france hud. >> translator: out of the 35 million euros we decided to earmark 22 billion for research and universities. this on top of the campus plan

and the increase of 20% of university budgets since 2007. all this is considerable. already we have selected 100 laboratories of excellence projects which will be given about 3 billion euros. which, of course, answers of fear or an accusation on the fact that in the past we have always centralized projects. in the documents that you have been given, i don't know if you've already read them perhaps, you will see the map of france. these 100 projects of laboratories of excellence are spread all over the country. and thanks to the capital that they will receive, these researchers for the first time we'll know stability over the next 10 years. 52 equipments of excellence

which will give to our laboratories the possibility of being in the front of world experience. 400 million euros. we wanted real world economy. the institutes of technological research will receive 2 billion euros. the institutes will gather in a public-private partnership on the unique campus, the best teams for training, research and development. can be corrected but we want to keep our industry, developed our industry, put our industry on the front of innovation. this is the goal of this technology research. six institutes have been decided. these are the showcases of france.

material and steel, rail, composed of materials. it sounds like a poem perhaps, but it shows that it is not only in paris or the paris region that will do this. and besides, to more projects are being studied in digital industry. one in brittany. because we didn't want for all projects to be selected in one fell swoop, in one center. the risk was too large, if they would miss interesting initiatives so we do a first call for projects, and then others before the end of the year are going to join in order to give more chances to teams that had lost in the first round, and to make sure that nobody goes through the net. we emphasize health, which is

part of french excellence also and it's a major actor in future years. 2.4 billion euros, plus 1 billion euros. we have chosen six university hospitals which will receive 850 million euros in order to accelerate transfer of scientific discoveries for the patients. what we realize was many french researchers were discovering new processes, but it was not our industry that would take advantage of it. and then there was a long delay before, between the discovery in the patients. and so these universities in a way, which are six super university hospitals, if you want, will also have eight national centers and 10 public

health centers that will determine for the long-term the factors that will deal with big diseases in order to prevent them and to cure them. now, we have noted with the prime minister and we worked all weekend on this, that different choices that we did following an independent jury, forgot cancer, or didn't deal with cancer. that was the rule. you go for excellence, you go for international juries. we cannot change the decision of these juries, otherwise what use would that be? i mean, the selection process has to be respected. but we thought that it was impossible not to have hospital institutes dealing with cancer. and so we have asked others,

seeing the second stage of the cancer plan and with the national institute for cancer is doing, to make proposals on the specific question of cancer. in order to have a dedicated university hospital center. at the beginning of july, we're going to announce the first selection of this excellence initiatives, 7.7 billion euros. the winners will be the beginning of the major sites for french scientific research, not all universities will be part and parcel of that but we're going to select world-class university centers at the level of the best universities in the world. not all will be excellence level, but all universities will have fallouts of this research.

in every sector we decided to privilege the link between research and the use of research wherever there's university research. we have to organize its use, simple flight, and make it more professional. so we're going to create 12 companies come either regional or multi-regional companies, five have been selected. other projects will improve but in the long run it's all over the country that we want to encourage the use of research. 900 million euros, we want to make research more practical, most practical as possible. it's an effort that has never been done until now, especially downstream where we want to create companies, we will have national seed funds with 400 million euros. it doesn't mean that only the biggest companies have a chance to every university, every

region must compete and use its strength. that we think that the drive towards excellence have not dealt sufficiently with education and training so far. so it is indispensable that excellence initiatives must be forwarded. and we've asked to make proposals that would allow to support projects dealing with training itself. all the initiatives and new pedagogy that we want to encourage and develop. with the investing for the future program, giving funds to 700 small, medium enterprises, with 1 billion euros we help them to re- industrialized.

it is effort without any president to help french industry reinvest realizing. we also investing in large industrial research projects, aerospace, car of the future, renewable energies, energy efficiencies, waste recycling, nanotechnologies in digital. so the investment program will finance the new generation rocket to succeed, the ex-for helicopter, the new engines for airplanes for the future, using a lot less fuel, and in terms of energy and sustainable level of development, the program for investing for the future will be in parallel with our energy strategy. we're going to dedicate 1 billion euros for nuclear programs of the future, especially a fourth generation reactors.

we are going to give important means from this larger borrowing for investing for the future in order to strengthen research in the field of nuclear safety, a field where france is a leader and everybody knows it. but the minister wanted us to invest on safety. of course, this is documentary with all the stress audits that we did on our power plants. so we are putting front on the fourth generation nuclear reactors. and on safety processes. which also will allow us to invest 1.35 million on renewable energies, and on zero carbon production. so, the program investment for the future will contribute to the financing of a pilot project

of co2 storage, a project which is really dear to my heart, more on nuclear safety, more on fourth generation reactors, and more on renewable energy. france does not need to turn its back on a given sector. we are working on all the sectors so that the french and french industry have an energy is competitive, at a competitive price. and so that the french can use energy that preserves their purchasing power. we also are supporting waste recycling, and with economy that uses less raw material thanks to intelligent grid. and the housing installation campaign. -- insulation campaign. finally, we're going to have networks. networks, our ideas for the

internet to have very large tanks. 70% of the french citizen should have it in 2020, and 100% of the citizens should have it in 2025. we are going to have strategic investment. for instance, which will allow us to keep our national independence. this is a topic i'm sure that you will, which we will talk about later. ladies and gentlemen, you can see that this is a very deep political choice. we are trying to convince the french that borrowing to create more than wealth is a choice for the future. and that the response in a crisis is not only in saving or cuts or deep cuts in public expenditures, but in an encouraging growth potential for tomorrow. france is facing a world that is

completely new, with competitors that are not waiting for us, that are not here to help us. but if france wants to remain a grand nation, if france wants to continue preserving its financing model, france must invest massively innovation, research in university, health, digital and industry. these are the choices. i'm sure that it can be criticized, but political will to encourage investment as it has never been done in this country, i think this could be the topic of consensus for all those who are preoccupied and concerned with the general interest. we should be the major concern of all political actors in our country. if you want, can answer your question. yes?

france out of. >> translator: after fukushima you dealt with nuclear safety. of other projects been reviewed in alternative energies? well, we proceeded to three orientations. of course, the ministers can correct me, but we had three in health, cancer. cancer, destroys too many lives. it's a disease that is too widely spread. too many destinies are destroyed by that. we want to have a world center for research against cancer. the french problem is that we had a lot of centers of excellence, including around paris of cancer. can we pull our forces in order to really have a world-class center? that's the first. second, i will and you, but let's be clear.

compared to the commission and the work we did in the past, it's the pedagogical excellence initiative. it's true, laboratories of excellence, equipment of excellence, all this is good but we saw that they were new big optical methods in universities. and that if we wanted to the best universities in the world we should work on the campus of course, on the equipment, on the material, on the capital for universities, but also we should privilege pedagogical initiatives. new projects, new programs, and methods. the whole world is moving. we can't just stay static with teaching methods that were already there 50 years ago. so what we need is to prepare for the 21st century. and, finally, third element, still in reorientation, nuclear

power. with the particular field of nuclear safety. france has a considerable advance on all the other countries of the world. that is why france has lost a few contracts in terms of nuclear reactors. because our reactors are more expensive because they are safer. but we want to invest in this more in nuclear safety. so, in terms of energy, three sectors. the fourth generation reactors. people are asking me what about the moratorium on nuclear power? who signed his -- who finds this proposal bizarre? much more it -- the moratorium is what? you don't do any new research for the new ones. you keep the ones that are less safe and you're not doing anything in terms of research of the safer once? this makes no sense. so we are investing on fourth

generation reactors. in terms of renewable energies, we have massive investment. prime minister and myself have announced 12 billion euros of investments for wind farms antiochian. at sea. -- antiochian. 12 billion euros. solar power has been multiplied. wind power by 18. so zero carbon energies we are investing in that, but we think that one of the most promising energies of the future is energy savings. it's efficiency. this is what we're working on. the plain of the future, if

