the americans or the israelis and as someone to the left of myself it is a shame. it also gives the u.s. the pretext because we are fighting our car when really there's a national liberation movement. because israel has the west bank under tight control and gaza too it is in collaboration. it has been very hard for events outside palestine. >> thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you all for coming. >> nir rosen is the author of in the belly of the green bird, the triumph of the murders in iraq. to find out more visit his website, nir rosen.com. ..

and wherein so honored to speak. and i want to talk tonight about a part of the world that should be a central focus of the united state, but still isn't yet. but as is often the case, elements of the u.s. military are ahead of the curve as to whether the trend of current events are headed. let me start with two things. we're all prisoners of the

mercator projection, americans that is. the mercator projection is the world unfolded on a flat rock single fish as north america and south america in a center with the indian and pacific oceans confined to the edges and therefore to the edges of consciousness as well. what we see in the center and we are at the heart of everything. after all, the united state is in the atlantic pacific country. we have keyboards on the atlantic and the pacific. worsen the 21st century world war i, world war ii, vietnam all encompassed in one respect or another were either atlantic or pacific. and also, our whole outlook, you

know, is that the atlantic and the pacific in the center. but what i'm here to say is that we have to focus on the third ocean, the indian ocean, which has been confined to the edges of our consciousness, but which is raising an important. another thing that we've all been prisoners of his revolving prisoners of cold war area studies at the end of world war ii, america found itself a great power, a great world power. and therefore it needed area experts for each part of the world submit artificially divided eurasia into the middle east, south asia, central asia, southeast asia, east asia, universities did this, think tanks did this, the pentagon did this, the cia and the state department all did this. and what i'm here to say tonight

is the these divisions are collapsing. it's all flowing together into one organic continuum, especially the southern overland of your ratio for the horn of africa to the indian nation archipelago north all the way to the sea of japan. as i said earlier the navy and marine corps have been onto this for some time. in october 2007 and 2007, the navy issued a maritime strategy for the next few decades, where it said it has been a two ocean navy in the pacific but would be oriented in the indian ocean and the pacific. the atlantic but it's no longer

contested in geopolitical terms. the real art growth conflict is in the greater indian ocean and the pacific. in june 2008fic. in june 2008 issued a vision statement for the next few decades, where it indicated that the united states marine corps would be at a principally in the indian and western pacific ocean. why is this? first of all, the indian ocean encompasses the entire arc of islam from the sahara desert across the longitude, several thousand miles to the indonesian archipelago. americans have gotten this idea that islam is a desert base, supposedly prone to the extremities to which deserts give rise and was spread quickly by the sword from arabia

westward across north africa into spain. but islam has also been a great seafaring days. remember the voyages of and that the sailor. sinbad was no money who sailed out of basra in what is today iraq. and when you read the distractions, what is conjured up the job means in the coast of indonesia and indonesia archipelago and other parts of the faraway south seas, several thousand miles across the longitude because islam was spread in the far east like sophisticated merchants and check hundreds of years to spread and was in addition layered upon indigenous hindu and malay cultures. islam took on an entirely

different task in the far east and it did in the middle east. lost was that so much ideological aspect. islam's artist is not some weird tangent. it constitutes almost half of the faith. about 600 million muslims live in the western part of the indian ocean all the way across north africa to morocco in about 580 million muslims live in the southern philippines, southwestern burma, the indian subcontinent, indonesia, the malay peninsula and elsewhere. so we have the indian ocean is the entire arc of islam. what else is there about it? is also the global energy interstate, where all of the oil and natural gas, the fossil fuels, that is, that come from

the arabian peninsula principally in the iranian plateau are transferred, are transported by supertankers across the whole width of the indian ocean 4000 miles across, through the narrow strait of malacca and lombok straits and north towards the burgeoning middle class fleshpots and east asia. the coastal cities of china, south korea and japan. so the indian ocean is a geographical tool to connect political development in both the middle east and in china and east asia all at the same time. and another thing, my book is entitled month and appeared in when americans hear the word monsoon, they think of the storm or perhaps a catastrophe or disaster of some sort, but that's only a very narrow

