Natural gas has many benefits such as low Environmental Impact and low Carbon Emissions than most of the other energy sources. It is the fuel thats most compatible with the use of Renewable Energy however security of supply in natural gas is more challenging than any other fuel source was natural gass physical qualities make it complicated and expensive to shift. Consequently theres a greater need in the coming decades for policies and government involvement to secure security of natural gas. Policy should focus on improving the security of supply in europes most vulnerable markets. Observers may speak of a Single European Energy Market but this is an illusion. States in europes periphery have a bigger security challenge than those in the west or other parts of europe. Natural gas sectors must be properly organized to guarantee security of supply regardless of the origin of the gas supplies or even the poll situation. Supply disruptions most frequently result from technical glitches or extreme weather. One of the Biggest Challenges has been the winter of 2012 due to extreme weather. Next the United States and europe should make sure that kiev gets its gas in order. A they have engaged in disregard for payments. This behavior endangers Energy Security supply to europe. Additional natural gas supply can also approve the supply in europe. The most promising new source is the southern gas corridor. Beginning in 2012, this project will bring natural gas into Southern Europe. This project is the first in decades to bring new volumes into europe and not just rerouting exist volumes. This also reaches the specific gas markets of Southern Europe which have previously relied on a Single Source and are the most vulnerable. Spurs can be built to additional markets in europe such as the balkans. They will bring new jobs in Southern Europe such as albania, greese, ititaly. Russia and iran have noticed the strategic choice. It needs continued eu and american support to make sure russia doesnt undermine it. Russia may stable to destabilize georgia. Continued u. S. Interest in resolving this conflict is important from moving a potential means for russia to destabilize the region. Another potential source of natural gas is from israel and cypress. This can be very useful for the region itself. The ability of these resources to Service Peace pipe lines i believe are overstated. Energy trade reflects existing peaceful relations, it doesnt create them. It also exacerbate existing potential conflicts and not resolve them. They can eradicate conflicts over water and essentially to remove any water shortages in the region. The increases Water Supplies to israel, jordan and the palestine territories. The new resources can also improve affordable electricity in the u. S. Which is very important for future prosperity and peace. In recent months there has been speculation that tehran could also become a source of supply to europe. While they have the second largest reserves the natural gas in the world. This is surprisingly an importer of natural gas. If they tried to launch a gas export project to europe, russia would surely block it. Over many years, their strategic competition between iran and russia especially in the sphere of natural gas export. Throughout europe moscow employs policies to be the dominant supplier in europe. They fund bogus environmental actio actions. Moscow utilizes this to protect its dominance in europe and remove the nonprofit status from the organization thats receive the funding from omoscow. Another mechanism that moscow can exploit is manipulation of gas hub trade in europe and this should be countered. Last, washington and brussels should clarify to nato and eu members that belong to these organizations that it entails organizations to protect the securi security. Up until this year, brussels has increasingly pulled out of the visit of ensuring Energy Security but the market pace alone will not be enough to encounter a relentless russia. National and eu institutions must take a more active and strategic role and the ut shoni states should support this. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chow. Chairman murphy Ranking Member johnson im honored to testify on Energy Security and the ongoing crisis in ukraine. When it comes to Energy Supply in europe we focus on natural gas supply. It is interesting to ponder why because europe is more dependant on oil supply. The level of anxiety is much higher with gas than oil. Why . The root causes are in part related to incomplete market integration in europe when it comes to gas and electricity. The gas markets have been dominated by long Term Contracts at fixed volumes with prices indexed to oil. Suppliers have restricted competition with destination clauses and control over pipe lines. These Business Practices were supported not only by major suppliers but also by incumbent countries that pass on the higher cost of gas to consumers. Consequently european markets in gas and Electricity Distribution ip sfr f infrastructure not not well connected. What can we do to help our allies and trading partners. The first point is that weve already done a lot through the shell gas boom. These supplies became available for western europe. Despite initial denial of the nature of the shell gas phenomena. It was forced to meet the market by adjusting down ward. As a result, european imports of russian gas increased by 13 last year, half of which transferred through ukraine. American european ong import facilities are currently operating at very low utilization rates. Even if usong exports were available today they would