 Good morning. I'm Leila Halal, director of the Middle East program at the New America Foundation. I want to thank the Open Technology Institute of New America and the delegation of the European Union for very quickly mobilizing to pull together this important event. I am pleased to be able to host a discussion on what more can be done to address Syria's humanitarian crisis with European Commissioner Krista Lina Georgieva. Commissioner Georgieva has been a vociferous proponent of increased humanitarian assistance for victims of Syria's conflict in European and UN forums. She has personally visited the region six times over the past two years visiting refugee camps, border areas, meeting with Syrian and Palestinian refugees and aid workers as well as hostest authorities. At the same time, she has been adamant to point out the urgent need to meet the needs of Syrians inside the country. Throughout her tenure as commissioner, she has been an extremely active public figure emphasizing care of the most vulnerable in places of immense crisis. Prior to her current position as European Commissioner for International Cooperation Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response, Dr. Georgieva was VP and Corporate Secretary of the World Bank Group. She has held numerous senior advisory and managerial posts with the bank in the economic and environmental sectors and she served as World Bank Director for the Russian Federation in 2004. She is an economist by training and taught at the University of National and World Economy in Sofia, Bulgaria for many years at the start of her career with visiting professorships and fellowships at the University of London School of Economics, Fiji's University of the South Pacific and the Australian National University. Commissioner Georgieva brings to her current role a special commitment, passion and sense of responsibility for human victims of conflict and crisis. I'm very pleased to welcome her to the stage but before she comes I want to just point out a few procedural matters. We have until 1230 with the commissioner. She's on a tight schedule in high demand so she'll have to leave promptly at 1230. She'll speak for approximately 15, 20 minutes. I will have a short dialogue with her and then we will open it up for the audience to ask questions. So without further ado, commissioner, thank you. Can I speak here? Okay, thank you. I do prefer to be able to see all of you. Thank you, Laila. Thank you all for coming. There is no day that passes. I don't spend worrying on what the Syria crisis is causing to the Syrian people, to the neighborhood and as a risk for the world. It is the most dramatic humanitarian catastrophe of recent decades. I wanted to start by just framing what has happened in one short year, how much since September last year conditions have worsened. What you don't see here is the number of victims. Last year there were 27,000 Syrians who lost their life. Today there are over 115,000. Last year there were 2.5 million people who depended on eight reaching them to just survive. Today this is actually already outdated. We are talking about eight or more million. Last year the displacements, people who were pushed out of their homes internally in Syria were a very large number, 1.2 million. This year there are over 4.3 million and most dramatic increase in terms of refugees. Last year 270,000 people crossed the borders of the neighboring countries, Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, Iraq, some went to Egypt. This year they are almost eight times more, 2.1 million people with predictions that the number will continue to go. This on its own tells us that we have extraordinary circumstances to cope with. But beyond the scale of the crisis what we also know is that it puts an enormous risk on the neighborhood. And just think for a second, the increase in victims and internal displacements, people who need help inside Syria is 1 to 4, approximately that proportion. The increase of refugees is 1 to 8, 8 times. And why is that so? Because it is so difficult to get help inside Syria because of the fighting. And that means that people are getting, their resources to cope are getting exhausted every day that passes. And their only chance is to run. But that is enormously difficult for serious neighbors. For Lebanon in particular, a country that is fragile on its own, that has come from a civil war of its own. And that is today the landing ground for the biggest proportion of Syrians, 770,000 registered refugees. If you take those that are not registered, it is over a million. In other words, the country has grown in population by 25% because of this crisis. For Jordan, King Abdullah would say that Jordan is hospitable. These are their brothers. But that he is very worried how long that could go without Jordan being destabilized. For Iraq, in Kurdistan, all of a sudden this year we have seen a huge increase of the flow of Kurdish Syrians running for their lives. 