In women and girls. Seizing these opportunities will help prevent crisis in the future but we must still respond to the crisises of today. We cannot turn away from the more than 60 Million People who have been forced to flee their homes, the highest number since world war ii. Many are fleeing the very same terrorists that we are fighting. Now is the time to do more by welcoming more refugees to america. Without discrimination based on race, religion, or ethnicity. And providing more support to refugee hosting countries. And we cannot defeat violent extremism when millions of people see a future of continued injustice and lack of opportunity. Development programs can help address underlying issues that make communities more vulnerable to violent extremism, getting directly to the causes of this problem not only addressing the symptoms. And we cannot ignore how so many challenges are exacerbated by the plague of corruption. Its not just the panama papers. The scale of corruption as much as 2. 6 trillion a year is a systemic threat that demands a robust response. So, to promote inclusive growth and solve shared problems we must collaborate closely with our full range of partners and help strengthen them. This includes ensuring that organizations like the United Nations are modernized for 21st century problems and it includes doing more with our strengths, our social entrepreneurs and innovators and we must use our Development Resources wisely. We need to collect more and better data and use it systematically and we must hold our own institutions and partners accountable for transparency and above all results. As americans we believe that everyone deserves a chance to succeed. That is why we give the most to private charities and respond so generously to humanitarian crisis. I believe that this november americans will once again affirm that they believe in engaging the world, building bridges, not walls, not only because it is the right thing to do but the smart thing as well. Thank you. Thank you very much. [applause] hi. You mentioned a couple of the reasons why development is important, helping to fight violent extremeism because people then have a reason for hope, dont have to choose a violent way of life, dealing with corruption which obviously has a lot of implications for american investment. But since a lot of america believes that 40 of our gdp goes to foreign assistance when only 1 does, can you explain a little bit more for the record why this is an Americans National interest. We, of course, have a large heart. Its part of our value system, but it goes way beyond our value system, so could you chat about that a little bit. Sure, absolutely. And you picked on some of the most compelling examples i think, if we can make an investment now we can save dollars in the future. And i already quoted the admiral, he recently wrote an article just yesterday about how he had been advocating for increased investment by usaid in niger because they were getting such strong results addressing some of those on the middle some of those fundamental causes of lack of hope and the lack of feeling that there can be justice in the future. So, i think that there are multiple challenges the example of ebola which others have spoken about as well is also such a clear example to me of if we dont strengthen the local and regional capacity of the Health Systems that are elsewhere in the world, the threat very rapidly meets us here at home and so those i think are two wonderful examples but they do run the gamut and it is such an important reminder. I saw a recent poll that people do think that its, you know, 24 of our budget and it is less than 1 and there is we do need to invest more in data and make our case, but its already a very strong one and we have to get out there and make that case to the American People. Thank you. I have a quick question, then i want to go to bill. Its not actually a quick question. Its an issue that i want you just to reflect on if you could. We have to do more for refugees and support them and host countries. You noted that. But they are having a transformative effect and not always a good one in the reaction that is taking place in europe and in some of the neighboring countries whose stability are being undermined. President obama has called for an emergency summit this year. What would be the specifics that we could reflect in our platform about the broader responsibility of the World Community and us providing leadership to address the many ramifications of the refugee crisis . I think its very critical that hes hosting the summit at the u. N. General assembly this year. Some of the targets that have been put out first to increase financing. I think its pretty clear that to address the scale of the crisis, we do need to commit dollars, and i also think one thing thats fundamental is recognizing that the old model, people spoke of the post world war ii model of humanitarian assistance no longer holds. The vast majority of Syrian Refugees living in lebanon and jordan are not living in camps and the duration of displacement has extended from a three to fiveyear window to much, much longer. So, i think its time for a reconceptualization almost of the kind of support that is needed in these situations. If you are displaced for 5, 10, 20 years and, you know, you really need the full range of support. Which, by the way, there are many compelling economic studies that show in the long run refugees contribute a great deal in terms of economic growth. Senator shaheen mentioned the innovation that is brought but there are shortterm costs and we cannot be naive about those. We need to reconceptualize and add more resources and really get the Global Community to take on more refugees as well. Thank you, bill . On occasion we end up with some of these good goals at crosspurposes. Im thinking among other things of the fact that some of our some of