version of the truth. the monsoon is really a weather system. if the wind system that brings agricultural prosperity, development, the lifecycle. in india, when there's been a good monsoon and elections right afterward, the party in power 10 to do well because the monsoon directly affects the economy. another thing about the months to come them with another wind systems in other oceans is predictable it flows steadily for six year in the northeast southwest direction and after six months reverses the south by 180 degrees and flows in the other direction northeast southwest. and because this project will sailing distances can be calculated in advance. so since antiquity knew when

they would arrive in some place, when they should leave. they got very few surprises at sea. this is unlike other oceans so that the indian ocean did not need to wait for the ages steamships to united. because of the monsoon, the indian ocean 4000 miles across constituted one into the cultural community. you had malay from the far east, living in large numbers in madagascar, right off the coast of east africa. you had to get many from the arabian peninsula in large numbers, living 4000 miles away and the far east in the indonesian archipelago. you had gujarati is from northwestern india, living all over the indian ocean. and you had in addition you had all my means from southeast

arabia, living in large numbers in east africa. everyone was everywhere in the ocean since antiquity because of the month and wins. it's why you find remain as many, not just a few that many seventh and eighth and ninth century mosque's of arabs and persians in coastal china. it's why you have chinese navigators from the humane dynasty, visiting yemen and southwest arabia and those of mongol islamic descent making the pilgrimage to mecca. literally, everyone was sailing or upscaling abound everywhere. because of this, the indian ocean up until the arrival of the portuguese in 1498 with foss coder, sailing to india -- let me put any site here.

we often read in our history books that bosco do, come on the portuguese navigator discovered india. he didn't discover india. what he discovered or rediscovered for the europeans was the wind system was the monsoon the wind system that would allow one to sail from what is today kenya and east africa across the arabian tea to palletized in the western -- on the western coast of india. when da gama arrived in india, he instituted 500 years of western dominance over the greater indian ocean and the western pacific. after the portuguese came to touch, the french, the british and finally the american navy at the end of world war ii. but before da gama, the indian ocean constituted a relatively peaceful robust trading system,

dominated by arabs, persians, hindus, chinese of simultaneous these that crisscross each other all along the trader a period and is treating system, i believe, will come back. will reemerge as western dominance of the indian ocean. the 500 year period of western dominance begins to dissipate as we entered not just an economic multipolar world, but a military multipolar world, where in relative terms the united states navy gets smaller. and i'll go into that a bit later. notice i talk about the indian ocean and the western pacific as one unit. they are united in the strait of malacca, the fumbler street in other indian nation straight. but in the 21st century, we're liable to see other forms of

bringing these two bodies of water together. there have been feasibility studies for building a canal in the it's no surprise in southern thailand come a $20 billion project that would equal the panama canal as an engineering miracle. dubai port world is doing feasibility studies for land bridges across the militias can kill a and the malaysian government itself is studying various land bridge schemes. the point is they're going to be more connection points between the bay of bengal and the south china sea that is from the eastern indian ocean in the southwestern part of the pacific ocean. so will be one organic continua bring him especially middle eastern hydrocarbon to asia. and why do i emphasize maritime affairs so much? it's because ms just an

information age, still, 90% of all commercial goods still travel by sea. and in terms of container ships come in the indian ocean is emerging, is the center of the world. the indian ocean on the western. not in this world, what is going on a great power terms is think of china moving vertically south towards the indian ocean. and india moving horizontally east and west along the indian ocean. china is building or developing state-of-the-art harbor facilities in guadalajara and pakistan and southwestern baluchistan coming near to the entrance of the street of workers in chittagong in the eastern part of bangladesh, and coyote through in burma off the natural gas fields to the bay of

bengal and in humbug to do and the south is the southern extremity of sri lanka. china does not seem to have -- this is a controversial topic about what china intends with the sport. it doesn't mean at this point that china wants full-fledged naval bases there. i would be too provocative to india and china is a pain to make people feel that it rises benevolent and non-hegemonic. i think what china envisioned or at least at this stage is warehousing through facilities through commercial goods that will involve these poor are destined for the middle east and east africa. at the same time, china is building a green facilities with its warships and merchant marine ships can be stored up with fuel, can get prepared, et

