term project. it is going to require us to stabilize syria in some fashion. which means we have got to get moderate sunnis who are able to govern and offer a real alternative in competition to what isil has been doing in some of these spaces. last point, with respect to assad. it's not just my opinion. i think it is the international opinion that assad has lost legitimacy. dropping barrel bombs on innocent families, killing tens of thousands of people. and right now what we're seeing -- the places isil is occupying are not controlled by assad anyway. frankly, assad doesn't seem to have the capability or reach to get into those areas. so i don't think there's a situation where we have to choose between assad or the kinds of people who carry on the incredible violence we have been seeing. we will continue to support a moderate opposition inside of syria, in part because we have to give people insight syria a choice other than isil or assad. and i don't see any scenario where assad is somehow able to bring peace and stability to a region that is majority sunni and has not, so far, shown any willingness to share power with them or in any significant way deal with the long-standing grievances they have there. >> i have consulted with congress throughout this process. i am confident that as commander in chief i have the authority to engage in the acts we are conducting currently. as our strategy develops, we will continue to consult with congress, and it will be important for congress to weigh in, for our consultations to continue to develop so the american people are part of the debate. but i don't want to but the cart before the horse. we don't have a strategy at. what i have seen in the news reports suggests folks are getting further ahead of where we are at than we currently are. that's not just my assessment, but the assessment of our military as well. we need to make sure we have plans and are developing them. at that point, i will consult with congress and make sure their voices are heard. but there is no point in me asking for action on the part of congress before i know exactly what it is that will be required for us to get the job done. >> do you consider russia's presence in ukraine and invasion, and are you considering other responses going beyond sanctionss? >> i consider the actions we have seen in the last week a continuation of what has been taking place for months now. as i said in my opening statement, there is no doubt that this is not a homegrown indigenous uprising in eastern ukraine. the separatists are backed, trained, armed, financed by russia. throughout the process, we have seen deep russian involvement in everything they have done. i think in part because of the progress you have seen by the ukrainians around donetsk and luhansk, russia determined it had to be a little more overt in what it had been doing. but it is not really a shift. what we have seen, though, is that president putin and russia repeatedly passed by potential off-ramps to resolve this diplomatically. so in consultations with european allies and partners our, my expectation is we will take additional steps. primarily because we have not seen any meaningful action on the part of russia to resolve this in diplomatic fashion. i think the sanctions we have already applied have been effective. our intelligence shows it has been effective, though it may not appear so on russian television. and there are ways for us to deepen or expand the scope of some of that work. but ultimately what is important to recognize is the degree to which russian decision-making is isolating russia. they are doing this to themselves. what i have been encouraged by is the degree to which our european partners recognize, even though they are bearing a cost in implementing the sanctions, they understand a broader principle is at stake. so i look forward to the consultations we will have next week. >> last year you said that democracy is stronger when the president acts with the support of congress. you say you do not have a strategy yet, and we can do that going forward. why didn't you go before congress before the current strikes in iraq? throughout your career, you raised concerns with the expansion of power in the executive. are you concerned your recent actions have cut against that? >> no, and here's why. it is not just part of my responsibility, but a sacred duty for me as commander in chief to protect the american people. that requires me to act fast, based on information i received if an embassy or consulate of ours is being threatened. the decisions i made were based on very concrete assessments about the possibility that erbil might be overrun and our consulate could be in danger. and i cannot afford to wait in order to make sure those folks are protected. but throughout the process, we consulted closely with congress, and the feedback i've gotten from congress is that we are doing the right thing. now, as we go forward, as i described to chuck, and look at a broader regional strategy with an international coalition and partners to systematically degrade isil's capacity to engage in the terrible violence and disruptions they have been engaging in, not just in syria, not just in iraq, but potentially elsewhere, then does consultations with congress for something that is longer-term become more relevant. it is my intention that congress has to, as representatives of the american people. and the american people need to hear what the strategy is. but as i said to chuck, i don't want to put the cart for the horse. in some reports, the suggestion seems to be that we are about to go full-scale on an elaborate strategy for defeating isil. and the suggestion has been that we will start moving forward imminently and somehow congress will be left in the dark. that's not what is going to happen. we will continue to focus on protecting the american people. we will continue, where we can, to engage in these of humanitarian acts that saved so many folks who were trapped on a mountain. we will work politically and diplomatically with folks in the region, and we will cobble together the kind of coalition that we need for a long-term strategy, as soon as we are able to fit together the military, political, and economic components of the strategy. there will be a military aspect of that, and it is going to be important for congress to know what that is. in part because it may cost some money. i will just take a couple more. >> do you regret not moving on isis earlier? also, the iraqi president said iraqi forces are in no position to stand up to isis. will forming a new government change the situation? >> once isil got into mosul, that posed a big problem. there was no doubt they were able to capture weapons and resources they have used to finance additional operations. at that stage, we immediately contacted the iraqi government. keep in mind, we have seen indications with the iraqi government for more than a year, indicating we saw significant problems in the sunni areas. prime minister maliki was not as responsive as we would like to some of the underlying political grievances that existed at the time. there's no doubt that in order for iraq security forces to be successful, they're going to need help. they are going to need help from us, from our international partners. they will need additional training, additional equipment. and we will be prepared to offer that support. there may be a role for an international coalition providing additional air support through the operation. but the reason it is so important an iraqi government be in place is that this is not simply a military problem. the problem we have had consistently is a sunni population that feels alienated from baghdad, that does not feel invested in what is happening. that does not feel as if anybody is looking out for them. if we can get a government in place that provides sunnis some hope that a national government serves their interests, if they can regain some confidence and trust that it will follow through on commitments made way back in 2006 and earlier about how, for example, giving people opportunities so they are not locked out of government positions. if those things are followed through on and we are able to combine it with a sound military strategy, i think we can be successful. if we cannot, the idea the united states or any outside power would perpetually defeat isis, i think, is unrealistic. as i said in a previous press conference, our military is the best in the world. we can rout isis on the ground and keep a lid on things temporarily, but then as soon as we leave the same problems come back again. so we have got to make sure iraqis understand that in the end they will be responsible for their own security. part of that is the capacity for them to make compromises. it also means states in the region stop being ambivalent about these extremist groups. the truth is, we have had state actors who at times thought the way to advance their interests was financing some of these groups as proxies. and part of our message to the entire region is, this should be a wake-up call to sunnis, to shia, to everybody, that a group like isis is beyond the pale. that they have no vision or ideology beyond violence and chaos and the slaughter of innocent people. and as a consequence, we have to all join together. even if we have differences on a range of political issues. to make sure they are rooted out. last