200,000 in six weeks across the border. And Egypt that is with huge difficulties on its own. But beyond the destabilization, destabilization of the region, we have to ask ourselves a very profound question. How long is this going to last? And that takes me to the humanitarian outlook of the future of the Syrian crisis. What next? Obviously, we are today more hopeful that there is a chance for a political solution. And obviously, political solution is the only one that can put an end to this madness. No question about it. But how quickly can a political solution be worked out? Given that the opposition is completely diversified and in Aleppo, our humanitarian colleagues tell us they are 250 different fighting groups. How are they going to come together at the negotiating table to form a position? And how willing, let's be fair and honest about it, how willing is really Assad to negotiate? From his behavior up to now, what is the indication that he is truly keen to get a solution that would make his side give? We have to, and this is where, for the humanitarian community, this is not our job. We are not engaging politics, but it is our job to speak truth to power. And our call here is to everybody, please work on the basis of realistic expectations, because wishful thinking harms people. Because of wishful thinking, people die. Last year, what was the wishful thinking? The wishful thinking went like this, Assad must go, Assad must go, Assad must go, Assad must go, and that translated into Assad will go. So in my trips to the region, September last year, September, October in the fall, regional leaders, the Lebanese, the Jordanians leadership privately would tell me, we don't think Assad is going to go anytime soon. But publicly, they felt that there was so much pressure on Assad, Assad will, that they didn't want to be against that political tight. But the result we face is this. We got one year of very dramatic increase of violence in Syria. And so what we are praying for is that this time around, there will be realistic assessment that a peace process is a must, that the window of opportunity opened because of international community finally found ground for unity because of the chemical weapons, that this has to be used wisely and that we, wisely means recognizing the role of everybody in the region. When you listen to political commentaries, usually what do you hear as the main parties of international push for peace? Who do you hear? Which are the countries you hear most? And US and Russia. What about Iran? Iran has more yield on Assad than Russia. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, they play a very important role. So if we want international process with an outcome that brings peace, there has to be a recognition of realities and that there has to be inclusiveness in this process. Again, this is not for the humanitarian community. This is not our job, but it is our job to say that we need peace and peace will come only when there is international mobilization that reflects realities that can bring peace. We know, what we know is that even peace happens tomorrow. Let's see, let's dream, be a bit in the wishful thinking side. Tomorrow there is peace. What does that mean? For Syrians inside whose houses are destroyed and for Syrians who have fled, who have nothing to go back to. Years before this catastrophe is overcome. In other words, we are in a protracted crisis situation and that means we need to help people this year, next year, the year after. And when we look at this protracted crisis scenario from a humanitarian perspective, we see two forks, two ways it would go. One, the one that we call status quo plus, there will be a continuous increase of refugees, hopefully not a big increase, you know, calming down inside Syria, but because resources of people are so exhausted, the refugee flow would continue gradually. And two, there could be a change in the status quo that creates potentially a riskier environment, either because Lebanon gets drawn somehow into a humanitarian crisis at home or with Hezbollah playing a role in Syria. We of course hope that we would stay to status quo plus and that over time, not too far in the future, there will be negotiations that would allow to retain the refugee flows, to kind of go to even preparation for returns, but not time soon we see this crisis becoming a thing of the past, not time soon. And that takes me to what does it mean in terms of action and how we are approaching it from the humanitarian side of the European Union. I would say the European Union of course has a political engagement, it has two members of the European Union, permanent members of the Security Council, actually we have a member of the European Union that is currently a member of the Security Council that I want to praise, Luxembourg, small country, big role. Luxembourg and Australia were the two countries that persevered for the Security Council to come up with a humanitarian statement, presidential statement, short of resolution, it would have been better to be a resolution, but between silence and statement we take statement and Luxembourg has done it, Luxembourg and Australia have worked on getting it done. Where we have taken the lead in Europe is indeed on the humanitarian side and rightly so, EU is the largest donor. We at any one point we provide 50 to 60 percent of humanitarian aid and development assistance in the world. In this crisis we have leaned forward from the very beginning, today collectively our member states and the commission, we are by far the largest donor, we have provided 2.7 billion dollars, US is next, US provided 1.3 billion dollars, but money is not the only thing, it is very important, they will continue to be very important. Where I think the EU has been on the humanitarian side, a very strong voice and will continue to be so, is three-fold. First, strong determination to do as much as possible inside Syria. 40 percent of our money goes inside Syria despite of the enormous difficulties of reaching out to people, food, medicine, shelter, protection. Second, we were the first to recognize the refugee problem is going to be very massive. 