This is a significant achievement. In the uk, we recognize the serious challenges still ahead for afghanistan, but we strongly believe that there is room for optimism about the countries longterm future. This is a crucial time for afghan men, women and children as a prepare for elections in 2014, which must be credible, transparent and inclusive. Is ofesident, poverty course a greater threat to stability and freedom as our conflict ands are oppression. United kingdom has met our spend money on national assistance. We are the only country in the g 20 to do so. Following the Global Economic crisis, we said we would not allens our books on the backs of the worlds poorest. We have held true to our word. On monday we announced that we would provide 1. 6 billion in global fund to fight aids, tb and malaria. That is 10 of the funds replenishment, so long as others join. Women and girls remain at the heart of our development agenda. They are the key to economic growth. Investing in Girls Education is the single most effective thing we can do to break the cycle of poverty. We must and gender inequality which is the root of pilot the root of violence against women. This is at the heart of the uks initiative to end Sexual Violence and conflict. I invite all states not yet to do so to endorse this. Over 115 states are already committed. Were sending a message to the victims of these devastating crimes that they are not alone and that their attackers will be punished. Mr. President , we have also used our presidency of the g8 to focus on three areas where we can support global prosperity, boosting trade, ensuring better transparency to help developing nations and if it from resources that are rightfully theirs and cracking down on tax evasion and closing tax loopholes. This is just the start of our work on this agenda and we are pleased that the uks trade, tax and transparency priorities have been fully reflected in agreements reached by the g 20, including measures to resist by two chinas measures years at the end of 2000 sixteenths of the trade remains is free and open as possible. Is inesident, whether it the g8, the g 20, the European Union or nato, or the commonwealth, or one of the five permanent members of the un Security Council, the uk will continue to be an active and engaged player in the world. The biggest problems we face our problems we share. Take Climate Change. Uis mornings reports by the n Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change confirms the sea levels are already rising and ice is melting faster than we expected. The report is an authoritative rebuke to all those who still persist in claiming that man made Climate Change does not exist. The uk will continue to cut our overions as well as giving 6 billion to assist developing countries to do the same and adapt to environmental changes. If we are to halt the devastating effects of Climate Change, we must listen to the science. Together. So we welcome the secretarygenerals announcement of a Leaders Summit next year is a key step towards all nations agreeing a deal in 2015 to take action to avert this crisis. Of course, we are all affected by the scourge of terrorism, whether it is a soldier brutally murdered on a quiet london street or innocent shoppers gunned down in a busy nairobi mall, we are all vulnerable. Following the recent horrific events in nairobi, the United Kingdom is working closely with the governments in kenya, somalia and countries across the region to tackle this issue. Our Global Response to terrorism must be robust, intelligent and cover all those areas where our Work Together can make a genuine difference. Alone, we can take small steps forward, but together we can take giant leaps. That much was clear earlier this worldsn we signed the first arms trade treaty to better regulate the global sale of weapons. United kingdom is proud of the role we played in delivering it and we urge any countries who have not signed to do so. This treaty reminds us that with enough political will, we can come together and do the previously unthinkable. That should embolden us to do yet more. The United Nations has many virtues, but it also has serious shortcomings and they must be faced. The United Nations has no greater friend than the United Kingdom, but it does not adequately reflect the world we live in today. The Security Council must be reformed. Unless more room is made at the top table it will fast become an anachronism, a relic of a different time. That is why the United Kingdom continues to support permanent seat for brazil, india, germany africann, and permanent representation, too. We call on all states to play their part here and in our other international institutions, just as we all play hours. We are at our best when we engage constructively with one another and when we are ambitious in assuming our shared goals. Is important for those countries whose economies have influenced and grown and transformed over more recent years as it is for the old, established powers. Greater influence means greater responsibility. Placerld is a better because brazil is taking a lead ,n tackling deforestation because mexico has enshrined Climate Change targets into law, because republic of korea has led the way on nuclear security. But there is much much more to do, many more areas to take a lead. Cutobal trade deal to bureaucracy at borders. It would mean a trillion dollar boost for the global economy. Any next two years, the United Kingdom wants to do as much as it can to drive progress on the u. S. Millennium development goals. We are also working in the u. N. And Civil Society to set out a post2015 agenda is even more ambitious. There can be no greater goal than to eradicate extreme poverty, leaving no one behind. On these and all other issues facing our nations, we are quite simply stronger together than we are apart part. Now more than ever, we must fend off the forces of insularity and isolationism, stand up for our values and look out to the world. Mr. President , that is what United Kingdom will do, and we stand ready to work with all others who will do the same. Thank you. [applause] will have more from the u. N. General Assembly Tomorrow with an address from the syrian deputy prime minister. His remarks come just days after the un Security Council unanimously voted on a resolution to eliminate serious chemical weapons stockpile. That is live at 9 45 am eastern on cspan two. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2013] the former deputy chairman said that the u. S. Agreement for syria has Great Potential for success than military strikes. He spoke at the Wilson Center in washington dc a few hours before the un Security Council adopted a resolution that set guidelines for the disposing of serious chemical weapons. File. This is 50 minutes. You. Lcome to all of those here today at the Wilson Center and those watching him either on cspan or via live webcast. Todays session is could not be more topical, on the challenges of chemical weapons disarmament in syria. The security consul of the nationsonal a united is set to eliminate serious stock of chemical weapons. This action diffuses the crisis assad regimeshe use of chemical weapons in late august and the u. S. That of military action to prevent humanr use. The resolution will be binding and enforceable under Chapter Seven of the United Nations charter. To discuss the challenge that lay ahead in achieving chemical weapons disarmament in syria, we are fortunate to have with us today one of the worlds leading. Uthorities on wmd issues theres a lot of hyperbole in washington, but i think that is an accurate disruption of charles all for Charles Dolph express on iraq began in the 1980s as washington considered his role regarding the iran iraq war. Dolpher served as executive chairman and later active chairman of United Nations special commission on iraq. It was from 1993 until 2000. It was at the friction point between baghdad and washington in regular crises until president clinton ordered a limited bombing in response to iraqs noncooperation in 1998. After the 2003 invasion of iraq and the toppling of the Saddam Hussein regime, charlesduelfer led the Iraq Survey Group that conducted the investigation of the scope of iraqs wmd. The isg was a unique Intelligence Organization of over 1700 military and civilian staff that investigated iraq wmd programs. He used all the available collection and analytic capabilities in a hostile environment. Thedelfer u report, i amended to you. He authored a superb book, essentially a memoir of his hidee in iraq, titled and seek the search for truth in iraq. It is also based on the extraordinary interviews that the isg conducted. To give us insight into what was going on inside the saddam howein regime and affordable miscalculation on both sides led to tragedy. Charles has recently headed a small entrepreneurial space launch company. Hes is a consultant and lecturer and he is also, i am proud to say, a Public Policy scholar at the Wilson Center. Charles will lead off with opening remarks, giving his lay down on a set of issues. He and i will have one or two rounds of questions between the two of us and then we will open it up for discussion on the floor. Trost, the floor is yours. , the floor is yours. Thank you everybody for coming out during lunch time and dozens more in the cspan audience. They are, like myself insomniacs who turn to these programs. Make my remarks in three sections. What want to do is go through some of the background to how we got to where we are today. That background has moved astonishingly fast. I want to talk a little bit iraq Lessons Learned from and why i think the current is a doable one. And maybe highlight some of the risk going ahead and how this may fit into other, broader issues. It really is astonishing how fast this has proceeded. 21,he last month, august there was this horrible chemical weapons attack in syria. There are horrible videos about that. And otheristration countries said how are we going to react to that . Over two weeks ago on september 10, the president of the United States had a Primetime Television address to the nation describing that this set of circumstances required military action. He was going to propose that to the congress, but he felt that that wereles broken by use of chemical weapons needed to be responded to. The new yorko protocol which cover both weapons. These are things that americans had not even heard of. He was betting his presidency on taking a military course of these twoaddress relatively obscure, but important arms control agreements. That was on the 10th of september. Shortly thereafter it became pretty clear, i think, that congress is not going to go along with that. The administrations position on syria and more particular its position on the narrow focus on. Yrian chemical weapons in that speech, i point out that his criteria were twofold. One was to decay serious chemical weapons capability and to deter third these are the two elements that he set out as his objectives for a military strike. This, is angers like very carefully targeted military strike. Was a very careful military , bute with a limited important objective, to deter and decay or degrade the syrian capability. So what happened after that . To the point i would make is he linked it to very horrible videos which struck me as interesting, i guess in the social media world, that is important