question. >> mr. president, despite all the actions the west has taken in ukraine, russia seems to be taking one step after another. at what point due sanctions no longer work? would you envisage the possibility, the necessity of military action to get russia to pull back from ukraine? >> we are not taking military action to solve the ukraine problem. what we are doing is mobilizing the international community to apply pressure. but i think it is very important to recognize that a military solution to this problem is not going to be forthcoming. now, the fact that russia has taken these actions in violation of sovereignty and territorial integrity of the ukrainians has resulted, i believe, in a weakening of russia, not a strengthening of russia. that may not be apparent immediately, but i believe it will be increasingly apparent. what it has also done is isolated russia from its trading partners, its commercial partners, international business, in ways that i think will be very difficult to recover from. we will continue to stand firm with our allies and partners that what is happening is wrong, that there is a solution that allows ukraine and russia to live peacefully, but it is not in the cards for us to see a military confrontation between russia and the united states in this region. keep in mind, however, i am about to go to a nato conference. ukraine is not a member of nato, but a number of states that are close by are. we take our article five commitments to defend each other very seriously. and that includes the smallest nato member, as was the largest nato member. part of why this meeting will be so important is to refocus attention on the critical function that nato plays, in order to deliver on the promise of our article five assurances. part of the reason i will be going to estonia is to let the estonians know that we mean what we say in respect to our treaty obligations. we don't have those treaty obligations for ukraine. we do, however, stand shoulder to shoulder with them, and we are doing not just a lot of work diplomatically, but also financially in order to make sure that they have the best chance of dealing with what is admittedly a very difficult situation. thank you very much. >> how do external effects impact your decision? >> let me just say this. i have been very clear about the fact that our immigration system is broken and needs to be fixed. my preference continues to be that congress act. i don't think anybody thinks that congress is going to act in the short term, but hope springs eternal that after the midterm elections they may act. in the meantime, what i have asked jeh johnson to do is look at what kinds of executive authorities we have in order to make the system work better. we have had a lot of stakeholder discussions. we have a set of proposals that is being worked out. and one thing that i think has happened, the issue of unaccompanied children that got so much attention a couple months back. part of the reason why that was important was not because that represented a huge, unprecedented surge in overall immigration at the border, but i do think that it changed the perception the american people have about what happens at the borders. one of the things we have had to do is work systematically to make sure that that specific problem in a fairly defined area of the border, that we are starting to deal with that in a serious way. and the good news is we have started to make some progress. what we have seen so far is throughout the summer, the number of apprehensions have been decreasing. maybe it is counterintuitive, but that is a good thing, because it means fewer folks are coming across. the number of apprehensions in august is down from july, and they are lower than they were august of last year. apprehensions in july where half of what they were in june. so we are seeing a significant downward trend in terms of unaccompanied children. and what that allows us to do is to make sure that those kids are being taken care of properly, with due process. at the same time, it has allowed us to engage in a broader conversation about what we need to do to get more resources down at the border. it would have been helped along if congress had voted for the supplemental i asked for. they did not. that means we have to make administrative and executive choices about, for example, more immigration judges. that has kept us busy, but it has not stopped the process of looking more broadly about how we get a smarter immigration system in place while we are waiting for congress to act. it continues to be my belief that if i don't see congressional action, that i have to do at least what i can in order to make the system work better. some of these things do affect timelines, and will be working through a systematically as possible in order to get this done. but have no doubt, in the absence of congressional action i will do what i can to make sure the system works better. thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> on the next washington journal, washington journal sta, then adro de co conversation with political pollsters doug usher and kelly conway about the november elections and campaign polling. later, a look at the challenges facing young adults. snyder be joined by tom of the national center for education statistics and jennifer garner -- jennifer lerner. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. washington journal is live each morning at 7:00 eastern. >> this month, c-span presents debates on what makes america great. evolution and fanatically modified foods, issues spotlight with in-depth looks at veterans health care, student loan debt and campus sexual assault. new perspectives on issues including global warming, voting rights, infectious disease and food safety. and our history tour showing sights and sounds from america's historic places. find our tv schedule at www.c-span.org and let us know what you think about the programs you are watching. >> the united nations security council held a meeting after reports that close to 1000 russian troops have entered ukraine. this meeting includes speeches by the russian and ukrainian ambassadors to the u.n. from thewill hear u.s. ambassador to the united nations, samantha power. >> thank you. mr. president, representatives on this council, this is our 24th session. to try to reign in russia's aggressive acts in ukraine. single one of those sessions has sent a straightforward, unified message -- russia must stop this conflict. russia is not listening. we said it when russia flagrantly violated international law in occupying crimea. we said it after the shocking downing of malaysia airlines flight 17 which took the lives of innocent men, women, children and infants. we say it today as russia's soldiers, tanks, air defense and artillery support and fight alongside separatists as they open a new front in a crisis manufactured in and fueled by russia. russia is not listening. instead of listening, instead of heating the demands of the international community, at every step, russia has come before this council to say everything except the truth. it has manipulated, obvious gated, outright lied. we have learned to measure bysia by its actions and not its words. in the last 48 hours, russia's actions have spoken volumes. , after meeting with ukrainian president poroshenko in minsk, president putin spoke of the need to "end bloodshed as soon as possible." yet, the same-day satellite imagery showed russian combat units, combat units, southeast of donetsk in eastern ukraine. ukraine detained personnel from the ninth brigade. russia claimed soldiers had wandered into ukrainian territory by mistake. in a time ofly conflict along one of the most carefully watched borders in the world. the day after those talks, russia fired rockets from inside russia at ukrainian positions. with russiancked armored vehicles and tanks. russian armored vehicles and multiple rocket launchers are positioned on the outskirts of that town as we speak. russia's force along the border is the largest it has been since it began redeploying forces in late may. it includes significant numbers of combat aircraft and helicopters. russian unmanned aircraft routinely cross into ukrainian airspace. other russian diplomat's into ukrainian territory include advanced artillery and air defense systems not found in the ukrainian inventory. these systems have shelled ukrainian positions in conjunction with a recent separatist counteroffensive. one of the separatist leaders that russia has armed and backed said openly that 3000 or 4000 russian soldiers have joined their cause. he was quick to clarify that these soldiers were on vacation but a russian soldier who chooses to fight in ukraine on his summer break is still a russian soldier. the armored russian military vehicle he drives is not his personal car. russia, family members of russian soldiers are holding funerals for their loved ones who have been killed in the fighting in ukraine. they are demanding answers for how they were killed. journalists who try to cover these funerals are harassed and threatened by armed men. still, according to the russian government, the soldiers were never there. they were never in crimea either until russia announced that those soldiers who were never there had annexed crimea. hours fit into a well-established pattern for russia. each step has paved the way for the one that followed. in spite