back in the 1930's, late 20s, early 30's, president hoover is alleged to have said the worst thing about capitalism is the capitalists, and so, you know, again, as servants of the american people, republicans and a majority and the house have a responsibility to the country to

not only keep an eye on the obama administration, we also have to make sure the private sector pleased by the rules, and i can assure you we will do that in the energy committee and speaker boehner in a conference call earlier has assured the incoming chairman of the new committees but we are going to take a look in every committee overseeing the obama administration and the jurisdictional private-sector as each committee is responsible for a. >> last question from julieanna. >> if you're unsuccessful in your bid to come chairman i'm sure you will stay on the committee and would you seek a subcommittee chairmanship and if so which one? [laughter] >> well, that's a very rhetorical question. i am fully engaged in being successful in convincing the republican conference and the

leadership to give me the privilege to be the full committee chairman, so i'm going to focus my efforts on being the full committee chairman, and i'm very confident that i will be successful in that effort, so i'm really not going to speculate on what happens if that's not successful because i think it will be successful. >> and finally, congressman barton, how what a chairmanship, your chairmanship defer than that of say fred upton? >> well that's a very speculative question. fred and i are very good friends. we sat side by side for a number of years. he and his family are lovely people, just delightful people. i think the difference is between congressman upton and

myself, you know, i am man obviously a consistent, conservative, across-the-board. fred tends to be somewhat more moderate. so you would have feel a little bit of a philosophical difference perhaps to read and i've also been chairman for one term, and i think i'd be able to hit the ground running. fred serve the subcommittee chairman on a number of the subcommittees so he certainly has his leadership of the subcommittee level, but the american people have given a two-year lease to be in the majority in the congress, and i think the we should put our best team on the field for the next two years and i think while fred is very competent and well qualified, my experience is that

a little bit higher level than his, and by what be much more able immediately to run the committee and in and the effective fashion. >> just to make it known we've invited congressman fred upton to appear on this program as well. ranking republican on the energy and commerce committee get potential chairman joe barton, thank you as always for being on "the communicators." we watch forward to watching the process unfold. juliana gruenwald of tech daily dose, thank you as well. >> president obama spoke before in the sp five permanent and endorsed the country

[applause] >> earlier president obama addressed the indian parliament and new delhi discovery and economic security partnership with india. the country as the president's first stop on a ten day trip to asia. this is about 35 minutes. >> mr. vice president, madam speaker, mr. prime minister, members of lok sabha and rajya sabha, and most of all, the people of india.

i thank you for the great honor of addressing the representatives of more than 1 billion indians in the world's largest democracy. [applause] i bring the ratings and friendship of the world's oldest democracy, the united states of america, including nearly 3 million proud and patriotic in the americans -- indy 500 in-americans. [applause] over the past three days, my wife, michele and i have experienced the beauty and the dynamism of india and its people. from the majesty of the tomb to the advanced technologies that are in power in farmers and women who are the backbone of the indian society.

from the celebrations with schoolchildren to the innovators who are fueling india's economic rise, from the university students who will chart india's future, leaders who helped bring in the hut to this moment of extraordinary promise. at every stop we have been welcomed with the hospitality for which indians have always been known. so to you and the people of india call on behalf of me, michele and the american people, please accept my deepest thanks. [applause]

bahood dhanyavad. [applause] i am not the first american president to visit india nor will i be the last. but i am proud to visit india so rarely in my presidency. it's no coincidence that india is my first stop on a visit to asia or that this has been my ljungqvist visit to another country since becoming president. [applause] for in asia and around the world, india is not simply emerging; india has emerged. [applause] and it is my firm belief that the relationship between the united states and india, bound by our shared interests and our shared values, would be one of the of defining partnerships of the 21st century. this is the partnership that i've come here to build. this is the vision that our nation can realize together.

my confidence in our shared future is grounded in mind respect for india's treasured past -- a civilization that's been shaping the world for thousands of years. indians unlocked the intricacies of the human body and the fastness of our universe. it's never exaggeration to say that our information age is rooted in india and innovations -- and putting the number zero. [applause] of course, india not only opened our minds, she expanded our moral imaginations with religious texts that still some in the faithful to the lives of dignity and discipline, with poets to imagine a future, where the mind is without fear and the head is held high. [applause]

and with a man whose message of love and justice in the worst, the father of your nation, mahatma ghandi. [applause] for me and michele, this visit has held a special meaning. for what my life including my work as a young man on behalf of the urban to pour condoleezza on the inspiration in the life of mahatma ghandi and as simple as profound weapon to be the change we seek in the world. [applause] and just as he summoned indians to seek their destiny he influenced champions of equality in my own country including a young preacher named martin luther king. after making his pilgrimage to india a half century ago, dr. king called ganhii's

philosophy of non-violent resistance the only logical and moral approach in the struggle for justice and progress. [applause] so we were honored to visit the residence where gandhi and king both state and were honored to pay our respects at raj ghat. i'm mindful the plan might not be standing before you today as president of the united states had it not been for gandhi and the message he shared and inspired with america and the world. [applause] an ancient civilization of science and innovation, a fundamental faith in human

progress -- this is the sturdy foundation upon which you have built ever since that stroke of midnight when the tricolor was raised over a free and independent india. [applause] and despite the skeptics who said this country was simply too poor or too fast or diverse to succeed, and you surmounted overwhelming odds and became a model to the world. instead of slipping into starvation, you launched a green revolution that put millions. instead of becoming dependent on commodities and exports, you invested in science and technology, and in your greatest resource, the indian people. and the world sees the results, from the super computers to build to the indian flag that to put on the moon. instead of resisting the global economy, you became one of its engines, reforming the licensing

raj and the unleashing an economic marvil that has lifted tens of millions of people from poverty and created one of the world's largest middle class's. instead of succumbing to the division, you have shown the strength of india, the very idea of india is its embrace of all colors, all castes, all creeds. [applause] it's the diversity represented in this chamber today. it's the richness of the faiths celebrated by a visitor to my hometown of chicago more than a century ago -- the renowned swami vivekanada. [applause] he said that holiness, purity and charity are not the exclusive positions of any church in the world and that

every system has produced men and women of the most exalted character. and instead of being lured by the false notion that progress must come at the expense of freedom, you build the institutions upon which true democracy depends -- free and fair elections, which enable citizens to choose their own leaders without recourse to arms -- [applause] -- an independent judiciary and the rule of law which allows people to address their grievances, and a thriving free press and a vibrant civil society in which allows a free voice to be heard. this year, as india marks 60 years with a strong and space constitution, the lesson is clear: india has succeeded not in spite of democracy, india has succeeded because of democracy. [applause]

now, just as india has changed, so, too, has the relationship between our two nations. in the decades after independence, in the gut advanced its interests as a pro leader of the non-aligned movement. yet, too often, the united states and india found ourselves on opposite sides of the north- south divide, a strange way along cold war. those days are over. here in india, two successive governments led by different parties have recognized the per partnership with america is both natural and necessary. and in the united states, both of my predecessors -- when a democrat, won a republican -- worked to bring us closer, leading to increased trade and the landmark civil nuclear agreement. [applause]

so, since that time, people in both our countries have asked what's next? how can we build on this progress and realize the full potential of our partnership? that's what i want to address today, the future that the united states seeks in an interconnected world, and why i believe that india is indispensable to this vision; how we can forge a true global partnership -- not just in one or two areas; but across many. not just for our mutual benefit, but for the benefit of the world. of course, when the indians can determine nds's national interests and how to read finance them on the world stage. but i stand before you today because i am convinced that the interests of the united states -- and the interests we share with india -- our best advanced in partnership.

i believe that. [applause] the united states seeks security -- the security of our country, our allies and partners. we seek prosperity -- a strong and growing economy in an open international economic system. we seek respect for universal values and we seek a just and sustainable international order that promotes peace and security by meeting global challenges through stronger global cooperation. now, to advance these interests, have committed the united states to the comprehensive engagement with the world, based on mutual interests and mutual respect. and a central pillar of this engagement is forging deeper cooperation with 21st century centers of influence -- and that must necessarily include india.

