russia. he was the prime minister, then became the president. exactly. and he was president before he was prime minister, became president for the second time. right. in that conversation we went through and really toured the world. in some places in the world, for example, in syria he had a different view of the facts on the ground than we did. and you can debate it with him and i did at some length. it was clear by the way in that meeting that in fact the approach that we had taken with his predecessor where we d accomplished the start of new things, a new arms control treaty and other things, that there was going to be a difference many the approach, much more confrontational. this notion of suspending u.s. military cooperation, it s having a spillover e effect. the u.s. and russia are cooperating in destroying supposedly syria s chemical weapons stockpile. but that is now on hold. is that wise? important for the united states and the international community to stand up ve
condemnation of what putin and russia has have done in crimea and ukraine. and this may be one of the costs of this. that s a pretty serious cost if that effort to destroy syria s chemical weapons stockpile, which was so important obviously to the region and the world, all of a sudden that s been put on hold because the u.s. and russia are no longer going to cooperate militarily? i think ultimately we can get back to that. russia has a lot at stake in that agreement in terms of destroying the chemical weapons in syria and the materials that we use to support that program. and i think we can get that back on track ultimately. i hope so. it is important obviously. because u.s. and europeans need russia in a whole host of arias, not just the syrian and iran, where else as you well know, better than most. i do. i dealt with the russians in each of those areas. but we have a situation here where you had an absolutely illegal action by russia done really under the pretext of protecti
do you feel that americans will be prepared to make too many concessions? thank you. well, first of all, i have two daughters. and they are both gorgeous and wonderful. and i would never choose between them. and that s how i feel about my outstanding european partners. all of them are wonderful in their own ways. now, to the serious part of the question, what i do believe is that the u.s./french alliance has never been stronger. and the levels of cooperation that we re seeing across a whole range of issues is much deeper than it was, i think, five years ago, ten years ago, twenty years
third question, the chemical weapons stockpile. barack obama and myself, when we re presented with proof of the use that had been made by the assad regime of chemical weapons, we decided that resorting to force was an option. and it is precisely because we made this decision that the option of a negotiation was also kept on the agenda. it is precisely for that reason that president putin made this offer, in circumstances you are all familiar with. this led to the destruction of some of the chemical weapons, but i agree with you. it is a very long-winded process. it s only partial destruction, and it certainly doesn t go nearly far enough. so rules were adopted, particularly within the framework of the security resolution, in case of
blocking, there s no prize for getting who it is. it is the syrian regime. one other observation, a conclusion, as a matter of fact. we should help along the humanitarian situation. and that is why a resolution will be voted at the nusc. and we will see again who speaks clearly on the issue of the syrian question and who is partisan. how can you object to humanitarian corridors? why would you prevent the vote of a resolution if, in good faith, it is all about saving human lives? so we decided to go all the way. and to get these clarifications.