of all these outrageous actions, ukraine has repeatedly sought a political solution to this crisis. it has sought a path to de-escalation. despite this pattern, president poroshenko showed up in minsk to meet with president putin. president putin was still unwilling to acknowledge the most basic facts we all know, that russia has armed, equipped and joined separatists fighting in ukraine. -- negotiations are urgently needed. russia has to stop lying and fueling this conflict. the mask is coming off. in these recent acts, we see russia's actions for what they are, a deliberate effort to support and fight alongside separatists in another sovereign country. ukraineas claimed that is not interested in a cease-fire. we have every interest in a cease-fire as do the ukrainians as long as it is a real one. russian separatists not only have no interest in observing a cease-fire, they cynically use the time to rearm and wait for additional soldiers and supplies to flow across the border. in the face of these alarming actions, the most important question for us now is not what we should say to russia. the most important question is what we should make russian do to listen. the united states, the eu and the g7 asserted targeted pressure so that this message is heard, so that russia begins to de-escalate rather than escalate, so that the reasonable plan put forward by president poroshenko is implemented. in the face of russia's continued aggression and blatant disregard for the u.n. charter, we will continue to work closely with our g7 and european partners to ratchet up the consequences on russia. i understand there are real costs fell by citizens of countries when governments take these actions. it has costs for businesses that trade with russia and sell to russian markets. are considerable and nobody should take them lightly. let's be clear. if unchecked, the damage that russia's disregard for international order poses is much much greater. these rules and principles that have taken generations to build with unparalleled investment, countless lives have been lost to establish and defend these principles. every single one of us has a stake in defending them. a threat to international order is a threat to all of our peace and security. these are the rules that russia is flouting when it illegally seizes territory and arms, equips and fight alongside illegal groups in neighboring countries. of roughly ae dozen countries that share a border with russia. let me close with a couple questions. how can we tell those countries that border russia that their piece and sovereignty is guaranteed if we do not make our message heard in ukraine? why should they believe it will be different if president putin decides to start supporting arms separatists and allowing soldiers on vacation to fight in their countries? just as important, what message are we sending to other countries with similarly alarming ambitions around the world when we that russia violate these rules without sufficient consequences? in the face of this threat, the cost of inaction is unacceptable. thank you. >> i think the representative. now, the representative for the russian federation. >> the situation in the southeast of ukraine is a consequence of the reckless policy of kiev which is conducting war against its own people. under the support and influence , thenumber of states geneva declaration and the berlin declaration, not to mention the agreement of the here they castry w aside this agreement which opened the opportunity for a civilized agreement. the so-called peace plan proposed by president poroshenko was only a step into further isolation. the piece was predicated by capitulation of the insurgents. this against the backdrop of any real steps towards the beginning of a political process or negotiations. where is the inclusive national dialogue promised by kiev or constitutional reform? isonly thing we are seeing a fight againstdiss -- a fight against dissent. president poroshenko has often made peaceful statements. just yesterday, this was his comment of the meeting in minsk. the main goal in kiev is peace. we demand action that could bring peace to ukraine. he also spoke on some kind of peacergent peav plan -- plan. is this another mover to distract attention while trying to solve the situation by force? we hope the kiev authorities the positive opportunities of the minsk meeting. we think that the ukrainian oned forces have trampled humanitarian law and have been shelling civilian quarters. ,hey are using artillery munitions with phosphorus and other weapons in so-called antiterrorist operations. there are hundreds of thousands of people sitting in basements for weeks without water, electricity, food or any kind of medicine. the overall number of those killed is over 2000. their number is increasing geometrically. the number of displaced people including refugees from ukraine to russia is already over 800,000 people. about theyou hear terrible losses of the ukrainian army. this is confirmed by the mass protests on ukraine. hundreds of ukrainian soldiers find themselves in the territory of russia. we give them food, drink, we care for them and send them back to ukraine. we expect the same kind of humane attitude of the kiev authorities. at the same time, it is said whilehey were stopped they had their documents and their weapons were not armed. this doesn't look like an armed group. everyone knows that there are russian relevant years -- volunteers in the east of ukraine. no one is hiding that. we would like similar transparency shown by other countries. maybe our american colleagues can tell us about what the american advisers who are in the building of the ukrainian security council are doing, or how many so-called mercenaries from so-called military enterprises are waging war thousands of kilometers away from their land. where did he ukrainian security forces get the latest weapons? the ambassador said, what kind of message can we send to a russia's neighbors? i suggest we send a message to washington. stop interfering in the internal affairs of sovereign states. undermine ato regime that you don't like. re-strengthen or geopolitical ambitions. your political ambitions. furthermore, stop taking advantage of the topic of the malaysian airliner that was shot down. russia has made a significant contribution to investigating this tragedy. hints, speculation, and we don't get any information. why haven't the ukrainian ofhorities provided records air traffic controllers' conversations? still, for some reason we don't know why. in spite of significant resistance, certain members of the security council refer to convoy.ian humanitarian today we are preparing for the sending of a second convoy. an agreement on this was confirmed today in a telephone call between foreign minister lavrov and the foreign minister of ukraine. we have to remember that the council is not there to disseminate guesswork or speculation, or spread accusations, but to find solutions to crises. today, we suggest adopting the following statement for the press. i am asking the secretary to disseminate the english text, which i will read in russian. the members of the security council express their serious concerns about the deteriorating situation in the southeast of ukraine and call for an immediate and unconditional cease-fire. members of the security council called on inclusive political dialogue in ukraine tased on the geneva declaration and the joint berlin declaration. in this context, they noted the urged thestrongly immediate resumption. members of the security council called on the international community to provide humanitarian assistance to the population of the donestk and luhansk regions of ukraine. we suggest voting on this statement today at this table. thank you very much. >> i thank the representative of the russian federation for his statement. i shall now make a statement in my capacity as the representative of the united kingdom. i thank mr. felton for his briefing. the united kingdom is deeply ofrmed that the escalation russian military intervention in eastern ukraine. units of the armed forces of the russian federation are now directly engaged in fighting inside ukraine against the armed forces of ukraine. these units, considered well over 1000 russian troops equipped with armored vehicles, artillery and defense systems. this is a clear violation of sovereign ukrainian territory by the russian federation. it is a clear breach of international law. realitydenials of this fit into the pattern of russia's dishonest approach to ukraine from the beginning of this crisis. we all remember that russia denied that it had any extra military personnel on the ground in crimea right up until its illegal and i patient with military force -- a legal an -- annexation by military force. tanks, armored personnel toriers and artillery separatist groups for months. the separatist arsenal contains up to 100 manned battle tanks, 80 armored personnel carriers, and 100tank weapons, artillery pieces. almost all of these have been directly supplied by russia since the conflict started. in the past three weeks, this support has increased significantly. no doubt in response to ukraine's success in liberating territory from the separatists. on the seventh of august, 50 vehicles including tanks, armored personnel carriers and rocket launchers crossed from russia into ukraine. on 15 august, a convoy of 23 