cetera. it's unclear what the chinese intend. if anyone tells you this is chinese grand strategy, don't believe them. because the chinese themselves may not know what their grand strategy is because the chinese, though it's an authoritarian government in the end still has a whole wealth of think tanks, area expert, various factions of the party at arguing debate with each other in academic journals and otherwise. so china is feeling its way towards the indian ocean in all of these ports and harbor facilities at its building our own countries where china is also providing significant military and economic age. so it's a combination of strong diplomatic and military representation in the building of these ports, it's clear that china will be able to use these

ports, which will be the 21st century equivalent of 19th 19th century british: station, which all along the route that chinese ships were that ships have to sail to bring the hydrocarbon from the greater middle east to the cities of coastal china. china, you know, territory was ravaged by the west, by japan, by czarist russia in the 19th century and early 20th century, where china was split up into 10 parts actually. but this history, with this nervousness about sovereignty and toward terri out of the, china does not want -- does not want to leave it up to the united states of america to guard the sea lines of communication forever. at some point it envisions a blue water navy that will appeal

to guard the sea lines of communication for itself. meanwhile, while china's pushing south, and let me just go back. why is china pushing south? why does it want to have all this presence on the indian ocean? because china faces a malacca dilemma. that is too much of its hydrocarbons are dependent on the narrow show reagan that sometimes pirate infested strait of malacca. it was alternative ways of getting energy to coastal china. its building pipelines across central asia, natural gas, oil pipelines through cosmic stan, to bring some of this middle eastern energy direct overland into western china and you know, it also wants to use these indian ocean ports eventually to =tranfour natural gas and oil

through pipelines across burma, perhaps in the distant future through pakistan directly into western and southern china so as to avoid the strait of the lockout. india is pushing east and west. you know, in today's india, among foreign-policy intellectuals, an historical figure has come back into prominence. that is lord george nathaniel cruz on. karzai was the viceroys india, the british-based raid india from 1899 to 1905. and karzai and is revered by today's indian policy elite, even though he was the revision. list because he looked out at the world from the same geographical perspective as today's indian leaders. and karzai and india was the greater india. it included today's pakistan,

irma and bangladesh as well. and required shadow zones of influence in the middle east, particularly in iran, in arabia, and central asia and in southeast asia up to the goal for the cyan, all among the indian ocean. and what happened is the indian fear of influence in the chinese fear of influence are overlapping. india and china do not have a difficult history. there is no long-standing hatred or warfare. it was over they fight in in 1962 in the foothills of the himalayas. but beyond that, the two countries have had a relatively peaceful path, separated as they were by the high wall of the himalayas. buddhism spread from andrea into china in the early modern centuries.

but what has created this indian chinese rivalry? and i use the word rivalry, not conflict is the shrinkage of distance caused by the advance of military technology. you have now chinese airfield and tibet with chinese fighter jet whose arc of operations include india. you have indian warships in the south china sea. you have chinese warships in the indian ocean. because of military technology and the churning economy, these two democratic e-mails find that their spheres of influence increasingly overlap. as i say this, keep in mind while india's growth has de-needed it from pakistan and hyphenated it was china so that we less and less compare it with

pakistan and more and more compare india with china, india is still not merely in the same level of development is china. china has more paid cruise per year than india has in total coming in now, just keep that in mind. get india will overtake china in terms of total population and i think the year is 2032. the place where you can see indian chinese competition the strongest on the indian ocean isn't burma. think of burma as pre-world war i belgian come about to be overrun by the french and the british. what does burma have class burma has natural gas, strategic mineral to handle, uranium, timber, hydropower. china is hoping the roads and railroads throughout her mother. it threatening to turn burma into a veritable colony and the

indians cannot stand by and just watch. one indian leader said to me that you americans from half a world away and more holistically , you know, cry out about her most authoritarian ignited military government. but we indians right next-door do not have the luxury to watch as burma is turned into a veritable chinese colony. the democratic pro-western india has engage burma. it's developed strong links with the burmese military were chinese build -- develops a deepwater ports in the natural gas fields off the bay of bengal and through 50 miles north, indians are doing the same. while china once pipelines going northeast across burma into southern china, india wants natural gas pipeline through bangladesh into india.

these are the real outlines of the new geography of the 21st century that we will face in the post-iraq, post-afghanistan world. by the year 2035, the world will consume 50% more hydrocarbons than it's consuming now. and half of that consumption will come from india and china. and much of that consumption will come via the indian ocean from the greater middle east. in this world, you know, this interconnected world is driven by several things. you know, the united states has a missionary foreign-policy, whether it's democrats or republicans going. the goal of our foreign policy is always to spread liberal democracy and capitalism.