40 percent, another 40 percent of these 2.7 billion go for refugees. Three, we recognize that it is not good enough to help refugees, we have to help communities that are hosting them. In Lebanon 1,400 villages and towns today host refugees. In one-third or more of these villages and towns, the refugees outnumber the local population. In Jordan, you have heard, I'm sure, about Zaatari camp. Zaatari camp is the fourth largest city in Jordan today, 125,000 refugees next to the city of Zaatari. Do you know how big Zaatari city is? 3,000 people. I mean, I actually cannot imagine any one of our countries or here in the United States to have a say next to Washington is what, close to a million now? And imagine next to Washington to have 100 times almost, no, 80 times bigger, 80 million refugee camp. This is just, I mean, in sheer proportions, this is just unthinkable. But what we recognize is that unless we help local communities with schooling and medical care, for Jordan water is crucial because they don't have it. We are going to, we actually are seeing clashes between local people and refugees in countries that have been incredibly hospitable. And I cannot say enough as gratitude of the world to these countries for what they do. We are now looking at the future with three priorities in the EU. Our number one priority is raise money. This is an extraordinary crisis we have to raise, to continue to raise extraordinary amounts of money from Europe, obviously from the traditional donors, but also from the country seen in the region from new donors, including from Russia. Everybody has to chip in for years to come. Second, make sure that we look at ways to raise money that are non-conventional but necessary. And I will give you only one example. Syria used to be a middle-income country. Syria is not a poor country, but serious accounts are frozen as a result of sanctions. Well, why not use serious money to feed serious people? Why not the World Food Program being authorized by the Syrian government to use funding to buy food and deliver it for all Syrians, not just those who are in government-controlled areas. We have to be thinking of how can we cope in the future in a way that is politically not easy but is necessary. And now third priority we had the meeting yesterday on it is to work hard on the future of Syria and the future of Syria are Syria's children. 50% of the victims of this crisis are kids. And I have been saying it time and again, when I close my eyes and I think of the Syria crisis, I don't see a face of a soldier or a face of a rebel, I see a face of a girl or a boy. Like a 13-year-old Aishem who in Lebanon is taking care of her handicap mother, Aishem works in the field for very low wage under basically slavery conditions. So I talked to her and to her mom and I wanted to say to Aishem, I hope you will go back to school. And I just didn't have the heart to say it because it would have been a lie. She's not going to go back to school. The best that can happen to her is to get married. So yesterday we met with UNICEF, put forward an excellent strategy to support 6 million Syrian children in Syria and outside with protection, psychological support, assistance, but also education. Because unless today we act on Syria's children, we are going to have a lost generation. We are going to have angry young people who know nothing but violence to be those in charge of the future of rebuilding Syria. So let me stop here. I think in 10 years time we would be looking back to what we have done in this crisis and it would be our public that can help us to do the right thing. So thank you for being engaged and thank you for being here. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for your candid comments, Commissioner. And it's very refreshing to hear you speak about the humanitarian side of the situation in Syria because in Washington we frequently get way too caught up in matters of high security and lose the picture. And I think with Syria in particular a lot of the stress is falling on humanitarian actors who understand perhaps more urgently than anyone of the need to reach a solution as opposed to just manage the crisis. And so thank you again for your comments. I want to ask you a few questions and the first is relating to a controversy that we often hear raised in Washington and other places. And that's about the ways in which the UN and other international actors are distributing aid and that is via Damascus. And given this need to sort of work with the government in order to ensure access to the country, how is it that European countries, the European Union, is working to ensure that aid is reaching both rebel-controlled areas and areas under the domination of the regime? This is actually a bit of a misperception that exists in public opinion that somehow people living in the government-controlled areas are those who get all the assistance and those that are in rebel-controlled areas are deprived. In fact, in our own mapping and we do a very thorough assessment of what our partners deliver where on the map of Syria, it is just about 50-50 government-controlled, rebel-controlled areas where misery is, where people are right to be unhappy for help not getting out to them is in the so-called contested areas where the fighting goes on. Their assistance is much more limited. How do we get help across? We have worked very hard to push the Assad government to allow more organizations to operate inside Syria. In the beginning of the conflict, it was only ICRC, the International Committee of the Red Cross that was allowed to operate in Syria. Today, there are 14 international non-government organizations, specialized humanitarian organizations. All the agencies of the United Nations are allowed to operate inside Syria. I can mention, for example, ACTIT, a very good European, very professional humanitarian organization. They have been very active in Aleppo, but the government-controlled part of Aleppo and the