armored personnel carriers cost close to the russian humanitarian convoy. the following day, a third convoy of military vehicles crossed the border. the evidence is overwhelming. plenty of it comes from the russian military itself. on the 13th of july, armored vehicles flying russian flags were photographed by a russian serviceman rossing the ukrainian border in donetsk. in july, a russian soldier posted photographs of himself operating military hardware inside ukraine. his photographs included images of himself inside a missile launch system, the very same weapon that appears to be used to shoot down an age 17. russia has also denied that it has shelled ukrainian territory. ,n fact, over just five days between the 14th and the 19th of august, ukrainian forces were fired upon from positions inside russian territory on at least 21 occasions with weapons systems ranging from heavy mortars to rockets. now we see irrefutable evidence of regular russian forces operating inside ukraine. for some months, russia has deployed small groups of spats znaz special forces in support of the separatists. these forces have been responsible for coordinating attacks and facilitating communications. their presence is clear from their communications. hours, there were 45 separate instances of russian secure to terry radio transmissions originating from inside ukrainian territory. today, nato has released satellite imagery taken on the 21st and funny third of august of russian artillery units inside ukraine in the vicinity of luhansk. on monday, 10 russian nearroopers were captured a village 20 kilometers inside ukrainian territory. we have satellite imagery confirming that supplement of russian armored vehicles supported by artillery south of donetsk. soldiernother russian serving with the knife motor rifle brigade was captured in luhansk. it is not credible for russia to keep claiming that these members of the russian armed forces are in ukraine by accident or on holiday. nor is a credible for russia to continue claiming to the whole world including the russian people that russian soldiers are not present on ukrainian territory. the increasing number of russian casualties and captured soldiers gives the lie to that. russia can no longer pretend that it is not a direct party to this conflict. this conflict would no longer exist without direct russian military involvement in support of the separatists. president putin has said that russia is willing to find a peaceful solution to the conflict. these words have little value against this clear pattern of escalating russian military involvement in eastern ukraine. violating international law of the u.n. charter in such a brazen manner is not compatible with russia's responsibility as a member of the security council. to immediatelyia withdraw its military forces from ukraine, stop its flow of weapons to the separatists, and help to secure a political solution to this crisis. i now resume my function as president of the council and give the floor to the representative of ukraine. >> thank you, mr. president. --lso would like to thank for his briefing today. mr. president, it is already half a year ago that this council first took up the issue of the russian aggression against ukraine. throughession started military occupation and annexation of a huge part of ukraine's sovereign territory. on by waging a war against ukraine through sponsoring their resume -- terrorism of illegal armed groups in the east of our state as well as shelling from the russian territory, a regular violation of ukrainian airspace by military aircraft. terroristlowed by groups with russian supplies, surface to air missiles, killing 298 passengers and crew on board. redline was illegal crossing of ukraine's border by so-called humanitarian convoys dispatched by russia without authorization from ukrainian government and in violation of international agreements and procedures. troopshas been pulling along the border with ukraine. military, over 45,000 1360 armored better vehicles, 150 grad systems, 192 military aircraft and 137 helicopters are deployed in the vicinity of our border. the situation has been changing. russia has launched a direct military invasion by its regular armed forces. two night, twp military -- military convoys crossed the ukrainian border with seven soldiers,ruck with tanks, two trucks with soldiers. after shelling of the positions of ukrainian forces from the territory of russia and from the district, the russian troops seized the town. havethan 10,000 civilians been held hostage by russian invaders. the citizens of ukraine are under psychological pressure. on august 20 4, 2014, two battalions and tactical groups of airborne forces of the russian armed crossed the border of ,kraine near the donetsk region 500 meters from the ukrainian state border. reportedly, russian military equipment was without license plates. they were painted with white stripes like ukrainian vehicles. the troops were wearing russian army combat uniforms. combat units have occupied several vehicles in the donetsk region. they are constructing fortified strongholds. on august 25, ukrainian armed attained w -- were detained. all their identities were revealed. we have serious doubt that the russian troops could have lost penetrating 25 meters into the territory of ukraine. we possess evidence including photo video proof as well as russian battle armored vehicles. all documentation proving they belong to russian military forces. abouteaves no doubt russian direct invasion into ukraine. mr. president, we see the russian federation responsible for the death toll among ukrainian civilians and military as well as the breakdown. we demand the russian federation immediately recall all its troops from the ukrainian territory to save lives of ukrainians and russians. we demand russia to establish control over the ukrainian-russian border under whichntrol of the osc would exclude supplies of militants to ukraine. allemand russia to release ukrainians who are held hostage. to all been open diplomatic initiations and have participated in every negotiation. ukraine, overof his peace plan, which russia deliberately undermined. while demonstrating full readiness for peace negotiations with russia during the meetings in minsk, president poroshenko need it clear that the integrity of ukraine as well as the european aspirations of ukrainian people are not negotiable. in lieu of the open russian military aggression, ukraine reserves its right to act in accordance with article 51 of the u.n. charter, which empowers every u.n. member state with the self-defenset of against a member of the united nations. we call upon the international community to provide effective assistance to ukraine to resist russian aggression. communitynternational keep witnessing silence as the fundamental principles of international law are being disrespected? democratic world is being challenged and world order is being destroyed. will it finally speak with one voice and act? the choice is fundamental. the world is challenged by a military mind ignoring universal principles and claiming absolute power. how many more red lines are to be crossed before this challenge is addressed? we call upon this council to fulfill its charter responsibility and take the urgent measures to stop the aggression against a sovereign u.n. members stayed. i thank you for your attention. >> i think the representative of ukraine for his statement. >> election day is just over two months away and we have debates to tell you about. on wednesday, we have coverage of a north carolina senate debate between senator kay hagan and republican challenger tom tillis. that is live at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. next thursday, california governor jerry brown and hkari will neel kas have their debate. we will have live coverage on c-span. up next, former state department, pentagon and fbi officials talk about the growing strength of terrorist group isis in syria and iraq. the potomac institute hosted this one hour and 45 minute event. >> thank you very >> thank you very much, mike, for the introduction. i would like to welcome the panelists as well as the audience and those who collaborated with us over the years in the diplomatic community in washington and internationally. indicated, we are going and we have aisis very distinguished panel with rich backgrounds and experience. details togo into introduce them, but first, we have professor ruth wedgwood. right here to my left, not -- tically, but at any rate >> i am, actually. >> she is a professor of international diplomacy at johns hopkins university and the president of the international association and she has worked with different administrations over the years. zaideman, a former legal attaché in the middle east. domestically and internationally. we will get the perspective from him. marks, whoassador ed is next to wayne. he served for many years at the state department and dealt with terrorism issues all over the world. , whohen we have dan raviv is known to many of us for many years from the news. he was in the middle east and europe. i have a copy of his book, which we will show later on. he published a number of books on intelligence. and then, of course, we have our mentioned which mike he collaborated with for decades. last, but not least, the great american, general al gray. do withould like to your permission, i want to remind