farmers of the union had a missionary foreign-policy spreading communism. china did not have a missionary foreign-policy heard china's foreign-policy is driven by the need -- by the need to acquire large scores of natural gas, oil, strategic minerals and strategic mental in order to raise the living standards dramatically of one fifth of humanity. china's leaders want to raise hundreds of billions of chinese into the middle class. and to do that you will need tremendous amounts of natural resource is. and that's why, you know, that's why it's going everywhere in search of it in africa to central asia to the middle east all, you know, off the coast of burma, bringing this oil and natural gas and coal and other

things into china. in this world -- this indian ocean maritime world factors and central asia even. while we americans continually ask ourselves how can we leave afghanistan? the chinese are asking themselves, how can we stay in afghanistan. china is already prospect and for copper in afghanistan, protected a american troops. china has its eye and a trillion dollars worth of minerals and metals under the surface of afghanistan. with the united states to semi-stabilize afghanistan and further stabilize pakistan, this would be a big strategic victory for the chinese because it would allow china to continue to build what is already started, a road in pipeline and will not work throughout central asia, parts of the middle east, leading

directly into china, bringing all sorts of natural resource is. if you look at the mouth of the tong dynasty in the eighth century bc, you see a map of china that included even horace and in northeastern iran and allah central asia including afghanistan into western china so think of the world, a few decades ahead, when you have roads and pipelines linking a yes fan and pakistan and iran was fourth on the indian ocean that will download onto ships come across in indian ocean were going the other way which ships depositing oil and natural gas, moved up through roads and pipelines and then transported across into western china.

now, what are we talking about here? were talking about the sum total of five of the iraq and afghanistan wars, whatever you think of those wars has been to fast-forward the rifle at the asian century. and by asian and south asian and east asian oath, one organic eurasia. and that's -- i mean that's not just in an economic sense because after all, east asia has been rising economically since the late 1970s. they were cover stories over 30 years ago in forbes and "fortune" magazine about the rise of the pacific tiger economies. i mean, the rise of the asian century in the military census work, and a military sense as well. it's not just china's military. india's navy is on its way to

becoming the third largest navy in the world. japan's supposedly cause i pass japan, which devotes only 1.5% of it military of its gdp to dissent has 123 warships of the highest quality. that's four times as many warships at a british royal navy. and this was before the british government and now the defense cut of about three weeks ago. you have -- lemieux put it this way. at the start of the cold war, when he looked at asian militaries, india, china, others what they were basically unsophisticated very large land armies, which were good for bringing in the crops, for building roads, for basically inculcating the sense of nationhood. you know, they were vehicles for

developing a nationalistic mentality and they were focused inward on the nation at health. the indignation military was focused on controlling politics in indonesia, not in focusing outward towards other countries. but as the decades old among the nation developed economically and prospered economically, you have the emergence of honest to goodness civilian military postindustrial military complexes, complete with favorite capability, missiles, air forces, sophisticated navies that were focused outward towards each other, rather than inwards toward nationbuilding. and then of course there is the chinese military. china will have more submarines in the water perhaps in 10 or 15 years than the united state navy

had. china is not by an across-the-board. it's fine in a very sophisticated manner. it's emphasizing the acquisition or development of submarines, of missiles that i'd see how cybercapabilities and abilities to hit gps satellite in space. in other words, anti-access capability to make it harder for the u.s. navy to go wherever upon, whenever one, however it wants in the future. so in the end of world war ii, the western pacific and indian ocean were in veritable american lakes that were slowly starting to change as these other navies and air forces get stronger and stronger in our navy, which was about 580 warships during the reagan era went down to about 350 warships during the clinton

era and is now down to about 286 warships. and according to the congressional budget office and others that these may drop into the mid-200 is in relative terms getting smaller. now i know that accounting -- surmising the strength of navies is an art more than a science. you just can't count warships as i just did. you have to say how much tonnage is there? how large are the personnel? how many helicopters are on board? how many aircraft are on board? you know, what is the quality of seamanship. all of these things factor in. and when you put all these things together, the united states is still far and away the largest force that feed will probably stay so for decades to come. but the gap is narrow. and keep something else in mind, the naval and air platforms were

