welcome to the news hour in doha. these are the top stories. intense discussions in relaxed surroundings. the u.s. and russia try to agree on syria's chemical weapons poolside at their hotel in geneva. any moment nowell hear about what's happened so far. these are live pictures from geneva. also ahead, former egyptian president hosni mubarak is back
in court over the deaths of protesters. more than 50 dead and 60,000 homeless as a cease-fire collapses in the philippines. and shark fin soup off the menu. hong kong's government bows to pressure from conservationists. talks between the u.s. and russia on how to bring syria's chemical weapons under international control are now into the third day. any time now we're expecting the top diplomats from both countries, john kerry and sergei lavrov, to address the media. these are live pictures from that meeting in switzerland where they are due very soon, as we've been saying, to give an update on the progress. we'll, of course, go to that when they come out and speak. jonah hall is live for us in geneva. jonah, the talks are entering
their third day. u.s. officials have been reported as saying they're tough talks but are making progress. any details on what progress is being made? >> reporter: nothing official as of yet. we're waiting for that press conference. i think we're going to say it very imminently now. we've watched over the last hour or two as john kerry and sergei lavrov have sat together at a table having a breakfast meeting going over documentation beside the pool at the hotel behind me here, perhaps looking over the progress made during the course of the night by their various teams and working groups of experts looking at putting together some sort of a framework deal to move forward with here in geneva. mr. lavrov himself has come inside. i think that press conference will come. what we have heard in terms of progress from u.s. administration officials speaking on condition of anonymity indicating that
progress has been made on one particular and very important issue, the question of the threat of force, which the united states has been adamant was needed to backup any agreement made with syria about its chemical weapons, to backup in the case of noncompliance, which russia and syria have said were not acceptable. the threat of force had to be put one side. what we're being told is that the united states may, in fact, be prepared to come up with some other enforcement mechanism within the context of a security council resolution, perhaps sanctions on the syrian government in damascus if they fail to comply or some other measure, but to take the threat of force away. if we hear that in the press conference, that will have been, i think, the most significant obstacle to a deal. >> so, jonah, that has, then, been the biggest stumbling block between the two sides, has it? >> reporter: well, i think it's
not the only stumbling block between the two sides. we know that timing is another big issue. we heard already from the syrian side from bashar al assad that they have exceeded to the global convention on chemical weapons and they now intend to play by rules in that process, which would allow them 30 days to produce any -- to produce documentation showing the size of their chemical weapon stockpiles and the location of storage and production facilities. jo john kerry came to these talks from thursday saying that wasn't good enough, the words of regime weren't good enough. there was no standard process. certainly that threat of force was a red line for both sides. for the russians and syrians, they said they wouldn't proceed on the basis of a threat of force. the americans had said they
wouldn't have any sort of deal worth signing if there wasn't a threat of force. if they lifted that, as i say, that is real grounds for progress. >> okay. we'll leave it there for now, though. we'll come back to you very shortly i'm sure. we are looking at a live shot from geneva, switzerland as a group of journalists surround the russian foreign minister sergei lavrov. he and john kerry are due to give a press conference shortly over the third day of talks about what to do about syria's chemical weapons. russia has proposed a plan to get their chemical weapons under international control. u.s. and russian diplomats say the two sides are edging closer to a deal on what to do about syria's chemical arsenal and that they are reportedly thrashing out the technical details of the disarmament
process. both sides have brought chemical weapons experts with them to these talks. once again, we're waiting to hear what sort of progress has been made so far at these talks. we'll bring you that press conference when it happens. the white house has said it would be willing to accept a u.n. resolution without including the threat of force, but in his weekly address president barack obama said the u.s. would have to be ready to carry out military action. >> we are not just going to take russia and assad's word for it. we need to secrete -- see concrete actions. since this plan emerged with a credible threat of u.s. military action, we will maintain or military posture in the region to keep the pressure on the assad regime. if diplomacy fails, the united states and the international community must remain prepared to act. >> meanwhile, aid groups say they're working hard to protect