opposition-controlled part, very difficult area with contested parts. ICRC is delivering assistance to both government-controlled and opposition-controlled areas. But why the public has this sense that this is not as fair? Because, indeed, for the United Nations, they need to get for every convoy of humanitarian aid permission from the government. And when they get this permission and the convoy crosses, we have had very horrible things, like the government people would stop the convoy and take out surgical kits, meaning that a wounded soldier on the other side is going to die. So that has been happening. But it is, from our perspective, the coverage, and actually this is one part of the story, the other part of the story is cross-border. Cross-line UN does, cross-border UN does not do. But under the banner, cross-border from Turkey into Jordan into Syria, this has been for, because there is a sovereignty issue, Security Council absolutely categorically against, but in the presidential statement, the Security Council actually said people need to be helped. And there has to be a chance to deliver assistance, not only cross-lines, but also cross-borders. And we have been supporting some of this action. Now, their limitations and the limitations are that the Turkish government and the Jordanian government, they are very cautious of not being dragged into a war. So their ability to provide for that kind of access is also limited. But just to sum it up, where we must continue to be pressing, it is on the issue of contested areas. And that is access, that is demanding for both sides of the conflict to allow help to reach people, something that for two years we were very shy to do with Security Council not saying a word, that it is wrong to kill civilians and it is wrong to harm humanitarian workers. Now we have the statement, now we need to build on it. Okay, so that leads me to one of my other questions, which was that now we have the Security Council resolution on the issue of chemical weapon disarmament. We have this presidential statement calling for increased humanitarian access from the presidency of the Security Council, not a resolution, but you seem to think that this statement is significant. And of course, it is because it mentions the need for increased access. It calls on the government in particular as a primary actor of responsibility to ensure that access. What are the next steps? The next steps are to turn the statement into really more access. And that is pressure from all members of the international community to those sides of the conflict. They are closest to, obviously, Russia can talk to Assad and the Saudis and Qatar can talk to the opposition fighters, some of the western powers can talk to the opposition groups. We have to recognize that in the opposition we have the more moderate part and we also have extreme elements and those I don't think anybody can talk to. And I don't even mean al-Nusra. I mean, al-Nusra now, I'm told that in comparison to ISIS, this is the Syria-Iraq al-Qaeda group, al-Nusra, they look moderate. So we are, because of this dragging the conflict for so long, we now do have a very bad people who I don't think would be amenable to provide access. But they are the fringe and then everybody else, there has to be pressure with very specific demands, convoys to cross lines, ceasefire. Cease fire, the weapon inspectors cannot do their job without some pressure on ceasefire. Cease fire must be used to also help people. Politically, this is sensitive because nobody wants to mix up the chemical weapons with anything else out of fear that the chemical weapons may not happen because of these other issues. But my sense is that it is absolutely crucial that we now measure progress and speak up. And I would tell you I'm worried because as we sit in this room, I just learned this morning that visas we have demanded for humanitarian actors to go into Syria have not yet been granted. And if Assad, if the government, I mean, it is pressure on the government, it's pressure on the opposition groups. But if we don't see documented evidence that there are measures taken to help people, we will have to pressure and pressure again. And this is where the international community, the key countries have to play their role beyond the chemical weapons, also on helping, getting help to people. Because if you're a mother who loses a child to a bullet, not to sarin gas, your grief is as deep and profound as those who have faced the most horrible of weapons. And that we cannot close our eyes to that yes, chemical weapons are now being tackled, but conventional weapons are used in full, full speed. So I want to also ask you about another issue that's been frequently raised in the Syrian context. And that that is the idea of imposing protective zones for civilians. And I'm raising this issue not in the context of a military intervention to tip the balance of the war. But but I've heard humanitarian actors raise the scenario of perhaps creating protection zones for civilians along the border. Because we know there are many IDPs who remain inside Syria along the borders with Jordan and Turkey and Lebanon, who haven't been able to cross into these countries. I mean, is is our protective zones an option for ensuring better humanitarian access, reducing the number of casualties? Do you see this as a good idea for Syria? I mean, anything that can help people to leave and be assisted, of course has to be looked into. The problem with this concept of humanitarian corridors or safe zones is that if you don't have somebody to protect them, they are not in existence. Then we go into the category of wishful thinking. Short of having peacekeepers. And I actually