Double Rainbow in Valencia, Spain

Sometimes life gives you little clues that the path you're on is in harmony with heaven. Sometimes, miracles may just unfold right before your eyes.

Pretty sure I found God's harp in Valencia.

Grace: the only way to describe what I saw today: the day the Berlin Wall fell 25 years ago.

69th Session of the United Nations General Assembly

It’s that time of year again! 193 Presidents and heads of state are invited to New York every September. They assemble in class and pomp and it’s never unusual to see dozens of them gathering together or speaking one right after another. This year I was right in the thick of it.

With H.E. President Enrique Peña Nieto from Mexico

With H.E. Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt from Denmark

President Obama's address before the 69th United Nations General Assembly:

"We are here because we gain more from opposition than conquest. Recently Russia's actions in the war resulted in a conflict that has killed thousands. This is a war in which might has made right. This is a war in which nation's borders can be redrawn by another. In America we believe that right makes might. We invite others to join us on the right side of history. We support the freedom of nations to make their own decisions: nations committed to solving conflict through peace and international law. If Russia takes that path, we will lift our sanctions and walk with Russia. That's what the US has done in reducing its nuclear stock piles. This speaks to a central question of our mutual aid: whether we will stand together or not. I am committed to stand with you today. 

As we speak, America's troops are helping stop the spread of Ebola. It's easy to see this as a distant problem until it is not. We must remain united in our nuclear efforts in pursuit of a world of peace and security without them. This will happen only if Iran stops expanding its nuclear program. Nations must be committed to solving conflict through peace and international law. We will do our part in helping developing nations. We cannot rely on a rule book built for the 20th century. 

Terror is not a new weapon. It has been used throughout the centuries by groups who have failed to achieve their objectives through persuasion or discourse. They have embraced a nightmare situation killing as many innocent lives as possible. America will not base its entire foreign policy on reacting to terrorists. The U.S. won't and never will. We reject any notion of a clash of civilization. Humanity's future depends on not dividing us along a line. The danger is promoted by religiously motivated fanatics. Law is the 21st century answer to international conflict. ISIS has terrorized all across Iraq & Syria. This is children too. Religious minorities have starved to death. Human beings have been beheaded. No God condones this terror. No grievous justifies these actions. There is no reason that works with this brand of people. We will not send foreign troops to occupy foreign lands. We will train and equip forces fighting against them on the ground. It is necessary for us to necessarily and consistently reject terrorists by cutting their funding and other mediums.  *No children anywhere should be raised to hate other people. It is time to eradicate war at its most fundamental source and that is the corrupting of young minds. We must remember a basic principle: Do unto thy neighbor as you would have done unto yourself. *We must declare war on war so the outcome will be peace on peace. ISIS is hiding behind a false Islam.

We need a resolution that underscores values so we're held accountable when we fall short. There's nothing new about wars over religion. It is time that religious and sectarian leaders stand up against this. Fighting in Syria has killed over 200,000 people. Iraq has gotten perilously close to plunging back into the abyss. We do see signs that this ride could be reversed. It must be followed by a broader truce. There is no other way for this madness to end. 

Countries of Muslim and Arab world must focus on the extraordinary potential of their people. We come from a great tradition that comes from education, not ignorance. When young people have the tools to succeed, those societies will flourish. When women participation in politics, nations are more likely to succeed. Young people rejecting terrorism & extremism is a task for the Middle East itself. America will be a constructive partner, we will take action, and we will lift up efforts to counter terror. 

America will not give up the pursuit of peace. The status quo in the West Bank is not acceptable. We wil stand up to principles that will be more just and more safe with 2 states living side by side on peace and security. We will take actions against immediate threats while pursuing long-term solutions. 