slightly expensive. the new ford class aircraft carrier, you know, cost about $12 billion. the newest destroyer that's on the drawing board can cost up to $4 billion. congress isn't going to to go for this. you know, it's going to find it harder and harder to go for this. in the latest fighter jets over $100 million. so ultimately, the strength of a country's naval and air force will depend upon the perceived health of the nation's economy. information's economy is wobbly for years on end and with low growth rates in another nation in scoring in the economy by 8%, 10% per year for years on end, that kappas cannot close. and you know, that's what we see

now. let me -- let me take a last part of my address with three examples of of this new world that were entering that is beyond iraq, beyond afghanistan. let me talk for a minute about sri lanka. sri lanka is not important for americans. of the signal and it is. sri lanka had a 25-year-old -- 25 year long double water between the sinhalese buddhist government in colombo relatively in the south and the ethnic hindu tamils. the civil war ended abruptly, decisively in may 2000 night and received almost no coverage in the american media. but it was very important for this new world were entering. sri lanka described the major

sea lanes of communication were tens of thousands of ships passed -- major ships passed by each year. i was in sri lanka when the war ended. in fact, i was arrested in sri lanka and spends her nights in a prison because i had trespassed onto the naval -- onto the harbor facility that the chinese were building and i was caught. and with the chinese are building was immense. it was the most immense construction site at ever seen in the world. there were literally just long lines, as far as the eye can be of dump trucks transporting soil entrails from the bottom of this massive hit to the top. the chinese are doing nothing must than moving southern miles

in the massive for complex their building, which you probably didn't read about. in effect, indirectly the chinese won the sri lankan civil war. the united states and other western powers denied almost the sri lankan government aid, military support because of human rights violations. china moves in. china moved in with everything from knockoffs of ak-47 assault rifles for roadblocks to both, two planes, to everything they could provide the sri lankan government as well as diplomatic detection at the united nations. and so when the war ended, the sri lankan government was very beholden to china. now of course, china as i said earlier is not going to build the naval base, is not going to

have the naval base in sri lanka because that would be too provocative to india. just as the united state probably will not have a full-fledged naval base again in vietnam, even though we're moving closer and closer politically and militarily with vietnam because that would be too provocative to china. in this new world were entering comments a matter of subtlety, were each -- were every power has to be careful not to enrage the other power and thus will be seen, you know, i kind of metternich and balance of power world played out in three dimensions, you know, with varying powers, you know, with varying powers, you know, with varying powers his, you know, china will play a great game of swords with india in sri lanka, in bangladesh, in nepal for influence in strategic position.

the united state denied nepal. china moved in. the united states tonight is pakistan. china moved in. in the way, it's very good for the united case that india is involved in burma because that way there can be one balance empowered essentially protect being indirectly protect the inner interest in burma. in a country like sri lanka that comes incredibly important in this new world, where you have india and china balancing against each other and where the united states is more indispensable than other because we are the only asian power that doesn't have territorial pretensions on the asian mainland, so that -- you know, the united states, you know, essentially needs to leverage like-minded democratic others in india, indonesia, south korea

and japan, all the places where president obama is currently visiting in order to manage the rise of china in a peaceful way. the other place that they too mention of taiwan. the r. 270 commercial flight we between taiwan and mainland china. at the same time, they are many hundreds of ms. wolf from china focused on taiwan. china is gradually inexorably enveloping taiwan, you know, intuit system so to speak. if things keep going if they're going, china will never need to contemplate an invasion of taiwan. you know, it will just keep developing its military capacity, keep enveloping the chinese -- the taiwanese economy. there was a 2009 rand report that said that by 2020, the

united states, even with f-22's, even with bases in japan, will not be able to defend taiwan in a credible manner. and once it's clear that there's a perception that the united states cannot defend taiwan, then you would have china able to divert attention and concentrate on the first island chain in the pacific, concentrate on the indian ocean, kind of a rough comparison one could make between the united state at the closing of the western frontier and building of the panama canal. it no coincidence that the last battle of the indian wars is just preceded by a short period of time the building of the panama canal and the emergence of a great american navy. because once the land frontier of the united states was consolidated, he could focus outward on the world.

