you were in brussels correspondent from 2002 through 2005. the early years as the euro project developed. i would -- i would love your sense of the internal german dynamics on this but appreciate the anti-german sentiment we are saying in the south. how does the german foreign policy and economic policy react to that? we look forward to your comments. thank you. >> thank you and thanks for your patience. i know this thing -- it is 10 days old. angela merkel said -- they ask, what is your name and would international become a german. she said i am just coming for vacation. icthey know they have a problem. i also would like to talk about that. and i guess i would like to comment on that as well. i think i would address two or three basic misperceptions i have observed here in d.c. german crisis management. i think no one in germany commensurately not the delran has any plan for this crisis trade what they're doing now is they're trying to define what they did as a plan. it is a little bit unfair because no one has anticipated this. there was no

before christmas, i was on a panel in brussels with a professor who is the iranian representative to the iaea. there was one thing we agreed, we are the only people in the world who have read all those reports. [laughter] let's go back to the iranian nuclear program. the international community's concern about it for a number of reasons. maybe the biggest reason is that iran conducted this clandestine and uranium enrichment conversion activities two decades without fulfilling its reporting requirements to the iaea. moreover, actually iran diverted nuclear material which it received from abroad, never reported to the iaea. this is a classic diversion of nuclear material. it also accepted nuclear material from the safeguards and conducted additional experiments from these. years the first lesson, calling a spade a spade. but you have never heard the iaea has said that nuclear materials were diverted. the reason for that was in 2003 when this came into allied of the international community, the reason for that was the agency did not call it a diversion and noncompliant because it would

and that takes place more than 3000 miles from nato's headquarters in brussels, where troops from all 28 members serve with troops from 22 nonmembers, partner countries have joined in the isaf mission. only nato has the integrated command and control structure that could manage such a complex undertaking. and 7000 more soldiers are maintaining security in the balkans where casework continues to play a crucial role. including are fighting the insurance of a safe and secure environment during the serbian presidential elections that will take place this coming sunday. presidential and parliamentary election. made it was also conducting maritime operations under nato flag. and as you know the last few weeks we successfully concluded a critical mission and libya that saved countless lives. there really isn't an issue today that is of national security importance that we do not work on with our european allies. countering terrorism, dealing with weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile proliferation, addressing cybersecurity, enhancing energy security. the list goes on and on. when

>> well, we're going to be discussing that in brussels and chicago. and obviously, we'll want to work closely with our isaf partners to determine what that enduring presence will look like. but clearly, it's -- it -- you know, any future presence will focus on areas like counterterrorism and focus also on training assistance and advice, as we've provided and probably will continue to provide in the future. do you assume there'll be hundreds if not thousands of u.s. soldiers still on the ground in 2014? >> i don't -- i don't think we ought to comment on what we're assuming at this point, mainly because we really want to engage in serious consultation with our partners as to what that presence ought to look like. >> but there will be some u.s. presence, correct? >> that's -- i think that'll be the case. >> secretary panetta and chairman dempsey, i wanted to follow up with -- on the attacks over the weekend. these kind of attacks are -- amount to something like guerrilla warfare. couldn't that in itself be effective enough to undermine the confidence of

secretary-general ban ki- moon speaking earlier today in brussels is calling on syrian authorities to exercise maximum restraint and he says opposition forces should also fully cooperate in the current cease- fire which he says is essential for political dialogue to continue. turning to domestic issues, reaction this morning to reports about secret service agents' actions in colombia from california republican darrell issa. in remarks on cbs, he says that lawmakers will "look over the shoulder of the agency and as it investigates the 11 agents involved." the chairman of the house oversight committee is concerned about the allegations that secret service agents or with prostitutes in columbia, saying that such a activities would severely compromise presidential security. we will hear more from the congressman later today when he gavels in a hearing on management issues and excessive spending at the general services administration. that's live at 1:30 on c-span radio or watch on c-span 3. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> it's been nearly 10 years since the rele