all of us, including myself, that we should turn off this little gadget. i do not see any music now. and we want to thank c-span for bringing the proceedings and the debate to a wider audience because a civil society can and should play a role in the debate. so i have a few minutes for some slides. sharon? the technical expert, right here. ok. state, the name going back to 1999. we should not be surprised. we simply did not follow through what happened on the ground. again, we are dealing with one of the most vicious groups in history the -- in history. they clearly represent a threat , and controlling the .ast territory that we know luckily, they think locally and they aim to not only take over the middle east and establish territory there, but also the balkans, spain, and africa as well. we will come back to it. andike indicated, al qaeda now, i think we mark the 13th anniversary of the 9/11 attack last month -- next month, in the next week or so. and we talk about al qaeda, we have to talk about many of their affiliates. the point i am making is there is no way that you can discuss isis in isolation. some of the other groups still exist and represent a major threat to many societies. country in that particular region has an al qaeda affiliate. for example, going all the way from the atlantic to the red sea , in kenya, for example, somalia , and so on. attacks onned the the anniversary of the embassies. i want to mention the anniversary of the attack in mole, the takeover of the -- of the mall. terrorized an entire city and country. we have to be concerned in that region. and there is a new york times report which is really not up to date at the time, the u.s. marine base in beirut. insistedime, reagan that the united states would play a role. we have to look at what hezbollah might do in the coming weeks and months. for example, some groups from al over abouter -- took 200 yards from the israeli border. they might have been the second charge. -- tranche. hamas, goingse, all the way back. are seeingce that we now in gaza in terms of killing, executing those that were accused of collaboration. bodies in the streets of gaza. then the major threat in africa, but also with aspirations globally. i think we should also pay intentions ofhe the group and the goal to establish national, regional, and global territories. secondly, all the way from primitive to smart power. today, there was a great article dealingashington post with the so-called american fighters. i do not know if you had a chance to see it, but it was something about americans. it is not known that these are americans. every particular country in the west is involved and there is more concerned in europe. controlling these territories, the financial support, the capability to also thends, and quality of their training, acquiring of weapons, oppressing of women, children, minorities, and so on -- and finally, we have to pay very close attention to war crimes and crimes against humanity. words, domestic law is still relevant to this issue. ago, atssor, many years columbia university, was trying to advance the concept of international civilization. in my view, i think we have to be concerned about the culture of life and the culture of death. and isis and the other terrorist both theological as well , they represent the philosophy of that. ultimately, we can discuss two issues today. intensity ofre and the threat of isis and some other affiliate groups. secondly, what can society do about it in order to reduce the risks and bring it under manageable levels? , i think theand president and his national security team our meeting in order to decide what options are available to the united states and their friends and allies in like-minded nations. to deal with the issue of syria and iran. but we have the short-term concern and i submit that we have to look to the long-term. with this, i would like to toite professor wedgwood begin the discussion. would you kindly come up here? >> thank you for having me. i guess the shorter people in the room get to speak first. that is the rule of deference is. -- deferences. we are physically small, but it is a pleasure to be back here. i am, by training, a lawyer. a federal prosecutor for quite a while. i actually did the remnants of the weather underground and now teach at johns hopkins. it is a wonderful school facing a tough economy. i am equally ignorant about the actual ideology of isis. one of the great surprises is how little we know about it. i was warned by a christian friend of mine who was from syria that the balance in syria was so delicate. assad was one of the few people who could probably keep the country mended together, as much as not like him or his tactics or his vicious ways of killing civilians. when syria fell apart, i had a warning given to me by this christian syrian about how difficult it was to manage the debris left by the agreement and how it did not match the ethnography of tribes or their economic mistakes or any logical affiliations. once again, like 9/11, we are caught flat-footed. idea what waso up. in iraq, we did not know who was who. we are extraordinarily deficient in our mapping of the ideological currents of radical islam. it is something that is hard to remedy given our general views of not recruiting people. a thorough vetting to know family members abroad. , if you want a big take away, it is an obvious point, but it is the most important. this is not the moment to be drawing down american military capabilities. one else going to do it but us. the brits are relatively modest in their capabilities. i think now is the time. if i was president obama, i would announce funding proposals for the department of defense. i would not be shutting down systems or drawing down the armed forces at these act moment -- at this exact moment. i do not think of failure to leave a residual force in iraq has much to do with it the cousin it was going to be a small force at best, but it is a signal. washing our hands of the region. one of my great worries from the last 30 years is what i call maligned multilateralism. the good guys who do it or do not do it, it is the bad guys. you can have cooperative with radical groups with conjoined operational objectives. the morphing of names is interesting if you are trying to pinpoint how to get them in the -- but ultimately, the current of the violence and radicalism that have been sweeping the region will not be unveiled by tab on any particular organization. mother whoi-french raised me on memories of charles martel and eastern european the turkso remember at the gate it -- at the gate. jewish europelim, and the rest of the muslim world is one that has been in contest for a while. it is not, in a sense, a new issue. clearly, the law enforcement is not sufficient. because i doblows not believe in torture but i do believe that you cannot beat this purely by military means as you have to use actions that do not turn upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt. you will never have that. capturing people and putting them in trial in the islamic district of new york will not be a sufficient way of addressing this. conversationdinner with a very eminent former prosecutor in new york city and asked him what he thought about putting 9/11 people on trial. he said, do you know what that would mean? the district attorney's office tries 50,000 cases a year with four or five witnesses each. those four or five people could not get to a court. , very restrictive rules on what you can present in court. quite apart from the possible intimidation of juries. mannerthis as a criminal -- obviously, the israeli-palestinian peace process is a footnote. it is not going to drive the region and its success. i was on the harvard campus during the troubles. they said, were you one of the diaper babies? i said no. but it was true that there was a move that was very hard to quell . even liberals were slightly seduced by the complaints. it will be athink generation before this mood of violence for its own sake, violence as sport, will be quelled down. one would like to have economic development in the region to give young men something to do. one would not like to be in bed with repressive military regimes like the egyptians. on the other hand, there are very few levers with which we can work at the present time. i do not have anything happy or useful to say. [laughter] is do note away reduce the american military capabilities. do not do this. because it does not stay home. it flies on airplanes and comes here. if we do not help our friends and allies in the middle east to tamp this down, it will be here. it will be here anyway because of the great problem that many countries face. with relatively free immigration, the shortage of manpower after world war ii for the welcoming of many people from the middle eastern region, and most of them were wonderful .eople, into european countries nonetheless, there are huge populations of young men in england and france and germany -- theewhere who will studentm the old bad days. always move left. itjohad, it -- to jihad, will be hard for young people to resist this. i will give you one example from my prosecuting days. veryermans were always diffident about law enforcement methods. wiretaps exist for a good reason. undercover operations exist for a good reason. in keeping europe lever of all -- in keeping europe liberal, they would have to consider