[applause] now, india is not the only emerging power in the world. but relationships between our countries is unique. for we are too strong democracies to constitution's begin with the same revolutionary words -- the same revolutionary words -- we the people. we are too great republic's dedicated to the liberty and justice and equality of all people. and we are free market economies where people have the freedom to pursue ideas and innovations that can change the world. and that's why i believe that india and america are indispensable partners in meeting the challenges of our time. [applause] since taking office, i therefore make our relationship a priority. i was proud to welcome the prime minister singh for the first

state visit of my presidency. [applause] for the first time ever, our governments are working together across the whole range of common challenges that we face. now, let me see it as clearly as i can: the united states not only welcome cbs a rising global power, we fervently support it and we have worked to help me get a reality. together with our partners, we have made the g20 the premier forum for international economic cooperation, bringing more voices to the table of global economic decision making, and that has included in the. we've increased the level of emerging economies like india and international financial institutions. we valued india's important for what copenhagen, where, for the first time, all major economies committed to take action to confront climate change -- and to stand by those actions. we salute in the's long history as a leading contributor to

united nations peacekeeping missions. and we welcome in the yen as it prepares to take its seat on the united nations security council. [applause] in short, with india assuming its rightful place in the world, we have a historic opportunity to make the relationship between our two countries a defining partnership of the century ahead. and i believe we can do so by working together in three important areas. first, as global partners we can promote prosperity in both our countries. together, we can create a high-tech, high-wage jobs of the future. with my visit, we are now ready to begin implementing our civil nuclear agreement. this will help meet india's's growing energy needs and create

thousands of jobs in both of our countries. [applause] we need to forge partnerships and high-tech sectors like defense and civil space. so we've remove indian organizations from our so-called entity list and we will work to remove and reform our controls on exports. both of these steps will ensure that indian companies seeking high-tech trade and technologies from america are treated the same as our very closest allies and partners. [applause] we can pursue joint research and development to create green jobs; given the more access to cleaner, affordable energy. meet the commitments we made it copenhagen and show the possibilities of slow carvin growth. and together, we can resist the

protectionism that stifles growth and innovation. the united states remains -- and will continue to remain -- one of the most open economies in the world. and by opening markets and reducing barriers to foreign investment, india can realize its full economic potential as well. sg 20 partners, we can make sure that the global economic recovery is strong and is durable. and we can keep striving for a lok sabha round that is the ambitious and is balanced with the courage to make the compromises their necessities of the global trade works for all economies. together, we can strengthen agriculture. cooperation between indian and american researchers and scientists sparked the green revolution. today, india is a leader in using technology to empower farmers, like those i met yesterday to get free updates on market and weather conditions on their cell phones. and the united states is a

leader in agricultural productivity and research. now, as farmers and rural areas face the effects of climate change and drought, will work together to spark a second, more sustainable ever green revolution. together, we are improving indian weather forecasting systems before the next monsoon season. we aim to help millions of indian farmers -- farming households save water and increase productivity, improve food processing so crops don't spoil on the way to market and enhance climate and crop forecasting to avoid losses that cripple communities and drive up food prices. and as part of our food security initiative, we are going to share in the's expertise with farmers in africa. and this is an indication of india's rise -- that we can our export hard-earned expertise to countries that see india as a

model for agricultural development. it's another powerful the example of how american and in the in partnerships he can address an urgent global challenge. because the wealthy nation also depends on the health of its people, will continue to support india's effort against diseases like tuberculosis and hiv/aids. and as global partners, will work to improve global health by preventing the spread of pandemic flu. and because now which is the currency of the 21st century, we will increase exchanges between our students, our colleges and our universities, which are among the best in the world. as we work to advance our shared prosperity, we can partner to address a second priority -- and that is our shared security. and mumbai i met with the courageous families and survivors of that barbaric attack. and here in the parliament,

which was itself targeted because of the democracy it represents, we honor the memory of all those who have been taken from us, including american citizens on 26 slash mikey 11 and indian citizens on 9/11. this is a bond that we share. it's why we insist that nothing ever justifies the slaughter of innocent men, women and children. it's why we are working together, more closely than ever, to prevent terrorist attacks and to deepen our cooperation even further. and it's why, as strong and resilient societies, we refuse to live in fear. we will not sacrifice the values and goals law that defines us coming and we will never waver in the defense of our people. america's fight against al qaeda and its terrorist affiliates is why we preserve in afghanistan,

where major development assistance from india has improved the lives of the afghan people. we are making progress and our mission to break the taliban's momentum and to train afghan forces so they can take the lead for their security. and while i have made it clear that american forces will begin the transition to elfgin responsibility next summer, i've also made it clear that america's commitment to the afghan people will endure. the united states will not abandon the people of afghanistan -- or the region -- to violent extremists who threaten us all. our strategy to disrupt and dismantle and dtv al qaeda and its affiliates has to succeed on both sides of the border. and that's why we have worked on this with the pakistani government to address the threat of terrorist networks in the border region. the pakistani government increasingly recognizes that these networks are not just a

threat outside of pakistan -- they are a threat to the pakistani people, as well. they've suffered greatly at the hands of violent extremists over the last several years. and we'll continue to insist to pakistan's leaders that terrorist safe havens within their borders are unacceptable, and that terrorists behind the mumbai attacks must be brought to justice. [applause] we must also recognize that all of us have an interest in both and afghanistan and pakistan that is stable and prosperous and democratic and india has an interest in that as well. in pursuit of regional security, we will continue to welcome dialogue between india and

pakistan, even as we recognize the disputes between your two countries can only be resolved by the people of your two countries. more broadly, india and the united states can partner in asia. today, the united states is once again playing a leadership role in asia, strengthening alliances, deepening relationships as we are doing with china, and we are the engaging with regional organizations like asean in which india is also a partner. like your neighbors in southeast asia, we want india not only to look east, we want india to engage east because it will increase the security and prosperity of all our nations. has to global leaders, the united states and india can partner for global security -- especially as india serves on the security council over the next two years.

indeed, the just and sustainable international order that america seeks includes a united nations that is efficient, effective, credible and legitimate. that is why i can say today come in the years ahead, i look forward to a reformed united nations security council that includes india as a permanent member. [applause] now, let me suggest with increased power comes increased responsibility. the united nations exists to fulfill its founding ideals of preserving peace and security, promoting global cooperation and advancing human rights. these are the responsibilities

of all nations, but especially those that seek to lead in the 21st century. and so we look forward to working with india and other nations that aspire to the security council membership to ensure that the security council is effective, that resolutions are implemented, that sanctions are enforced, that we strengthen the international norms which recognize the rights and responsibilities of all nations and all individuals. this includes our responsibility to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. since i took office, the united states has reduced the role of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy, and we've agreed with russia to reduce our own and arsenals. we have put preventing nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism that the top of our nuclear agenda and the strength and the cornerstone of the global nonproliferation regime which is the nuclear

nonproliferation treaty. together, the united states and india can pursue our goal of securing the votes for marble nuclear materials. we can make it clear that even as every nation has the right to peaceful nuclear energy, every nation must also meet its international obligations -- and that includes the islamic republic of iran. and together, we can pursue efficient in the in leaders have espoused since independence -- a world without nuclear weapons. [applause] and this leads me to the final area where our countries can partner -- strengthening the foundations of space governments,, not only at home and abroad. in the united states my administration has worked to make the government more open and transparent and accountable to people. here in india, your harnessing

technologies to do the same, as i saw yesterday at an expert in mumbai. door landmark right to information act is in power and citizens the ability -- [applause] to get the services to which they are entitled. [applause] and to hold officials accountable. voters can get information about candidates by text message. and you're delivering education and health care services to rural communities as i saw yesterday when i joined the e-panchayat with villagers in rajasthan to now in a new collaboration on open government or two countries are going to share our experience, identify what works and develop the next generation of tools to empower citizens. and another example of our american indian partnership can address global challenges we are going to share these innovations with civil society groups and countries around the world. we are going to show that

democracy, more than any other form of government, delivers for the common man and woman. likewise, when india votes, the whole world watches. thousands of political parties, hundreds of thousands of polling centers, millions of candidates and poll workers, and 700 million voters. there's nothing like it on the plan at. there is so much that country's transition and to democracy can learn from india's experience. so much expertise that india can share with the world. and that, too, is what is possible when the world's largest democracy increases its role as a global leader. as the world's two largest democracies, we must never forget the price of our own freedom is standing up for the freedom of others. [applause]

indians know this, for it is the story of your nation. before he ever began his struggle for indian independence, gandhi stood up for the rights of indians in south africa. just as others, including the united states, supported indian independence. india championed the self-determination of people from africa to asia as the too broke free from colonialism. [applause] and along with the united states, you've been a leader in supporting space development and civil society groups around the world. and this, too, is part of india's preakness. now we all understand, every country will fall of its own path. no one nation has a monopoly on wisdom, and on tv, no nation

should ever try to impose its values on another. but when peaceful space movements are suppressed -- as they have been in burma, for example, then that democracies of the world cannot remain silent. for it is unacceptable to gun down peaceful protesters and incarcerate political prisoners decade after decade. it is unacceptable to hold the aspirations of an entire people hostage to the greedy and paranoia of bankrupt regimes. it is unacceptable to stealing elections, as the regime in burma has gone up again for all the world to see. faced with such gross violations of human rights, it is the responsibility of the international community -- especially leaders like the united states and india -- to condemn that. and if i can be frank, in international fora, india has often shied away from some of

these issues. but speaking up for those who cannot do so for themselves is not interfering in the affairs of other countries. it's not violating the rights of sovereign nations. it is staying true to our space principles. it is giving meaning to the human rights that we say our universal. and it still stands sustains the progress that in asia and around the world has helped turn dictatorship into democracies and ultimately increase our security in the bottle. so promoting shared prosperity, preserving peace and security, strengthening space governments and human rights -- these are the responsibilities of leadership. and as global partners, this is the leadership that the united states and india can offer in the 21st century. ultimately, though, this cannot be a relationship only between presidents and prime ministers, or in the halls of parliament. ultimately, this must be a partnership between our people. [applause]