would think that the next to be thought about is having peacekeepers in Syria in areas that allow that to be to be the case. If you don't have it, then what is going to happen in this protected humanitarian zones is that they will be used for armed people to rest. They will be definitely drawn into the conflict and civilians will be hurt. Also, many people with experience say in a country like Syria that can potentially be broken into pieces, protected zones do bring a bit of a risk of accelerating this breakdown because they kind of create enclaves that can be then marked as independent Republic of X. And that is something to be mindful of. But just to be absolutely fair, no option should be off the table in such extraordinary circumstances. And if we are in a situation when in a particular area for temporarily we can get more assistance, say in the area between Turkish border and fighting lines, I wouldn't discount it like this. I mean, we just need to always think of the unintended consequences of any decision we make and how we are managing these unintended consequences. Before I turn it to the audience, I just want to ask them, what forums are people doing this hard thinking? Well, for quite some time, this is actually a great question. And they are there for quite some time. We had a real forum on the Syria humanitarian crisis called Syria Humanitarian Forum. It was very inclusive. We had everybody there, the Russians, the Chinese, the Syrians themselves. But then we reached the point when it was very clear there were two legitimate sides of the conflict, the Syrian government and the Syrian opposition, but only the Syrian government was allowed to take part. So we, the EU, we said this is unacceptable. We have to have both parties of the conflict and then the forum died because we could not get consensus with Russia and China to pressure Syria to get the opposition to be represented. So what do we have today? We have two things that are two groups that are very important. One is the UN agencies and some development organizations because of the impact of the crisis on the Lebanese and Jordanian communities that are meeting on a regular basis. The next meeting would be in Amman on October 4th. They review where we are in terms of needs. They basically work on bottom-up needs assessments, who is doing what, division of labor and where the donors are very present in a sense putting pressure for every euro, every dollar to be stretched to the maximum. We also have a, we have taken an initiative with the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Jordan at the margins of UNGA to meet every year. Well, sorry, I shouldn't say that. We were supposed to meet once last year because Assad must go, Assad will go. But obviously we met this year again and I'm sorry to say, but I'm pretty sure that there would be a need for that kind of meeting to continue. So we do, and what is actually rewarding to see is that when the minds are focused on uncalled for suffering, undue suffering, you actually see ideological opponents find in common ground. Thank you. We'll open it up for questions. Michelle, too. Hi, thank you so much. I just want to address the Syrian American Medical Society from the Syrian American Medical Society. And thank you so much for your work and for being such an advocate on these issues. My question is about the Presidential Declaration and the intervals for reporting. And basically I agree with everything that you've said. I think we had the opportunity to talk to some of the member states and brought up this concern, and I wanted to hear your opinion about getting basically more reporting if there's a resolution coming up at the Security Council. So frequent specific intervals for reporting by the Secretary General, specific reports so that the Security Council members don't need to review kind of and agree on who is going to be reporting to them because we know certain countries don't think that it's necessary to have reports on the humanitarian situation that frequently. And also I wanted to ask your opinion on, we heard that there's a high-level working group that was supposed to be being formed from the initiative in Jordan on humanitarian aid to replace the humanitarian forum. So do you think Russia would be, and other countries, would be willing to take part and bring opposition humanitarian issues to the table? Thank you. Thank you again. Thank you. Do you want us to collect a couple of questions? Let's collect a couple of questions because I'm mindful of time. We have one here, the blue. Brian Beery, Washington correspondent for Euro Politics. I'm just wondering how the United States and the EU are coordinating their aid efforts. And also just following up on the previous point about the rebel-controlled areas, I've heard that one of the Islamist groups confiscated aid from the European aid. So how much of a problem is this that they're actually confiscating your aid convoys? Thank you. Kristi Dellafield with the Syrian Coalition liaison to the Assistance Coordination Unit. My question is a little bit about what the EU is looking at in terms of ways to certify and involve new partners, Syrian partners. As the security situation and the access situation has deteriorated, we find that more and more international aid workers aren't going inside Syria and that INGOs aren't able to absorb new funding streams to be able to meet the need. So there's a strong desire within the Syrian community to have more of these new Syrian NGOs that do have access and are delivering assistance to partner them with INGOs and with funders such as the EU. Thank you. Let me take those and then let's see what we might have still. On the presidential