everything is, a lighter airplane, the electric car, sometimes i've asked have you chosen come is going to be hybrid or electric? we are not choosing. we invest massively with the private sector on lighter vehicles, on the hybrid engine, on the electric engine, on bonuses. the bonus system. you know the french system, the fleet is the cleanest fleet in europe. tanks to the bonus system. so we don't want to choose what is a good energy or less good one. we want to invest massively in order to be there in 2020 with 23% of renewable energy in the french energetic landscape. but everybody knows there's no alternative to nuclear power. all the specialist will tell you so we have to work on nuclear power. and work on renewables. a last word on people who said

we should abandon nuclear power. these are the very people who want for france not to fulfill its copenhagen commitments in terms of greenhouse gases. because if we want to keep nuclear power it's because we want to remain independent. we want competitive energy and we don't want to impose the french incredible increases in the prices of energy. and because nuclear energy does not produce greenhouse gases. it is a clean energy. so we are very logical with ourselves in terms of energy investment. friends i'vin the document you e gave priority for investing for the future to university research and information. what do you think of this

scandal and the baccalaureate? don't you think parents are anxious about the future, so are their children? what about all these frauds? do you think the baccalaureate is obsolete? what do we think? >> the minister of was on tv yesterday. you talked about it. he was quite sensible. i fully support him. but if you don't mind i would like to concentrate on investing for the future. in the framework of that, i didn't talk about financing the baccalaureate. so i know that it's in the news. i'm aware of it, but i'd like to convince you of one thing. what we are talking about today is very important for our country, for your children, for yourself in the next 20 years. i know that the news all

consuming and it's fascinating, but it disappears. investing for the future 20 years from now will still take advantage of that. so the question is, is france going to be stronger after the crisis or less strong. ganley altogether draw the consequences of the failures of the past? we all -- and we face the future? would be would fail in the past? to me taxes in france that destroys initiative. too much public expenditures. too heavy. not enough investment. all the sectors are concerned why our factories moving a broad? because our taxes are too heavy. because our products are not competitive. because we did not invest enough. that's what happened. we want our universities to be autonomous but if you don't give them the means, it's useless. autonomy is not an and of itself

the autonomy is a means to an end. and i'm very happy that it is the government of france that has made a huge effort for universities without any precedents in the history of the fifth republic. that's what matters. you know, it is a change. to me i am so satisfied to see that the university world, which was frozen for so long, to seize investments of the future, seize upon the reform of universities in order to compete and proposed projects in all universities, large ones, small ones and the ones. could we keep on going down in a ranking? is acceptable our students would go to the elite school, turned their back to university and our best friends where they wanted to have their kids to do solid

studies that would send them a broad? i mean, this is as important as fraud in baccalaureate i understand the problem, but their response given was good. there was no good solution, and he tried to choose the least bad. preserving republicans equity. there's no good answer. if people have already the text, what you mean, people who are unhappy if you cancel the exam, people would succeed, we would say why cancel this one? i mean, there's no good solution. and i think that his solution is the best of all the bad ones. but i'd like to come back on investing for the future and research. [speaking in french] drifted in terms of the

industry, production is inferior to the level before the crisis, and our trade deficit is huge. compared to the long-term that your talk about, don't you think we need short-term measures to preserve employment in france? i think these measures we've already taken. [speaking in french] >> translator: even if it is not understood at the time, we did away with a professional tax. this is to preserve our factories in france. people who are keeping the factory in france were rewarded by professional tax that only existed in france and nowhere else in europe. i mean, you own the company. you on the factory. if you say france, you'll be heavily taxed if you move your factor summer in europe, you're no longer taxed. i mean, this is a measure we took. 6 billion euros left for the treasury.

the research tax credit, over 4 billion euros. we have the tax code which is the most favorable in europe. why have we lost market share is? and your right to mention it. first because wetmore competitors and they are better. let's admit it. and on the other hand because we did not invest enough. we are not competitive. and that is the reason, and that is why we did away with the professional tax. that is why we have this research tax credit so that our companies become more competitive, and that we regain market share. the problem is that when we are busy with a 35 hour week, other people are concentrating on improving their training, education, investments, manufacturing process. that's how we got backwards. that started in the year 2000. so what are we doing?

investment for the future for the next 20 years, and the entire policy that we decided to set up. but investing in nuclear power, it is good for french industry. the decision taken by germany and france means 30 to 45 billion euros they will need in order to replace energy. anyway, we cannot go on like this. we cannot keep on ignoring the rest of the world. the question is that we have to prepare france for the challenges of the 21st century, and also to keep on financing our social model. you see today the questions that are being posted. of course, you have the dead question, but in her to reimburse the debt unique growth. you need savings and unique growth. the interests of the debt is over 40 billion euros a year, every year.

and this is not going to stop after the presidential election in 2012. this is a topic that every french citizen must deal with. i have not been elected so that friends goes through the tribulations of greece, portugal or ireland. i mean, the time to talk is over. we have to act. and this reality is the reality of today's world. nobody can do without it. too many current expenditures, too many public expenditures, too many public jobs. not enough research, not enough innovation, not enough investment. and i promise you, this is not a question of left or right or by george or minority. it's a question of general interest. there's no other choice for the country. this is the choice we all have to make because it is that path that all successful countries have chosen.

and if france decides not to take that path, it will pay with more unemployed, with more factories going abroad, and with less purchasing power. and we won't be able to finance our social model anymore. you can't avoid it. when we are choosing to work only 35 hours a week, the german neighbors were choosing to do an investment and competitive the. today they have less unemployed, a smaller deficit and more worth. here we are. our greek friends, just like our portuguese friends and our irish friends, our pain easy, and especially the greece. the negligence of governments that didn't want to see that when you're doing efforts in time, you avoid disasters. that is the situation there in right now. it is not by chance, you see, that france did not have to go

through that because our ranking has been preserved and we can still borrow at good rates. two years ago greece had to borrow 30%. france only borrows around 3%. so those who want to go back on my decision to not replace civil servants who are retiring, and the golden rule that will impose a balanced budget in term. if you don't want to do that, the debt is going to explode. the deficits are going to explode and france will not be to finance itself. it's not a question of politics, of left and right. believe me, it's a question of good sense and general interest. the whole world knows. and especially if you want to preserve our social model, in

order to preserve our social model, because we don't want to touch it, we want to preserve it. [speaking in french] >> translator: first, will there be a particular method in order to assess the return on investments for the administration? number two, because of all the european problems, it is essential for france to have finance minister. when you going to name a new minister? [speaking in french] >> translator: you went fast and you move north. i mean, what am i still you are. congratulations. every year we want to assess publicly the rhythm of the great borrowing. see what the projects aren't

that have been retained, and see what are the results of the projects that we retain. every year. of course, there will be a press conference, but also there will be a parliamentary debate so that the parliament is associated. 35 billion euros. it's a huge sum. it is normal that the method be specific, and it is normal that there is an assessment. so things are extremely clear. of course. how you assess the university, but realized how universities were the only universities in the world, not to be autonomous, and not to any capital. well, what do you do with capital if you're a university? well, you can invest. you can guarantee loans.

you can have a real autonomy, which was not the case until now. one wonders where do the teachers, these university professors, find the strength to succeed without any autonomy, without any funds whatsoever. until now. so total transparency on that, and total transparency on royalties and on failures if we should get, and on the successes. as to the rest, i'm going to wait. and then i will decide with the trying to re- -- with the prime minister. there's no question to talk about it, or to answer your question. it seems to me that there is a

minimum of decency that we have to have towards the executive directors of the imf. they would be very surprised to see we would act as if they had already decided. so up to the last minute we're going to respect their decision and we're going to wait. [speaking in french] >> translator: mr. president, you are talking about investing for the future. i have a double question. first, when you compare our trade deficits of that of germany, you see that germany has invested in industrial sectors, machine tools and so forth. and also on smes. my first question is the following. how do you see france 10 or 20 years from now, what would be the strength of france 20 years from now? do you think that investing for the future that you are doing is going to solve the trade deficit, the chronic trade deficit of france?