not be imported by europe but east asia where spot gas prices are double that of european gases. The benefits to europe lies not in the qualities it might receive but future price formulation in markets. It may no longer rise and fall with oil prices. The competitive advantage to shell gas revolution provided the u. S. Economy with lower gas and electricity prices coupled with reduced gas emissions has also caused europeans to he reexamine their energy policies. With renew efforts to further market utilization, enforce competition rules and rethink the use of energy resources. In the meantime the crisis in ukraine caused by russian action presents danger to European Energy security. These countries rely on russia for almost all of their gas imports. Much of which transferred through ukraine. Ukrains corrupt Energy Structure created vulnerabilities for itself and neighbors. The current government is left with mounting gas debt to russia. This led to the cut off of russian supply to ukraine on june 16th. Ukraine depends on russia normally for 60 of its gas demand. In either case, are there ready substitutes . If the already delayed injection of gas into western ukrainian Storage Facilities does not begin soon, ukraine will run out of gas before the start of winter. The Ukrainian Government would be left with a winter with the choice of letting its own population freeze or taking gas from russia destined for european markets for the own use. If they want to further destabilize ukraine and provide it is an unreliable transit partner. It is in rushs interest to prolong negotiations. The european gas market is surprisingly complacent about the situation. Spot gas prices have dropped significantly although gas Storage Capacity has risen, actual storage is not as high as it could be. The risk of miscalculation is high. Meanwhile russia is pushing the south stream pipe line which would pass uk an all together. I instinctually question economic negotiations brokened by european leaders. It has become serious when negotiators stopped talking to the press. Long term sustainable economic transactions cannot be placed mainly on political conditions which tend to change as we discovered with the russian ukrainian gas deals of january 2006, january 2009, april, 2010, and last november. Raising matters to the highest political level as europe has done only invites russia to make political command demands such as accommodation of the occupation of crimea, stopping further economic sanctions. The only issue is to strengthen ukraine. The Energy Minister observed first hand and up close the blunders made by previous Ukrainian Governments on policy. Concrete policy action is required. What knees to be done for the Energy Sector in ukraine is unknown especially with natural gas. What i have been missing with the capacity to execute reforms in a orderly and systematic way. Reform depends foremost on ukrainian leaders. They require consorted warner siftance if they are to be successful. As long as ukraine is weak, it is an open invitation from russian opportunism and aggression. Neither ukraine nor the west will have another chance bettered by the opportunity created by the crisis for energy reform. The situation cried out for american leadership, working closely with europe and the donor community. By injecting resources with the provision of assistance. A policy must be done with sound analysis not wishful thinking. Thank you all for your testimony. Mr. Chow, i wanted to ask you a question about the effect of a prolonged crisis in ukraine. So say that it would accrue to russias benefit because it would undermine faith in ukraine on behalf of the eu. I think theres sort of three in my mind 3 possible outcomes. Im sure you can add to them. One is the one that you suggest that it will undermine european faith in ukraine and compromise enthusiasm for marring together ukraine and the eu or ultimately with nato. Second, it could increase enthusiasm for alternate routes of gas to europe south stream as the primary example. It could also be a tremendous wake up call, the straw that breaks the kam ecamels back in of prompting europe to do the things necessary to become much more Energy Independent of russia. Why is my third alternative not just as as you plausible as the first two . Thank you, senator, for that important question. I hope youre right but i think youre sitting in russias shoes, europe got a wake up call in january, 2006 when gas was cut off to ukraine. It got another wake up call in january of 2009 when instead of a three day gas cut off, europe suffered a three week gas cut off. It has done precious little so far accept for the steps that i have already mentioned. Its response to the invasion of crimea as well as russias adventurism may i say in southEastern Ukraine has been relatively weak and disunited. From Vladimir Putins head, the way he sees it and he may be miscalculating, the time is on his side, not on europe or ukraines side. Let me ask that question of the other three panelists. A simple question that isnt simple. Does a prolonged crisis harm ukraine more or russia more with respect to future dynamics over eu membership or future continued reliance on European Energy. Mr. Lucas you had your hand up so ill go to you and mr. Shaffer. I think you frequently get wake up calls and then it goes back to sleep again. I think the question here is the time frame. I would slightly disagree with mr. Chow that i think the previous crises have stimulated quite a lot of activity in europe. We do now have a pretty much north south gas grid with better storage. Weve had the Third