*We will not shy away from the promise of this institution and its promise of civil rights. Sometimes we have failed to live up to our ideals, it's true. We take to heart the small city in Missouri where one man was killed. Yes, we have our own racial and ethnic tensions. What you see in America is a country that has steadily worked to address our problems: a divide that existed since the beginning of its nation. We fight for our ideals & are willing to criticize ourselves when we fall short. We insist on free press & address our differences in the open space of democracy. We change our communities and countries for the better. I believe this promise can help win the war. We look to the eyes of youg people around the world. *“Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home – so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person; the neighbourhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm or office where he works. Such are the places where every man, woman and child seeks equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination. Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little meaning anywhere. Without concerned citizen action to uphold them close to home, we shall look in vain for progress in the larger world.” -Eleanor Roosevelt. Young people are moving forward, hungry for a better world. People are learning to resort to each other. People look to us here as they are trying to better their lives. The U.S. won't be distracted by what it has to do." 

Saudi and Kuwait Ambassadors on Israel, Iran, and Syria

Ambassador Abdallah Al-Mouallimi of Saudi Arabia, Alon Ben-Meir, and Ambassador Mansour Al-Otaibi of Kuwait

They don't feel the pressure. Yes they have security consent, but not now. The reason is they don't pose any threats to Israel. All settlers: they're against concessions. They're not ready to dismantle the settlements. They have hundreds of thousands of them, maybe 150,000. Since 1967 they've been ok and think, 'the situation is stable, the status quo is in our interest, let's go on with it.' -K

Over 350,000 in the West Bank even now. Palestinians are saying they want to continue the negotiations. There's significant authorities in Israel that want peace and to end this conflict. -Alon

I thought Israel was a democracy where government represents the people. I'm glad to be corrected. -SA

They could rely on a coalition government and Netanyahu has been and has been using that as an excuse. If you're a leader and you believe in peace, you should be able to sacrifice your own position to move the process forward. The United States remains indispensable in this process. -Alon

I think that there are actually 3 parties to address. First, the people of Israel need to know truth with regards to these negotiations and they need to hear it from an ally. That is the U.S. Then we will see the degree of commitment that Israelis want peace; Israelis want peace, however, that want is not translating into political will. The second party that needs to be addressed is the poor Israeli lobby in the U.S., which is very important and very influential: they also need to be told the truth. U.S. needs to make its own position known. Third, the world at large and U.S. needs to make its position known. If Israeli population, which is committed to peace, feels they are faced with a situation where their closest ally tells them they're wrong, that will change the situation a bit. President Obama's speech delivered in Israel a year ago. That was the closest to a moment of truth speech that has ever been given to the Israeli public.  He received good applause for it from the Israeli youth and I was personally reassured by that. We need to do often. We need to do that often enough and we need to do that forcefully enough. One speech doesn't mean everything. -SA

One speech will not do everything. United States is the only power that can make a difference. We have to move the process forward, because if nothing else happens, it could eventually explode again. -Alon

We have to raise what the Secretary of State is doing because he got the support of the international community including the Arab states. He's very respected, very well respected person. Even Hillary Clinton was orchestrating the peace process. We have to remember what happened with her. She was trying to push the peace process between the two parties. She got a promise from the Israelis that they will stop all settlement activities while the process continued between the two parties, but the Israelis would not give in. She was in trouble. The Israelis rely on support. They have very strong settlements. They're always arguing; they always put the United States for the image of the U.S. Sometimes they change their position. Got an agreement that the settlements should stop and that negotiations would not continue as long as settlement activity was going on. What happened after she left? They got the concessions from the Palestinians. Palestinians accepted the settlement activities go on while they are negotiating with Israel. This is not good for the stake. Now they put the United States in a very difficult position. Shall they continue on their own and pressure both parties? Or they should say something publicly to Israel that we cannot keep brokering the peace process as long as you're not adhering to your commitments.  -K