so i want to conclude by speaking directly to the people of india who are watching today. in your lives, you have overcome odds that might have overwhelmed the lesser country. in just decades, you have achieved progress and to limit that to other nations centuries. you are now assuming your rightful place as a leader among nations. your parents and grandparents imagined this. your children and grandchildren will look back on this. but only this generation of indians can seize the possibilities of the moment. as you carry on with the hard work ahead, i want every indian citizen to know the united states of america will not simply be cheering you from the

sidelines. we will be there with you, shoulder to shoulder. [applause] because we believe in the promise of india. and we believe the future is what we make it. we believe that no matter who you are or where you come from, every person can fulfil their god-given potential, just as dalit, dr. ambedkar could lift himself up and then the words of the constitution that protects the rights of all the indians. [applause] we believe that no matter where

you live, with a religion to punjab, or the bylines of chandi chowk [laughter] in a section or a new high rise in bangalore, every person deserves the same chance to live in security and dignity to get an education, to find work, to give their children a better future. and we believe that when countries and cultures put aside old habits and attitudes that keep people apart, when we recognize our common humanity, then we can begin to fulfill these aspirations that we share. it's a simple lesson contained in that collection of stories which has guided the indians for centuries -- punjab and its --

panchtantra and it's the instructions de all those who entered this call. that is one is mine and the other a stranger is the concept of little minds. but to the large part, the world was office their family. this is the story of india, this is the story of america. that despite their differences, people can see themselves and one another, and work together and succeed to get there has won proud nation. and they can be the spirit of partnership between nominations -- that even as we honor the histories which in different times kept us apart, even as we preserve what makes us unique in a globalized world, we can recognize how much we can achieve together. and if we let this simple concept be our guide, if we pursue the vision i've described to the -- a global partnership

to meet global challenges -- could i have no doubt that future generations -- indians in american -- well when the world is more prosperous and more secure and more just because of the bonds our generation has forged today. so thank you. and jai hind. [applause] and long live the partnership between india and the united states. [applause]

now a conversation on technology in india. we will hear from the technology adviser to india's prime minister. the discussion also includes china's relationship to india. from the believe east conference last month in a new orleans, this is an hour and 15 minutes. >> we are going to get started on the next session if you all will take your seats. >> very good. thank you very much. i want to start with an announcement. neither sam or i are running for the presidency is so if there is anybody out there that is really screaming with rage, don't directed at us, okay?

we are very privileged to have you here. it is a characteristic to innovation the but i think is wrapped up in the story of san and what he's done with his life. the first part is that so much innovation really only happens when a truly innovative person gets the idea and follows through on it and then the second chapter of innovation is that it affects whole groups of people and whole nations and that's kind of the story if you will. he grew up in a small village in india, she ended up as an adviser to gandhi when he was prime minister and literally lawyer to the indian nation. and that is sort of chapter 1. chapter two is in what he is in the midst of doing. in fact he is leaving for new delhi again i think on monday, isn't it? so why don't we start by just telling them the 1980's chapter

of this remarkable story of why iran a whole nation and not only the technical part but what it does for a country and its people. >> well, in 1980i had sold the company i had in chicago to rockwell international and i decided to go visit india after having made a little bit of money. i had never been to new delhi. i went to delhi and tried to call my wife from a five-star hotel and couldn't recall to chicago. so a little bit of arrogance and a lot of ignorance said i'm going to fix this damn thing. so then i decided to commute back and forth for several years trying to convince the government that we need to focus on our et until the confirmation

building. i was convinced that information, communication technology, things about openness, accessibility, connectivity, networking, democratization, decentralization, and as a result, social transformation. based on my own background i was also convinced technology is a great social a fourth second only to death. i believe technology can be an entry point to bring about generational change. so i got a chance to meet mrs. mrs. ghandi then, and we need to focus on i.t. because we have a lot of young talent to worry about rural india, access, sustainability, development, you're own design of digital switch cannot rely on

multinationals commanded the and she said what you want. so i said give me 510 years. i got 500 engineers average age of 23 and we build all the product india would need to wire urban india so we build fiber-optic factories, switches, software and trained almost 30,000 people. the start of the whole new revolution and then mrs. ghandi and i became prime minister and ultimately i decided to go back to india, change my nationality back from u.s. to indian and then spent about a decade working on all aspects of telecom, i.t. software. i remember jack welch coming to

india. he wanted to meet the prime minister. the prime minister was busy so jack and i had a breakfast we never met before and he's a dime here to sell engines and i said i'm not bonding engines. i'm going to sell your software. [laughter] so he said i'm not buying software. so then he said what do we do? finally he let me tell him about software and he said what you want? i said give me a 10 million-dollar order. this was the time there were five people. jack gave us a 10 million-dollar order, i picked up the call for ibm and that is how the software industry got started in india. all kind of interesting stories, but we have great times in the

80's. i was convinced i.t. would change india but democratization of information is the key to strengthening of the indian democracy. >> to give the audience a sense of the skill what we are talking about when you started there were how many phones per population? >> in 1981 we had 2 million telephones for 800 million people roughly. it used to take 15 years to get a telephone connection. if you got a connection, half of the time you got dialtone, half of the time you had to wait. it used to take regular

connections. i had a friend who went from the u.s. to india and wanted to get married and decided he was going to marry a girl with a telephone connection. [laughter] today we have 700 million mobile phones. we are adding ten to 15 million a month, month after month, new connections. in the next 24 months we will probably have 900 million mobile phones. for the first time a country of a billion people is connected. we are an asian of a connected billion so we need to think differently. ten years ago we were a nation of a billion unconnected so how do you strategize for the future with this connectivity? so my job now is to really look

at public information infrastructure. spec what we come back to that. that's chapter to and i want to first wrapup chapter 1. there is at first glance when listening to you this is not too difficult to one year of 900 million people and so long. there were all sorts of obstacles you had to overcome some of which is a sociological and some are penal, some hour infrastructure and so on. go over some of the things you had to get to where india now we is to respect first of all, i had to decide that i wanted to build a nation and not build a business. so i had to give up everything. i spent lots of money going back and forth. i had to take a ghandi approach.

central sacrifice, love for everybody, simplicity, openness and transparency. there were stories in india that the cia planted a man and the prime minister's office told me to. you had to be very careful that you are working with a system that doesn't expect outside information to change it overnight. it was pretty painful but it had to be done. i had young children born and raised in chicago. parents in chicago so i had to move my family, left my parents there, at a personal level it was pretty tough. a political level i had all the support from the prime minister. so i believed political will was

very important. without political will i wouldn't have done what i could do. and then the support came from young talent. in india we have 550 million young below the age of 25. we essentials the need to build their future, their prosperity, jobs, growth, education, that's the main challenge today. it is tough. stomach and there were systemic problems. the federated manager of government, the local corruption, lots of people benefit from the system the way it was and you had to do for all of that. now, chapter 2, which is what you are in beach on now is even more pervasive and impressive than chapter 1.

explain, wiring the country for all information and the use of clouds as the kind of generating mechanism. >> the last five years i've been working on knowledge permission as a chairman of india, which commissioned with about seven of my colleagues collected five aspects of knowledge. access to knowledge which includes land which is, translation, broadband, programs, higher education, distant learning, vocational information, we also looked at norwich, innovation, and entrepreneurship, the use of knowledge and agriculture helped small and medium scale industries and the government's.

about 27 different subjects preparing the last 20 years. if you go to www.knowledgecommission.gov.in you will see hundreds of pages of documents on the recommendations to the prime minister. for the last year, focused on building six different platforms to this gerdemann for a connected country, the broadband platform bandwidth wearing all lotteries, r&d institutions to cost two to 5 billion government approved it sent away 15 points wider. then we ought to create i.t.

platforms for the forces is working on. but all billion people will fingerprints and irish. then we want to create security and applications, payment. these are the six platforms that we need to create. to do this we need to connect to under the 50,000 local governments, 200 megabit bandwidths. with 800,000 fiber. it's all down of most of it. so we are using that fiber with railways, authorities, telephone companies to lawyer of all local governments to education like

last night in a discussion on education. what we are missing is the role of technology to read we don't learn the same way i learned 50 years ago. they do not need to create contact were delivered content. today most of the time 90% of the time teachers create content and deliver content. so the room of the teacher will change to that of a mentor. so how do you define a new teacher? so we are looking at a lot of these things in light of what technology can do. without technology we cannot meet our aspirations. we don't have enough teachers, don't have enough buildings, everything we plan to do the next ten, 20 years is going to be based on my i.t..