the efforts of multinational agencies to electrify parts of the world are leading to rapid increases in the use of fossil fuel at obvious odds with our goals set out in paris. Can you provide some advice for the committee on language or ideas that might make it easier to make sure that americans involvement in those multilateral agencies was instead directed toward clean energy . Great question. When i worked at the Millennium Challenge Corporation we were very involved in power africa. That was something looked at very closely and you indicated part of the solution which is how can we in encourage investment in clean energies. And i also think there are really creative solutions. Folks at center for Global Development have been looking at, not at energy per se but looking at the case of forests how can we encourage agriculture in a way that also reduces emissions. So, i think you have to have Innovative Solutions overall to address the Climate Change issue and i think one great way to do that is to start to pay for those results when we see them. Thank you. We will invite Robert Wexler to join us. Hes the executive director oh, by the way, im not nara tandem, im carol browner. She had to step out. Shell be back. Robert wexler is the executive director of the center for middle east peace and economic cooperation. He served in the u. S. House of representatives for five terms. Throughout his tenure in congress mr. Wexler was an outfolken advocate for the unbreakable bond between the United States and israel and a leading proponent for israels right for selfdefense and the need for a just and comprehensive resolution in the arab israeli conflict. Thank you for being here. Thank you. It is a particular honor to appear before this committee, before so many friends and colleagues, to discuss certain challenges in the middle east. We must work closely with our Strategic Partners and allies to achieve success. First, we must defeat isis and not just contain it. Our regional partners must carry a greater burden with military, financial and diplomatic contributions. Secretary clinton has laid out an ambitious threepoint plan to defeat isis. She will work with a Broad Coalition to destroy isiss strongholds in iraq and syria. She will dismantle the Global Network of terror, denying terrorists money, arms and fighters. And she will strengthen our defenses at home. By contrast, donald trump has no plan whatsoever. Extremist groups like isis feed off instability and conflict especially in iraq. To achieve stability, baghdad must pursue a more inclusive government and deliver for iraqis while rooting out corruption. What is happening in syria is a moral travesty. At least 250,000 dead and nearly 5 million refugees. Taking action is essential for both our security and our values. We must reach a diplomatic solution that provides for new leadership and enables syrians to take on isis. Tehrans fingerprints are on nearly every conflict across the middle east. Iran supports terrorism and repeatedly calls to destroy israel. Irans human rights record is abysmal. Iran must never be allowed to obtain a Nuclear Weapon. I support the International Agreement between the p5 plus 1 nations in iran because with vigorous enforcement, it verifiably thwarts all of irans pathways to a nuclear bomb without resorting to dwar. The nuclear deal enables us to more strenuously push back against irans destabilizing activities in the region. Particularly their support for terrorists proxies like hezbollah. Secretary clinton will ensure that nonnuclear sanctions continue to be implemented particularly to rein in irans illicit Ballistic Missile program. Achieving our National Security objectives requires close collaboration with our allies. First and foremost, israel. Hillary clinton and democrats support israels right to defend itself. Democrats not only have a longstanding record of friendship with israel, but also an ironclad commitment to israels security. This has been the case from the moment president truman recognized israel just 11 minutes after declaring its independence and secretary clinton will continue that commitment. Yesterdays terrorist attack in tel aviv was yet another painful reminder of the threats israel faces including from hamas and the importance of the United StatesStanding Shoulder to shoulder with israel. We must unequivocally support israels right to defend herself and ensure its qualitative military edge including through a new tenyear defense memorandum. The Obama Administration has had unprecedented defense and intelligence cooperation with israel which must continue. We want peace and security in the middle east. We are committed to a negotiated twostate solution that guarantees israels future as a secure and democratic jewish state with recognized borders in jerusalem as its capital and provides palestinians with justice, sovereignty and dignity. Israelis deserve security and recognition and a normal life free from terror and palestinians need to govern themselves in their own contiguous and viable state. The best way to achieve peace and security is for both sides to implement confidencebuilding measures and avoid unhelpful actions. Incitement is dangerous and undermines a negotiated twostate outcome. While some proponents of the boycott divestment and sanctions movement may hope that pressuring israel will lead to peace, the truth is outside forces will not resolve the Israeli Palestinian conflict. Particularly when antisemitism is rising throughout the world, democrats must condemn efforts to isolate and delegitimize israel. Of course, no country is above criticism. But the delegitimization of israel it must stop immediately. Walking away from the middle east is not an option because we have deep National Interests at stake. It would be an error, terrible error, to cede the mantle of leadership for global peace and security. At the same time we certainly