[speaking in french] >> translator: we have to choose. we cannot reach world level in all sectors. this is the big problem when you want to invest for the future, and where to invest for the future. french tradition is that we take the quality for equal terrorism. that is to say, we would have divided the 35 billion euro cake by regions and each region would've had exactly the same. we didn't want to do that. number two, if you take the example of industry, we have selected 10 different industrial pillars that are major. energy, i talked about it.

you cannot conceive of a strong economy 20 years from now, especially in a country that has no fossil fuels energy with us. very, very powerful, energetic policy. it's an important topic. i mean, our german friends are facing it now. number two, health. health is a major industry france has a system of health coverage that is unlike any other system in the world. it is not only of course to pay royalties to american labs which, of course, are excellent, but we would have a system that protects the health of french citizens which would reimburse the research efforts by making large foreign labs rich. i mean, it's a huge subject for us. number three, there's no saving possible, note the economy possible if we don't keep the

transportation industry, airplanes, rail, automobiles, ships. it's major, the experience in the world show that just for automobile is 10% of our working population. so we think that our industrialists alone cannot worked on the plane of the future, the car of the future or the shape of the future. if i were to take another subject, take textile. textile is going to remain a french reality, but mora on a niche than on a -- more on a niche such as we had it in the 19th century. i could take other examples. communication in today's world, it is a major, major subject. the large communication group in the world are english-speaking.

and if you're looking at french groups, their size in the world, is not yet there. and win some class, they don't have television. when they're in television their absent in other sectors. the investment we want to make in digital industry is very important for us. so clearly it is not up to me or up to the prime minister to decide 25 years from now where we are going to be. but the political commitment that we are taking today is to make choices. we can't do everything. look at the shipyard, for instance. the prime minister and i really think it's special for different reasons. i'm sure that in the leisure society of the 21st century,

cruise liners of the new generation have a great future. and in france, for years and years and years we have been building fantastic ships. if we had not taken 30% of the capital of the shipyard it would have disappeared. one century of skill of know-how would have disappeared if you make the wrong decision. it is not a secret to say that i did not like the decision taken in the 2000 to abandon. i think it was a mistake, and i say, i think of it doesn't mean i'm right. i think it was a mistake to turn our back on the chemical industry. i know the problems of the chemical energy, but can we imagine a large economy without a chemical industry? i mean, this is the type of questions, that at the same time if siemens had bought others,

seems is a remarkable company. what would've happened to the french high speed? way would it be? so, a certain number of sectors, just to say for health, we know we're going to have to spend more for the health of french citizens because treatments are more expensive. because science has made progress and we have to pay for it. because people are less and less pain tolerant. this is quite normal. but at the same time, do you think every city can have a cancer center? 18 that does research in its own little corner. i mean, don't you think that we need to pool them, just around paris there were three liver transplant centers. i mean, these are extremely sophisticated techniques. don't you think that we should pool them and give to the best team the means to exist at the

world level? that's what we are building right at the moment. so these choices, we are not allowed to make them. we are talking to professionals, to the industry, of course about all these choices. because we don't know everything. choices, excellence, international jury, assessment, i mean this is really the policy that i want to choose. even if i can't tell you what are going to be the major sectors of the french economy 10 or 20 years from now. [speaking in french] >> translator: mr. president, you said you were not elected so that france would know theq?a?a? travel agent a?of greece, and i? know you're working hard with your partners on a solution to the financial problems of greece. is it true that the french treasury and french banks proposed a plan in order to reinvest 70% of the greek, new

borrowings, new loans, over 30 years? and the other 30% would be place on zero coupon notes. is it true? [speaking in french] >> translator: and do you think this proposal could be adopted by partners? [speaking in french] >> translator: i hope we are working on that. and when i went not last week but the week before in berlin, and with chancellor merkel we decided to launch the basis of a compromise on the voluntary participation of the private sector in the greek tragedy. we committed ourselves to go from the principle to the concrete realization. the principle was the voluntary participation of the private sector. why? because if it is not voluntary it would have been perceived to

default. with a huge risk of disasters in cascade. so, we worked very hard with a finance mr., worked very hard with the banks and insurance companies. not only the banks, insurance companies as well. on what could be a voluntary participation of the private sector and we concluded that by spreading loans over 30 years, by bringing them to the level of european loans, plus indexing premium on greek growth, there would be a system that each country could probably find at least interesting. the idea is that we're not going to abandon greece. we are going to descend the euro. this is our interest, of us all. it is our interest.

and those who propose this folly that would be the exit out of the euro, it's a folly. it's something that is completely inane. why? because i remind you that france has a debt of 1,500,000,000,000 euros, in euros. in france. its currency is going to be devalued but our debt remains in euros. so going out of the euro would double or triple the debt of the country going out of the euro. i mean it's an argument i've heard a lot, and i'm surprised that i've not heard it a lot. do you understand the? if you have a day in euros, that debt remains in years. if tomorrow you get out of the euros, the first thing that happens when you get out of the euros is the national currency

is going to be devalued. if a national currency is devalued, your debt stock increases mechanically of the level of evaluation of the year. that is to say, people who are advocating the exit of the year are advocating the tripling or the doubling of the debt of the french. it is crazy. i don't know if you understand me enough, and i also think that the euro is a formidable progress in the european construction. it is a europe. and if we're no longer in europe, well then, it's confrontation. who thinks that alone we would be stronger to face the world, as hard as it is, the competition in the world? know, these are -- it's a name. it's completely crazy. i mean, i understand the reality

of politics. i was part of the. but there are limits. and the limit is responsibility. and it's the general interest. that's what it is. there is a limit. but also say that we have committed ourselves to reduce our deficit in front of the whole world, nobody can question us on that. nobody. nobody. of course, our greek friends will have to make efforts, both majority and minority. that's for sure. and the project that we've made is being debated right now, as one of the element that we hope to be positive. we can't amend it of course. the french project is not the outside. [speaking in french]

>> translator: mr. president, in your introduction you say÷?÷? that we underestimated the÷?t?z? crisis.÷?t?÷?÷?÷?÷?t?t?t? you said we.÷?÷? are you part of that?÷?t? if you underestimate the crisis? and this general understatement of the crisis, perhaps justifies the fact that we are disappointed about your results in terms of purchasing power. is that why the french are losing confidence in the future? i tried to follow you. [speaking in french] >> translator: it was present with such courtesy and such politeness, and i think you. yes, we underestimate the gravity of the crisis. why? because the crisis caused a lot of suffering in the world and caused suffering and france. less than in other countries. i do not underestimate the suffering of the french in a crisis.

