Deals also among the tradition of american leadership. Its now more than 15 years since president kennedy said let us never negotiate out of fear but let us never fear to negotiate. He was speaking to the need for discussion between united dates in the soviet union which could last for to restrict the Nuclear Weapons feared in those days the risk was a Catastrophic Nuclear war between two superpowers. The risk is Nuclear Weapons will spread to more and more countries particularly in the middle east, the most volatile region in our world. Today, because america negotiated from a position of strength in principle, they stop the spread of the weapons in the region. Because of this deal the International Community will be able to verify the Islamic Republic of iran will not develop a new air weapon. This deal midfebruary out of line when we achieve a framework earlier this spring. Every pathway to Nuclear Weapon is cut off an inspection and transparency regime necessary to verify the objec
Together for p5 1. And this also shows china wants to play a role though the United States is still the first fiddle. And china is the third one. The second one is the europeans. But we are learning. We are still in internship. To have a digression you have your American University in beirut for more than 100 years. And you have American University in cairo. We even dont have many confucius institutes there. So you can help us for that. The third one is there are emerging, new overlapping interests in cooperation. Like our cooperation against piracy piracy. Navigation safety security. And our cooperation on the chemical weapon issue of syria. Et cetera. So i still believe the United States is the most important factor. But you will change your ways of thinking and practicing. Thank you. You mentioned quartet versus p5 1. Brian spoke insightfully on the fact that the p5 1, if a deal is done, the first question becomes can it hold together in enforcing and supporting a deal . Then anothe
Security issue which has the Great Potential for souring the overall strategic discussion. I think it makes it hard. I think its essential for us to try to explore these ideas, but it becomes more of an academic or think tank exercise and less of a practical exercise if these sorts of perceptions create is much distrust. Last comments before i go out to the audience . Let me go out. We have a lot of hands and we have 10, 12 minutes. Im going to start with the gentleman way back on the left. Yes, you. Yes ill bill jones from executive intelligence review. Id like to just focus on this issue of the one road and one belt. Because it seems to me that the way the u. S. The attitude toward the one road, one belt will determine the course of human history. If it is willing to join this and to work in this, i think were going to have a flourishing of Economic Growth the likes which of we havent seen. We saw at the ufa conference nearly 50 of the World Population has said, we have to move in a
Have a European Union as opposed to not having one in as many as our relationship with europe was good in both context. Ill take a swing at it. First of all, the e. U. Whatever the current problems may be is a Major Economic problem in the world and a Major Trading partner. Is that good for us or bad for us. Good for us. As they negotiation trade agreements with the United States. But as prosperity is growing and one that american investors can send their products and send their money and make investment. Do you have any proof that it was growing slower before or after the e. U. In the 1990s it grew quite well as did we. It has had propped since 2008. Weve recovered more quickly than europe has. This is outside of the framework of this hearing but do you have any data that backs that up, from the history of that, while were talking since 19 45 so somewhere in the neighborhood of 70 years. The lowering of trade barriers in europe which was part of the european project clearly helped sti
So we have to be if youre in an enclosed environment be very concerned with what the human body is exhaling. In terms of the future of space station, do we have plans to expand, put different elements on to the space station at this point . Currently on the u. S. Side we just reconfigured the permanent Multi Purpose module from one location to the other location to make room for a docking adopter that we discussed earlier to let commercial vehicles come. Thats about all were going td on the u. S. Side. Theres no major new additions coming. The russians talked about a solar platform to provide solar energy for their segment. The russians talked about another Research Module they may add. We on the u. S. Side dont have any major additions, no. The Bigelow Company has a new concept without the inflatables. Is there any use of this technology . It will be added to space station next year. This is an expandable module that will be added to the station. It will stay there for about a year, y