The United States did say the settlements are illegitimate, but when the time came for a resolution as presented to the United Nations Security Council saying exactly the same thing, condemning the settlements and saying they're illegitimate and unhelpful to peace, guess what the result of the vote was? 14 to 1. The United States went against the international consensus that included Britain and France and other European Countries and voted against that. That is sending a double message. I hope this administration will see the same kind of commitment we saw from President Eisenhower in 1956. I hope we can see the type of courage from two figures that are unpopular in the Arab World who certainly have demonstrated their courage: Prime minister Begin and Prime Minister Shahou. Begin removed all the settlements from Sinai and Sharon removed all the settlements from Gaza. I'm not here to seek their praises, but they were courageous enough to take unpopular stands as were previous American Presidents and I hope that this President is willing to be courageous enough to take a stand. -SA

I'm maybe hesitant to criticize this administration, but I'm not a diplomat. I'm much less hopeful. It's going to take a much more forceful approach to change the dynamics and that is not coming from this White House. That's unfortunate. -Alon

The Arab Peace initiative still stands. It has been out there and reinforced. There have been calls for it to be withdrawn Saudi Arabia and Kuwait and many other Arab countries have argued forcefully that it should not. I don't know what more the Arab states can do other than tell Israel we are willing to have completely peaceful relations with you with the entire Arab world with the Islamic world right behind once an amicable and just solution to the Palestinian issue is concluded. Calls for international conferences have been had before. They have continuously been rejected by Israel because Israel feels more secure in the confinement of an American-led Israeli-Palestinian encounter as opposed to an international conference, but we have Annapolis, we've had Madrid we've had many such conferences before and I'm not sure whether one more will make the trick. If you really think so I'll convey it to the mission and see if it works. Israel has always wanted to talk to the Arab states more than the Palestinians. In doing so, they're demonstrating look, we don't have a problem with anybody we're dealing with the Saudis, Egyptians, Moroccans with everybody else, and therefore it's only the Palestinians that are making the dirty noise. I think that that is unhelpful for the Arab states to try to step on the stage instead of the Palestinians. The Palestinians are the people who own the cause and they are the ones who need to negotiate and conclude the deal with Israel. Once that deal is concluded, we will all be there to celebrate and support.

The truth is the Israelis don't fit with the Arab states. They did not answer a very important initiative with the Arab States. Mostly they don't know what's going on in the United Nations. The Israelis and United States they don't actually say anything in the press about resolutions adopted by an overwhelming majority of member states against Israel. Who voted against these resolutions? The United States: in the General Assembly not the Security Council. The United States, Israel, and Palau only. The rest support these resolutions. So they don't fit. In conformity with all the other international resolutions and instruments the Israelis are a very civilized country they are a member of the United Nations and once you're a member there's an article that says you have to respect, implement, and adhere to these resolutions. But the Israelis they don't. They cannot be held accountable because the United States, by using the veto they are protecting them. This is why we don't put them under the spotlight. The second part to why we don't deal with Iran, because we have the same threat, we have the same concern towards the Iranians, but Iran to us is only big neighbor. We have security concerns, but we meet with them we talk to them. At least the international community now almost they reached an agreement with them hopefully the final agreement will be concluded in the next few months, then at least that will address all the concerns of the neighboring states. This is why I can't elaborate on this issue because it's very complicated and we are at least optimistic that the new leadership in Iran hopefully they will deliver on their promises and that they're sincere when they say that they're against building a nuclear weapon because we don't want any nuclear weapon in our area. We know that the Israelis, even though they will not announce it; even here or they they say they have a nuclear weapon but we don't want any nuclear weapon. -K

Perhaps the turmoil in the gulf states is an opportunity for Israel to talk to its neighbors because they share common threats. Iran is under tremendous economic strength and wants some sort of economic credit. They will come back again in two to three years. They will resume the nuclear program. Iran is a significant player in the region. -Alon