must not allow military adventurism like donald trump suggests such as bombing countries to take their oil. Americans face a clear choice in this election. And the outcome could not be more critical. Thank you for your time. [applause] questions . I appreciate the conversation we had yesterday. Likewise. As you know, i have very deep disagreements with you, my brother, but i think i want to see where we can reach common ground, a higher ground. I think both of us can agree that a precious palestinian baby on the west bank has exactly the same value as a precious jewish baby in tel aviv. So when we talk about evenness at the moral and spiritual level, you come out of a judaic tradition, i come out of a christian tradition, we overlap in that regard, the real questions going to be a commitment to security for precious jewish brothers and sisters in israel can never be predicated on an occupation of presses palestinians. If were concerned about security it seems to me were going to have to talk seriously about occupation. I dont know whether you would allow the use of that or, you know, New York Times said we how do we acknowledge those hundres of years of contempt . 2,000 years, hated, helicopter edaunted, vicious contempt, preoccupation with security. Understandable. Palestinians, made an image of god like anybody else. Wrestled with occupation for 50some years. Demeaned, devalued, dominated, exploited. For too long the Democratic Party has been beholden to apac that didnt take seriously the humanity of palestinian brothers and sisters. Were at a turning point now and, of course, its going to be a slow one on the Democratic Party but some of us will be working outside the Democratic Party to make it quicker. Weve got to fight antisemitism, antijewish hatred. It goes hand in hand with every christian civilization and islamic civilizations, its wrong and unjust but that cannot be the excuse in any way downplaying the unbelievable misery that we see in gaza and west bank and other places. The first question would be would you argue for the use of the word occupation in the platform . And, two, how would you respond to those who say for so long the United States has been so biased toward Israeli Security and not accent the humanity of palestinians to talk about even handedness is always a version of antisemitism as opposed to a struggle for justice. You let me know whether thats fair or not because i want to make sure our dialogue is mediated with respect. I respect you, my brother, i know you respect me, but we just have deep disagreements. Sure. Dr. West, i appreciate the comments. No, i would not support and would, in fact, oppose the use of the word occupation for the very reason that it undermines our common objective. Your objective and my objective and more importantly the objective of secretary clinton, of president obama, of the Democratic Party, is to achieve a negotiated twostate outcome. A negotiated twostate outcome will result in an agreement on borders. And once you have borders, the issue that propels your concern regarding what you refer to as occupation will be resolved. And anything short of a twostate outcome, you will not be happy. You will not achieve your i will not seek what i seek to achieve, but more importantly the Palestinian People will not seek and receive what they justly deserve and the israeli people will not achieve what they justly deserve. So, we have to consistently keep with behavior that promotes and encourages a twostate outcome. That would be my point of view and that, more importantly, should be the focus of the democratic platform. In addition to its consistent heartfelt support for israels security. Because the foundation of a twostate outcome is both the security of israelis and palestinians. And lets be candid if we could. When we talk about security, oftentimes the focus is on israel. But if there was a lack of security in the west bank, it would be the moderate palestinians who would suffer the most. Not the extremists. So, the need for security in israel and the need for the west bank to have its security is designed all around the support of a twostate outcome and the actors that support moderation and the implementation of the palestinian state. Just three words i want to ask you about. The first is the question of settlements. You mentioned unilateral actions should be avoided. Are settlements unilateral actions . Secondly, you mentioned that israel has a right to defend itself. But would you agree or disagree that that selfdefense has been disproportionate . And thirdly, on the question of occupation, it has been recognized by every u. S. Administration that there is an occupation, and there are pieces of legislation circulating that sort of want to rewrite that notion, much to the dismay and concern of people literally around the world to sort of define a post67 israel, which. Itself a unilateral action taken by our congress that redefines the borders unilaterally. Would you not feel that it is more important to include the word occupation which our president , this current president has mentioned and every previous president has mentioned, as a way simply of clarifying that to get to two states an occupation has to end. Jim, you and i are friends and we go way back and i respect your point of view enormously. Where i would differ with your conclusion is that, number one, in terms of our platform, our position should be the position of every republican and Democratic Administration since president johnson. And we shouldnt be any less or any more in terms of how we deal with settlements and we should be consistent. But with all due respect, for those that focus only on settlements, you in effect undermine the whole equation that supports a negotiated twostate outcome. Settlement is one part of this very problematic story. But so is jerusalem and so is refugees and so is security and so are borders. So,