third times, occasions for here in washington or in brussels or even perhaps in cairo or benghazi, people are listening to and thinking about what the human rights organizations are saying and the human rights organizations can sometimes drive media coverage and public debate. you know, they cannot put an issue onto the agenda of the u.n. security council. that's true. yet on the other hand you talk about, you know, the real struggle that has gone on in this country around a very, you know, which you assert anything to write lee, the most basic idea that torture is unacceptable and the fact that now, more than 10 years after 9/11, that the bedrock comment is still not fully accepted and they think we saw that in the context of some of the recent debate between the republican candidates for the nomination. you know, you attribute as i understand it, at least in part you attribute the failure to more firmly at trench the absolute ban on torture on what you see as the dilution of the language of rights to include things like a right to housing, right to food that really kind of in your mind

from the bottom and that is also why with the commission we hosted a high level event the people in brussels on the sustainable energy for all, developing countries came and they were encouraged because this is about opportunity and this is about jobs, is about building a green economy. cities are some of the elements and divisions we hope to see in rio, we and europe are heavily engaged and we hope to come with a strong unified voice towards building a global inclusive agreed economy and we hope the u.s. will be there as well. thank you. [applause] the minister has agreed to take a few questions and we have a few minutes for that. if i may ask the first question you are speaking here not only has the cooperation minister from denmark but also as a country that holds the presidency of the european union and i wonder what you could reflect whether you're a busy night in its support for the sustainable energy for all has the strong backing that denmark is given to it and also offered in observations on whether there are any points of difference between your government and tear on the one hand

the uruguay round had collapsed in brussels in 1991. we came home and begin to negotiate the nafta. president george h.w. bush signed in december of 1992 and it was put through congress the following year. within four or five minutes we completed the uruguay round. people came back. they did not want to have the north american market, which was so large to not have the benefits for the global economy. my friend to my lectures thinks that delhi is that. i agree it is on life-support, but i also believe there is a way to bring it back. any still on my left. [laughter] no change at all clear. and i believe doha could contribute to the five strategies you just mentioned, but i don't have time to go through. but i tell you there's a simple package that would poppers and gains than i would move forward if i had the chance to do so. the transpacific partnership is the only trade agreement that this administration is negotiating a and i think occurred, could be grave. the stated goal and i quote mr. bring together economies from across the pacific, developed and developing into a single tra

uruguay had collapsed in brussels. we came home and began to negotiate nafta. president bush signed in december of 1992. it was put through congress the following year. within five months, we completed the uruguay rounds. people did not want to have the north american market not have the benefits for the global economy. my friend to my left thing is that doha is dead. i believe there is a way to bring back. >> i'm still to your left. [laughter] >> no change at all there. i believe doha could contribute to those of five strategies i just mentioned. a simple package that would harvest some gains. i would move forward if i had a chance to do so. i think the trans-pacific partnership could be grade. the stated goal is to bring together economies from across the pacific into a single trading community to serve as a platform for broader regional integration and a free-trade area of the asia-pacific. the trans-pacific partnership involves nine nations. we have trade agreements with four of the nine. brunei, new zealand, malaysia, be add-nam' would ons. the potential f

i'm going to brussels next week. one of the agenda items is operation unified protection. what we have to do is be candid with each other. it they need to do what they need to provide. they relied exclusively on us to provide. i see this as a positive. >> what you think are the greatest risks of the united states? >> on vacation i've been portrayed as saying this is too hard. that is not the case. it has to do something, and we absolutely have the capability. i have to be clear about the military objective is that i was being asked to achieve. i have to be clear about how these were contributing to some outcomes that we would all understand and agree upon. but the dishes stopping the violence, that is one outcome. the other responsibility is to balance the rest to the mission. what would be the cost of doing this? the risk to the forest is a zero sum game. we are deployed all over the world. if i am asked to do something in syria and the secretary says i need this option, my response ability is to make sure i understand this and that by articulate the risks not to the miss

we saw that with nafta to be the the uruguay round collapsed in brussels in 1991. we came home and began to negotiate nafta. president george h. w. bush signed it in december of 1992 and was put through congress the following year. within four or five months we completed the round. people came back. they didn't want to have the north american market which was so large to not have the benefits for the global economy. my friend to my left thinks doha is dead. i agree is on life support plan also believe there's a way to bring it back. >> and he's still on my left. [laughter] >> no change at all. and i believe doha could contribute to the strategies i just mentioned but i don't have time in my five minutes to go through but i will tell you there's a simple package that would harvest some games and i would move forward if i had the chance to do so. now the trans-pacific partnership is the only trade agreement this administration is negotiating and i think it could great. the stated goal, and i quote is to bring together economies from across the pacific developed and d