once taiwan was the fact that we consolidated by china, that would herald a real multipolar military world, which is still largely unipolar because of the -- not because of american troops in iraq and afghanistan, but because of the preponderance of the u.s. navy and air force. and finally, for me talk a little bit about the south china sea. as i said before, vietnam, which dominates the western boundary of the south china sea is emerging as one of the surest american allies in all of eurasia, precisely because vietnam defeated the united state in a war. it has no chips on its shoulders, no axes to grind, no bridges to bear, no face to lose by openly entering into a military alliance of sorts with

the united states without needing to make explanations or apologies to it neighbors. and the tom group a fierce china. vietnam, indonesia, other countries as their largest trading partner and therefore they require the united states as a hedging power, against china. indonesia has only two submarines. china has many dozens. indonesia requires the presence of the united states navy to balance against china, the indonesia cannot do this publicly because indonesia would be afraid to alienate others in the comic world. indonesia is 230 million people, 200 million of which are most on, the largest muslim society under. so let me just say a few words about the south china v., which indonesia, the non, the philippines, malaysia all porter and he sent.

they all have conflicting claims to each other because the south china sea is rich in oil, rich in natural gas. it remained a way to indian ocean and the greater islamic world in one direction and it's the gateway to coastal china to south korea and japan and all the trades, you know, and consumer goods. you know, preponderance of global -- global consumer goods, oil and natural gas transit in the south sea. china just is not claims against the other nations in the south china sea, china feels the south china sea as a core interest, which it hopes to dominate. think of the south china sea as china's caribbean. in geographical terms, the south china sea is what is called a marginal fee.

that is it is partly enclosed, partly open to the ocean, same as the caribbean and. a chinese official said to me, when i mention that china considers it a core national interests and this is counter to what the united states and its allies in all the other countries in the area see a. this chinese officials did to me, you americans in the 19th century and in the earliest 20th, you recognize the caribbean was an international waterway, but you also made it clear that you intended to dominate. why should we chinese act any differently towards the south china sea than you americans due to the caribbean -- due to the caribbean? said the south china sea is a coming issue. it's an issue that's going to be -- that has a great future in the headline, as much as the persian gulf has had in the last

few decades. so let me close up with this idea that military activities is often not linear. the vietnam war was more like the philippine war, the philippine insurrection at the turn of the 20th century than it was like korea and world war ii, which preceded it. the second gulf war bore little relationship to the first gulf war and is more similar to vietnam in the philippine insurrection. the fact that america has been preoccupied for a decade with messy land wars in the greater middle east doesn't mean that the future to let terri activities is necessarily. it could very well be maritime centric and air centric. thank you very much.

caught back pockmarked. [applause] okay, i'll take questions now. yes, sir. >> jean strauss, foundation. it appears to be everything you say is wonderful to learn, some of which i know. economic nationalism will rear its ugly head in the near future because of so therefore i went to your comment about this being a decoder is supposed to ward. >> yes, nationalist and it

beyond and deer isle in asia to the degree that it isn't. europe is in a post-national phase. and that's connected to what secretary gates has said openly in europe's aversion, you know, to using military force. countries like china, india, other countries in the region are not ashamed of their militaries are afraid of using them and they have real national consciousness, which most importantly united elites. they may argue with each other, how tasty debates with each other, but they are not so divided by fundamentals of foreign policy as ours are as high as they were not entering a kantian realm, you know, perpetual peace.

for entering an 18th century european realm of strong nationalism. this may not -- this does not necessarily foreshadow war or violence because europe was very late in century. this is a very maritime centric area. and maritime centric areas tend overall to be marquees of, you know, less volatile. you know, the question is what china become a great power? isn't it reasonable to assume that china would be a great representative robert zoellick when he was trade representative said china needs to be a responsible stakeholder in the world system. if china is going to help dominate the global system, it should help protect it, help protect the sea lines of communication, cooperate with the united states on various things. it's been a challenge getting

the chinese to see it this way because from their point of view if let the american struggle enough guinness and. you know, if they succeed, that's good for us and meanwhile they are diverted from intruding on east asia. it's a constant challenge to get these up-and-coming nations to kind of make the same sacrifices for the global system as say the united states has had. you know, what is the ultimate results of american power? it's to make the sea lines of communication safe so that globalization can proceed and that piracy is an interesting new sent still, though it threatens to maybe get worse. yeah. >> was cool to see in the future of the indian ocean for american

eagle base in garcia? [inaudible] >> yeah, i ain't the lease ends in to any 16 for diego garcia if i'm not mistaken. i imagine it will be extended. we depend significantly on diego garcia, that diego garcia was an address from where we sent b-52s i believe to bomb afghanistan and not over 2001. it's right astride the main sealants of communications. it's a good base to house. but we also need to be thinking not in terms of big river king cold war style bases, with troops, their families and cats and dogs, the kind of bases that become political millstones because the feisty local medias that are offended by it. so it's not just diego garcia.