500,000 unemployed people more, but less than in other countries. and do not think for one minute that the crisis which we have gone through was a crisis just like the others. it is not true. why? because for the first time in the history of the world we have known a crisis that was touching at the same time all sectors in every region of the world. crisis in the past, including the 1929 crisis. we are getting advanced countries. we have had asian crisis. we that latin american crisis. this one, to hit absolutely every single region in the world. everywhere you looked it was collapsing. and we came very close to catastrophe. in a speech i promised the french favors where it would never be ruined, that the bank plan would allow us without

spending one sense of taxpayers money, to preserve french peoples saving. we kept our word. but the world came very close. it's a reality. it i is a reality. and besides, there still is, there still are many reasons that could cause in the future every turn, maybe not exactly the same but a return to the same type of incident. i don't want -- people are disappointed on the purchasing power. i don't remember having ever seen one government where the citizens thank the government for the purchasing power and for our efforts. so i know that in terms of purchasing power, my government, just like the ones before, will

never quite be able to convince. but remember that they are professionals. there are indices. what do they tell you? the officials one, the independent ones, what do they tell you? they say even in the heart of the crisis in 2009, french purchasing power progressed in france. am i wrong? yes or no? the first thing, that's a common. i'm talking about indices. what do independent indices show? the french national statistics indices that measure the evolution of the purchasing power of the french. what do they say? they say that in the heart of the crisis in 2009, purchasing power went up to the french don't believe it. i understand that.

that is the indices were saying the opposite you would have started your question by saying, statistics show that purchasing power went down, what are you going to do to reverse it. you didn't start like that. you said, there's a problem of trust to reduce, or you made a comment first, and then he went to the fact. my answer is to start with the fact. and to try to change your comment. it is what it wanted to tell you. including on civil service. i mean, do you have to tell the french that some european countries have decreased public service salaries by 15%, pensions by 15%. we didn't want to do that. some european countries decreased the allocation for handicapped adults. we increased hours by 25% in some european countries.

they decreased by 25%. scholarships and universities. not very far. i mean, just across the water there. we didn't do that. because we are increasing scholarships and france. our answer to the crisis is to create some savings, but to invest because i think it country that went through such a crisis cannot retract or contract, but do not minimize the gravity of the crisis that our country just went through. [speaking in french] >> translator: mr. president, what are you investing for yourself in the future? many comments, people say you changed your own style. are you thinking about 2012? our youth century thinking about your candidacy or your reelection eventually in 2012? [speaking in french] >> translator: i associate

this with investing for the future, and i really am very sensitive to that. i would never have thought about that myself, you know, but let me be one thing. serious, 2012 is next year. to say that we're not thinking about next year, nobody would believe me. but i have a specificity. i am the president of the republic. i have duties. the duties of my mandate. i cannot do as if i didn't. it is normal that politicians who do not have the same duties do not have the same responsibilities. and about themselves, think about their political family, about the parties. normal. this is the game of bureaucracy, but i cannot afford it. i'm the president of france. i'm the president of the g8.

i'm the president of the g20. i cannot afford it and i'm not entitled to do that. before even thinking about another term, i have to think about finishing this one. the french gave me five years. i've already done for. there's a little bit less than one year to go. it is my duty. i have no choice. i have duties, obligations, an agenda, responsibilities. i have to be accountable. i need to show results. i have 18 with the prime minister and that i have to manage. have to make decisions every day. i cannot think about anything else. the time will come. we will talk about it, but it is not a formula, i should say, it is not -- because of style.

it is a reality. and believe me, i feel that every day i have to take decisions with the government, with the prime minister, difficult decisions. and, of course, the task is very complicated, but it has to be done. because there is no choice. and if we don't do that, if i don't do that, who's going to do it? so let's get out of this disease, this habitual disease, consisting of thinking of which are going to do later on. when you have not even finish what you have to do. and being accountable about it. and i will not budge from that conviction because it is my duty all through 2011, as i said in my new years wishes, there's no other choice, believe you me,

the tv -- be it tv, before the end of your term are you going to deal with the question raised by economists that underlie better or to preserve the future of companies, businesses, you have to decrease social protection, which is heavy on business. are you going to reopen the question of financing social protection before the end of 2012? [speaking in french] >> translator: no. we will not have any structural changes on social protection. beyond the questions of dependency. i mean, not that there's no problem, but you can't tell business everything that we did to be more competitive and to strengthen permanently, with at

the same time impose taxes to go live with everyday a new project, everyday a new tax, every day a new chance. private companies, businesses in order to be competitive need stability. but in the outer years do you think that the question of financing our social protection is on the table? of course it will be on the table. how should we do? how should our imports take part in the financing of our social protection? how to lighten up the costs of work so that work is at the center of everything, and that it is not scaring employment. these are very important questions. are have to this could be part and parcel of the debates of the

famous support your mentioning a few minutes ago. it's tough, but i think it would create instability. today where we need stability. so i'm not closing the door, but i'm telling you where we are right now. i will add that it is high time for all these subjects to be thought of in a european dimension. everything is not reduced to a french-french debate, especially when were talking about taxes. let's look at what others are doing. let's imagine what we could do together, and this extraordinary and important question of our partnership with germany, the strengthening of the convergence between the two economies, france and germany. because the more the world is opened, the more the disparities within europe our problem. and the more we have to

harmonize, we will talk about it later. [speaking in french] >> translator: i don't want to tire you too much. another question. [speaking in french] >> translator: back to the debt and deficits. given our deficit, what is the level that you think will be a problem when we'll have a hard time finding the resources in order to maintain today's growth or even to vote for a better growth in future years? [speaking in french] >> translator: the point of no return if you want is the level of the deficit under which the debt of france decreases. that is the rendezvous, if you want. you don't have to be an economist. you know that. around 3% of the deficit, given the progress of the growth, the

debt, the weight of that decreases. that's the point. that's the tipping point. you don't need about 150 criteria. 3% of deficit, the debt increases compared to national wealth. below 3%, little by little the debt of the country decreases, not in absolute terms but in relative terms compared to the economy. that is the tipping point. and we have taken commitment in europe in order to meet the 3% in 2013. this is not a question of being a socialist or liberal, or left or right. the european council around the table, any political color, but is also good sense there is general interest. we cannot keep on spending more than what we yearn. so to have a deficit in terms of

crisis its normal. in 2009 we left 22% of tax receipts in one fell swoop. its normal every deficit. but when growth comes back, you have to think about it. it's not because it is others. it's because it's in the superior national interest. that's why. [speaking in french] >> translator: the socialists are opening their primary campaign this week. have you studied the economic proposals, and doesn't satisfy the criteria that you mentioned in your speech? [speaking in french] >> translator: i don't want to be unpleasant but the analysis didn't take much time, you know? i can imagine the proposals will be explained and we will talk about it when they will be development. [speaking in french]

>> translator: let's come back on the method and the borrowing. you dealt with local actors. it's a first year what is your judgment on the regions which are on the left, and on the centralization in france? [speaking in french] >> translator: dealing with local actors, not really. i was very impressed by all actors. i did not expect such a festival of innovation of initiatives. even small team sometimes the look-alike losers on paper and that were retained. i think it's extraordinary. ..

the different levels of hierarchy were no longer announced. you could go around them. you could go without. those steps. besides, in terms of decentralization the entire reform that we started, it is the first stage. i am sure we need more stages later on but municipalities, departments, region's beleaguered we have too many layers. we can't go on like this. this is not decentralization. it is different layers of cakes

that are heavy and need to be financed. there are turf wars. that is why we wanted a territorial reform. that would bring the department for the region together with the same actors. it is the same people. today in many regions -- the regions have twenty billion of common spending on the same sector in the department or the region. last question. >> bloomberg news. you were saying the state was mobilizing to invest in the future. do you think businesses that are paying really high wages like several millions of euro is

working for the future. do you intend to tax those businesses? second question about libya. are there any discussions in order to get gadhafi outside the country? don't you fear that your allies might decide to leave the alliance? it is not very high wages that would prevent investment. >> translator: sometimes one wonders if some leaders in business think they're living in the same world as the one we live in. frankly it is true. one wonders. some banks who are in a very difficult situation, you see

incredible bonuses. it is not questioning my investment but it is shocking that somebody who discovers a new process, who creates an invention and starts business from scratch burns a lot of money because he himself invested his own money and his own life and that the reward is there. so much the better. look at what he brought to the u. s. formidable. incredible. somebody who is a leader of the company and because of a windfall all of a sudden sees a 25% compensation increase where his company was in a dire situation. i am shocked. i wonder what they are thinking. commissioner beltran made

proposals. we support them. i would like a little bit more common sense to come back so the government wouldn't have to react every time with a law. it is not the best solution. recognized that but if we have more common sense, if people could understand -- i must tell you the truth. i have not understood at all the violent reaction by the president of the chamber of commerce to the bonuses. we could have talked about it calmly. how can you tell which earners -- you have a crisis, tighten your belt and when there's recovery you get nothing. shut up. i don't agree with that. it is shocking. it is shocking. i am not saying the government's project cannot be improved. of course. but why such a frontal position from business? it makes no sense.