>> you mentioned yesterday on the session of education one of the points made during that session was within the craft a profession where you want to call it. there is a built-in resistance to change it can be overcome to some extent. but you are proposing is more radical than what we are talking about for america. what is the situation in terms of both public, the government and the educational the establishment as far as change of the dimension and how do you educate indians. >> we have teachers unions and also have lobbies and we get lots of assistance. our job is to go to the public because of this to the democracy, promote our ideas and carry young people. in many of these areas you have

territories. we don't have a lot of investor interest. i give you one example. the u.s. we have 1200 to the centers for government. everybody and his brother came up to the data center. in india we plan to build because we are starting in 2010 as opposed to 1980. so we have a sort of advantage to live from mainly because we are doing it now. so we are counting on that and keep fighting the battles everyday. >> this session we have coming up on this after india and china you are also taking radically different approaches to the use of technology and the use of information because this is such different political systems how would you characterize if i can put it this way the competitions

with the two great and very large countries and the roads of you are on and the prospects? >> i don't see it as a competition the half a billion people to serve, we have a billion people to serve. we have a democracy to reverse we have to focus on democratizing information. we have to focus on open government. we have to focus on technology to deliver public services, education, health. we have to be serious problems of our own. it is pretty but in the rich and poor, urban and rural, educated and uneducated. tomography, 550 million a young below the 25. a diplomat, we are doing everything, but we are not doing it fast enough. we need more of all of it. zocor pattern is going to be

different. it will be slow compared to china. like the wanted to build the road when from the airport to the city. somebody finally drew a line and said that's the road. .. >> first of all people can pick up the phone and call a member

of parliament and scream. they think that's great. wake them up at midnight. ask for help to go to the hospital, get admission for my kid, ask your all kinds of things. they get a lot of information about their job, weather forecasting, information on seats, pricing for their goods and services, the price of tomatoes, i make a lot of calls, and find out where to sell, so i take -- i think communication has opened their horizon. we still have 19th century mind set, 20th century prophesies, and 21st century needs, but when a little kid in the village can get in front of a screen and visit a museum, it changes his perception compared to when i came to america in 1964, i had

never made a telephone call in my life. i had a masters in physic, and i never had seen television. i knew how good the design was, but i had never seen one. compared to that, kids today see the world day in and out so their aspirations are very different. their reflections are very different. i think technology has given us a new road map to build a nation. we are already excited about it. we think next 25 years are going to be very critical for india. we have a window of opportunity for next five or seven years to put all of these things in place, and that's all someone like me at my age can do. >> this is a little off the subject of what we've been

discussioning right now, but we have a unique situation here. you are an indian also with a long american heritage. we have a president about to go to india on what is a more consequential trip than usual we tend to think. what are your thoughts about what happens on the trip, and your area of modernization and development. what would you like to see come up? >> well, there's a lot of expectations about this trip. everyone believes that the oldest and the biggest democracies coming together would mean a lot to the rest of the world. we signed a nuclear treaty. we need lots of energy. we believe in open government, and i believe this visit of the president obama is being watched by the rest of the leaders in the world as an important event,

and i hope we can send the right signals to the world that we want to build a different kind of a world together. i think u.s. needs india, and india needs the u.s. more so than ever before. earlier u.s. looked down on india for a long time. there's all kinds of stories of how gandhi and reagan got along. i think it's about time to look in the eyes with the same level of respect and begin a whole new chapter. a lot of hope is going to be spending with two days in mumbai and delhi, and we want to work with an open government and send a signal to the world we want to have democratization together. >> that's a good note to

transfer ourselves. >> if you give me one minute, i forgot to talk about innovation. >> yeah. [laughter] >> we have set up in india a national innovation counsel to look at five aspects of innovation. one innovation as a platform. it's not about products and services and high-tech and science. it's more about innovations in government, social sector, families, and look at innovation as -- two innovations for inclusive roads. we believe, especially i believe, best friends in the world have been solving problems of the rich who really don't have problems to solve. the problems of the poor don't get the right kind of talent. we want to get the best brain

solving problems of the poor because we have lots of poor and the world is looking to us to solve the problems of the poor in the world. three, we want to create new equal system for innovation. we want to define new drivers. for example, disposable versus doable. we want to create this course on innovation, so we are really working on lots of interesting things to make sure that innovation comes out of the labs into the minds of the people. again, it's going to take a decade, but the process is on. >> thank you so much. it's really quite a story, and it's a privilege to have you here. >> thanks. [applause] >> hello again. this is session two this

morning, or three actually, and the subject is india and china. i'm going to throw in a third nation because it's so consequential to both of those and the whole east asia region, and that's us, the united states. particularly since there's quite a bit news coming up. you heard us mention the trip coming up, but there's the g20 and our own election and what's happening in congress afterwards, but i think a little bit of u.s. and how it relates to india and china is very much in order. now, we have on our panel today on the far left is robert who has a long and distinguished career both in public life and in the investment community in new york. he is currently u.s. under secretary of state for economic, business, and agricultural affairs. next to him is taroon, an author and journalist and a publisher

of a magazine that is particularly known for very brave investigative reporting, and on my right is yeshan who is in international economy and management. on the far right who is an economiest and author and written a very provocative book, "how the west was lost." let's get started. bob, first, with just a few statistics to give people a sense of the scale of what we're dealing with and the change. china has a gross national product of about $5 trillion. compared to that, the u.s. has a gross national product of 15 trillion, but the chinese figure is growing at a ratter dramatic -- rather dramatic rate and closing

the gap all the time. the third player here, india. india is the forty the size -- fourth the size of china in terms of gdp, but it's in terms on a very fast scale and china is expected to grow the next year at a 9.5% rate, india at 8.5% rate, and comparing us to the two of them, we are agreeing at the rate of 2.5%. bob, what do we expect from the trip that obama is taking, and how special do we think this one is versus normal international presidential travel? >> well, i think this trip is sphecial in a number of ways. >> let's check to make everybody can hear? >> is this coming across? good, excellent. >> if not, shout, and we can pass this back and forth. >> i think this trip is very interesting. first of all, it's the longest

period of time president obama will be outside the united states. second, if you look at the path of this trip, there is an important signal here. he's going from india to indonesia, then he's going up to korea and japan. these are the four biggest democracies in that area, and if you look at this trip, it's really to underscore several things. first of all, india. the growing importance of india in the u.s. political, security, and economic relationship. second, indonesia, a democracy that has been growing very rapidly, and has become a vibrant democracy really just over the last 10-15 years. then, south korea who went from a authoritarian system to a democracy and is now a prosperous country in terms of its growth rate and dinism, and

of course the old ally region, japan. working with these countries is important to demonstrate that we do support democracies in the region. when you look at india in particular, you look at india versus china. it's indian and china. the united states has to have a relationship with both, but we have a particularly compelling relationship with india. as sam pointed out, india has demonstrated very balanced growth over the last several years. it does not depend as heavily on exports like china. the democratization in india makes it a more vibrant society. you don't have whatever benefits china has in terms of growth, one is not democratization of information, and therefore one of the points the president is going to eferl size in -- emphasize in india is how we can work with the democracy to work with respect to open government, democratization of information, increased trade, increase cooperation with india and the

security of the indian ocean, and support for the the politicians in india reforming the country at a rapid rate. when you go to the other two meetings in japan and korea, the meeting in korea is a meeting of the g20. when we work with the g20, it's a large group, and you need partners in the g20 to cooperate on certain items. we'll work with india closely in the g20 on a range of things, and then going to japan for the apec summit and the last point i make is that the particular element of the trip that's worth noting and worth noting in the region is that the united states has not been playing over the last seven or eight years as proactive of a role in east asia as many countries in the region would like, but the fact the

president is making this trip, visiting these countries, he's going to demonstrate that the united states must play and will play and is going to play a much more proactive role in the east io sha region, and this trip is designed to do that not just because of the rise of china, but that's an important part. the other is these countries want a strong american presence in the region whether china was there or not. >> let me get you to adjust that point for a moment. we've had a policy really for quite some time openly of engagement with china, and not so public of containment that is too stroke, -- strong, but countries starting with india going all the way around to korea. this is surfacing now that it's more than we have done in the past, and i wonder, bob, if one of the reasons for that is the fact that china has at least

recently got in the number of ways against us in particular and the rules we set for norms in international behavior, and then against its neighbors? >> well, i think without trying to characterize china's position, i do think that the chinese have been asserting interests in the region, in particular areas of the region where the united states also has interest, and secretary clinton made it very clear when she was there a few months ago, that matters of territorial dispute issues in the south china sea and elsewhere were not just issues that could be resolved by china, but the united states had a very strong interest in this region as well, and i think that the neighbors of china want to make sure that the 7th fleet remains there, that american troops remain there particularly what's going on with japan and china and it becomes more important, and so asserting that

the south china sea is not china's lake is a demonstration not that the united states is trying to exercise a strong military role in terms of countering china, but demonstrating the united states has strong interest there that other countries in the region have strong interests there, and we intend through our presence in the region to underscore those interests, but the other point is economic. the other point is if we're going to grow, and we heard the first panel yesterday talk about weak growth in this country, if we're going to grow this economy and create jobs, one of the major ways of doing it is to demonstrate that we can work with these countries to expand markets in the asian region. that's an important part of domestic recovery now and of prosperity over the next several decades to come.