First I agree with your assessment about Iran's attitude towards the negotiations. Second I don't agree with your premise that we and Israel have the same concerns about the Iranian nuclear program. Quite frankly I think that Israel has no concerns about the Iranian nuclear program. Not a single Iranian soldier has died on the front with Israel over the past 60 years. Not a single shot has been fired into Israel from Iran. I think the Iranian threat is a smoke scream that Israel keeps raising to avoid dealing with the Palestinian issue and the more the world focuses on Iran the less they can focus on the Palestinians. The threat from the nuclear program from Iran is to us; to both of us; it is to the region not to Israel. It is a threat of nuclear disaster as a result of accident. The nuclear reactors in Bushehr are closer to Kuwait and we are than it is to Tehran. We are the ones who are feeling the heat and feeling the threat. The Israelis are just using it for the time. -SA

Israel is threatening Iran and Iran can proceed to try and build a nuclear weapon. So whether they are fearful or not, what Israel is doing or not does serve the interest of the gulf states. -Alon

When Israel senses a nuclear threat from Iran, it did not announce it will do anything it sent planes and it bombed the Iraqi nuclear reactor and came back. When Israel felt the threat from the Syrian reactor or whatever the case they were building, they did not talk about it they sent a plane and they came back and so on. If Israel felt really threatened they would have acted a long time ago. Israel does not feel threatened by the Iranian program; Israel uses the Iranian program to raise fears in order to avoid having to make the concessions. -SA

I'm prepared to subscribe to this notion up to a point, but the truth is there's a huge difference between nuclear attack in Iraq, 2 or 3 in Iraq verses what happened in Syria. What Iran has is more than a dozen facilities: some buried 200 feet in the ground so it's a completely different story. Iran has a much better air defense system. There's not one surgical attack you can get rid of Iran's nuclear facilities so that is a major consideration. Also Israel has to deal with the United States. Attacking Iran is not going to be a surgical attack like in Syria. -Alon

There have been many international conferences about Israeli situation. However, Israel wants this to come from the U.S., which is why these international conferences have failed.

(Please excuse brevity in this Syrian segment):

What's happening in Syria is beyond tragic. Over 35,000 children under the age of 12. Whole world is just watching. Your countries are supporting true rebels in various ways. Obama did nothing in wake of chemical attack.

Assad has not only lost legitimacy, he's lost any credibility to maintain power. His credibility has been shattered irreparably. Just a matter of how many more lives will be lost before the leadership will be rearranged. Who will loose legitimacy is the security council. We entrusted them to maintain peace and security. Why has nothing happened? Because of their indifferences. P5: They used veto 3 times: in the meantime, people die. Regimes are attacking. Resolutions of Security Council are not forceful. They are not assuming their responsibilities. -Kuwait

Long time, this will make them loose legitimacy. We don't want it to. -SA

When Iraq invaded Kuwait, the liberation of Kuwait, we owe to the UN. They defend small countries. Security Council acted. We don't want them to loose their legitimacy. 

Why is the Arab league not in position to make a call?

If Israel were to attack Syria, I'm not sure lawyers are going to tell us this is permissible. Revolution in Syria is by Syria for Syria. They need more supplies. If international community reacted, you would see a balance of power. Saudi Arabia is supplying weapons: why is it not enough? Whatever weapons we obtain from U.S., we're not allowed to share with other countries. International consensus comes from one place: the UN. You have a nation being disintegrated before our eyes and for the history books... Kuwait is not sending weapons. We held 2 donation conferences: collected $2 billion which went to UN to assist Syrians. U.S. tried to make a resolution in the Security Council; it was blocked by Russia. This has been the worst civil war and genocide since WW2. Syrian people don't need troops; they need logistical support. There are countries who haven't supplied sufficient support. Without U.S. conserted contribution, European countries won't act. When we accuse Russians: they say, you defend the Israelis. Security Council needs to be reformed. One particular crisis is consuming. American leadership should do more. 

Arab turmoil rather than Arab spring as it is not limited to spring. War on civilians. What has happened has strengthened our commitment and prosperity. Deputy crown prince to ensure stability in SA.

Someone has to go to Israel. Prime Minister Netanyahu would have to declare that he supports Arab peace initiative. Not all Arab world behind Muslim Brotherhood. Obama too. Not all countries are behind the GCC.

We cannot afford to have 65 more years of Israeli and Palestinian conflict. 