these days. But risky, because if there were a military strike, it is safe to somebody would come up with unpleasant videos about the consequences of a military strike. So you wind up going down this path where policy is derived by competitive videos. In any case, what im trying to suggest here is that there was a bit of a dodgy position that United States got itself into with respect to syrian cw activities. Rov, thees sergei lav foreign minister of russia. He proposed an astonishing idea. By usingaddress this weapons inspectors, u n weapons inspectors . Now, there arent too unique features about serge he spent five years as the Russian Ambassador to the iraqd nations as the ambassador. He is a pretty good idea of the ins and outs of weapons inspectors, what they could and could not do. , theings turned out weapons inspectors did a better job than we even knew at the time in getting rid of the iraqi chemical weapons, biological weapons and the rest of their inventory. Had that experience, but he also knows that syria. The right pieces of data and experience in accents ch would have allowed him he had this idea, hey, wouldve figured on this weapons yours route . Washington had the wisdom to say this is the good idea. It didnt come completely out of the blue. There had been an ongoing dialogue and there was an oblique reference to this in a geneva statement, but there had been an ongoing dialogue between the staffs on dealing with chemical weapons. They met five times if im correct on this. It wasnt completely out of the blue, but certainly for lavrov to inject this option at the time was important. That kind of safe washington from facing some very difficult decisions. Highlight about lavrovs knowledge of syria is he is a smart guy. He is not a cuddly guy, but he is very smart. He would not be proposing something if he thought the syrians were going to pull a fast one on us. , myent in to geneva hypothesis is with preferred knowledge that at least for the first few steps, syria is going to comply. Imagine the circumstances or the and by between lavrov sheer all assad. Alassad. His regime is kind of wobbly and one of the things that could help him is his resurgence of international legitimacy. If you drew lines and i can thisne lavrov during third he could say your damascus need to do something to retain your international legitimacy, and the opponents and insurgents, there legitimacy will decay. Youhe russians will support if you make a Forward Movement on this chemical weapon side and you will bolster your international legitimacy. Is a critical piece of all this. What is in it for the syrians, unlike iraq, iraq that the si de, the positive and would be that they would get out of sanctions. Eplus for him is sustaining russian support, Building International legitimacy to the extent that they can and hoping to outlast the coceo sickness and hoping to outlast the cohesiveness only the russians answered a lavrov couldve done that. Im not standing here is a great fan of him. I was certainly on the receiving end of a lot of spears in the Security Councils in the 1990s. He was more than happy to play around with some of the facts to suit him. I remember at one point as a deputy chairman u or the acting chairman ofnscom at a certain point. And on scum had brought in had brought in samples to serve as reference materials for a laboratories that we had in our facility in wasad heard lavrov shocked and horrified that unscom was bringing and chemical agent into a rock. Who knows it would we could be doing, we could be ceding evidence. He made a pretty elaborate and unscom was part of the problem and not part of the solution. Ien i speak about him and seem to be quite positive about him, i am only describing that he was in a position to take this step, not necessarily the best person on the planet are it i wouldnt be nominating him for the nobel peace prize. But he is a pragmatist and he would not be proposing something that he didnt think he could cause creactive deliver on. Serioushe could cause to deliver on that he could causesyria to deliver on. Some people compare this to a rock. You guys were thrashing about on iraq for a decade. In iraq we got most of the chemical weapons done in a. Of probably 18 months. We didnt know what 100 was, so we didnt know how much we did in those first few months, but it turns out it was the bulk of it. The mechanical process of doing this is feasible, so long as syria cooperates. This is a very key feature of what they agreed to in geneva. Like the case of iraq they levied all of the heavy lifting, the obligations, the burden of proof was put on syria. The role of the inspectors was critically limited to verifying what the syrians say. That dynamic was essential and it was sustained and built in, beginning in the agreement in geneva and now in the draft resolution which as rob mentioned is intended to be passed tonight. Implementing or corresponding agreement that they will have at the executive committee. We will also have that then amick embedded in it. One other thing i would comment on in the geneva discussion, and kerry met. They said they came to a common assessment of the serial weapons holding. You have to imagine that their intelligence and russian intelligence coming up and saying that they have about the same idea for what is in their inventories. Vital, a cousin of the syrians actually produce their declaration, it became pretty clear pretty quickly that it was in the ballpark. It hasnt been made public yet, although when it is passed around among the opcw countries, i imagine it will be public pretty quickly. That declaration has been seen as being pretty thorough and pretty detailed. That is a key first step.