if there is money that you can give to the shareholders because you make huge profits perhaps you can give some to the wage earners or the employees who contributed to the fact you made more profits. one thinks sometimes that the simplest things -- did government is completely determined, if a company gives more dividends or make more profit it is normal that the employees could be rewarded. not only the shareholders but the employees count. as to libya, that is another topic. all i can say is i was rather shocked to here -- tutor about the french military investment.

last year france invested eighteen billion euros in military equipment and $16 billion on military research and i commend our soldiers. mr. gadhafi knows what he needs to do for pc to come back after 41 years of dictatorship. let him leave power and leave the libyans to a democratic future. it depends on him. last question. >> translator: mr. president, you keep quoting germany as an example but we have the impression there are more divergences between mr. gadhafi as a nuclear power, $1 billion in investment. when germany decides to completely leave nuclear power ten years from now, the same on

economic resolve on libya. don't you think we have a grave problem in terms of europe since the franco-german couple in is the answer to europe as to the economic results? >> we have 1% growth in the first quarter and germany have higher growth. in order to talk about divergence it would be that france would be in a recession and germany -- we are both growing. we have strong growth. it is true that we diverge on different topics. we understand we should renounce nuclear power because our german friends renounced it. so i should turn my back to george pompandreou. because the choice of nuclear

power was confirmed by miterrand himself like the other presidents. should we have not gone to libya because our german friends who participated in the summit didn't want to be in it? what would have been the ambiance of the press conference? so the choice between diverging or being a follower. let me choose a third. and independent country that makes its own choices, gathered around its european partners. my role with the government is to defend the superior interests of the nation which is to have an energy that could guarantee

our independence. send this superior interests of the nation for france to be faithful to history and its message. thanks to the french military and its allies, just that. it seems to me the justification for investment. as to the rest it is because we don't agree on everything that europe is based on compromise. there is no other choice. believe you me i prefer this to what preceding generation's new because the preceding generations new another end. much on europe which means peace. [inaudible conversations]

[silence] [silence] >> up next we will hear from the president's counter-terrorism homeland security advisor john brennan. this morning the senate will discuss the nomination of army general david petraeus to the director of the central intelligence agency. a vote on his nomination is at 2:00 p.m. eastern. live senate coverage on c-span2.

>> today is robert gates's last day as defense secretary. after serving in the position under presidents bush and obama the pentagon will hold a farewell ceremony. chairman of the joint chiefs of staff admiral mike mullen and president obama are among the speakers. former cia director leon panetta will be his replacement. live coverage under way at 9:45 eastern on c-span3. later in the day on c-span, actor gary semise will talk about a foundation to help soldiers and their families. that is live from the national press club at 1:00 p.m. eastern. president obama's counter-terrorism and homeland security advisor john brennan and they'll be administration's

new counter-terrorism strategy wednesday. he spoke at the johns hopkins school of international studies. it is an hour and 15 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> i have never heard it so quiet in any room aside -- i think that is a sense of anticipation and excitement about our program today. welcome. many honored guests, students and faculty and others. we are pleased and honored to host john brennan, assistant to the president for homeland security and counter-terrorism. to introduce our speaker and moderate the program today we have the perfect person and that is right here in our community.

professor john mclaughlin is a member of our faculty and hold the position of distinguished practitioner at the philip merrill center of strategic studies. as many of you know john mclaughlin had a highly distinguished career as central intelligence agency. beginning in 1972 and rising to the rank of deputy director and acting director in 2004. no one could ever show the appreciation facing -- the challenges speaking of speaker every day. professor mclaughlin from a distinguished career when he earned his graduate degree and where he is now, most outstanding member of our community devoted to students, of alumni and institutional buildings. professor mclaughlin.

>> thank you. in this last decade nothing has affected policy of the united states and indeed the daily lives of americans more than the threat of a possible terrorist attack. the impact has been clear in foreign policy and many aspect of domestic policy and how we have employed military forces and how we have built coalitions and use the alliances. even before this decade was very old, many people were calling this long war. by any president in american history this has turned out to be true. in the process, u.s. counter-terrorism policy has evolve. as progress has occurred and as new threats have appeared. and the adversaries, speaking mainly of al qaeda, has also

changed, showing signs of vulnerability while also experimented with new tactics and becoming in some ways more elusive. with the death of osama bin laden two months ago the united states has arrived at a milestone of sorts but many are asking what this means. how do we assess the threat now? what work remains to be done? what strategy is most appropriate for this new phase? here to discuss this with us today is someone i know to be one of the most dedicated public servants, john brennan, assistant to the president for homeland security and counter-terrorism. it is hard to imagine anyone better prepared for these responsibilities than john brennan. prior to joining the president in 2009 mr. brennan had a lengthy career in government and

the private sector. and counter-terrorism has been a threat running through his career since the early 1990s. a graduate of florida university and the university of texas at austin mr. brennan served 25 years at the cia beginning in 1980. during that time he held major responsibilities in the analysis, overseas operations and leadership at cia headquarters. he served as chief of the cia station in the middle eastern country and as chief of staff and deputy executive director at the agency. foreshadowing his current responsibilities mr. brennan designed and built the nation's first national counter-terrorism center and following his cia career, mr. brennan was the

president and ceo of the analysis corp. and chairman of the intelligence national security alliance, association of public and private sector national security leaders. for anyone who knows mr. brennan there is something greater than the sum of these parts. the nation does not have a harder working, tireless public servant, a person of absolute integrity, dedicated to keeping this country safe. it is my pleasure to present to you john brennan. [applause] >> thank you and good afternoon. thanks for being here today and thank you, dean einhorn for your welcome and decades of service in global institutions. the land as a special pleasure for me to be introduced by john mclaughlin, a friend and colleague of many years and one

of our nation's greatest intelligence professional. john was referred to as the world's smartest man and was frequently introduced that way and no one debated the point. he is also the world's nicest man and that is something people don't know. he is the world's greatest magician in my mind. if you haven't seen his magic you are missing out on something. it is a pleasure for me to be here at the school of advanced international studies. and institution that instilled generations of public servants. pragmatic approach to problem-solving that is essential for effective conduct of foreign policy. i especially want to thank the merrill center for strategic studies for its emphasis on national security and for joining with the office of the director of national intelligence to introduce students to our intelligence community and inspiring the next generation of intelligence professionals. it is wonderful to see so many friends and colleagues i had the privilege to work with over many years. you have devoted your live to

protecting this nation from many threats including the one that brings me here today that claimed the lives of some of our friends and colleagues. that is the continued terrorist threat from al qaeda. today we are releasing president obama's national strategy for counter-terrorism which formalizes the approach we have been pursuing and adapting for the last two years to prevent terrorist attacks to in short al qaeda's to devise. i am pleased we are joined by dedicated professionals from across the federal government who helped to shape our strategy and worked tirelessly every day to keep our country safer. thank you for being here and thank you for your dedicated service over many years. i want to point out the strategy posted to the white house

website that will be copies available today. unlike to put our strategy in context. the like to outline key goals and principles and describe how we are putting these principles into practice to protect the american people. i want to begin with the largest strategic environment that shapes our counter-terrorism efforts. it starts with the recognition that this counter-terrorism strategy is only one part of president obama's larger national security strategy. this is very important. our counter-terrorism policies do not define our entire foreign policy. they are a vital part of and are designed to reinforce our broader national security interests. since taking office president obama has worked to restore a positive vision of american leadership in the world. leadership be fined not by threats and dangers we will pose but by the security, opportunity and dignity that american