things like this to get inside these radicalized groups and make sure that they are monitored, if not shut down. i wish we were not having this meeting and we were only worrying about the economy and , but onel labor chain does not choose one's time or issues. thank you for having me. [laughter] [applause] >> my name is wayne zaideman. i was overseas in the middle east. i was the fbi representative in foreign countries. lebanon, syria, jordan, the palestinian authority, and israel. very different times. for about 17 years, i was a special agent in the fbi covering counterterrorism and intelligence in the middle east. i spent time in headquarters as a supervisor, assistant section chief. with that background, i would like to say that i agree with professorwegwood. --with professor wedgwood. not thercement is solution. i found it disturbing when i heard president obama say after the beheading of james foley that he is going to make sure that they identify the perpetrator and bring the andetrator to justice locate him and bring him to justice. this is reminiscent of the old days, the pre-9/11 days of the , a, where the slogan was crime occurs, a terrorism event, and then the whole unit, in the case of osama bin laden, analysts, supervisors, managers, all working for years on developing evidence, presenting prosecutive summary reports to the u.s. attorney, and then, courtthat, bringing it to and they may or may not ever find the people. if they do, they bring them to the u.s. district court. evidence anduate then you have to worry about the , thereat, besides that is the problem of sources and methods. so let's say the fbi is working with the cia, military intelligence, nsa, other agencies. a lot of the information is provided for intelligence purposes only. they do not want to and up testifying in court. they do not want to destroy sources on the ground. so they do not want to give you evidence. on the flipside, the u.s. attorneys and the grand jury's want to maintain the secrecy of their evidence. so it provided one of the biggest problems of information sharing. so i am hoping that we do not go back. because after 9/11, there was a huge culture change within the fbi and intelligence investigations. no longer is the primary desire somebody, find them, and convict them in a court of law. it was strictly to disrupt and terrorism before it happens, to be proactive, to prevent terrorist actions from occurring in the united states. it werethe examples of kenya, tanzania, the east african bombings, the uss cole. these were all treated as criminal investigations. it was a dismal failure. it should remain a war on terrorism. i say war on terrorism because it is not law enforcement. we have to identify our enemies and remember who our friends are. we have to return to the terms terrorism and islamic extremism. after obama came into the office, that was stricken from the vocabulary of the fbi and other u.s. government agencies. no more terrorism, it is man-made disasters. extremismlamic because it is not politically correct. the enemy is not islam. it is not all muslims. that is understood. but the enemy is islamic extremism. years, the have seen that most terrorist instances have been conducted by islamic extremists. so we have to understand that. bay, gitmo, that was something of that, when obama took office, he made a pledge that he would immediately close down gitmo. that policy was doomed to dismal failure because they are not criminals, they are enemy combatants. it would be a grave mistake to bring the detainees to the u.s. and put them on civilian trial. that was seen when they made if you attempt to do it. -- a few attempts to do it. they are acquitted and they are free. now have terrorist threats in new york and chicago, los angeles, wherever. gitmo ise reasons for that their home countries do not want them back. that were terrorists started off in the war in afghanistan against the soviets and they went through the bosnian-serbian war and all of the various al qaeda manifestations. their own countries do not want them back. that is the problem that we have with isis and these other groups. have british passports, u.s. passports, canadian passports. do we want them back? if they all came back here after fighting in syria or iraq, lebanon, wherever they are fighting, we have a big problem. now we have a military with reduced resources. we have got to keep track of lots of people. so it is a big problem. as i mentioned, the other intelligence agencies are reluctant to cooperate if they are not sure the evidence will be used in a way they wanted to be used. it is no less relevant for foreign cooperation. withlegal attaché, i met intelligence agencies, security agencies, police agencies from those countries. cases, they cooperate with us because it is reciprocal. we help them, they help us. , it is not for law enforcement purposes. it is for intelligence purposes only. --they have a right to limit if they are giving us information, they can limit how it is being used. again, it does not lend itself well to law-enforcement purposes. rendition, another activity that has been widely condemned by some circles within the administration. to transportused captured terrorist subjects from one country to another for detention, arrest, and interrogation. they will be afforded the protection in the country detaining and interrogating them. in other words, they are not subject to u.s. laws. they are subject to egyptian laws, jordanian laws, etc. so the information that they obtained in those host countries and then provided to u.s. intelligence or law enforcement personnel. think about it this way. if we insist on not letting those home countries deal with it their way and bring them to the united states, now they are immediately subject to u.s. law, to means you get miranda ,arnings, you get an attorney you ensure that they will keep their mouth shut immediately. you are not going to potentially save lives as a result of getting information that could possibly save american lives and other lives. basically, we let them do the interviews. we do not do it. we can provide them with questions and things we are looking for. hopefully they will then provide it to us. it would be a mistake to do away with renditions. the former cia director michael hayter -- michael hayden said they have been conducted to get terrorist intelligence on those still at large. he said that in 2007. what about the targets? we are talking about ice is now. -- isis now. we have to understand that islamic extremists are basically of one mind. whether it is isis, isil, ,ezbollah, hamas, bo boko haram al qaeda, whatever you are dealing with, they all view the world as being in the abode of islam. mean there has to be a continuous jihad interrupted trucesorary truce is -- until the world is made up of countries ruled by islamic law where the people inside convert to islam or they are required to submit to islamic law. besides isis, no part of it can be negotiated away by any leader. to do so would be heresy and the leader would be labeled an infidel. or worse yet, a polytheist or pagan. it is no surprise that they have no desire to negotiate with israel. it also shows how christians and , they were traditionally called people with a book. they were allowed certain protections within islam countries. if islamic extremists rename them as pagans, all bets are off and they can be subject to anything they want them to be subject to, including beheading. islamic extremists have no desire to submit casualties. groups,to be, left-wing they wanted to play to the media and try to reduce civilian chaldees -- casualties in order to retain sympathy. islamic extremists, their theence is not international community. god. audience is and they portend to know what god wants. therefore, terrorism becomes a sacred act. there was always a reluctance to shut down islamic front groups. they were called islamic charities. even though the fbi and other groups knew that they were supporting the terrorist groups. it was believed that they would not pass the smell test. in other words, if you see in the new york times or the washington post that we shut down all of the charities and the poor children and women and orphans are not getting their money -- so no action was taken. even though the moneys were not used to buy bread and cheese. they were used to build bombs and missiles. the one notable exception with the holy land foundation, there was a prosecution. but there are many other different groups in the united states that you see on the news frequently. unfortunately, there are a lot of elements of the government that use groups as consultants or partners against terrorism. it is really misguided. it will never succeed. remember who are friends are and who our enemies are. things that the obama administration did that puzzled they invited the egypt,brotherhood into tunisia. they decided that this was going peace. partner for somehow, that was going to be successful. another example is when gaddafi was overthrown. after he had dismantled his nuclear program. does this make any sense to anybody? iraq,bush went into gaddafi said, i change my mind. kauai with the west. here are the keys to my nuclear site. i am totally dismantling it. then we go back and take over the regime and kill him. now we are talking about iran and saying, dismantle your nuclear weapons. what kind of lesson does that