Energy Package which has reduced russias monopoly power. This means were if they cut the gas off right now we got three months before it would start to bite. Thats quite nice but in terms of the sort of stuff you were talking about to make a real difference, were talking years. You know . If we stopped right now in five years time we could have a really resilient if not independent but a europe that had lots of energy and storage. The gap between three years and five years is the vulnerability. What russia knows is that they can threaten stuff which scares politicians just like here. We have a fragile recovery. The politicians are desperate not to have stuff thats going to harm growth and jobs and so on. An energy interruption worries what it does to business confident. Thats thats a powerful weapon for the russians. They just have to threaten this stuff. We already think of ways to make this conflict go away rather than trying to whip it. Ms. Shaffer. I think russia set up a really perfect strategy to actually set up ukraine against europe because basically the gas is still flowing to europe. The only way for ukraine is get the gas is to disrupt the supplies to europe and not take it into storage for future system. As winter approaches, its spinning kiev against europe. If you look at previous European Response to this krieps is was north stream. Building a pipe line from russia to gem any to circumvents states. We might be more responsible to the southern corridor. Theres another alternative. While the Third Energy Package is great in terms of principals in a very Perfect World with all the gas trade, its very nice. I think in the reality of russian behavior while its manipulation of gas hubs at price. Of course they can flood the market, deny the market and really effect these prices. I think what we need in europe is a paradigm change. They based the Third Energy Package on the american model. The market has done a great job here in increasing u. S. Energy Security. The u. S. Has thousands of gas buyers. Hundreds of gas producers. The largest gas producer only has 3 of the market. Each has about a third of the market. Its a completely different game. What europe needs is a paradigm shift that gas is not a commodity. It is a utility. When we grew up, we called it a utility. Not something that you just trade. When you think about it its a public good which needs much more public involvement. Yes. May i add that i do think that what really is at stake is a competition of two systems. Our liberal societies and putins idea that hes going to use the time before we get our act together to export his liberal ways of running a society. I must say what you encountered in bulgearia in that he is targeting the weakest link. I must add one of the biggest problems is not directly related to energy but that the perception of the russian threat is very very different in western europe, in northern europe, Southern Europe and let me say eastern europe. In eastern europe, i think im worried. Im really worried that russia with the multiple tools in his tool box, putin using energy, all kinds of other tools to influence the Eastern European and Central European countries which he feels was once part of his sphere of influence. Its just not fair that they are now on the other side. Lmr. Ambassadors you asked fr a soft ball so i will throw it to you. With as put what is is putin thinking. I think putin is thinking right now, first of all, he says my goal was to destabilize ukraine enough to that it is definite that ukraine will not be part of the western institutions. The European Union or nato. This was his first goal. I think he has achieved that. He will resort to all kind of means to stop trouble when the moment comes and it looks like things are too smooth. Right now hes totally satisfied with running or owning quote unquote, crimea. I have no doubt that of course, at any moment he can turn the switch on and we will be back to a lot of trouble. The fact that we dont see him visibly present eastern ukrainian conflict at this moment does not mean that he is not fully in control of the insurgencies. Mr. Lucas. Yeah, i think mr. Putin thinks that were weak and hes winning. I agree. I was always in support of strong sanctions hopefully targeted one thats were painful to him, not us. When we were talking about sanctions that were a double edged sword i really wanted to stop talking about them because they werent going to be implemented and they had no effect. When we were in poland, i dont want to identify the individual telling us this but i think weve had this since confirm that had apparently 100 to 110 russians control 75 of the wealth. Certainly being from the outside in, hearing how effective the sanctions were against North Koreans just top leaders, denying them their access to Bank Accounts was the most effective sanction. Why dont we target in a far more robust fashion those 100 to 110 individuals that really do rely on the west for banking and disburse. That type of thing . I couldnt agree with you more senator. Were looking for magic sanctions that dont hurt us and do hurt putin. Unfortunately there arent such things. Every country has got something to lose because russia has done a good jb of building up null nerabilities. I think the visa sanctions are a really powerful weapon. We have laws against Money Laundering in this country and my country. Banks are supposed to know know the people before taking their money. How is it possible that these officials are coming and putting hundreds of millions of dollars through our payment and financial system. How is it