syrians from poison gas attacks. omar has been spending time with one charity on the syrian/turkish border. >> reporter: he's a surgeon that runs an aid foundation in turkey. they have ten field hospitals in syria and sends almost everything to people back home. after the suspected chemical attacks on august 21st, their focus changed. they delivered half a mill atropene ampules and will deliver more. it's an antidote to poisons. >> translator: this is the basic treatment for those who became subject to gases including sarin. on average every person exposed to gas needs 50 ampules. >> reporter: they're not the only aid group sends supplies to
syria or helping refugees by providing full medical treatment for free. there are over 100 syrian and foreign aid groups that are sending humanitarian relief including gear to protect against a chemical attack. these masks have become crucial and in great demand. the doctor says they bought up to 3,000 of them and dozens of turkish military gear through intermediaries to send to syria. doctors say they bought full-protective gear like this suit and mask for 200 u.s. dollars. that's three times more than the original price. they say that's because the demand is so high after the suspected chemical attacks in qatar on august 21st. but the suspected chemical attack and the talk of a possible military intervention against the syrian government did not stop a group sending much-needed aid. syria is at war, a war that
killed over 100,000 people and left millions in desperate need of everything. let's go back to geneva where the u.s. secretary of state john kerry and the russian foreign minister sergei lavrov are soon going to start their press conference on the third day of their talks over what to do with regards to syria's chemical weapons. the russians have proposed a plan to try and get syria's chemical weapons under international control. u.s. and russian diplomats are saying that both sides are edging closer to a deal, and syria's chemical arsenal, and they're thrashing out the technical details of the disarmament process. we're seeing reports that the u.s. might drop it's insistence that a u.n. -- >> thank you very much -- >> must be backed by military force.
john kerry has started speaking. let's listen to what he's saying. >> i'm particularly grateful to sergei lavrov, who stayed extra time from what he had originally planned hoping we would finish sooner. this gave us additional opportunity to be able to work through some of the issues. i especially want to thank the cooperative effort of sergei lavrov who has worked hard, and his entire delegation, including teams of the world's foremost chemical weapons experts who have joined us here for the important discussions we've had over the last two days. two weeks ago president obama made the decision that because of the agregious use of chemical weapons in syria against women
and children all discriminately murdered in the night that claimed the lives of people trying to rescue people, he believed it was critical for the world to say, no more. the president made the difficult decision that after multiple warnings it was his decision that the time had come to take military action to deter future use of such weapons. he also made the decision that we needed to take time to enlist the support of the congress and the american people, and i have no doubt that the combination of the threat of force and the willingness to pursue diplomacy helped to bring us to this moment. but diplomacy requires willing partners, and i want to thank president putin for his willingness to pick up on the possibility of negotiating an end to syrian weapons of mass destruction. his willingness to embrace ideas
for how to accomplish this goal and his willingness to send foreign minister lavrov here to pursue this effort was essential to getting to this point. i want to thank sergei lavrov for his diligent efforts and the efforts of his entire delegation who worked hard and in good faith to overcome difficulties and even disagreements in order to try to find a way through tireless efforts to get us where we are today. i also want to thank foreign minist minister fabius of france whom we consulted as well as foreign minister william hague of the united kingdom, both of whom will meet in paris on monday to discuss the road ahead. for nearly 100 years the world has embraced the international norm against the use of chemical weapon, and the principles that
the united states and the russian federation have agreed on today can, with accountable follow-through, allow us to expedite the elimination of syria's chemical weapons. providing this framework is fully implemented, it can end the threat these weapons pose not only to the syrian people but also to their neighbors, to the region, and because of the threat of proliferation, this framework can provide greater protection and security to the world. we said at the outset that to accomplish our goal this plan had to produce transparency, accountability, timeliness, and enforceability. it must be credible and verifiable. if fully implemented, we believe it can meet these standards. the world will now expect the
assad regime to live up to its public commitments. as i said at the outset of these negotiations, there can be no games, no room for avoidance, or anything less than full compliance by the assad regime. i thank sergei lavrov for his efforts to try and guarantee the genuine aspects of this framework. so let me just outline specifically where we are and the steps that the united states and russia have agreed to take under this framework. first, the scope. we have reached a shared assessment of the amount and type of chemical weapons poss s possessed by the assad regime. we are committed to the rapid assumption of control by the international community of those weapons. second, specific time lines.