statement, behind the statement is a very prudent professional work done by the UN and the international NGOs that are doing work inside Syria. Valerie Amos has gone to Syria a couple of times when she issued her report to the Security Council. It outlined very specific steps to be taken to get more access like we know the key routes for humanitarian convoys. Can we have negotiated access for these routes? So we don't have to negotiate every time with a bunch of dysfunctional government agencies to get signatures for the convoys to go. They are issues on focusing on medical facilities. This has been a huge human tragedy to allow hospitals to be bombed, ambulances to be shot at without an outcry internationally. To be honest, I've never seen a conflict of that size in which international humanitarian law is so blatantly trumped over without an outcry in the world. And I keep saying to people, it's not only about Syria. It is about the precedent of tolerance for inhumane behavior that we are setting up and we are not speaking loudly against it. And that in the statement, we have this all framed in a very concrete measurable manner. We would like to see, and actually I should have mentioned that before, we would like to see that UNHCR for the refugees, ICRC on respect for international humanitarian law, that they are given regular platform to the Security Council to report on progress or lack of. And that would be again an area for advocacy for the humanitarian community, for all of us, because unless we do it, we would have erosion of something that has been achieved on the backs, not on the backs, on the graves of people dying in conflicts. Some humanity, space for humanity even in the most horrible of circumstances. I was just two weeks ago at Omaha Beach in France, the landing place for the U.S. during the Second World War where thousands and thousands of American soldiers died. And I was standing there saying, you know, we got because of these tragedies, we got international humanitarian law, meaning don't kill civilians, don't hurt humanitarian workers, don't bomb hospitals. And now this is happening and we are silent. And that of course is where the it is not a moral, it is a moral issue. It's not just a moral issue. It is a matter of how we live in a world with more asymmetric conflicts and how we protect the right of doctors to do their jobs. In Aleppo there were 5,000 doctors before the conflict. We were taught in April they were 36 and that they are now maybe 10 and just think what it means of destruction of health system of a country. So we will continue to be pressing that the statement is followed true and we will continue to be working on replacing the Syrian humanitarian forum. Let's see how Russia would respond to that, hopefully positively. And if that avenue doesn't work, what else we can do because we do need everybody on this. On EU-US coordination, it has been exemplary in this crisis. We work very closely with two of the US offices, the Humanitarian Affairs in USAID and the Refugee in State Department, Population and Refugees Office. We compare notes on practically all policy and operational issues systematically because together US and Europe we are the largest contributor to address this crisis. We, on the question of confiscation of aid, look these are, I mean this is a war, it is a war, it is a war and there are very extreme groups in this war. But for fairness to our partners we actually have been very prudent in delivering aid and the vast majority of aid funded not just by the EU is actually getting to people. The organizations that work inside Syria are very prudent in knowing their limitations. And there is a flip side to that. The fact that we have very, very rare cases of aid being confiscated by groups is because we are prudent in how much we operate in contested areas. And to be honest in my hearts sometimes I lose sleep over this prudency because yes we are prudent but this means that there is a population in Syria in contested areas that is systematically deprived of aid because we can't take the risk of getting there. My huge admiration for the Syrian humanitarian workers that are operating as part of the UN system and the Syrian Red Crescent. Thirty-one Syrian humanitarian workers have been killed in this war. Many more one did, many more kidnapped. I have been on the phone with UNHCR when we were, they were delivering a convoy, stopped, people arrested and then they are negotiating. Antonio Guterres called me in case we need to use also EU pressure for the convoy, for the people who were running the convoy to be released. People are taking risks but obviously when it comes down to crossing lines, crossing lines this risk is the highest. And when it comes down to delivering contested areas we unfortunately are not where we want to be. I mean out of the today about seven, eight million people need help. At best we get on the regular basis to a third to a half at best on the regular basis. Sorry, I realize that we are. But just I think that one of the questions is that could we make better use of. I'm going to that question, yeah. We have been very conscious in the EU that the only reason people survive in Syria is because of the help they get from local communities. And the community organizations in Syria are very good. Women's organizations, neighborhood organizations. We have insisted for the government to allow us to partner and at one point we got almost a hundred organizations that were allowed to be partners to the EU supported organizations. That list went down to 29. It was trimmed by the government. We have a legislative constraint. We cannot work directly with local organizations because the