there's intellectual property and making sure our trade rights are protected and going there with the g20 and apec conversations that will take place in japan, we want to say we have a strong economic role in the region by dmon -- demonstrating we are working with countries in the region and have a strong interest in the region and we want cooperation with the other democracies. the chinese have what they call a string of pearls where they've developed commercial relations throughout the region through china all the way through sri lanka. we have a string of democracies we want to work with not so much against china, but to show we have a sustaining role in this region. >> bob, this is a new phenomena to a certain extent that there's restivity to america playing an aggressive role is up to china's

neighbors. >> i think our neighbors feel more reassured by america being there than america receding in the economic region. the united states has been encouraged by virtually every country in the region including vietnam. they are one the strongest advocates of the united states continuing to play an economic security role in the region, and virtually every country in the regionments it. i think there's a feeling, the old notion of balance of power is not a conventionally used word, but there's a feeling that a strong american presence in the region is very comfortable. we don't have territorial objectives in the region, but we do play and have for a long time played a strong and balancing security role in the region, and that is what others want to see us do more proactively, and secretary clinton has been doing

this with her trips, and president obama is going to do this wanting more trade with the region in their interests and in ours, and we have an abiding long term security role. these ceilings are important to us, the strength and stability of the friends in the region is important to us, and you can do this with a security role, but you have to keep economic engagement that we'll emphasize also. >> let's go inside china for a moment. reevaluation of currency is a hot topic right now, and is likely to come up at the g20. i'd like to hear more on just how important a factor this is in china's success story versus a number of other factors. >> yeah, okay. that's a very good question. if you look at the chinese growth in the last 30 years, in the first 15 years or so, it was

mostly domestic consumption that's rising fast in the 1908s, early -- 1980s and 1990s. one of the reasons there's a figure about the gdp growth and that's been fast at 9% consistently for the last 30 years, but if you look at the household income growth, personal income, that growth has been extremely uneven in the last 30 years. in the first 15 years, that growth was very fast. personal income growth, that powered personal consumption, and that made china basically like a typical growth with gdp growing and consumption growing. what has happened in the last 10 or 15 years is that the household income is like the united states if you look at medium income growth in this country that has been virtually flat. china is not flat, but relative

to gdp growth, the personal income growth has not nearly been as fast. the personal consumption has suffered. i view the currency issue more of a result of those factors that have inhibited the growth of the personal income. rather than a deliberate policy, sort of philosophy, rather as a result of that, one of the consequences, there's slower pays of the personal income growth is that a lot of the jobs have been created in the export sector, and that becomes a political issue. they are right when they say that the currency issue is not a tech technical issue, but a political issue. one of the reasons it's a political issue is that so much of the job rates is concentrated in the export sector. look at the service sector of the chinese economy, it's 40% of

the gdp, much lower compared with india. service factory is one of the most labor intensive sectors, and i would argue that the way to go forward is not so much the focus on the currency issue, but focus on liberalization to create more jobs. >> now, you mentioned the human situation in china. for the last three decades, china had one massive five year program after another and focused on the buildup of infrastructure. we had an announcement of the next five year plan starting in 2011, massive investments again but of a different nature this time. >> it's a very interesting shift in the -- it's subtle, but it's a very important shift. >> not so subtle. >> well, we look at the five year plan, but this one is quite

different. this one is precisely a result of the fact of the recognition that the personal income growth in the last 15 years has lacked gdp growth. this time around for the first time as i remember the phrase inclusive growth which made it in india and the other countries, but for the first time, it made it into the official document about the economic development and economic growth. china has a higher level of income inequality compared with the united states. >> right. >> it is very, very high, and one of the things that many people don't know is that china is the first 15 years of the reforms had an improvement in the income distributions and it was going down, but it was in the the last 15 years the income

inequality becomes a huge issue. they have massive implorations of politics and things like that. i am very happy that for the first time at that level, they recognize the problem and began to address it. >> to summarize it, it looks as if they follow through they invest massively in education, social services, and in knowledge-based job creation. now, if they follow through in the scale they're suggesting, we may not notice it right away, but within a few years, we'll notice a tremendous change. >> i think in terms of the science and technology, they have made massive investments all along. the share of the gdp is about 1.8% of the and there's 2% of that range in developing countries to have such a high

ratio of rnd and gdp is a very, very dramatic thing. i have met with colleagues, and if you look at the chinese publications, the number is rising. >> the number of patents are up. >> yes, and all these thing, we have equality of some of these things, but overall there's no question that chinese science capabilities are rising significantly. i think the issue more is not about that. it's not about the poverty or the science and education, it's more about the bottoms here. surprisingly to many people, they don't know that china has in the last 15 years has invested less in education as compared with many other developing countries. public investments, the shortage of the public investment was more than made up by private

investments, but households, the pes and if they invest a high percentage of their income in education, don't ask them to consume tvs and electronics and bicycles, and all the other things the economy is producing. this is a social contract, and now they recognize that the lack of public spending on education is hindering. in china talking about economic, everybody listens because the social stuff people think this is soft, soft, we don't need to listen to you. if you link the social investments to economics, they listen. the reason why people are not spending is because they spend so much on their basic education, they don't have the money to spend on other things. >> let's turn to india for a second. it has followed in the wake of china, several decades later, with sustained large-growth

increases, and today it's an economic miracle of the sort. however, you have been very forthright in pointing out some of the holes in the pizza so to speak, and some of the things not being addressed or willfully not being addressed. tell us a little bit your own picture of the current economic situation and cosh yowling if you -- sociology if you will and where it's heading. >> i've been hearing since yesterday morning everyone is ob -- obsessed about the american dream. the founding flint is what like the american dream, an obsession with the ideal equality, liberty, compassion. these are the kind of deep ideas

that were sunk by the founding fathers, an outstanding group of men. the thing that res enated -- resinated is he had to become a gandhi-man. you have a situation where you have a large number of people, 200 to 300 million part of a strong narrative of economic growth, but you also have incredible amount of 700 to 800 million people who don't have a story to their life. you have 600 million people, the size of africa that live in subquality. i agree that we have mobile phones, the truth is that there

are have many people, 500 million people in india who still barely get sustainable food. you, you -- a lot of the conversation here with bob here, what works for america, but what you have to ask us is what would work for india. what works for america doesn't work for us. i can tell you what excites us is not artificial america, but what excites india is americans. we resinate to the values of liberties and democracy, but we do not like at all with american foreign policy and the way it's played itself out. i heard him say that we pursue the idea of lining with democracy. that's not true. in asia, america backed a very, very undemocratic series of regimes. >> it's a new administration.

>> it's a new administration. [laughter] it's a new day. >> let me ask you a question here though between the two of you. are you a little less on the mission tick of what bob is -- optimistic of what the u.s.-india relations will be? >> i'm generally less optimistic about the synopsis of the official level. i'm hugely on optimistic about the people who will -- i have india friends who live in america and are absolutely part of american culture today. when i meet my american friends, i resinate to them, but when we look at american foreign policy, there's a lot to hold back on. what is our concern, and i think sam said it, but we're not obsessing about china. if china is obsessing about -- i think america is obsessing with chie nare more than india.

it's what sam said in the morning. we have 800 million people who we need to feed and educate, and it's a huge task. india's best and brightest are not taking great wealth. india's best and brightest are working very hard and i know hundreds of these guys trying to crack the con numb drum of policy that cracks india. i would imagine that if you lacked economic well being, you would be neurotic about it, but i find a lot of the conversation here has been incredibly economic country and a lot of an sighty is about well being. i heard china mentioned again and again without any infliction of moral principles. it's never been about what china doesn't do right. you would imagine liberty would be the founding principle in a

conversation. you don't see that when it comes to a conversation with china. we don't get a tick-box in india, but practicing the democracy that is very complicated and dflt, and i -- difficult, but i would say we do a better job of manager conflicts -- managing conflicts in democracy, and i'm reminded of the 30-year-old, an innocence at large that can get a little worried. we are a complex country. we are trying to deal with things in a complex way, and i don't think it's china or america that we obsess about. what we obsess about, and we're hugely imperfect as a society, but i think the idea behind that, the founding flint with we negotiate is fairly sound. we are a work in progress, but i think we feel we are doing it

the right way. >> you have provided quite a bit of coverage on corruption as an issue. is it growing? how serious is it? will the economic growth rate continue? >> you know, for some reason the world has again linged to corruption issues, but to me corruption is a symptom. i don't think it's the cause. i think the cause is inequality. if you have inequality on the scale that we have, corruption is inevitable. you see inequality, you know there's crouping. our problem is potential religious trouble. we have the second largest population of muslims. there are lots of issues. there's the right wing hindu stream. these are great battles in

india. to be honest, the north has fought again and again, and sought a government policy that's more humane. it's the idea of the society and actually -- there's a very strong call of ideologically driven maui's and they should be made or hunted out, but most of the people lying around them are really the poorest of the poor, people who have been driven pretty much because the state policies failed them for decades now. i mean, our argument has been consistently that you need to adopt a more human main approach to them and provide food and provide education and you need to stop going into the forest and getting these guys because you figured out there's these at the bottom of the forest and that lies at the bottom of the problem. they want a slice of the forest because under the forest lies

oxide and iron-ore. >> very good. we're going to turn to you all in a few minutes, so think up some questions, usual rules, put your hand up and we'll get to you. i said in a few minutes we'll go to you for questions, but first i want to hear -- i know you all want to hear from them, who has to get back to the third country that's in this mix for this panel, the united states. you have one of the more dramatic views. there is a debate going on about whether the decline that we're suffering in the united states now is kind of a bad patch for awhile, or are we on some historical decline that will go on and on. there's statistics that support the latter. >> i'm glad i'm speaking after them. i think this discussion is important whether america is