the united states and russia are committed to the elimination of syrian chemical weapons in the sooner and safest manner. we agreed that syria must submit within a week, not in 30 days, but in one week a comprehensive listing and additional details will be addressed regarding that in the coming days. third, the unprecedented use of chemical weapons convention procedures is an important component of this framework. we have committed to use extraordinary procedures under the chemical weapons convention for the expeditious destruction and stringent verification of syrian chemical weapons. fourth, varification and monitoring. in the interest of accountable, the united states and russia have afwrgreed the syrians must
provide the chemical weapons and supporting personnel with an immediate and unfettered right to inspect any and all sights in syria. fifth, destruction. we have agreed to destroy all chemical weapons including the possibility of removing weapons for destruction outside of syria. we have also reached a side agreement on methodology. fifth finally -- sixth, excuse me. our agreement today strengthens the executive council decision to use the chemical weapons convention extraordinary procedures in order to ensure full implementation. it also provides for u.n. administrative and logistical support to the opcw for
inspections and destruction. in the event of noncompliance, we have committed to impose measures under chapter 7 within the u.n. security council. ultimately, perhaps more so than anywhere in the world, actions will matter more than words. in a case of the assad regime, president reagan's old adage about trust but verify, that is a need of an update. we have committed here to a standard that says, verify and verify. but i also want to be clear about the end game here. if we can join together and make this framework a success and eliminate syria's chemical weapons, we would not only save lives but we would reduce the threat to the region and
reinforce an international standard, an international norm. we could also lay the groundwork for further cooperation that is essential to end the bloodshed that has consumed syria for more than two years. what we agreed on here today could conceivably by the first critical, concrete step in that direction. the united states and russia have long agreed that there is no military solution to the conflict in syria. it has to be political. it has to happen at the negotiating table, and we, together, remain deeply committed to getting there. from the beginning president obama has repeated again and again there is no military solution. we must find the political solution through diplomacy. foreign minister lavrov and i have long talked about the importance of creating the conditions for a political settlement that implements the
geneva one communique. we will very soon be meeting again. we agreed to meet on the margins of the u.n. general assemblies in order to advance these two links parallel efforts, and we have no illusions about the challenges ahead. the united states and russia have not always seen eye to eye. that is known. we still don't see eye to eye on everything. we will not lose sight of the fact together that the implementation of this framework, which will require the vigilance and investment of the international community and full accountability of the assad regime presents a hard road ahead. ensuring that a dictator's wanton use of chemical weapons never again comes to pass we believe is worth pursuing and achieving, and president obama is determined that we work hard in the days ahead to travel a
path of conscience and to achieve our goals. we know that president putin and sergei lavrov are committed to that endeavor. thank you. [ speaking in russian ] >> we are listening to the russian foreign minister, sergei lavrov, speaking at the moment. apologies. we're trying to get a translation up for you. meanwhile, the u.s. secretary of state john kerry has spoken.
he says that president obama decided that the use of chemical weapons against innocent civilians in syria and following those attacks that it was time to take military action against syria, but that diplomacy must be given a chance. let's listen to what sergei lavrov is saying. we have a translator now. >> translator: which has to get in legal form and to nevertheless it's hard not to over estimate it. we paid good attention to all the efforts, especially to john kerry for the constructive -- his attitude to have this work. in the course of which the rhetoric doesn't belong in this, and to concentrate on the professional coordination of the practice solution of this, how to handle the syrian arsenal, and further ways how to demolish
it. the initial point was the decision of damascus to join the and to use the obligations until the formal joining of this convention. that's when damascus will start fulfilling its obligations. we agreed in the joint steps, which were taken by all the delegations pursuing the procedures in the kwings on the prohibition of chemical weapons which allow promptly and without any delays, without complications to do the tasks. we hope that the members of the
executive council of this organization will share our russian/american approaches and will tackle these proposals. the decision concerning or the measures concerning syrian weapons. we already agreed that we'll have to get support from the -- support from the security and security council on the issues which are beyond the competence of the organization itself. especially the to ensure the work of the inspectors here in the proposals pointed out that the main responsibility will be assumed by the syrian authorities, not just by him but the other syrian parties, also the opposition, so that they don't create any threats for the personnel to do their work. it has to be done.