possible that he was allowed to list on the London Stock Exchange when it feasted on the corpse they buy their as sets for nothing, 8 billion of western shareholders money goes down the tube. And than they were allowed to list on the one of the outeld stock exchanges. Powers that fee enforce your laws. I think we should start by enforcing our own laws. Wed be amazed by the scope. Our visas, we dont have to stop with these people. The most terrifying thing is not a russian woman. If they come home and their women say we cant vacation in the west anymore or go to school there because these visa sanctions go to us. That would really hurt. Doesnt it really hurt the oligarchs when they cant spread their wealth around the world. The first thing they do is get foreign pos ports. They get finish citizenship and diversify. We have a wonderful opportunity there to hurt them. Yes, we know theres much more grumbling in the inner circles of putin about the sanctions than meets the eye so let me ask why dont we do it . That i dont know. I think putin thinks that he can count on the divide between the west and europe. So were showing more weakness playing right into his hands. I think so. What is the eu thinking pi not dropping those charges. Not revealing to the public what they found in their investigations. What is the eu thinking . What would be the most directed sanction when putin is invading crimea and threatening Eastern Ukraine. What are they thinking . I think in a way it was too perfect. Was seen as a normal esk aleation of force. We dont want to escalate this. Were not going to send message naval forces to the black sea. Were trying to apply very judicious moderate sanctions. Raise the cost to putin and give him a chance to back down and launching the ephiladelphia ent as a missile to the krem len. The russians have always said dont go down this quasijudicial role, we will agree to stop doing this stuff and pay fines here and there. We dont want a big public fight. I fear that that argument has begun to bite. I think its a great pity. Im beginning if were ever going to see it. It was going to be under this commission but it lacks like it will be passed to the next commission but we dont know what the political make up of that commission will be. Thank you. I will complete my next round. Sure. Mr. Lucas you said twice that russia is winning. I want to pursue that rather simplistic rendering of geopolitics. So i guess if the measurement is levels of testosterone and bravado, he is winning. If the measurement is the respect of Approval Ratings of putin versus obama, hes winning. But when i look at other metrics, its hard for me to understand how hes winning. He has less friends now than he had before. Form r er republics have climbi over themselves to sign Association Agreements with the European Union and are not stopped by illegal tactics and invasions. His economy is in recession two straight quarters likely of negative growth, massive capital flight. Hes no longer a member of g 8. He certainly has less influence than he used to. Were having a debate about how fast europe is going to move away from Russian Energy but theres no debate as to whether in the next ten years we will see more or less reliance. Its just at the pace. How is he winning if he has less friends, his economy is in worse shape, hes been kicked out the International Institutions and his reason for existence being an Energy Supplier to europe is in perils. Well, i think its a bit like saying first of all i completely agree to you. Its a bit like saying to tony sa soprano and he says i have lots of friends. The people who need to be scared of me are. A couple of years ago putin was in trouble in russia because the Modernization Program had worked. He was becoming a figure of ridicule and the opposition is doing quite well. Now ratings are high. He has distracted russian Public Opinion through foreign adve adventur adventures. Hes right that moldova, georgia, kazakhstan, they are all nervous. He doesnt care about that. When he needs them to do something, he can make them do it. He sees he has more influence now in western europe or europe that he had never dreamed of. The success of this divide rule strategy has been pretty if impressive. You ohm have nly have to look a ways the countries are signing up, theres a whole range of things that must make him think the sun is shining. I want to add to this that hes look, he doesnt necessarily want to be seen winning. He wants to win. Meaning that while we are debating ukraine, while were debating energy, at the same time hes doing a lot of other things in europe. Hes buying up banks and companies. What he wants is a long term influence within the European Union and within nato. With that sense, i think in a way he is winning. Hes not winning in the sense that we consider winning but he is winning in the sense in his own world, he is going to gain a foot hold that will be very difficult to counter if were not very careful. I think thats an enormously important distinction right because i dont really care if he thinks that hes winning according to his terms. We have to conduct our business according to our understanding of winning, losing, what benefits us, what is to the detriment of u. S. Security interests. Let me turn the topic to another more specific issue. That is this intersection of production and transmission. When we were in romania there was some very positive discussion about the oblt to move roam an resources in moldova say for the fact that the russians owned a controlling stake of the transmission lines inside moldova so all of the work that