Numbers because i was told that the intel that the government has on the syrians is not as good as the one it had on the iraqis, et cetera. So there are genuine difficulties that will have to be overcome, but our experience over the past 40 years in dealing with resettlement is that this country has the expee willingness to do it when the conditions require it. Let me just some discussions right now about us working with russia as it relates to syria. And i just want to understand from your perspective, dealing with refugees, are they fleeing assads barrel bombs or are they fleeing isis . I know theyre fleeing both. Generally speaking can you get at for this discussion the greater roots or roots, if you will, of why theyre fleeing the countries briefly . Then i want to follow with questions. Go ahead. Last week in greece over the course of two or three days, i must have spoken with 200 or 300 refugees, the majority of them syria. The answer to your question, it depends where in syria theyre coming from. Theyre from aleppo, greater damascus out in the east of the country. Its a different situation in different parts of the country. But the point that you made, theyre facing a movement on one hand they have the barrel bombs of assad. On the other hand they have the terror of isis. Its almost as they flee from the barrel bombs they end up being driven into the hands of isis and thats whats forcing them out the particular circumstances in different parts of the country are obviously a matter of detail. But there is a wider significant point. 95 of the barrel bombing attacks that and other attacks that the Assad Air Force are undertake ing are not again isis targets. If i could, so people understand, these are just against civilian populations, right . And other rebel group. And some of them are against other rebel fortifications. But its certainly the case that a very small proportion of the bombing raids are targeted on isis. Does anybody differ or want to add to that . I would just add, having been in iraq last week, that it very much differs depending on the circumstances. For example, i met with a couple of sisters who had recently escaped, having been sold to three different men. Theyre now living in a container with another family. Clearly dealing with enormous trauma. And they dont really have a sense of what their future is. And they have no ability to imagine going home, which is true for a number of minority populations that have been pushed out of their homes. In the absence of security guarantees theyre saying we want to be resettled. We cant go back unless theres security. So, thats one set of specific issues. But i also met with a young sunni woman who had been studying for her University Exams when isis swept through mosul. She fled with her family, living in a very crowded apartment. She hasnt been able to resume her studies. Its been over a year. She is just wondering what is her life likely to be. And she also wants to go to europe. So there are lots of reasons that people are desperate to envision a better life. Let me just ask this question. So, if an effort its hard for me to contemplate this even. If an effort were put in place to strengthen assad, which is what russia and iran are pursuing right now, what effect would that have if we were somehow a part of that or winked and a nod and said that was okay, what would that do from your perspective, based on what youre seeing on the ground relative to the refugee crisis. I think i can answer for you. If you would, answer for the recor record. I congratulate you on the precision of your question and leading a humanitarian organization, im going to have to be extremely precise in my answer. I mean, i think that from our point of view, the violations of International Law and basic rights are coming from all sides but the majority are coming from the Assad Government. Secondly, its evident to anyone who reads the newspapers or follows the debate that significant actions by the Assad Government have bolstered isis and have enabled the growth of isis. Thirdly, any diplomatic or political approach needs to address both sides of the coin if it is to have a chance of success. I would just add that, as we mentioned earlier, there is a tool. U. N. Security Council Resolution 2139, unanimously passed, that has not been upheld by key actors in the region who are now making different moves. And so there is an urgent opportunity to ask, push for key actors to take that seriously. That addresses the targeting of civilians, the barrel bombing, the withholding of humanitarian assistance. I know im running out of time myself. I would say i dont remember many u. N. Security Council Resolutions that have been adhered to. When theyre not adhered to, we just change them to something that can be adhered to. So im sorry, im a skeptic. But dr. Gavinon . I fully subscribe to what david was saying, regarding the source of the main drivers of exxodus. Of course, there are changes. Clearly driven by the isis offensive. If you speak to refugees on the border, the majority will refer to the barrel bombing. This is the story we get on and on and on. Syrian doctors who work for ngos who have a 501c3. Im not talking about wild groups, et cetera. And my fear is that any attempt at peace that does not immediately have an impact over how, in this case, barrel bombing are being used against civilian are going nowhere, will be if i could, unless the barrel bombing stops, the refugee crisis will continue to get worse. And just in closing, i apologize to my colleagues here, are any of the arab countries, saudi arabia, some of those that are working to unseat assad in certain ways, are they taking any refugees at present . Theyre not signatories to the 1951 convention. They dont recognize the status of refugees. They would say there are 500,000 syrians living in saudi arabia and 120,000 syrians living in the united arab emirates. Some arrived recently, others have been there for a long time but their status is not as refugees but as migrant workers. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And thank you. I would like to thank our witnesses today, not just for being here today but what youre doing in the middle of a huge crisis. We all empathize. I would like to start with you. In 2011, u. S. Created a vacuum in which isis began to grow. They needed land to legitimize the caliphate. Theyve done that. Now weve seen in the last few weeks the formalization of russias presence there with military troops and so forth. In the last five years especially, weve seen iran and russia supporting the assad regime, which weve been talking about today. My question is what complication does russia now showing up with military presence and do you have any perspective, being in the region you talk about development and humanitarian help coming together. I would like to know how this development and the lack of a u. S. Strategy in the region complicates your ability to deal with the ongoing crisis. I have a couple of followup questions about that on prevention. Thank you very much, senator. I should say that every time the senators applaud the work of our organizations its very reinforcing for our staff out there in the field in really the most dangerous places doing extraordinary work i want to thank you very much for what you said, which i see as a tribute to their work. I think that in respect of the complication, i think you said, thats been inserted by the russian moves over the last two or three weeks, i have to defer to those who are privy to the intelligence and to the military option making thats going on as the leader of a humanitarian organization, what i have to keep on stressing is that all the decisions, both military and political and humanitarian need to be made with the needs of the citizens at the heart. What i would point to the last five years is the extraordinary fragmentation and complexity thats developed both within syria and within iraq as well. And that complication makes it doubly difficult for us to do our job. The negotiation thats necessary to have local consent to deliver aid depends on engaging without building an array of local actors whose power changes sometimes on a weekly basis. The wider point about the russian role, i think, has to be split into two parts until the passage of the u. N. Security Council Resolutions, there was no cover for the cross border work that we and others were trying to do. And so the issue then is trying to get that cover. Since the passage of the resolutions, however, we havent actually been able to do more work. We found our situation constrained in part by the position on the battlefield but also the lack of official backing from those who supported the resolution. Thats why the emphasis that nancy has put on turning those words and that resolution to action notwithstanding the history that the chairman referred to remains very, very important. Security Council Resolution is only as strong as the nation states who back it and their willingness to see it through. You know, yesterday and i want to move this question now to assad and putins relationship with assad. Yesterday made a comment, and i quote, refugees undoubtedly need our compassion and support. The only way to resolve the problem is to restore statehood. My question, and ill start with dr. Gavinaw, can we solve this problem as long as assad is barrel bombing his own people, targeting open markets and children . The question before us is can we solve this . One level is obviously the immediate crisis and then the longterm solution. As you said, this is no longer a blip. It is a trend. If that trend is there, going back to what senator cardin mentioned earlier, we have to develop a different strategy. This is not just about feeding people for a few weeks. Its about educating, training. In trying to prevent this now, at least getting at the immediate crisis, how should we look at putins comments relative to assad and what irans position has been over the last decade with regard to bashir assad . I can only answer this from the perspective of what i heard from refugees. I hope youll take my answer in this context. I certainly think that if negotiation takes place with assad and has to be credible with a large number of people who fled the country, they should be an immediate stop to the deliberate attack against civilians. Any process that does not control that from day one will be doomed. It will not lead anywhere in terms of satisfying. Its very violent. Whether he is prepared to do that is a precondition for getting into peace negotiations, i dont know, to be honest. And im not anywhere close to this discussion. But i think its essential that people are going to be associated through a peace settlement, have to make a commitment to stop immediately the sort of deliberate attack on civilians. In a conflict there will always be civilian casualties by the very nature of the contact. But the deliberate attacks on civilians is something that is far too egregious to sustain a peace process. Weve all traveled to the region. Senator card sbinin and i were this spring. If the United States had accepted refugees that would be the size of england, for example. Theyre overwhelmed. We see that. What im really concerned about long term are the children. We talk about it being half the problem basically today. Will you speak to that and elaborate a little bit more about what we can do in the immediate future and what the longterm implications those are . It looks like a breeding ground for dissent. Will you speak to that and what we need to be doing now in order to prevent further exaggeration of this crisis in the future . Yes. Youre absolutely right. There is an enormous population of children who are out of school, both from the syria crisis and iraq and through the region who are the next generation growing up without a future, without a sense that they have something positive to connect to. And so as we look regionally at this whole issue of how to counter violent extremism while at the same time we are not, as a global community, enabling these displaced kids to connect to education and something more positive in their lives, we are absolutely creating, as the activists in iraq told me, you know, seven hot spots. Seven time bombs. And so there was a very important effort launched two years ago cold no lost generation, an effort to gather focus across the humanitarian and Development Community on education and on enabling there to be fuller support for kids. And one of the challenges that we have and david spoke to this is that we get trapped inside the differing mandates and stove pipes of the way in which we deliver humanitarian and development assistance. And so my hope is that this Current Crisis will really catalyze us to move further and faster on some of the innovative ways that we know we can use to provide more appropriate assistance that gives people a chance to have a living, to get the kind of help they need to recover from trauma, to get their kids educated. That is one of the most important things that would enable people to not leave the region because they have a sense that only by going to europe or the United States will they have an opportunity for those basic ways of having a more dignified life. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you. I might just point out that barrel bombs are being delivered by air. I think everybody understands that. I cant imagine what these many refugees and people around the world are thinking about nations like the United States and others that know this is happening as were sitting here in these nice circumstances and are continuing every day to allow that to happen. Plus the torturing of people in its prisons yet were going to the u. N. Security council and talking about hollow, hollow resolutions. Anyway, senator menendez . Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you all for your testimony. Let me just briefly join the chorus of voices that have recognized the International Rescue committee. Ive done work with them. Its extraordinary work and should be incredibly proud to lead them. As someone who comes from a community that were refugees to the United States, i have a very strong appreciation of the willingness of the country to accept those who are fleeing for whatever the reasons. So im a strong supporter of broadening our response. But i also understand that at the core of the problem, as miss lindbergh said in her testimony, that the most generous contribution of the United States only scratches the surface. At the end of the day unless we get to the root causes, we are treating symptoms but not the causes of what makes people flee from their home. And in this case and in the case of syria, the ongoing conflict. The barrel bombing, which unfortunately is in and of itself a horrific act, is also exacerbated by the use of chlorine gas in violation of International Standards as well as my thought was that when this committee passed an authorization for the use of force to stop assads use of chemical weapons against its people that we would be looking at a permanent stoppage of chemical weapons against its people. And while i certainly rejoice in the fact that we did do a lot to relieve the risk to the people of syria by a variety of chemical weapons, we have not relieved them from the total risk at the end of the day. And so at some point, it is hollow if you dont follow through. So what i wanted to get a sense of, first of all, on your statement the most generous contribution of the United States scratches the surface. Maybe plrks millibrand, you can help me with this, too. In other countries, the number of refugees flowing into them, what would be the percent, visavis, taking place . Onefourth of the jordanian population. In occurred stan its onefifth of their population. These are unimaginable numbers. 20 to 25 . 25 in jordan is syrian refugee right now. Lebanon, sorry. Just to follow that, 85 of the worlds refugees are in developing countries. The european comparison would be germany has agreed to take 500,000 refugees accept 500,000 asylum claims over the next year and each of the next three years, a population of 90 million. Italy, population of some 60 million, has taken in each of the last two years 120,000 refugees. The uk Prime Minister has pledged theyll take 4,000 a year in a population of 60 million. You can see the variation there and the big gap between the neighboring states in the middle east and the european government. Its worth saying the u. S. At its peak was taking about 180,000 refugees a year in 89, 90, 91. So 85,000 total refugees, that is not necessarily syrian refugees, that would be about 2 of the american population. So i say that in the context of understanding the challenges of other countries here compared to what the United States is looking at. And i say to myself in that regard, you know, we are either going to choose to help countries where, in fact, refugees are flooding to in the first instance and to well, we are, to be more robust about it. Or we have to think about what is a number that is acceptable here in the United States as part of an international commitment. But i want to go to the core question, which is how do we stop at i would assume correct me if im wrong for the record but none of you advocate that in order to stop the refugee crisis that we should accept the violation the violent violators of human rights and Core Principles as a way to solve that. Is that right . Youre nodding, if you could say yes for the record. Yes. Okay. If that is the reality, in the case of syria moving away from assad, even in transitional but at the end of the day moving away from assad. I only see the circumstances getting worse, not better. Were doing nothing to stop the barrel bombing, including that with chlorine gas. We have russia, that is now sending all types of military hardware and creating an air base for itself in syria. I see at the end of the day that they have been a patron of assad and will continue to be a patron of assad until they see a solution that protects their interest at the end of the day. So, in the interim, i see them using that force. And whatever entity they are using that force again lets say isil, inevitably in a circumstance such as this, it will create more refugees. And i see iran that has continued to support assad. So, i dont see a lessening of the refugee crisis. There are still, as i understand it, millions displaced, who have not become refugees. At some point their displ