advances in partnership with people around the world. this has enhanced our national security in many areas against many threats. at the same time many of the president's foreign policy initiatives also help to achieve our more focused counter-terrorism goal. they do so by addressing political, economic and social conditions that can sometimes you'll violent extremism and push certain individuals into the arms of al qaeda. for instance when diplomats promote peaceful resolution of political disputes and grievances, when our trade and economic policies generate growth, went development experts support good governance that addresses people's basic needs and we stand up for universal human rights, all of this can undermine violent extremists and terrorists like al qaeda. peaceful political economic and social progress undermines the claim that the only way to

achieve change is through violence. it can be a powerful antidote to the disillusionment and sense of powerlessness that makes some individuals more susceptible to violent ideologies. our strategy recognizes counter-terrorism efforts clearly benefit from and at times depend on broader foreign policy efforts. even as our strategy opens more narrowly on preventing terrorist attacks against our interests at home and abroad, this obviously is the first counter-terrorism strategy to reflect the extraordinary political changes that are sweeping the middle east and north africa. it is true that these changes may bring changes and uncertainty in the new term as we are seeing in yemen. it is also true that terrorist organizations and nations that support them seek to capitalize on the instability that change can sometimes bring. that is why we are working closely with allies and partners

to make sure these malevolent actors do not succeed in hijacking this moment of hope. for their violent ends. as president obama has said these dramatic changes also mark a historic moment of opportunity. the too for our counter-terrorism efforts. for decades terrorist organizations like al qaeda have preached the only way to affect change is through violence. now that claim has been repudiated and has been repudiated by ordinary citizens in to need and egypt and beyond. changing and challenging the government's through peaceful protest even as they are sometimes met with horrific brutality as in libya and syria. moreover these citizens have rejected the medieval ideology of al qaeda that divides people by faith and gender and opting instead to work together with christians and men and women, secular and religious. it is the most profound change in the history of the arab

world. al qaeda and its ilk have been left on the sidelines watching history passed by. president obama has placed the united states, right side of history pledging our support for the political and economic reforms and universal as human rights that people in the region are demanding. this too has profound implications for are counter-terrorism efforts. against this backdrop our strategy is very precise about the threat we face and the goals we seek. one of the most dangerous forms of human error is forgetting what one is trying to achieve and president obama is adamant that we never forget who we are fighting for what we are trying to achieve. let me start by saying our strategy is not designed to, that directly every terrorist organization in every corner of the world many of which have neither the intention or the capability to attack the united states or our citizens.

our strategy recognizes there are numerous groups that support terrorism in order to oppose u.s. interests. iran and syria remain leading state sponsors of terrorism. hezbollah and hamas are terrorist organization that britain is real and our interests in the middle east. we will therefore continue to use the full range of our foreign policy tools to prevent these regimes and terrorist organizations from endangering our national security. for example president obama has made it clear the united states is determined to prevent iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. we will continue working closely with allies and partners in sharing and acting upon intelligence to prevent the flow of weapons and funds to hezbollah and hamas to prevent attacks against allies, citizens for our interests but the principal focus of this counter-terrorism strategy and the focus of our effort since president obama took office is a network that poses the most direct threat to the united

states and that is al qaeda and its affiliates. we use these terms deliberately. it is al qaeda which is founded by osama bin laden that has murdered our citizens, bombing our embassies in kenya and tanzania to the attacks on the u. ss cole to the attacks on september 11th which instill citizens of more than 90 other countries. the al qaeda affiliate's, groups that are part of its network which share its goals that also attempted to attack our homeland. it was al qaeda's peninsula based in yemen that attempted to bring down an airliner over detroit which put explosives on cargo planes in the united states. it was the pakistani taliban that spend faizu shazad to blow up the plane in washington d.c.. sometimes with little or no direct physical contact with al qaeda, who have succumbed to

take full ideology to engage in terrorist activities in the united states. these misguided individuals are spurred on by the likes of al qaeda's anwar al-awaki to inflict videos over the internet and we have seen the results, the murder of a military recruiter two years ago and the attack on our service men and women in fort hood. this is the first counter-terrorism strategy that focuses on the ability of al qaeda and its network to inspire people in the united states to attack us from within. indeed this is the first counter-terrorism strategy that designates the homeland as a primary area of emphasis in our counter-terrorism efforts. our strategy is shaped by a deeper understanding of al qaeda's strategy and tactics that we have gained over the last decade. i am not talking about their

grandiose vision of global domination through a violent islamic state. that vision is absurd and we are not going to organize our counter-terrorism policy against an illusion that is never going to happen. we are not going to elevate these thugs and their murderous aspirations into something larger than they are. rather president obama is determined our foreign and national security policy do not play into al qaeda's strategy or ideology. al qaeda seeks to terrorize us into retreating from the world stage. president obama has made it a priority to renew american leadership in the world strengthening our alliances and deepening partnerships. al qaeda seeks to portray america as an enemy of the world's muslims but president obama has made it clear the united states is not and never will be at war with islam. al qaeda seeks to lead us financially by dryness into long costly wars that inflame anti-american sentiment.

under president obama we are working to end the war in iraq and afghanistan responsibly even as we keep unrelenting pressure on al qaeda. going forward we will be mindful that if our nation is threatened our best offense won't always be deploying large armies abroad but rather deliberating targeted surgical pressure to the groups that threaten us. al qaeda seeks to portray itself as a religious movement defending the rights of muslims but the united states will continue to expose al qaeda as nothing more than murderers. they purport to the islamists but they are neither religious leaders north dollars. there's nothing islamic or holy about slaughtering innocent men, women and children. they claim to protect muslims but the vast majority of our card's victims are in fact innocent muslim men, women and children and it is no wonder the overwhelming majority of the world's muslims have rejected al qaeda and what its supporters

continue to decline. just as a strategy is precise about who our enemy is, it is clear about our posture as well as our goal. this is a war. a broad and sustained integrated campaign that harnesses every element of american power and we seek nothing less than the utter destruction of this evil that calls itself al qaeda. to achieve this goal we need to be dismantled the core of al qaeda in pakistan and prevented the ability to reestablish a safe haven in the pakistan/afghanistan region. in other words we aim to render the heart of al qaeda in capable of launching attacks against our homeland, our citizens or our allies as well as preventing this group from inspiring its affiliate's to do so. at the same time hopefully this means addressing the serious threat posed by its affiliates operating outside south asia. this does not require a global

war but does require a focus on specific regions including what we might call the periphery, places like yemen, somalia and iraq. this is another important distinction that characterizes this strategy. the al qaeda core has weakened under attack our unyielding pressure but has looked increasingly to these other groups and individuals to take up its cause including its goal of striking united states. to destroy al qaeda we are pursuing a specific focus counter-terrorism objective is. we are protecting our homeland by constantly reducing vulnerability and adapting and updating our defenses. we are taking the fight to wherever the cancer of al qaeda manifests itself, degrading its capabilities and disrupting its operations. degrading the capability of our kayak's senior leadership to inspire, communicate with and direct the operations of its adherents around the world. we are denying al qaeda any

safe-haven, the physical sanctuary it needs to launch attacks against us. we are aggressively confronting their ideology which attempts to exploit local land of the legitimate grievances in its attempt to justify its violence. we are depriving them of their enabling means including the illicit financing, logistical support and online communications that sustain its network. we are working to prevent al qaeda from acquiring or developing weapons of mass destruction which is why president obama is leading the global effort to secure the world's materials in four years. in many respects specific counter-terrorism goals are not new. they tracked closely with the goal of the previous administration. this illustrates another important characteristic of this strategy -- represent the wholesale overhaul or wholesale retention of previous policies. president obama's approach to