it has to be in detail, looked through in detail. that's very important. as i have said, the responsibility is not to threaten the personnel . all the parties have the responsibility not to jeopardize their work. we also have agreed that any violations of the procedures, which will be approved by the executive committee of the ocw, as well as the fact of any use of chemical weapons by whoever will be considered in the u.n. security council. the security council will use the corresponding measures, which are relating to the situation. we can too do that and develop
this decision, and it's stressing the joint positions on the admissibility to use chemical weapons as well as a necessity of reporting any facts to the security council. of course, in the agreed approach approaches, there's talk of nonuse of force, and we don't want any automatic sanctions. any violations should be clearly proved in the u.n. security council. we understand the agreement as reached today at the beginning of the -- they grow towards the full solution, comprehensive solution of the task of the control and destruction of the chemical weapons of the syrian republic. we, in all our proposals i have
mentioned, we have this attitude with our colleagues to conduct the joint work within the executive committee of the opcw where we join with other members of this organization to make this agreement assume some clear interpretation. the agreement is preliminary and needs to be fixed in the universal mechanics -- neck nichl. this issue was very quickly, and it shows if there's goodwill, if there's clear attitudes of the heads of state as friendly work, russia and the united states can achieve results to solve key issues, including the threat of
the spread of it. this is the implementation of this agreement that has importance not just from the point of view of to fulfill the task of the liquidation of all the chemical weapons but also will allow to avoid a military scenario, which would be catastrophic for the region. in this connection we have conce concerns with our adherence to the peaceful resolution of the crisis in syria. we contacted a meeting and discussed how quickly we can move this process. we hope that the syrian government has done it, and their position is also clear without any clauses. without preliminary conditions
with the only goal of the comprehensive implementation of geneva communique of the 20th of june, 2012. because we discussed what we have read already from new york this information, the date of the communique of this conference. it was mentioned in october that russia was ready -- in september to conduct this conference earlier, but the main thing to achieve all the syrian parties are represented at this conference without any special conditions but on the basis of the fulfillment of the geneva communique. whether they have defined their desti destiny, there's also a support of the approaches and joint express gratitude to france. we're ready to work with them
mr. lavrov, could you give part of your answer in english. when is the first inspection? is there a deadline for that? and for further action. i heard you say that secretary kerry it would as soon as safely possible but what's your idea of when that might be? separately, can you reconcile about the chapter 7 resolution with what minister lavrov said about taking -- that this removes the threat of the use of force. is the threat of the use of force within the security council still an option here, and is u.s. military action separate from that still an option? thank you very much. >> translator: i hope that they interpret this here.