was going to go into moving the product to the border of moldova was potentially for not because once you got it into the country, it was still up to russia. The Third Energy Package speaks to this in trying to separate the two but how important is this control of transmission to Russian Energy and what are the prospects to dislodge their control of transmission . Is there anything that the United States can do about that asking that to panel. Ms. Shaffer, you seem most eager to answer. Great. This is thank you for the question senator murphy. Its crucial in the sense the Third Energy Package has created opportunity for them to get the hands on Transmission Systems because other shippers or distributors cant own it. These things have gone for sale. With financial crisis in a number of countries in the reasonable, this has given them incredible influence in europe. Suddenly we see a small russian unknown company pop up and try to buy the Transmission System in greese meaning they are quite aware that they are aware that if you cant beat them with the south stream buy a chunk within. The Third Energy Package will enable this type of behavior not the opposite. We see that in the case of moldova russia is taking payment for gas infrastructure. In the end, this might even be more hurting of state independence than actually the gas supplies because this becomes an actor in the local economy and gives it a lot of leverage as one of the major domestic forces in a country. Mr. Chow your thoughts on this question. I will support what mr. Shaffer said. The idea of mipiling up debt in order to have a debt equity swap later is a longstanding Business Model since the collapse of the soviet union that happened in russia and it applies in the moldova region as well. The reason they are controlling equity is for all the debt that they owe including gas debt gas that was actually utilized by transnechia and not paid for. This is quite a common practice by russia. The eu leverage that on paper could be applied is the fact that these countries, including moldova and ukraine by the way with signatories to the european treaty committee. They are supposed to supply overtime with the energy key of the European Union. That has been observed mainly in the breach in the case of moldova up until now but this is certainly something within the eus power to police over time. It has chosen not to do so for reasons that my colleague that know more than i do. Senator johnson, i want to go back to the issue of winning because its the crucial point. If we dont understand what the objective of our adversaries are, we will misjudge. I dont believe he is acting rationally from a standpoint of improving his economy. I agree with you mr. Chairman. This is no in russias best interest long term but is it in the best interest of Vladimir Putin. I think this is all about his ego and power and his control. Mr. Lucas you were talking about in your testimony, we assumed russia was a friend and hoped that. I wish at this point russia was a friendly rival but they are not a friendly rival. They are an adversary. Im hoping they dont become a fullfledged enemy. I want to ask you again mr. Lucas. What do you think is Vladimir Putins goal personally. What is he in this for . Well, i think first of all lots of money to be honest. Secondly, i think he wants to weaken the west to the point where he doesnt think were a threat to him so he wants to corrupt, coerce europe. Hes doing a pretty good job of it. I think he worries that successful countries on his borders might give people ideas. We quite longly in the European Union thought russia would be happy if we could make ukraine into a success story. We thought this would be a great thing for russia to have a successful neighbor. I tried again and again to explain to European Union officials that if we try to make success of ukraine that is an existential threat to putin. He will react very strongly. They said we dont believe in geopolitics. I said you may not believe in geopolitics but geopolitics believes in you. Why is that an existential threats to putin. If he has successful democracies. Because for example, ukraine would be the second largest Russian Media space in the world. If you have 10s of millions of people consuming Russian Media and having debate and inquiry, some of that will start touching on russia. Russians will start watching that. He needs to be able to tell russians that my way is the only way. So successful bordering countries threaten his power and control. This is true when i first mate my trip to the region in 2011, ef one of those countries were talking about they were all talking about how Vladimir Putin at that point in time he was doing everything he possibly could to undermine their democracies and success. Youve brought up a very important point that these front line states have been warning us about this. And we refuse to acknowledge it because it doesnt make sense to us. Why wouldnt everybody do that . We want integrated economies and life up others lifestyles. We patronize them and belittle them and we told them they had their hair on fire. They proved right. We should ask them for advice. I cant resist to cut in here because i agree. We did warn our friends and allies with the impending and this has been in the making for the last 12 years. I keep telling people just because im hungary an i might still be right about Vladimir Putin. I would like to echo what edward said is that first of all he is not interested in the long, long, long term success of russia because what youre talking about is a very difficult, painful, bloody