counter terrorism is pragmatic, not ideological. it is based on what works and what our experience has been. it builds upon policies and practices that were instituted and refined over the past decade in partnership with congress, a partnership we are determined to continue and reflects an evolution in our understanding of the threat, capabilities of our government, capacity of our partners and the tools and technologies at our disposal. what is new and i believe distinguishes this strategy is a principle that guides our efforts to destroy al qaeda. first we are using every lawful to lend authority available. no single agency or department has will responsibility for this fight because no single department or agency has all the capabilities needed for this fight. this is and must be a hole up government effort which is why the obama administration has strengthened the tools it has. we strength and intelligence, spanning human intelligence and skills and we are constantly

working to improve our capabilities and learn from our experiences. following the attack at fort hood and the failed attack over detroit we improve the analytical process and created new groups to track information and enhance cooperation among our intelligence agencies including better information sharing so all threats are acted upon quickly. we strengthen our military capabilities and increase the size of our special forces and unique assets so al qaeda insure they safe-haven and insure our military and intelligence professionals are working more closely than ever before. we strengthened homeland security with a multi layer defense bolstering security at our borders and airports, improving partnerships with state and local government and allied partners including sharing more information, increasing capacity of first responders and preparing for bar code terrorism. bio terrorism. we are taking key recommendations of the 9/11 commission.

learning the lessons of recent attempt at attacks we have increased aviation security by strengthening a watch list procedure and sharing information in real time. enhancing screening of cargo and for the first time insuring 1 hundred% screening of all passengers traveling in, to and from the united states which was another recommendation of the 9/11 commission. we have constantly assessed and improve their defenses in replacing the old color-coded threats system with a more targeted approach that provides detailed information about specific credible threats and protective measures. in addition we are using the full range of law-enforcement tools as part of our effort to build an effective and durable legal framework for the war against al qaeda. this includes our most effective tool for prosecuting, convicting and sentencing terrorists and a proven tool for gathering intelligence and preventing attacks, article 3 courts.

it also includes before military commissions which at this time, which at times offer unique advantages. in this framework, the recently renewed patriot act. in short we must have a legal framework that provides in-store dairy counter terrorism and law enforcement professionals with all the awful tools to do their job and keep our country safe. we must not and will not tie their hands. for all these tools to work properly departments and agencies across the federal government must work cooperative plea. today our personnel are working more closely than ever before. as we saw in the operation that killed osama bin laden that success was not due to any single person or piece of information. it was the result of many people working together closely over many years and that is what we will continue to do. even as we use every tool in the government we are guided by at second principle. the need for partnership with institutions and countries around the world as we recognize

that no one nation can bring about al qaeda at the mine is. over the past decade we have made enormous progress building and strengthening an international architecture to confront the threat from scott al qaeda. this includes greater cooperation with multilateral institutions like the united nations, nato allies and regional organizations like the association of the african union. we have increased efforts to build the capacity of partners so they can take the fight that al qaeda in their own country. that is why the key element of the president's strategy is growing afghan security forces. it is why we will begin the transition so that afghans can take responsibility for their own security. it is why we must continue cooperation with pakistan. in recent weeks we have been reminded our relationship with pakistan is not without tension or frustration. we are working with our pakistani partners to overcome

differences and continue our efforts against our common enemies. as frustrating as this relationship can be, pakistan has been critical to many of our most significant successes against al qaeda. tens of thousands of pakistani and civilians have given their lives against militancy and despite recent tensions i am confident pakistan will remain one of our most important counter-terrorism partners. these kinds of security partnerships are vital. critical intelligence that allowed us to discover the explosives being shipped to the united states in cargo planes was provided by our saudi arabia and partners. al qaeda in iraq has suffered major losses at the hands of iraqi security forces trained by the united states. despite the ongoing and stability are counter-terrorism cooperation with yemen continues and i would argue the recent territorial gains made by militants only makes our

partnership with yemen more important. around the world we will deepen our security cooperation with partners wherever al qaeda intends to take root whether it is in somalia or southeast asia. al qaeda seeks to depict this fight as one between muslims and the united states, it is the opposite. the international community, including muslim majority nations and muslim communities are united against al qaeda. this leads to the third principle of our strategy. rather than pursuing a 1-size-fits-all approach we recognize different threats in different places demand different tools so even as we use all the resources at our disposal against al qaeda, we will apply the right tools in the right way in the right place with laser focus. in some places like tribal regions between afghanistan and pakistan we will deliver overwhelming force against al qaeda. whenever possible our efforts

around world will be in close coordination with our partners. and when necessary, as the president, we will do whatever is necessary to protect the united states as we did with osama bin laden. in some places our efforts will focus on training for an security services. in others as with our saudi arabia and gulf state partners our focus will include shutting down al qaeda's financial pipeline with longstanding allies and partners thwarting attacks through close intelligence cooperation. in the united states where the rule of law is paramount it is our federal, state and local law enforcement and home and security officials who rightly take the lead. around the world including at home we will continue to show the united states offers a vision of progress and justice while al qaeda offers nothing but death and destruction. related to our counter-terrorism strategy i would note keeping our nation secure depend on

strong partnership between government and communities here at home including muslim and arab americans some of whom join us today. these americans have worked to protect their community from al qaeda's violent ideology and helped prevent terrorist attacks in our country. the obama administration will unveil its approach for partnering with communities to prevent violent extremism in the united states. the key tenet of this approach is what it comes to protecting our country muslim americans are not part of a problem. they are part of the solution. this relates to our fourth principle, building a culture of resilience here at home. we are doing everything in our power to prevent another terrorist attack on our soil. at the same time a responsible effective counterterrorism strategy recognizes no nation of matter how powerful including a free and open society of three hundred million americans can

prevent every single threat from every single individual who wishes to do us harm. it is not enough simply to be prepared for the attacks. we have to be resilient and recover quickly should an attack occurred. as a resilient nation we are constantly improving our ability to withstand any attack especially against our critical infrastructure including cyber thereby denying al qaeda the economic damage and destruction that it seeks. as a resilient government we are strengthening the partnerships that hate states -- help states and localities recover quickly and as a resilient people we must remember every one of us can deprive al qaeda of the success it seeks. al qaeda wants to terrorize us so we must not give in to fear. they want to change us so we must stay true to who we are. which brings me to our fourth principle. the one that guides all the others. in all our actions we will uphold the core values of the finest american. i spent 30 years working on

behalf of our nation's security. i understand breathtaking capabilities of our intelligence counter-terrorism communities but the most powerful weapon of all which we must never forsake are the values and ideals america represents to the world. when we fail to abide by our values we play into the hands of our party which tries to portray us as the people of hypocrisy and decadence. we uphold these values, at send a message to the people around world that it is america, not al qaeda that represent opportunity, dignity and justice. living our values will keep us safe. as americans we stand for human rights. that is why in the first stage in office president obama made it clear the united states of america does not torture and why he banned the use of enhanced interrogation techniques which do not work. as americans we uphold the rule of law at home including the privacy, civil-rights and civil liberties of all americans. it is because of our commitment

to the rule of law and national security that we will never waver in our conviction the united states will be more secure today and the prison at guantanamo bay is ultimately closed. living our values. communicates to the world what america represents. also directly undermines al qaeda's twist ideology. when we remember the diversity of faith and background is not a weakness of america body strength, when we show muslim americans are part of our american family we expose al qaeda's lie that cultures must clash. we remember that islam is part of america. we show that america could never be at war with islam. these are our core principles and this is a strategy that has enabled us to put al qaeda under more pressure than at any time since 9/11. with our allies and partners we have thwarted attacks around the world. we have disrupted plot that home including the plots of nazzal l