they're very professional, and that's why i'll continue to talk in russian. i will stress again -- they don't need special interpretation, they speak for themselves, these documents. these documents, i want to stress cannot be dress docume s documents, russian/american documents, and after this the executive council will approve the decision we will be able to say clearly when the special will start and the documents which you will see in the time frame today when our professionals considered to be reasonable at the same time and
they also allow the professionals to ensure the safety concerning the question to john kerry. i would like once again -- i would like to talk about the arrangements agreed to in the security council to support the decisions, which were accepted and will be adopted and the progress. we also agreed that we will be -- we will be expecting a full implementation of the demands of this report, which will formulate on the basis of convention. if they're not fulfilled or in any case used by anyone with chemical weapons, the security council will take measures on
the chart. it doesn't mean, of course, that any violation reported will be taken at face value. it's just investigated, or it will try to get -- there's so much force with that. one has to be very, very cautio cautious. we're sure the violation will take place with the kouns, -- security council, where the measures are measurable with the seriousness of what has happened. this is pointless to speculate any more on this today. >> so let me, as sergei did,
comment on both sides of it, if i may. first of all, there are time lines in here. it's an ambitious goal, and the inspectors must be on the ground no later than november, and the goal is to complete the destruction and removal and/or removal by halfway through next year, 2014. that is a stated goal within this framework. in addition to that, there is -- there are requirements in the framework, which you will see, that automatically take noncompliance and/or some question of deviation from the framework will go to the security council for debate as to what measure might be implemented. there is an agreement between russia and the united states
that noncompliance is going to be held accountable within the security council under chapter 7. what remedy is chosen is subject to the debate within the council, which is always true. there's a commitment to impose measures. that's the language. we'll impose measures comensurate with whatever is needed to terms of the builtabilibuil accountability and we think that is an appropriate and should. sergei knows under any circumstances there would be a debate in the security council even now. so there's no diminishment, there's no dimunition of options. it's impossible under these circumstances to have a preagreement as to what that specific sanctions might or might not be for circumstances we tonight even know yet. our hope is we have a tight enough regiment agreed upon, as
we have said, in the extraordinary measures that we have laid out. we have actually agreed on a new process, on a more vigorous process and a more defined process. for instance, the unfettered access of inspectors. that is not in normal cwc procedure. it will be embraced through a u.n. resolution as part of the process that exists here. so we have high anticipation that as i said, if fully implemented this will have an ability to be both verifiable, accountab accountable, and the world would make its judgments as we go along. with respect to the question of the use of force, first of all, the president of the united states under our constitution as manneder in chief always retains the right to defend the united states of america and our interests, and he always has
that right even as he asks congress to approve. he retained a declared and understandable time-honored right with respect to his power as commander in chief. but the president also said he wanted to find a diplomatic solution to this. now, the potential of the threat of force is clearly one of those options that may or may not be available to the security council and the subject of deba debate. everybody knows the differences of opinion about it. depends on what assad does, that possibility existing either within the process of the united nations or as it did here with a decision by the president of the united states and like-minded allies if they thought that's what it came to. i think the president sending me here and directing me to work with my counterpart, sergei
lavrov, as president putin sent him here indicates that both presidents believe the preferred route, which i think is the preferred route of most citizens of the world, is to find a peaceful solution to these kinds of conflicts. that's what i think we have worked in good faith to try to do here today. >> translator: my question to both leaders. have you agreed about the quantity of chemical weapons that will be destroyed? who is going to pay for that? >> translator: all these questions are laid out in a document you will receive very shortly, and they contain the estimates approximately, but the
final decision on these issues will be taken by the corresponding council of the organization. the documents obtain our joint vision of all the volumes and time lines. it should be -- the old information should have been fin final, and a decision will be taken by the executive committee. >> let me just say that we have agreed, as you will see in the documents, on a basic assessment of the numbers and types and locations. we have agreed between us. that's a very important point here, because we expect the assad regime, obviously, in it's declaration, to show the candor that we have shown in reaching that agreement. with respect to the issues of destruction, there is a clause
in which we agree that we will contribute resources including finance to some degree. we have a certain amount of budget for this kind of purpose. we will seek in the process of the u.n. and in the effort to have a global commitment to this help from many other of our international partners. we're convinced the urgency of this will be a test for the international community's commitment to the chemical weapons convention and to the importance of restraining chemical weapons and weapons of mass destruction. so i think the global community will participate and this can be achievable. as to where it is destructed, the experts really need to make determinations about individual weapons. some can be destroyed on the site. many cannot. that's something that has to be
part of the cwc process that will be contained in the extraordinary procedures that we've called for. >> translator: we have countries that were ready to pay for war. i'm sure there are other than countries that want a peaceful solution. >> we're going to send sergei to talk to them and make that arrangement. >> reporter: mr. secretary, david lurman from bloomberg fooichfive days ago in london you seemed to dismiss it saying assad won't do it, and, quote, it can't be done, obviously. my question is how did the impossible suddenly become
possible, and why is it credible to think you can send the inspectors in on the ground in the middle of a civil war and as a practical matter, if you really want to get thorough, verifiable inspections in all corners of the country, don't you have to stop the fighting first? >> let me answer both questions. i purposely made the statements that i made in london, and i did indeed say it was impossible and he won't do it. even as i hoped it would be possible and wanted him to do it. the language of diplomacy sometimes requires that you put things to the test, and we did. sergei and i had been talking even three days before that about this very concept. we had two phone calls on the thursday and friday before it, and i got a phone call very quickly from sergei saying, let's see if we can take this and move. he talked to his president, and they talked to -- the presidents
talked in st. petersburg, and the rest is history and we're here. so, obviously, i would hope and always hope that we could have removed those weapons and we wanted to, but we didn't know whether or not this could be given the kind of life it has been given in the last 48 hours. so it just didn't make sense to raise a concept that hadn't yet been put to the test or afwrgre upon or worked through. i'm pleased that president putin took initiative and sergei took initiative and president obama responded. we're here, and so the question is, where too we -- do we go from here and how do we build on this, which i think is really critical? how do you do this in a time of war? look, this is logical.