give to iran? they would probably say, you know, up yours. but what i see is, in the confirmation hearings of secretary of defense hagel, he made what the news media said was a slip up. he said the policy is containment and he was handed a note by one of the aids. then he said it was not containment. they are going to prevent them from getting nuclear weapons. now it becomes obvious that he was telling the truth but he was not supposed to at that time, because that is apparently the policy. dismantling, you are and giveu can contain them another six months. is that ourlt friends, like egypt, jordan, israel, tend to become our adversaries. islamic stream is groups and groupslike -- extremist and groups like the muslim , we embrace -- they do not believe in contemporary nationstates. boundaries are against the muslim caliphate. must be regained by jihad. they must submit to muslim rule. here we have the muslim brotherhood saying what isis is saying, or i so. -- or isil. we have to examine our policies and get back on the right that,g and understand number one, we must continue to treat terrorism as an intelligence investigation. we must identify the enemy and eliminate them as a threat for the u.s. and our allies. our real our life and make good use of them in the coalition. israel, parts of saudi arabia. i say that because they have their factions of supporters and factions who do not support us. finally, we must follow the money trail and material support of terrorism. thank you. [applause] >> the chairs are tight here. all right. good afternoon. i am a standard issue american professional diplomat. or rather, a retired one. therefore, i will address this question from my professional does everybody else who deals with the subject. to look ati will try it from the perspective of international politics, international historic trends and the role of diplomacy. the last 10 or 12 years, we have ignored these questions at our cost. the president of the international system was begun by the pizza was failure, which was so ingrained -- the piece of west failure -- the peace of westphalia. it is usually get bigger -- de riguer for diplomats and writers. the system began in the 17th century and was so it's -- so accepted that it became the basic argument for the 20th century to the disappearing colonial regimes in the middle east. they were quite consciously ,eplaced by nationstates although of varying colors. nationalist, leftists, authoritarian, and once in a while, even democratic. the united nations from the original 15, to the record 190 today. everybody wants to be a nation. consensual economic system does not operate with any cost to perfection. it has been challenged several times in the past. napoleon in his revolutionary mode and most recently with the soviet union, which attempted to replace the nationstate system with a burgeoning theory of economic class. however, while it is still the universal system in the world, it is being challenged on several fronts. regions,all, in some by sheer incompetence and social political pressures. particularly in the middle east, which is apparently in a state of disintegration. reoccur, ericicts persian, turkish persian, modern-traditional, democratic-authoritarian, national-tribal, rich-four -- rich-poor. i am struck by the observation that the three most obviously competent nationstates in the reason -- in the region, iran, turkey, and israel, are not arabic. the most dramatic challenge to the west billion system -- the west point in system -- the westphalian system is the islamic caliphate. the original islamic caliphate preceded it by several centuries. differentdamentally because it claimed global universality on the basis of religion. deniedamic caliphate legitimacy of governments to every other system of governance. vision, thet islamic caliphate spread over much of what we now call the middle east and what we now call europe. in 1853.by vienna by the time the last -- of the last siege of vienna, the caliphate had lost its purely islamic religious character. it had morphed into a more traditional empire, a more political military power -organized empire. and itsman empire caliphate identity died, disappeared in 1922, to be replaced, surprised, by a consciously-national nationstate. and french and english-created protector regimes elsewhere in the nation. as the 20th century moved on, these european colonial protector regimes were replaced by westphalian nationstates. too many in the area, this was an alien framework which, to this day, still competes with religious and tribal identities. at the same time this was happening, the counterrevolution of islamic governance was being reborn. intrinsic in the teachings of the jihadists was a call for the return of islamic governance and the islamic caliphate. while this claim was recognized by many, this aspect of the challenge ignored the more immediate threat to violence on a local level. violence exercised by various groups and so on, jihadists. arising from various local backgrounds. turkey, syria, iraqi, and so on. but the caliphate is more fundamental fights for local power. is clear about its exclusionary caliphate projects. the ambition has been clear to the governments in the area as well as outliers like the united states. and we are an ally. -- an outlier. obviously, something is missing or wrong in the political orders in the region. wrong so that the islamiconaries, the governance model practiced by isis, is somehow able to attract growing numbers. causes comes to the tongue easily, but is never less pertinent. national leaders in the area must somehow identify and deal with these root causes as matters of urgent recess the. -- urgent necessity. the ice's promise is to return them to a dominant position in the area. in history, the caliphate marked a. sunnimarked a period of dominance and is being touted as the proper form of government for all real muslims. however, this challenge also has a very immediate tactical aspect. violence on the streets chaos,hing anarchy and attracting the four horsemen of the apocalypse. that part of it must be. with today, somehow, someway. requires muslim nations to see isis as the threat it really is to them. this has been a problem up to iraq, most, including have been mired in religious divisions of their own nature. many have had their own relations with extremists of one sort or another. isis has financing from a number of people, donors in kuwait. saudi arabia furnishing weapons, not worried about where they are going. weapons flowing across borders. i recently came across an e-mail which rather sarcastically but accurately describe the situation. "are you line was, confused by what is going on in the middle east?" " we support the iraqi government in the fight against isis. we do not like isis. isis is supported by saudi arabia, who we do like. we do not like assad in syria. we support the fight against him. but isis is also fighting against him. we do not like iran. but iran supports the fight against isis. so some of our friends support our enemies. some enemies are now our friends. and some of our enemies are now fighting against our other enemies, who we want to lose. but we do not want our enemies who are fighting our enemies to win. defeated, theyre could be replaced with people we like even less. it is quite simple, really. you you understand now?" all of that has to stop. there are signs that is happening in recent days. the challenge is being recognized around the circuit of chancery street -- of chanceries. the sunni-shia, persian-arab, and other spats are being re-evacuated and alliances are being reconsidered. the saudi's have made significant contributions to you and antiterrorism programs. un antiterrorism programs. the turkish policy has been evolving. and there is a lot of highly-public public agonizing going on in washington. anybody notice the washington post the last week or so? so the threat must be met at several levels immediately as well as overtime. defeating or substantially frustrating isis will require a broad coalition of nations to address the military threat and political and religious issues. this will require some sort of grand strategy. thisirst step in creating strategy is identifying its authors and participants. a coalition of the willing is required. actually, a coalition of the threatened. but that phrase lacks a certain enthusiasm. it must be based on the muslim countries in the region. such a grand strategy must be multilateral and as much political as military. in fact, even more so. if every military activity is supposed to be the attention of politics and not for its own sake, this is the situation and we must not let tactics eclipse strategy. the long-term strategy marshaling allies and addressing the region's political dysfunction is required and the operative word is long-term. need to organize such grand alliance is a matter of priority all around the world. this task is very difficult and only because it requires a serious reconsideration of many previous and existing policies and practices. including for the united states. we must consider questions not only of what, how much, and how soon, but with whom. we can only imagine the amount of scrambling that must be going on in offices. staffs screening for information and answers. for information and answers. on,while, as this is going the response to the immediate challenge is being