going to rise or decline and the issues within the united states needs to be said in the broader context. there's an interesting article that came out last week about restoring the american dream, and in it it initially talks about being raised in india and watching dallas and completely obsessed with the big hair, the cars, and shiny americans. growing up in africa, i had the same experience. we have million people and 60% under the gauge of 24 live in dire poverty. all these issues are with the needs and desires to have economic growth, issues with poverty, the inequality, and all that applies to africa ten-fold. when it comes to the united states specifically and economics 101, economics look at three things, capital, labor,

and productivity. if you look at the quality and quantity around capital law boar and the productivity, it's very clearly a story that is leaning towards the merging world, and i would say in many ways because of the structural issues we've been discussing around the united states the last couple of days, it's leading against the united states. i don't think that the united states is a sort of, it's all over said and done, but i think there's still a lot of policy issues, not just around the united states specific comply, -- specifically, but also how they engage with bigger regions such as a million people in africa and closer to home like brazil with china being their leading trading agency. we have to start to have a bigger engagement and discussion around what america's role is going to be particularly given that in places like africa in particular, united states policy

and approach has been one, but now africans and the african leadership has decided that that hasn't worked for 60 years. africans are simple people, want what you want,ment education and health care, and the reality is there are now other potential sources of finance potential opportunities to build alliances with the chinese and indians, and so i hope that next time we're sitting up here, there's discussions about the obama presidency going to africa with a new lens, not just to hand out money which by the way, the united states is boar roadwaying -- borrowing from china to give to africa. the misallocation of labor and productivity in the united states, but the issues bigger than that. >> there are, but there's one that you tend to focus in on, and that is that we made such a mess of things, that at least for a period of time, we need to

close our economy some. we cannot continue as an open economy to the extent we are now, and build jobs and take care of our own people. in other words, to use the word protectism may be more important than we think. can you explain? >> my next book argues that the united states is facing an ad hoc choice. you have two alternatives. state open to the rest of the world in terms of trade and capital, or close up and deal with what i believe are structural issues. i think the united states is going to be facing structural unemployment which is something no one in this room has experienced unless you come from outside. now, i know that in the united states people get, you know, because it's always, you know, left or right or democratic or republican or black or white, people don't want to have a discussion around protectism. however, given the fact you have a large number of jobs not

coming back which glenn hutchens talked about yesterday, and also the fact if you look at what globalization has done in terms of the coefficient and income growth as talked about a moment ago in this country and not just in the united states, but also in europe, there should be space to have a clear discussion around what the possibilities of having some form of protection at least until you fix the structural problems in this country. i know people don't like that discussion because they view, they point the holy and claim we are so integrated now it's not possible to have some kind of more aggressive protectist pooing sighs, but the reality is it has to be on the table and in the mainstream to be discussed. >> why don't we get that discussion started here, but it has to be brief due to time. >> with all due respect, that's

the worst way to look at the problem and the worst answer to it. it's not an either or problem whether we are protectists or not. many countries, many countries, are far more open to the economy and have less income disperty than the united states does. scanned knave ya is open, and the problem in the united states in terms of dealing with the problem would not be resolved by protectionism or restricting the inflow of immigrants, particularly talented immigrants or restricting the flow of capital. the question is are we going to be the leading economy over the next 20 years? the right way to do is to go back to the first panel that was discussed yesterday and deal with our own internal issues in a more purposeful way. education, we're not dealing with education.

we're not going to be a world-class economy in 20 years unless we have a world-class education system today. infrastructure, we need to build out the infrastructure. we don't need protectionism to do that. we need a purposeful approach internally to deal with that. we need to deal with energy. reduced energy dependence, we need to do that and have the capability to do it. we need to get our act together to address this. we need to address a number of internal structural issues on our own looking at the rest of the world as the boogy-man saying well, the rest of the world is responsible for our problems. diverts us from the attention to the problems we have at home. we have to deal with those. we can't blame the rest of the world. cutting us off from competition is the wrong answer and countries that have done that in the past have failed and not succeeded. in this global economy it would be so disruptive to the average american consumer and producer. american companies need the

global market in order to expand jobs and expand profits so they can invest more in innovation in the united states. innovation economy is the competitive economy. sam made the point earlier. >> i have to stop you. >> you need to have a free flow of information and good. >> we could go all day. >> i'd like to. i'd like to. >> it's a good issue to debate. >> i'm going to have to stop you and get questions from the floor before we close out in 5 minutes. can i see some hands? over here. way over there. no? somebody? hi, i'm -- >> i'm, i'm ryan with the daily beast. the pla for the most part has been cooperative with the u.s. military, however, in the last decade the new guard of the pla is going with a paradigm that

the united states military is the enemy of china. what does this ramify for the u.s.-china relationship especially in a closed society where the ccp nationalism in order to balance against enemies? >> any discussions on pla is -- i'm not an expert on the military, but i -- let me say this. you're right that china is not a democracy. we know that. i have to say, you know, the internet technology since this is an innovation summit, the internet technology is traymatically affecting the political discourse and the discussion in china. there is a rising level of transparency in china on the

internet. the official channels are trying to suppress the information, but they are succeeding, but not doing it completely, so there is more transparency now about the pla. the kind of claims that china has been making about south china sea and others is they have actually have been remarkably consistent in terms of their rhetoric. i think what changed is the power that china has today to make similar claims in 1972 with the same impact as you do now with the second largest economy in the world, and when president obama visited china in the communique, there was a reference to south asia. a lot of my indian friends feel angry on china and u.s. talking issues related to south asia. i got a communique making

exactly the same points, and so the reference point has changed, and so i'm not sure of how much the rhetoric has changed or the perception of the power and the power itself obviously has changed. i think this is a new reality that both sides have to come to some sort of consensus about how to deal with it. it is, it is tough. >> it is. we are virtually out of time, but i want to give tyrone and some others to give a final comment if we said things that need to be responded to. let's start with you. >> i just want to underscore the fact that everything has to be on the table. i don't think we can outright dismiss certain things because we have an emotional attachment to the status quo. i do agree having an open

society in capital and trade that moves freely is something we should all want, but the fact of the matter is the united states does have a history of preaching or basically saying do as i say and not as i do. we know there's foreign subsidies and the united states has intervened in a number of sectors. this is just another way of saying what's important for us to have this discussion about what the implications are. i do believe there are gains clearly for the united states in terms of trade, but i do think we should have it be open-minded to the fact that we could see an increase in income inequality as people who are educated are the most competitive on the global scale. we should at least have the space to have that discussion. it's not crazy, and i do think that's the important thing to remember. >> largely, i just think that india's successes or failures is going to weigh heavily on the world. we are in some sense a template to the world in the way we

succeed in how its shaping in multiling lal and ethnic and it's that and very poor. the results are high, and if india succeed, a new idea of civilization will be beyond economic comes into play, and i think gandhi said many things about everything. there's hundreds of writings, and truly i heard everything about self-dedication, but beyond tolerance and violence, one thing he spoke about intelligently coming home to us today is the idea of sustainable life. i think that gandhi idea comes back in the next decades to haunt us in a huge way of the question of productivity, growth, and also the question of consumption, and i think that gandhi-idea will come into play,

and maybe, i'm not sure, but maybe it finds roots again in india and take flower, and we will see them. >> just a footnote before we quit, it was mentioned an article which i think is in the "thyme" magazine -- "time" magazine that came out on friday. it's a long and detailed cover story and a striking one taking a position i haven't heard taken before. he doesn't go all the way to protectionism, but we need to rethink what nation we will be and what kind of initiatives we're launching now to close the gap in which in his opinion is growing between us and some of the state capitalist countries of the moment. help me thank this very fine panel for this discussion. [applause] >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you.

coming up on c-span2, a look on china's military spending and relations with the u.s., and a conversation about u.s. policy toward iran, and after that president obama addresses india's parliament, and later a discussion on technology in india. >> up next, a conversation own u.s.-china relations. this part of washington journal is 40 minutes. >> our next guess this morning is drew thompson, the china's

study director at the nixon center. we're talking about china's military buildup. some say it's a growing threat. is it? >> guest: threat in the combination of capabilities and intent. we track their capabilities, but it's difficult to know what china's intent is. it's an opaque system. we don't have a lot of cooperation with them at the moment, so there's a lot of mistrust in the relationship and the mistrust runs both ways. it's hard to say whether or not it's a threat. i mean, other countries have robust militaries, and they're not a threat because we have a sense of their intent. with china, we just don't have that. >> host: some look on how much china spends on their military. the united states spends $663 billion, and china spends $98.8 billion, and then united kingdom, and france, and

russia. >> guest: there's a lot of question on that number and whether it's higher or lower by order of magnitude. the real question is again, what are they going to do with it? i lot of investment is improving capabilities that are in some cases directed at the united states and our ability to intervene close to their shores, and that, of course, is disconcerning. but if we look at how they shaped their military and much of that spending went towards just improving the livelihoods of their soldiers. a couple years ago they increased the budget of food .50 per day per soldier. we have to see the reality that it's growing around 10% sometimes more and sometimes less. it's an a growth trajectory, and we need to keep any on it. >> host: there's tension between us, why?