only way for us to be fast in delivering help is by delivering through authorized certified, if you wish, partners. We have about 200 partners, UN and NGO partners with whom we have partnership agreements. But we are very keen on these partners building local capacity, delivering through local, especially community organizations. And we have been supporting the assistance coordination unit. We meet on the regular basis. We understand the capacity constraint that the assistance coordination unit. This is a Syrian entity. This is an entity that was established by the opposition to connect with the world and receive assistance. But you're right to pose this question because we are not succeeding enough to make the transmission line through local organizations work as effectively as possible. Some of the NGOs and the ICRC are really good in doing that. Some have less capabilities to ground locally. Obviously, we want to use everybody that is able to deliver help. Okay. We have like three minutes left. Any burning questions and I'll try to answer very quick one question here in the middle. Hi, my name is Kate Norland. I'm from Human Rights First. My question is about refugees and refugee resettlement. I'm wondering what you think the role of refugee resettlement is in relieving the strain on Syria's neighbors and whether you think maybe a unified EU border policy that made it easier for people to get into the EU without putting so much pressure also on Greece and Bulgaria and Italy might be a useful thing. Thank you. I had wanted to give Chris an opportunity to ask a question about Palestinians. Hi, commissioner. Thank you for coming. My name is Chris McGratham from UNR from the UN Relief and Works Agency. As you know, Palestinian refugees in Syria have tried pretty hard to stay out of the conflict, but the population, while smaller than of course the Syrian population has been disproportionately affected by the crisis. I don't know if you could talk a little bit about that and also what the EU is doing for this population as well. Right. And unfortunately, we will have to wrap it up with these two questions. On the first question, of course, we have to be thinking ahead on the fact that refugee flaws will continue. And therefore, what is today only 50,000 Syrians in Europe is going to go up. My own country, Bulgaria, has seen very rapid increase from very low numbers to now about 100 a day on average crossing Syrian refugees crossing into Bulgaria. We, this is not my responsibility. This is the responsibility of Commissioner Maastrom, Home Affairs dealing with internal matters. And there is a conversation going on in Europe on creating a common framework. Some of our countries are great, Germany, Sweden. Germany, when UNHCR called for 10,000 humanitarian admissions, Germany said, we are taking 5,000. Germany, not very well known fact, has 600,000 refugees on its territory. This is one of the top 10 countries. Actually, I think they are fifth in the world in terms of receiving refugees. But some of our other countries are less forecoming. I mean, let me be very honest. And we have work to do in Europe to create this mechanism of solidarity. My voice has been, my statement on this has been crystal clear, keep our hearts open, our wallets open, our borders open, because this is extraordinary crisis. And I'll tell you, I have some of my fellow Bulgarians now jumping all over me, saying we don't want the refugees, we are poor, we can't accept them. And I'm very firm on this. On this solidarity is a two-way street. We have to be accommodating people. But this is going to be a conversation in Europe to continue. And you will see now in some of our countries, right-wing parties are winning more space with anti-immigration platforms. So it's going to be a difficult conversation. I believe Europe will come on the right side of this. It will. But we need to be working on it. I'm sorry I didn't mention the Palestinians in the very beginning. This is, these are people who are hit twice. They were refugees, and now they're refugees again. There were about 500,000 Palestinians in Syria looked after very well by the Syrian government. They were one of the most fortunate Palestinian refugees. And then they were thrown into the into the war. Palestinian camps are now part of the war field. And Palestinians have very few places they can go to. They only 7,000, 8,000 were able to go to Jordan. Jordan is very worried about an increase for domestic stability reasons. About 50,000, 55,000 have gone to Lebanon. I have gone every time there to visit Palestinian camps. Horrible, horrible conditions. Imagine a room two by two. I'm not exaggerating. Two by two with nine people living in this room. Palestinians from coming from Syria. So bad that some would say I am going back in Syria. I would rather die. This is how difficult conditions are. They are now Palestinians in Bulgaria. They are clearly crossing Turkey for a better, more amenable destination. Also Kurdish, Kurdish Syrians in Bulgaria. But for the fate of the Palestinians, obviously this is where the international community, and I'm criticizing myself. We have to always remember these people because they are hit twice. And I want to end up with one thing. Not only the Syria crisis is horrible for the Syrians, but this is a crisis throwing a long shadow over the rest of the world. I'm going tomorrow to the Central African Republic. Because of Syria, so many places where people suffer are now left a little less attentive, which is a tragedy for those who need our help, our attention and help. And thank you very much for your good questions and your participation today. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.