process. At the end of the day it will be the best for the russian people. What hes interested in is the next 20 years. He wants to stay in power for the next 20 years. Transparency, accountability, because the rule of law means that he will end up where almost all authoritarian dictators and leaders end up. That is something wants to prevent. Understanding his goal. I totally agree that. Whats the best way to blunt that and confront that. What is the first thing we should do and the most effective thing we can do and implement quickly. Well, let me just say this that its counter ntuitive, the harder we act, the more determined we are, the more likely he is to back off. By the way when we were in poland, i dont want to name the official, this individual said the main reason Vladimir Putin didnt go further into Eastern Ukraine is because he was generally surprised by the reaction. The west actually covered what he was doing and basically this polish official credited the wests reaction that surprised putin for having him hold off. That basically pollsters his point. Absolutely. I want to see it could have been a little bit harder. I just this because this would have given us a lot more time to fix the problem. I think our reaction was totally weak, totally lacked resolve. Totally ro totally lacked roo solve. I want to say thatsensitives of what his actions caused. Its not going to help him in the short run but as a reaction to show that russia cannot be isolated and his need for political win in the trade sphere. The fact that he may think that he hes winning does not mean we should give up. I think to tread fast with policy is the most important thing. I will repeat that strengthening ukraine, ukraine become a democratic and prosperous free country is the best we can do in the medium term. I agree. We should be doing everything we can do to bolster things that might actually change the balance and calculus. Ms. Shaffer. I think we shouldnt equate russias reasons to actions with putins successful goals. I think any russian leadership would try to invade crimea. There was an an interesting debate in the United States. Is this a return to geopolitics. The idea of geopolitics is the return of the pacific ocean. Of course geopolitics is there, as mr. Lucas pointed out, we tried to ignore them. The most dangerous way of analyzing politics is the world as you would like it to be versus how it is. The soviet break up left the black sea fleet outside the jurisdiction of russia. Im not saying on an ethical level this was nice invading another country. If california broke out from the ut it was a ticking bomb. The only problem is we didnt learn any lessons how countries react. There is something connecting these panels because states that invading crimea was something that was always going to happen. This is the russian play book. I think why they seem to be pulling back from ukraine is it gets us to Eastern Ukraine were focusing on Eastern Ukraine forgetting about crimea. This is the same thing they did when they were invating georgia. Now youre very happy when they say. It seems like they are going to invade and than you see they are very happy when they want to stay in the region as peace kiepers. I think we need to focus on getting them out of Eastern Ukraine. Vladimir putin is playing us like a voe vie oe instrumt. We have to recognize his power and control because it makes no sense for his country the citizens of russia when he wants to maintain his open personal power for long as he lives. Everyday thousands of people are trying to enter the United States. They are hoping not only to renter here but stay as legal citizens. I dont see thousands of people trying to make it into russia. I agree we have to this debeat in our policies. I thank you the witnesses. Thank you ms. Shaffer for that comment as well. Senator johnson and i agree on much more than people may think when it comes to these topics. We obviously disagree on right now the score card between the east and the west. I will just close with this comment. You know, theres some irony to put putins actions. We both agree that theres short term calculus. Russia made the name by playing. I think its important for us to remember that the long game is creating a real contrast between what it means to align yourself with the west and free Market Economics and liberal democrat oe cra democracy. This is a symmetrical warfare. They are willing to use tactics that we simply arent willing to use. It may mean that we lose a few battles but it ultimately probably means that we now are the ones that hopefully will be able to win in the long game. Thank you very much for being here. With that our hearing is adjourned. The record will remain open until friday at 5 00 if we have another questions from committee members. We hope that you will turn answers around as quickly as possible. On the next washington journal, california congressman jeff denum on the influm of unaccompanied minors at the u. S. Mexican Border and his efforts to get House Republicans to act on immigration legislation. And representative gym mcgovernor talks about his resolution to remove troops from iraq by the end of the year. Later the Financial LiteracyGroup Discusses the literacy of teenagers. Washington journal is live every morning on 7 00 eastern on cspan. You can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. Now you can keep in touch with Current Events from the nations capitol using any phone any time with cspan raid oe on audio now. Call 2026268888. To hear congressional coverage, Public Affairs forums and washington journal programs. You can also here audio of the five networks affair programs beginning 7 at 2 00 eastern. Call 2026268888. Long distance or phone charges may apply. Next the state departments ambassador at large, stephen rapp talks about what his office is doing to prosecute those accused of committing mass atrocities in syrias civil war. This has cohosted by the atlantic counsel and the Public International law and policy group. Its just under an hour and a ha half. Ready . Ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon. Welcome to the center for the atlantic counsel. My name is free hoff, im a senior fellow at the center. Im delighted to see such a large crowd in afternoon. I think that one thing that everybody in this room can agree on regardless of political orientation or anything else is that on days like this in washington d. C. , its a good thing to have indoor work. On behalf of the hurreri center and policy group, i really would like to welcome you to our conversation with ambassador stephen rap on war crimes in syria, the challenge of promoting accountability and protecting civilians. If youd like to join this discussion online, please use the acsyria. We very much welcome the cosponsorship of the Public International law and policy group. A Pro Bono Law Firm whose leaders have participated in a Blue Ribbon Committee that has prepared a discussion paper for a forum, a tribunal that could ultimately prosecute syrian atrocitie atrocities. The reason were here though today is to hear from a former colleague whose work i admire and continue to admire, ambassador steve rap. Hes the ambassador at large in the department of state for war crimes issues. He heads the office of global criminal justice and hes had this job since september 2009. Among other things, he has served with distinction and pros c , prosecutorial roles with the genocide in ruwanda. In 2011 to september of 2012 when i set aside my own duties at the department of state, steve and i were colleagues in the search for both political transition and accountability in the context of syria. I admired steves dedication and energy very much. I believe that as a general matter we are much better served by our public serve aants than y of us realize in this country. In the case of steve rap, i think its particularly true. This man is a true believer who brings energy, determination to everything he does. More importantly than my admiration, i recall very specifically that your work was deeply admired by the secretary of state. Our format today will be that of a discussion. Well start by giving ambassador rap an opportunity to describe his mission for the United States government and the main challenges he faces in trying to accomplish that mission. He and i then will have a brief conversation after which i will open the floor up to your participation and our goal this afternoon is to conclude at 3 30 sharp. So steve, were welcomed. Were honored you could find the time to do this this afternoon. Id like you to get things rolling. Describe your mission and describe the things that are keeping you from apliccomplishi it in the next 20 minutes or so. Thats a tall order. Just generally, my office, the office for global justice. It has established in order to further our policy of accountability for mass atrocities and led u. S. Engagement with the yug oe sla f slaufia to assist and support on a case by case basis internationally and in order to fulfill the goal of holding those leaders responsible who have committed the worst crimes known to human kind. In the last 20 years, a lot has happened in this area. Indeed some have said its the most dramatic change in the International System the fact that the president of yugoslavi was convicted and the Prime Minister of ruwanda and those who participated in the genocide of 800,000 men, women, children just 20 years ago right now, those individuals have been held to account. As we deal with what has been done, we look at other situations, some past and sadly, some very current like that in syria where the dock umation from the syrian observatory on human rights is more than 162,000 People Killed since february march of 2011 numbers now greater than the former yugoslavia and in sierra leon and in terms of the assad government, a war against its own people beginning with shooting peaceful dem straigono to the dropping of barrel bombs on civil yian neighborhoods and the torture and murder of thousands of people in state custody. Its not just they that are doing the crimes there. They started that activity and the vast majority of their responsibility. We have other groups in the armed opposition creating horrible atrocities, beheadings in public view by groups like crisis that have now spread their poison into iraq. The challenge in my office and the challenge for all of us who believe in justice is how do we take the lessons that weve learned at these international tribunals, how do we fulfill the expectations of the victims and survivors in syria. There are different ways to do that. Ways that we already have and that question to affect the situation. They are not as satisfying as they might be but we are looking at different alternatives but first of all were doing a fantastic job of documenting whats going on out there. You remember when he were at the friends of the Syrian People in april of 2012 in istanbul, secretary clinton announced her support for documentation. At least 40 other governments that were also supporting groups in the field that are collecting documentation. They are actually rounding or getting close to gather more than a million pages. Of documents