al-wazi to bomb in the subways in new york. we made them harder to transfer money and pushed out, finances to its weakest point in years. along with our partners in pakistan and yemen we have shown al qaeda it will enjoy no safe haven and made it harder for them to communicate and train. and to plot. its leadership ranks have been decimated with more key leaders eliminated in rapid succession that at any other time since 9/11. for example al qaeda's third ranking leader al-matri killed. one of the most dangerous commanders reportedly killed. opportunities in yemen, including ali salaharhan. all killed. the leader of the pakistani taliban killed. fazz fazzul, mastermind of the bombing in africa killed by

somali security forces. all told over the past two years virtually every major al qaeda a philly it has lost its key leader or operational commander and more than half of their top leadership has been eliminated. al qaeda it has adapted resilience and has sought to replace its leaders but have been forced to do so with less experienced individuals. that is another reason we and our partners have stepped up our efforts. if we hit al qaeda hearty enough and often enough there will come a time when they can no longer replenished their ranks with skill leaders that they need to sustain their operations. that is the direction where we are headed did today. with the death of osama bin laden we have struck our biggest blow against al qaeda yet. we have taken out al qaeda's founder and operational commander who continued to read direct his followers to attack the united states and most significantly, al qaeda's symbolic figure who inspired so many others to violence.

in his place the organization is left with ayman al-zawahiri please milan aging doctor who lacks charisma and the loyalty and respect of many within al qaeda. the fact that it took so many weeks for al qaeda to settle on ayman al-zawahiri as its new leader suggests possible divisions at the highest level. taken together the progress i described allows us for the first time to envision the demise of al qaeda's core leadership in the coming years. it will take time but make no mistake, al qaeda is in its decline. this by no means could just as serious threat from al qaeda has passed. not at all. ayman al-zawahiri may attempt to demonstrate his leadership and al qaeda may try to show its relevance through new attacks. lone individuals may seek to avenge bin laden's death and people may tragically lose their lives. nor with the destruction of its leadership means the destruction of the al qaeda network. aqap is the most active

affiliate's in the network and poses a serious direct threat to the united states. from the territory it controls in somalia, al-shibob continues to call for attacks against the united states. we cannot let our guard down. we will pummel al qaeda and remain vigilant at home. as we approach the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, americans seek to understand where we are, we need to look no further than the compound where bin laden spent his final days. there he was, hold up for years behind prison like walls, isolated from the world. but even he understood the sorry state of his organization and its ideology. information seized from that compound revealed bin laden's concerns about al qaeda's long-term liability. the call for large-scale attacks against americans but encountered resistance from his

followers and went for years without seeing any spectacular attacks. he saw his senior leaders taken down one by one and worried about the ability to replace them effectively. perhaps most importantly bin laden clearly sensed al qaeda is losing the larger battle for hearts and minds. he knew that al qaeda's murder of sunni innocent civilians, most of them muslims had deeply and perhaps permanently tarnished al qaeda's image in the world. he knew he failed to portray america as being at war with islam. in fact he worried that our recent focus on al qaeda as an enemy prevented more muslims from rallying to his cause so much so that he considered changing al qaeda's name. we are left with that final image seen around world, an old terrorist, alone, and children a blanket flipping through old videos of a man and a moment that history is vastly leaving

behind. the fight is not over. guided by the strategy we are releasing today we will never waver in our efforts to protect the american people. we will continue to be clear and precise about our enemy and continue to use every tool at our disposal and apply them wisely and judiciously. we will continue to forge strong partnerships around the world and build a culture of resilience here at home. as americans we will continue to uphold the ideals and core values that inspired the world and the people of to keep us safe. president obama said it best last week. we have put al qaeda on a path to defeat and will not relent until the job is done. once again i want to thank general mclaughlin for letting me unveil president obama's national strategy of counter-terrorism today. thank you very much. [applause]

>> mr. brennan has contended to take some questions. i know the media has frequent access to him so i will give priority to our students, faculty, invited guests from the foreign policy community. there's a microphone which will come to you when you raise your hand when i recognize you. please state your name and give your question and please confine to one question. right here. [inaudible] >> good afternoon. thank you for coming. i am from george mason university. i have a question about the terrorist detainees. you stated the president wants to close guantanamo bay. has there been a decision about

what will happen with the detainee's currently held there? >> it is well recognized the congress has expressed concerns about the closure of guantanamo facility. we have released a number of individuals from guantanamo since president obama -- transferring many of those overseas to their countries of origin or to third countries. there are a number of individuals now that are moving in to the prosecution path, notably the co-conspirators of 9/11. there has been an announcement about military commissions moving forward. there's a population at guantanamo now some of whom will be prosecuted and some who will possibly be transferred abroad. what the president said is he wants to close one, responsibly and in a way that does not

threaten american security. this is something that will continue to work with the congress about. requires congressional support, partnership. this is something that is still very much a policy of this administration but we are not going to do it in a manner that jeopardize our security or doesn't take into account the very unique circumstances of those cases. >> bruce rydell. you mentioned the arabian peninsula as the most dangerous affiliate of al qaeda today. yemen looks from the outside to be heading towards chaos and perhaps even state failure. can you give us some more detail on how you see as proceeding to deal with yemen and get the yemenis more effective in fighting al qaeda? >> thanks. all of the al qaeda elements

present a serious threat. al qaeda is the most operationally active and given they have the ability to operate in certain portions of yemen gives us concern and they have been able to use yemen as a training area to launch these attacks against as inside yemen and abroad. there's a fair amount of political turmoil in yemen. president stalin up --sallah is undergoing medical treatment. deposition is the pc see initiative is the best path forward to resolve yemen's political crisis. we worked with the yemenis over the past several years. previous administration as well as this administration building up their counter-terrorism capability. just like in pakistan where thousands of pakistani have fallen prey to terrorist attack, yemeni security military also has died as a result of those attacks. there are many elements within

yemen that are opposed to al qaeda expanding its capabilities as well as control of yemeni territory. yemen is a patchwork of various tribes, various political groupings, political power centers. we are working very closely with counter-terrorism elements. one thing we insist on is we provide yemeni counter-terrorism forces only be used against al qaeda. and not be used in any way against yemeni citizens who are protesting as they have a right to do peacefully and we have been very vigilant in making sure none of these units we have trained or provided are being used against them. counter-terrorism cooperation needs to continue to grow. there are obvious limitations based on the yemeni forces capabilities. president obama has committed to yemen that we will be strong partners. we see a direct threat to the

homeland. anwar al-laaki is a dangerous individual. the threat that comes from aqap is real and serious. this is something to continue work on. the framework right now we use with the yemenis is to build up their counter-terrorism capabilities and provide the intelligence information they need to prosecute their efforts and to partner with them when it is something we believe we can do and needs to be done to protect our interests. it will be a long haul. >> student right in the middle. yes? >> good afternoon. my name is brad potter. the recent killing of osama bin laden in abbottathat has led to speculation about the pakistani government. can you speculate on that?

>> to my knowledge the pakistani leadership, military, political and intelligence was caught totally unaware that bin laden was found in the compound in abbottabad. they're trying to figure out why in six years. that is not to say there aren't elements somewhere within the pakistani establishment that were knowledgeable about this but looking at that that situation osama bin laden and the people in that compound practiced phenomenal opsec. to our knowledge he never left that compound after he got there. the people who were in the compound most of them never left either. a couple folks basically served to provide the type of support

that he needed. this is something that i don't know how many people in al qaeda and senior leadership ranks knew where bin laden was but he was someone who knew that if he let it be known his whereabouts is days would be numbered. he became confident and relaxed in abbottabad and he was surprised when our navy seals were in front of him. i have not seen anything. one question we had right away that we raised to the pakistani government, they try to figure out the same thing. pakistan is a large country. it is one of their lessons learned in terms of what they need to do to make sure they are aware of what is happening, doesn't mean they're all fighting in a cave