>> guest: not tension as much as mistrust. we don't appreciate one another, and that also mean, you know, the united states doesn't have many, you know, competitors, and the only potential competitor in the distant horizon is possibly china. there's mistrust. there's not a lot of cooperation between the two, and that's how mostly the u.s. builds trust with other partners and countries, we cooperate together, train together, exercise together and serve together. we don't do that with china. they tend to operate on their own, and that creates a deficit in the amount we trust one another. that's not the same as tension. there's accidents with u.s. platforms and chinese platforms coming within close proximity, and that can create tensions. >> host: the article talking about prom's overseas trip makes the point that the president is

skipping china, and that this could add to the mistrurs or whatever is going on between the two countries. is that a mistake? >> guest: well, this is a well-traveled president, and he did go to china. he's made that visit, and china's president is expected to visit the united states in mid january. there is a fair amount of high level summit ri. he is a lot of other places to visit including a long postponed trip to indonesia where he spent time as a young man. i think it's difficult to say it's a mistake to skip china. we have been through a rough patch in the security relationship. we're on the process of mending that. we're expecting secretary of defense gates to visit china before he leaves office, but look at where hillary clinton and secretary robert gates are now. i mean, they're in asia and spending a lot of time engaging in asia, and they have been

going back constantly. the u.s. presence in the region is fairly significant, and it's not just about china. >> host: for the chinese culturally, what does it mean that secretary gates didn't accept an invitation from china, and now will go, the president goes on the trip and don't go to china, for the chinese in their culture, what does it mean? >> guest: i don't think it means anything. in terms of culture, you have to look more broadly than senior leadership in both countries. the u.s. has invested heavily political capital and attention in the region. we've heard we're back, there's a question of whether we left, but the impression was that the u.s. had not been maintaining an active presence politically, and that needed to get corrected, but i don't think the chinese are looking at the u.s. -- i mean, some people perhaps are seeing the u.s. as maybe, you know, adopting a containment

strategy. there are fear mongers in their strategic culture that worry about long-term relations with the u.s., and relations with china's neighbors, and see that, you know, the u.s. with malintent, but i'm not sure they're looking at president obama's trip as one as threatening china in this case. >> host: we're talking about the military buildup and drew thompson is the director at the nixon center. what is the pla? >> guest: the peoples liberation army, 2.2 million citizens active service members in the defense of their own country. you know, it has a long and rich history starting out with, you know, the civil war period when they fought the -- it's essentially it's a party's armmy, the party responsible for keeping the communist party in

power which is distinct from a professional army. >> host: what impact does a dilledup of the pla have? >> guest: that's an open question. again, a buildup in and of itself is not necessarily a challenge or threat. the question is what do they intend to do and what's the nature of the buildup? that's an area where all countries in the region including japan and u.s. alis and other countries in southeast asia have to engage them effectively and cooperate with them to determine what the intent is, and i think it's buildup, you know, runs a lot of risks. china is engaged in a very progressive modernization process, but at this point they control the pace of that itself and howfdz they want to -- how fast they want to grow and what platforms they want to invest in. one stray ji is they lieu --

strategy is they lose control in the arms race. they're building up, we're building up, southeast asian countries are responding, and it risks into something more expensive. >> host: the lines are lighting up for you, but before calls, i want to get out there for our viewers your background on this issue. >> guest: well, i lived in china about 10 to last 20 years, and when i wasn't living there, i was studying there, but i come from the private sector. i worked in a variety of business and food production and others, and i've been working on policy issues here in washington for about, you know, almost 10 years now. >> host: oregon, democratic line, mark, go ahead. >> caller: good morning, folks. thank god for c-span. your expertise is appreciated. i want your opinion really on

-- for me all this reinvolves around taiwan and that going on with north korea. in your opinion, what is the inevidentability that taiwan is going to become a part of china, and what is that going to create for us? thank you. >> guest: taiwan is very central to the military security relationship between the united states, and it's always been something of a challenge. i mean, the communique highlights this in 1972 and the negotiated documents between the chinese and president nixon identified taiwan as a devicive factor in the relationship that needs to be managed, and we have managing it ever since. i think it's impossible to predict how taiwan turns out. i think there is a recognition

that the mainland and taiwan are tied in length, but the question is whether or not a peaceful settlement is going to be achieved to the satisfaction of the taiwan people. that's the objective of the people. until that happens, it's going to be a continuation of mistrust which in many ways places taiwan in a position of strength so that it can negotiate is settlement with the mainland to its own satisfaction and agreeable to the people of taiwan. much of the tension that has occurred in the last year has been related to the announcement of taiwan.sale tuppeo but it occurs at that time went

across great relationship -- cross-strait relationship is at its best place ever. host: tweet here. guest: that is a really good question. china has been investing really heavily in creating new submarines and a land-based missile defense. it has been actively getting technology, both domestically and imports and other means to create an effective classic strategic deterrence. that said, it is still very small. and as a handful of missiles compared to the united states. if we look at the negotiations with the russians at the moment, china is a marginal actor, as the u.s. and russia compared their stockpiles.

china has the minimal means for deterrence. the use this summer it is important, because that provides -- more c-span.org -- the use of submarines is important, because that provides a more active deterrence. submarines are very difficult to deter, very difficult to track. most of the countries in the area don't possess adequate capability to conduct an -- to conduct anti-submarine acts. host: ohio. good morning, gary. caller: since we are spending six times more than -- host: than china. caller: ok, and the reason for

that is all of our foreign aid is on the military bill. if they are going to talk about putting money and cutting -- cutting money and cutting money from social security, they have to start with foreign aid. it is all wrapped up together. why is a person from industrial part of your background be -- or about the military buildup if it was not just to protect our interests of big companies in china? guest: well, i mean, if you are looking at economic interests abroad, both the united states and china have a significant international interests that they have to protect, and the military is one tool to protect them.

if you look at the u.s. marine corps, one of their primary missions abroad is not just invading countries like afghanistan and providing security there but evacuate american citizens in places -- but he evacuating american citizens from places where there has been a natural disaster or unrest the united states will need to protect investments abroad. it has gotten more and more economic interests, and more and more major chinese companies are investing abroad i infrastructure. the pla will eventually be called upon to protect those interests, either directly or indirectly, putting boots on the ground when needed to evacuate chinese citizens, or supporting foreign militaries or the investments are to protect chinese interests, much like the

u.s. does one cooperating with allies abroad. guest: space and cyber is a complicated issue an important one. secretary gates in ' has announced any partnership initiative -- in australia has announced eight new partnership initiative for surveillance. australia is uniquely qualified because of its location. remember when john glenn flew over in his first flight and perth turn on the lights for him -- it is at the crossroads of space. it is natural that we would work together on that. that is not as heavily -- not necessarily geared to confront china. there is a need for this

regardless of china's rise. all countries face cyber threats. last week, we had a major attack in denmark, and we don't of -- who conducted -- we had an attack in myanmar, and we don't know who conducted it. it may have been the myanmar government. it's hard to pin down. there is a universal need for developing nations to build cyber infrastructure to defend themselves. there is no reason that china cannot be part of an architecture and the feature that contributes to the security and -- the internet -- part of an architecture in the future the contribute to the security of the internet. host: next call. caller: the question i had was already asked about the monetary amounts.

my idea is to cut the military and half -- military in half and use the money to help us your incident using the money to help everybody ever placed -- to help us here instead of using the money to help everybody everyplace else. host: this is the topic this morning, china's military buildup. drew thompson is the china studies director at the nixon center. michael on the republican line in sterling heights, michigan. caller: i am of the vietnam veteran and i am apprehensive about red china. the red chinese have killed 61 million people. communism was caused more human misery, death, and despair that all of the annals of human experience.

it is not on the scale as under mao zedong but it is still a totalitarian system. guest: china is still a police state, but they are a far cry from the comments of the 1950's, 1960's, 1970's -- from the communists of the 1950's, 1960's, 1970's. they have opened their economy and lifted hundreds of millions of poverty. the standards of living are much greater than they were 30 years ago. the question is, how is the u.s. going to adapt to the changes, how will we coopt china, and how will we help china should its choices so that it can treat its own people with compassion and dignity and make sure that their rights are protected as well as being irresponsible pleasure to turn the current -- as well as

being a responsible player, the term at the current administration is using, are around the world? host: medina, ohio, leslie, go ahead. caller: drew, thank you for your candid and honest report. it is refreshing. china has changed, and to the vietnam veteran, he is right on, and it is something that can come back, even though it has moved from the vill -- veitnam era. we have got to spend our military resources on anti- submarine were for a -- warfare. at how we collect the money --

and how will we collect the money they vote? guest: in terms of chinese holdings of u.s. treasuries, it is about 6% or 7%. it is far from being a dominant older -- holder. that should make us all take a deep breath and pause. china cannot use its holdings of treasuries as economic leverage against the united states. it would not be in their interest rate it would harm their currency as well as ours. they contain no advantage to doing that. -- they can gain no advantage by doing that. i think it is really a non- issue. it happened in the last election cycle -- it is not a weapon. in terms of the chinese submarine abilities, they are growing, but they are a long wait from being able to operate

abroad. they are still a coastal forts, and if you look at the way china is investing in its navy, they are looking more and in -- investing in coastal craft than the blue water may navy. the 10,000 at the stores would be the largest ones in its fleet -- the 10,000 destroyers would be the largest ones in its fleet. only two are on a range with the largest u.s. frigates. in terms of the submarine, isn't asymmetrical threat. -- it is an asymmetrical threat. the u.s. has a fairly strong capabilities to protect its floating assets. the real trick is working with our allies in japan, south korea, malaysia, to help build

their capacities and defend their maritime rounds so that they can ensure that when some marines entered their territory, it is peaceful -- submarines enter the territory, is peaceful. host: republican line, you are on with drew thompson. caller: i want you to address why china is doing what is doing, and go back to the first of the unequal treaties, the treaty of nanking, and how all these wars began because of trade deficits with the british. this is white china today is doing what they are doing grid -- why time that today is doing what they are doing. history repeats itself, but the circumstances are always different.