it's our bases in south korea and japan do we need to kind of reconfigure into more austere subtle operating places, which will be under the local sovereignty where will provide in the footprint is pronounced as it presently is. you know, we need to establish more -- better relationships with the islands of the sea shells, militias, you know, other places so that when we need to be in these places for exercises, protecting the sea lanes, for doing this or not, we will be able to because will have a very robust public diplomacy in the region that will enable us to have good relations with these countries, that will enable us to be able to use these bases. i may say a word about public

diplomacy. probably the biggest benefit is fired of having special negotiations, special envoys for israel, palestine and afghanistan and pakistan is that it's freed up secretary of state hillary clinton to make repeated trips to east asia and south asia, where she is in effect competing with the chinese. you know, in terms of public diplomacy, the obama administration has really handled this well a thing. yeah, there is a handcuffed in the back there. >> yes, mr. kaplan, commander shugart in. one thing as a submarine officer i haven't noticed in the past is the members who happen to be the five countries of the world that has ballistic blissful submarines. and i also noticed that the

indians but their finishing touches on one of their own, that president obama today gave a formal endorsement of their security council unpopulated or not of those developments. >> yes, the security council represent the balance of power at the end of world war ii. it doesn't represent the balance of power today. president obama said that the united states is in favor of india joining the security council. you know, that's going to raise issues with the chinese, should brazil be a member, should south africa be a member? clearly this is an issue with a lot of complications. ballistic missiles are now -- are now spreading to an extent. i mean, you know, ballistic missiles and the marines are

spreading to an extent where there was a great book published in 1999 by your professor paul bracken fire in the use, the rise of asia and nuclear age. and he said that there is a continued uninterrupted line of overlapping ballistic missile ranges from israel on the mediterranean to the sea of japan. and none existed until saddam hussein's regime was toppled so that in military terms, we are really seeing this movement to asia, to these countries that are not -- that are not permanent members of security council. clearly something has to change to more adequately reflect the balance power in the world.

>> good evening, commander. question, do you know anything about the impact of the region or even the development of china and subdued because the russian government and also which are going to be constructed with the technology. >> you know it's interesting, the russian defense industry throughout the bad years of the night teen 90s when rush is a collapsed and its economy collapsed in its currency collapse.

the russian defense industry was held aloft by purchases from the guy that cut the going. india continues to purchase russian equipment, the india's grand strategy in terms of procurement is to gradually shift from purchasing russian equipment of purchasing american equipment because the quality is higher. india became dependent on russia during the cold war because russia was closer to india. it could potentially do more damage to india comes to india with the nonaligned power that tilted towards russia more than towards the united states. with the cold war over, but the opening up of the indian economy, india now find itself tilting towards the united state in military procurement will gradually shift in that direction. and that's one of the outcomes of president obama says it to

india. when they say another word about russia. president putin recently opened a natural gas pipeline to china as well as in not greeting a highway, connecting moscow all the way to the russian far east, which is eastern siberia. what's going on here? obviously russia would play customers for natural gas in china. china would one another out what to buy energy. at this russian highway is meant to fly closer to russia because russia is the rate of chinese corporate and democratic influence into russia. the population density and chinese manchuria is 62 times higher than in the russia's far east. and the population in the russian far east is dropping.

so that russia cannot altogether trust china for geographical reasons so that, you know, rush is very fragile in areas, even as it has a robust arms industry. [inaudible] >> -- you addressed nuclear proliferation. once iran, egypt, saudi arabia, turkey have weapons within the next 10 years, dynamic stability of the indian ocean is going to change dramatically. and what's going to be? >> if iran gets a few tactical nuclear -- tactical level nuclear weapons, if possible that saudi arabia would pay pakistan to have pakistan