determined by the key policy question that lies just below the surface of everything we are talking about and everyone concerned. when does the enemy of my enemy become my ally? and at what cost? thank you. [applause] >> thank you. really brilliant from edward marks. i am dan raviv. historianrnalist and who has not been a diplomat or a soldier but has watched all of this unfold. a lot of people wonder if it is just sort of history repeats itself and the same things keep happening and we do not learn lessons. i do not really feel that way. part of what is fascinating about news and history is that it is new. there is something new. the isis movement really deserves a major concern. ,t grew out of things especially in iraq, that we did not pay enough attention to. that we sort of new or not resolved and that muslims would be angry and they would find alliances. organization that shows many aspects of being an army. so that is isis. the biggest concern, if you are a democratic nation, is protecting your own people. that is how we come back to one of the biggest issues here at the potomac institute and that is terrorism and what might happen in our own country, in the united states, and in our ally nations. and there really is a danger. i do not want to repeat the obvious that has been in the news. isis has western citizens with western passports. france, come back to italy, and even the united states and commit terrorism here. it is a real danger. keeption number one is to citizens safe, this merits major public attention. who it comes to americans have apparently joined islamic radical movements in syria and maybe in iraq -- after all, to isis, the border does not exist. who havee have two gotten media attention. there was the death of the man improbably named douglas macarthur. in minneapolis, he apparently became a convert to islam and thought it was cool to hang out with somalis, many of whom had become radicalized. he thought it would make sense to go to syria and join the battle. was confirmed killed in some battle in syria this past weekend. the state department had to answer questions about it. the u.s. government confirmed and tried to offer consular services to the extent possible. we are fascinated by what turned this guy, but he is not unique. there have been others. another who got publicity a few months ago blew himself up in syria. he was a young man from florida who was born as an american muslim. perhaps you have seen his angry fact, at leastin one of the islamic front organizations in syria decided to make a big hero of him. he is a martyr to them, after all. so we have his angry speech, the lashing out. so he is going to attack this country and that country. so we will turn to israel and fight for palestine. we are after you next, israel, and all of that. is assigned to drive a truck and push a button and blow himself up, apparently killing some soldiers. i am not going to be little or magnify these acts, but i will point out that at least those two examples and to others that u.s. government sources say they have heard of, one in syria and one in iraq a total of 4 at , happened over there. does that mean i can relax? they do not have plans to use foreign passports to reinject themselves into society and blow themselves up in a shopping mall? again, we have discussed that. it does not have to be 9/11. it does not have to be some brilliant, complicated attack. it does not have to be for buses and two trains in london. it could be something relatively small on the world scale. in the united states especially, that would shake things up incredibly. the main job of a western them a credit government is to keep its own people safe. also, for the sake of keeping society safe, so the stock market does not crash 800 points when there is an act of terrorism in the united states. so the economy is important. lives are important. stopping bloodshed is important. how do you do that? wet sending troops to where have had troops before? clearly not. you have got to have a mix. if isis is new, and to me, it is new, ignoring borders and being multinational and having these high ambitions and having westerners as volunteers and i am sure some of them would be willing to kill themselves, they are new. we need a new game and a complex one and one that does not just involve the military. if it involves the military, please not 80,000 troops. something more clever, special operators, folks whose missions .re not acknowledged of course, it has got to involve our intelligence agencies and of course, dare i say thanks to edward snowden? is it ok to say that? we have learned the capabilities of the electronic intelligence and they are formidable. we can listen and monitor and watch, unless your enemy, of course, is totally refusing to use electronic media and not using the internet or mobile phones. well, that does not seem to be true. at the very least, this growing enemy loves issuing propaganda videos and messages and beheadings. ,here is something to trace something for intelligence agencies to work on in order to locate people, to identify people. it is not an impossible task. this is not an episode of "homeland" on tv. it will not be solved in one hour or even 13 episodes. it requires patient work, but there is a lot to do. a lot to come to grips with an things that we can use. we need to monitor isis. it can be challenging. to the extent we can, we need to penetrate isis. use your own imagination here. if they welcome western volunteers, it is not going to impossible to penetrate isis, is it? use your imagination. people who are good at counterintelligence do. it will require a mammoth amount of patience. if you do have an agent inside because you turned somebody or made -- or managed to inject , it does not mean you use them right away. it is a long-term activity. all of this could be going on. how do you make isis break up for surrender? in that part of the world, you want to humiliate them. you want them to look like losers. you want things to go wrong. you want the local communities, the sunni muslims and various them,ities to reject which would be an important part of the solution if it could happen. the sunni nations reject them. show somenations backbone. part of the political solution is a better government in iraq. .t is meaningful sunni muslims, the minority in iraq, felt left out of things and embittered. they weren't either going to join the islamic state or at least support the islamic state or look the other way or offer hiding places or money or food or travel routes. it makes a difference when the local population turns against them. al qaeda in iraq started to dry up and diminished when the sunnis in that part of iraq turned against them. there wasn't anything to be .ained if you can get sunnis to turn against them, it makes a difference. part of the solution is better government in iraq. how about in syria? sure, that would be nice. syria has had a civil war for 3.5 years. it is like a big black hole. we know that terrorists will fill that kind of vacuum. costs toare so many the syrian civil war. not the least of rich -- not the least of which, almost 200,000 people who have died. just think about that for a moment. many of them have died awful deaths that would make unbelievable stories in the world media. if we could get there and we could show them and we could show suffering children and families, etc. of course, we have done some of that. we have done some of the refugee stories from turkey and jordan and other neighboring countries. it has not changed much. the background has not changed. who are the rebels in syria? are there still groups that we could support? i will share with you some of the knowledge israel has acquired. with my co-author, we write about israel. a lot of people think israel is so but about -- is good at intel. they mj understood -- ust understand isis. they should have known about al qaeda. of 8 millionountry people. think about where it is. byis surrounded by by at -- enemies.

Related Keywords

Turkey , Erbil , Liwa Irbil , Iraq , California , United States , Tanzania , Syria , Luhansk , Luhans Ka Oblast , Ukraine , Russia , Washington , District Of Columbia , Minsk , Belarus General , Belarus , Egypt , Iowa , Vienna , Wien , Austria , Cuba , Spain , Chicago , Illinois , New York , Canada , Malaysia , Germany , Afghanistan , Iran , Kiev , Ukraine General , Florida , Puerto Rico , Columbia University , Lebanon , Eastern Region , Ash Sharqiyah , Saudi Arabia , Jordan , London , City Of , United Kingdom , Beirut , Beyrouth , Kenya , West Point , Estonia , Baghdad , Israel , Sinjar , Babil , Gaza , Israel General , Geneva , Genè , Switzerland , Somalia , France , Berlin , Italy , Kuwait , Americans , America , Puerto Ricans , Egyptians , Saudi , Ukrainians , Turkish , Soviets , Germans , Scotland , Turks , Estonians , French , Iraqi , British , Russian Federation , Malaysian , Jordanian , Israeli , Russians , American , Puerto Rican , Canadian , Russian , Iraqis , Egyptian , Somalis , Ukrainian , Soviet , Syrian , Palestinian , Cuban , Charles Martel , William Tecumseh Sherman Atlanta , James Foley , Douglas Macarthur , Sunni States , Ron Paul , Los Angeles , Jennifer Lerner , Johns Hopkins , Jerry Brown , Bush V Gore , Tom Tillis , Michael Hayter Hayden , William Burroughs , Edward Snowden , Chuck Todd , Dan Raviv , Al Qaeda , Jeh Johnson , Ckelly Conway , Kay Hagan , Tom Snyder ,