Brussels of Spring

Last night, my Opera singing roommate asked, "Lindsay, what's your favorite city in Europe?" I didn't even have to hesitate. "Brussels," I replied. Architecturally speaking, Brussels is about as timeless and charming as cities come. All of the buildings are about the same height: perhaps 3 to 4 stories high, as if personifying equality. A colorful array of pastel pink, blue, yellow, and lime green homes line the avenues. Statues and memorials line the islands and corners that divide the cobblestone streets. Belgians have never historically sought power in an imperialistic way, nor have they rustled too many feathers, and have in a way been handed the European Union to help lead this relatively peaceful period of European history. "The last shall be first and the first shall be last." This peaceful, colorful city has sit snug all these centuries and has become an epicenter of continental and international diplomacy. Neutrality triggers diplomacy, and this quaint and humble city has silently earned its power.

Nominally, Brussels sounds like a mix between blossom and rustles. It reminds me of the song "Rustles of spring," which I love playing on the piano. It's fast, moving, inspiring, and exciting. For me, Brussels was all of this and more.

There are about 3 centers of power in Brussels: the EU, the Grand Palace, and the Grand Place. Our hotel was a few blocks West of the Grand Place, the ancient epicenter of Brussels' strength. This center is still full of bustling trucks and floral merchants selling pansies and poppies in the center of the cobblestone square. The square is surrounded by guildhalls, the city's Town Hall, and the Breadhouse. Every building in the center is immaculate and represents something unique as if to divide the sources of power whose activities take place within the building's beautiful walls. The square is the most important tourist destination and most remarkable landmark in Brussels, some say. It was a joy to take my morning run through a center that left me awe-struck. Brussels may not be tall, but this European favorite of mine is grand, detailed, and refined in its own way. My roommate may be partial to Paris, but I find that Brussels' style and personality suits my fancy perfectly.

Morning run in the Grand Place

Royal Palace of Brussels

Our rental car and I on the streets of Brussels

Blue skies and old churches

Observe: Brussel's colored pants and shoes

European Union

Berlaymont

It's a bit of an enigma: the Europen Union. Nestled in the center of the beautiful, neutral city of Brussels, the EU finds itself in a bit of a tizzy during this, an election year (EU leadership rotates every 5 years). The European Union looks like and even takes on the architectural resemblance of the United Nations, only instead of waiving the 193 country flags that make up the UN member states, this continental epicenter of Europe waives the sole flag of the European Union at its entrance. We had an excellent meeting with Euractiv: the largest private sector public relations company for the European Union. They warmly welcomed us back at the end of the month to conduct some policy workshops.

Ours is one of the most visible experiments on the value of public/ private partnerships. Our public relations firm in London indicated that social entrepreneurship and CSR is a much more developed practice in the United States than in the United Kingdom, where an organization is either considered to be doing good or making money. We were pleased to make note of the largest press body for the European Union, which also happens to be privately owned. 

Rwanda: Take Two

I attended an absolutely fascinating discussion this week during this, the first month of the 20th commemorative year of the Rwandan genocide. "Would we take action to stop the genocide if it happened today?" Rwandan Ambassador to the United States Mathilde Mukantabana posed a question that has received much attention over the past two decades. In 2011, the Arab League called for stronger action in Libya and the United Nations Security Council authorized a NATO attack once economic sanctions proved to be a futile means of protecting Libyan civilians. Such "crimes against humanity" have received a different level of response in recent years, but there is much to learn from the action, or inaction, of world leaders and countries during past conflict.

"There is nothing here but people, and there are too many of them as it is," observed one of the generals who came to the aid during the 1994 Rwanda conflict. Ambassador Mukantabana choked up Wednesday while introducing Commander Romeo A. Dallaire of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda, who in kind observed, "A child stuck an AK-47 up my nose. That child was about 12 or 13, the same age as my son. Was that boy less human than my son? Was he less of an element of the human race than my son? Where have we moved the yardstick?"