when the british assault on the faulty chips before, -- they lost -- one of the british sold them at befall the ships will for -- sold them the faulty ships before, they lost the battle. they know their history and past. host: sounds like she knows the history as well. guest: up until 1997, when hong kong was returned, they see that as the century of humiliation. it was a time of great uncertainty and tortured. -- and hardship. they were grappling with the challenge of bringing in foreign technology, and was a big challenge, and they did not succeed. i had a different formula where

they can bring in technology -- they have a different formula with a can bring in technology and they are not worried as much about the communist party mandate. we see the same thing with the internet. when the internet was introduced into china, we thought it would be the undoing communism and the leadership. it has not turned out that way. they had adapted they are continuing to adapt. the world is not as bismarckian as it was. china is not falling into the same trap as the soviet union dead. the question is whether or not the new security relationship in the future is going to help the united states and china or whether it will be 80 some equation -- whether it will be a zero sum equation. host: 4 worth, texas, john on

the democratic line. caller: thank you. i find it a little bit ironic that the trillion dollars we owe china was entirely borrowed that could invade iraq and afghanistan. it seems like your guest is currently concerned about the buildup of the chinese military. one of the previous callers said it is not even 1/10 at the size of our own military. correct me if i'm wrong, but i see that as the ankle you are taking here. guest: there is a lot of distrust of the united states abroad. there's a lot of concern that the united states means other countries harbor we see that a lot in central asia. -- there is a lot of concern that the united states means other countries harm. we see that a lot in central

asia. the u.s. presence there they don't see as legitimate, they don't see it as being endorsed by the united nations. china is not injured into security efforts in afghanistan -- china is not contributing to security efforts in afghanistan. they don't see us as a trust for the actors in central asia -- as trust with the actors and central asia. they see a different model were they would like a more consensus-driven approach that is more encompassing. and unfortunately, one that potentially excludes the united states. that is where the u.s. needs to push back, partly because our presence in these organizations were the chinese have a dominant presence is an important way to show the chinese and other countries that our intentions

are generally positive. host: steve is joining us on the democratic line. caller: my comment is simply, i believe that china is in a lot of ways wiser than we are because they know history better than we are. china has very little interest in -- and thanks very little about taking us over -- thinks very little about taking us over or competing militarily. they are building their military because they have to in this world, but they have figured out a way to weaken our country and strengthen their country is economically. guest: i think there is something to that. the real challenges economic interests and protecting them, but around the world and at home. the military has a minor role to play there. it is more important that the

u.s. continues to pursue a trade agenda more aggressively, that it does not sit back and lose out in the realm of economic condition. we see china forming a free trade relationships with the allies.ost important yet we are still providers up security. look at asean. even as the u.s. relationship with several asean countries grows, china has trade agreements with all of them. that concerns many countries in southeast asia. they are economically dependent on china, and china might use that as coercion. i think it is difficult to see at this point, but in the future is a possibility. the trading relationship between the u.s., china, and the

rest of the world is complicated and integrated. but thankfully, in some ways, it is not really a security question. the role the military here is ensuring of freedom of navigation, freedom of control. that is an area where you see positive developments. you see china's contribution to the maritime policy missions in africa, cargo to and from the gulf. it is a vital contribution to security, and an area where china and the u.s. have a similar goals. all countries have a similar interest there. it is the areas where economic interest coincide with mutual security interests and we have opportunities to cooperate. host: drew thompson is the nixon

center's china studies director. line.n the republican mode caller: i would like to see comments on at the position of the philippines and that part of the world as we close down military bases, and appoint a submarine -- a point with the submarines is also being closed. if you read about world war ii, that is every geographically important part of the world. guest: it is, but the uss made it very clear that it will --us has made it very clear that it will maintain the structure. it is not looking to expand, secretary gates has made that clear. but is looking to expand with a

military allies, and it is that just southeast asia, but northeast asia as well -- not just south east asia, but northeast asia as well. the philippines is critical, but the u.s. as determine that maintaining a civilian relationship with the leadership is more important than maintaining these bases that date back to world war ii. the infrastructure in places like guam, building relationships with the singapore, settling issues with japan -- we have a lot of debate about the status of okinawa. host: a couple more phone calls. harrisburg, pennsylvania, independent line. caller: good morning, thank you for c-span. mr. thompson, i hear more about

the chinese military buildup. i go back to november 1950, and the puppet regime in north korea and the lives lost and the frozen feet and hands of our soldiers that did not have the proper equipment to fight. i think about that, and i think about what they might do in the ensuing year or two or possibly five if they have a troop buildup if they go after soft. and the korean peninsula -- if they go after south korea on the korean peninsula. guest: since normalizing relations with south korea in 1992, they have had a fairly balanced relationship and the balance it with north korea. i don't think there is concern

in south korea about china somehow invading south korea. again, there is economic interdependence between the two countries. china -- it is their no. 1 trading partner. there is concern in south korea but the economic relationship that surpasses the european or u.s. relationship might translate into a lack of leverage. i'm not a big believer in that. i think it has proven so far to be effective. an active trading relationship was not created a different security environment. it is not about whether the economic relationship creates leverage. it is about what the to these countries can maintain economic dynamism -- it is about whether each of these countries can make

an economic dynamism. should there be a situation where china is compelled to send forces to north korea, it is impossible to know what the terms would be or what the causes would be. it is hard to predict the future in this respect. we have been guessing that north korea would collapse for a long time and we have been wrong. the prospects are slim at the moment, but if we look at the china and north korea relationship, china is committed to making sure north korea -- to ensuring north korea's survival. but that is not a military equation, it is mostly an economic one. it provides investment to north korea to keep its infrastructure rowling. that is how they are supporting it, not with weapons or troops.

host: washington, d.c., go ahead. caller: you have described how china is building an asymmetrical capacity in the taiwan area to deter the united states from coming to taiwan's defense but i want you to comment on our end to do it -- our ambiguity to not coming to the defense of taiwan. guest: the u.s. is committed to helping taiwan defend itself. i think that the current president of taiwan is on track towards that. he used his first term to cement an economic relationship that benefits taiwan and now he is looking for political advances

in its next term. he has hinted that there are opportunities for dialogue between the two sides, opportunities to attract two, associations with retired officers, as well as the possibility for a peace treaty. there are positive developments that the u.s. policy towards taiwan have been able. host: 10 at t -- tennessee, you have a question or comment? caller: i wish the united states would stop spending so much money on defense, being a threat to the rest of the world, and perhaps the rest of the world would look at us and say, "we don't have to spend all our money on defense." we are the only country taking over other countries. host: republican line, and new jersey. caller: two things.

one, in general, i see the threat of war in the next 10 to 15 years to be quite large. if you look at it in terms of history, china has abandoned communism. there is the old story that nobody believes in communism except american college professors. china has instead taken up the 19th century nationalism that is giving its people a unifying idea, which is the source of all the troubles of europe in the 20th century. i think that we sort of seat china with the same sort of psychology that germany had vis- a-vis where the u.s. as the hegemon is denying china its place in the sun. ec had a lot on chinese chat

boards where they log on to make comments, were they constantly referred to the united states as holding china down. and anything that was it a tribute, a tributary or possession of the chinese empire, should by natural light be under the sway of beijing today. and contrary to what democrats have said, the united states military -- there is a basic misconception. we pay our pride its $20,000, sgt $40,000, colonels and generals $150,000. the huge military budget we have is a lot personnel expense that people like china do not carry. host: we will get a response because we don't have a lot of time. guest: we don't have a lot of time to answer every complex

question. i don't think we're headed to war with china or anyone else but the u.s. has a fairly good image abroad in many places. the countries that fear the worst of the united states are the ones that know the least about it and have least contact. it is monday, which all the optimists to date. i see this as and -- we should all be optimists today. i see this as an opportunity to cooperate where possible. that is where the pla presents a number of opportunities. him and carried assistance in disasters. -- humanitarian assistance in disasters. the incidents recently where pla doctors serve on u.s. medical ships to learn from each other and build relationships. we are increasingly seeing extended the personnel --

exchanges of personnel. as that goes on, we will see less and less of these extremist views on chinese blogs. when they have the opportunity out at ware. officers and find ot .. colonize the rest of the world. they are not seeking at the moment to expand their territory. there are lingering territorial disputes, but jchina at the way it is now is the way it is