one of the reasons that we believe this is achievable is because the assad regime has taken extraordinary pains in order to keep control of these weapons. they have moved them, and we know they have moved them. we have seen them move them. we watched this, and so we know they've continued to always move them to a place of more control. therefore, since these weapons are in areas under regime control predominantly, sergei raises questions that maybe the opposition has some here or there and absolutely, fair is fair. both sides have to be responsible. if they do, that also -- that may present a larger challenge, but those of us who have been supporting the opposition have a responsibility to help create access there, and the regime has responsibility where we believe the largest -- the measure -- in fact, we believe the only weapons are ought to be
accessible because the assad regime controls the access. so in point of fact, it shouldn't be in a contested area, largely because they've been working to keep it out of a contested area. that is the sort of silver lining, if you will, in the way in which they have contained these weapons. so it's our expectations that with the cooperation of the international community, with adequate contribution of protection forces and people to go on the ground, if the assad regime is prepared to live up to its word, we should not have a problem achieving access to their sites. that will quickly be put to the test. >> translator: let me answer your question. first let me clarify.
these are the proposal it is he brought here. did he conduct a meeting with you? this is the same building where 12 years ago russia and the united states pushed their reset button. after that conversation with mr. lavrov, do you think our countries might reset our relations again? >> well -- go ahead, please. >> no, go ahead. >> well, i think, as i said in my opening comments, we've had some differences here and there on certain issues, but we've also worked together cooperatively on many things. sergei lavrov and i have never stopped talking. we have consistently been prepared to try to work to deal with issues, and that's why we did geneva i and that's why
we're here now with respect to this initiative. on larger issue, on iran, russia and the united states cooperate. on north korea russia and the united states cooperate. on wto we cooperate, on s.t.a.r.t. treaty we cooperate, on the reduction of nuclear weapons we cooperate. we had a two plus two meeting, which means the two secretaries of state and defense meeting their counterparts from russia in washington even in the midst of all the other hurly burly issues. we had a very constructive meeting in which we laid out an agenda to continue to work on weapons of mass destruction, to continue to work on trade, to continue to work on other issues, even the issues that in the press get elevated into this question of reset, no reset, et cetera. so i think -- i hope certific e
certificate -- sergei feels the way i do, there are things we disagree on. but big nations, powerful nations, leaders cannot afford to get caught up in the small things. and president putin, to his credit, despite real disagreement with our policy, despite a disagreement with where we were heading, reached out and tried to continue the dialogue. so i would say look for the glass being, you know, half-full rather than half-empty and let's see how we proceed from here. >> can you wait a second for me to answer the question. >> this is what i've been doing for the last couple of days. [ laughter ] >> translator: the meeting with kofi annan doesn't have any official position, duty now, but
he's a very respected politician and he's a member of the so-called club of the wise and takes part in the support of the u.n. this delegation in moscow, it's clear he handed it over to special bams ambassadors, kofi annan is a political animal and can't forget it. he takes care there's less wars sp and more stability in the world. that was his concern, worry about it personally. he asked me to tell me how to see the situation and how to manage to agree with john. it was yesterday in the evening, but it was clear that it was --
we were towards an agreement, we were moving towards an agreement, which has to be to get some legal obligations at the hague and new york. i told them honestly we're very concerned about the attempts to undermine any efforts which are directed to pacify the situation to remove some aspects, including what you have mentioned. we try to talk about that with john. i told him that in our negotiations the most critical moment of negotiations, we suddenly saw on the tv screens information that ban ki-moon from the u.n. had the report of the incident will be presented
on monday. that he cannot disclose the content, but it will say clearly in this report that the chemical weapons were used, had been used. straightaway there was some information that he says that he really many times committed some crimes. then it turned out it was set up on these two phases that the report will contain confirmation of the use of chemical weapons, and he meant the estimates by the international commission, which was in a hearing in geneva, and it was mentioned in their reports of the crimes against humankind. all these channels showed in a row the report which confirms use of chemical weapons and bashar assad committed these crimes a few times against
humankind. this happened with connection with the access. this is a deliberate attempt to undermine our meeting here. it was a deliberate, and they failed to do so to frustrate us. in any cases of the use of the allege -- of the alleged use of chemical weapons, they should be honestly and thoroughly investigated on the basis of facts. that's why everyone who is talking about the weapons used by the regime, they should probably wait for the conclusions of the report that will establish if it happened or not. these conclusions will be considered with the other evidence, with respect to who could do something that happened on the 21st.
there was so much attention paid to the sanctions of the role of the u.n. security council. let's respect the security council. let's preempt what the security council and the conclusions, let's preempt them to speculate what they can make when they consider all the combination of facts of these events that took place and what preceded this event. it's necessary that the group of inspectors headed by this as soon as possible of the presentation of the report return to investigate further incidents, which are part of the mandate. i'm very concerned and kofi annan said i'm concerned that there is some ground to suspect the report, which you have presented on monday. they tried to kind of camouflage it. this is one direction in
comparison with what inspectors have written. we're glad that at the end of the day it was assessed personally of the president and the security council meeting and all the issues which the members would have will be addressed directly to him. i want to apologize that for a long time i was dwelling on this because i was -- because he was concerned about it and i shared it with him, my concern about this issue. what concerns the issue -- what concerns john kerry, i would like to support his words. i said in my introduction that the agreement is today and is a more complex issue. this agreement hasn't become a law yet. it hasn't yet been approved, but it's a russian/american initiative without any false modesty when we do act together,
we really manage to mobilize the support of the world majority of the international community. by itself it shows how important it is for us to rise above the things when somebody tries to make them not important in our relations: to make a obstacle in the developments and some bitterne bitterness. this is something that officials issue. i want to say the president at the meeting it was established last year and also during other events to address the -- we should develop the cooperation, as john said. of course, there are some discrepancies. we have joint goals to achief a peaceful solution so syria
remains an integral, civilized minority groups, religious fwrups will be in safety. but we -- we have difference in the measures to be applied. we sensed some joint approach, and on other issues we should act. on monday in vienna they open the conference, and we also try to execute an agreement concerning the use of fuch lar weapons. so we're trying to negotiate this agreement. if you agree and say the pipeline will -- there's a hot line set up with the security council on the problems on cyber security and they will prepare
some statements of the presidents on the tasks of the economic cooperation and also long-term course of the development of russian/american relations. the fact that the negotiators laid down the right thing in the papers, it won't be lost, and if there's a chance in russia, these are the documents. we'll sign these documents. >> i was just thinking, sergei, you could be a senator. [ laughter ] >> do we have any more? are we finished? we're finished. >> thank you. we have been listening to the u.s. secretary of state john
this is al jazeera. these are some of the stories we are following it's expected to get worse before it gets better, colorado officials have rescued hundreds of people by air and land. vows to restore the shore again, but first on the agenda, trying to figure out how that massive fire starts. plus, a sand shortage in the sunshine state, how miami beach is dealing with its shrinking shoreline. ♪