>> where did you travel around? >> family and friends helped us out, opened their villages and homes to us, and they took us in, and they took us around, with fighters from their units, and they -- the families were each in different units, and they took care of us. >> what do you think, you know, our colleague here at the americas said that there are believed to be 800 militias. other, you know, other militaries that are particularly viable, however particularly successful, or is it -- is it just a thicket of, you know, small groups that are just each handling their open little region? >> there are baaal yons and brigades trying to move -- i spent time, the only place i can talk about, there's a military conference, with five or six people on there, and then you

have the brigades there, leaders of the brigades, and then you have units underneath them. they have a hire hierarchy stru. i don't know if the structure at the top is executed at the bottom, but there's coordination between the individual units because when they get together, when they decide they want to carry an operation, an individual unit can't do it alope. they need to rely op other units to come together. >> an interesting thing in comparing, observing activities in libya, the syria rebels have a sophisticated military tactics than the libyans. >> libya got together amongst themselves and talk about what to do the next day. the way an operation is planned and carried out on the syria side shows a high level of sophistication that people are learning, civilians are learning the details of war, and how to

scope out a place, how to -- initially come up with the plan, how to scope out the place, how to decide how many fighters are needed, and then what the operation will look like. from top to the bottom, these guys are getting very good. >> how would a no-fly zone, enforced no-fly zone, affect the war in syria? >> what the no-fly zone would do initially is their rei -- regime has bases that are islands in the seas of rebels. they would have to give up those areas. they use them -- three or four air bases, there's an air corridor to shovel supplies there and whatnot, and it uses that as the base to bomb the region. it would have to fall back. it would have to fall back from those areas into predetermines areas of strategic interest for the regime, and all of that would happen in the beginning. the regime would have long

range -- same thing in libya, regime has long range cannons and missiles that the rebels don't have. attack missiles and strike on the front line, the regime used that to push people back? >> in libya? >> yeah. what happened in labia was unique because the rebels for stopped on the road between benghazi and tripoli, and basically in libya, the last army that -- last cop qer able to move east to west and take the country were the arabs in the 7th century. it has not happened since then. these guys got stalemated in the desert, and then what you had is a situation that was the third largest city, and the regime couldn't conquer there, and an arab city, a urban area, and there's cohesiveness among the

people so there was an airstrip there to bring supplies there. those things eventually won the war. when the u.s. thought of a no-fly zone, okay, the guys move east to west. then the war was stalemated very quickly. what you had -- what you saw was a gradual explanation, fixed wing planes to helicopters, french brought those in couple months later for precision and be able to bomb those regime targets, and then you brought spotters on the ground and special forces, western special forces to work with the rebels. there was a garage wall escalation. >> should that happen in syria or what's your view? >> i think the problem in syria is if we go to the no-fly zone, no guarantee that's leading to a rebel victory. what we haved too is try to work, find and negotiate is settlement with the regime to have a soft landing in this

point in time. >> do you think the regime had plenty of time to think about sort of the negotiated settlement. do you think they have any appetite for one? >> i think that what the regime made many bad decisions along the way. there were many partnerships along the way it could have reduced tensions and maybe ended the war, and it has not done that. it has not shown the strategic audacity and insights that the new generation just doesn't have that. >> interesting form of sedacity in terms of the approach dealing with internal dissent. >> he ruled for 30 years in a country where no leader ruled for five years since independence in 1946. >> his son adopted the same approach also; right? repression if it's at sufficiently high levels works. >> the thing is he didn't --

that goes back to the powell doctrine. you use force, come out strong with it early on. he didn't do that. it was a slow escalation. >> should have been hammer rules as friedman says? >> well, i don't know -- i don't advocate violence, but maybe, you know, he gets a raw deal, he wasn't this ruthless sadistic man like saddam was who wanted violence every day. he wanted state. he allowed pockets of some levels, and he's between is a dam and authoritarian leaders of the regime like mubarak in egypt and tunisia and yemen and whatnot. he has that middle ground, and he really gets a bum rep. if you read the conversations,

the clinton tapes, he's expressing concerns and fears to clinton, and clinton is sympathetic with these things. needed a better pr organization to help him out. >> okay. by the way, is that patrick seal? >> is that patrick seal? patrick focused too much on the conspiracy theories of why certain things happened in the region. >> turning to egypt, you interviewed a lot of people in the movement. you mentioned the 1990s, obviously, where the, you know, basically the egyptians put down, and it is islamist insurgeon sigh and stapped to death, end of the movement. >> which, by the way, the

leadership was against. >> the islamic -- >> in prison. >> yeah, yeah. they were much more. the question is, you know, is there any likelihood of the head of al-qaeda to resuscitate an al-qaeda-like group in egypt or other groups or egyptians gone through that in the 1990s seen as a dead end? how do you see that sort of militant movement in egypt playing out? >> here's the thing. first of all, all of the friends entered the political process. they renounced violenc okay? >> right. >> what you have, and both in the jihad and the islamic groups, they -- the leaders and then the mid level guys all embrace the political process. first, they had the cease fire in 1997 renouncing violence, and gradually over the next decade, a lot of the people were released.

after the revolution on the jihad side, the brother and cousin, these people move straight into politics. >> the brother out of jail now. >> he's from a different clothe p >> what clothe is that? >> he was not in prison with these people at the time. there was a transformation in the 1980s and 1990s. i spoke to one. we were young, didn't understand things. we want and read books. he was friends with the man assassinated is saddam. talk about the most senior people saying we were wrong, and this process started in 1997. what happened is you have these organizations and the political process, and they were not political leaders or military leaders or administrative

leaders. they wanted to cling to their routes, but they don't have the experience now to create new organizations. it's going to take them a lot of time when they want to do that. we have signs of people on the ground trying to move, trying to shift and operate. you know, all the people who are in march 2011 when the prisons were opened. >> signs meaning what? >> certain people came up on radar. the people that follow these things, and they -- there's a cause for concern that somebody that these people are establishing camps. they are going out, trying toed radicalize the population. >> establishing camps where? >> some in libya and egypt. >> egyptians? >> yeah. >> do they call themselves al-qaeda or how do they self-identify? >> i don't think they call themselves al-qaeda from what i understand. they want to be al-qaeda.

>> any sense of size? >> i can't give you an estimate on the size. >> have they done anything in egypt of any note? >> well, you know, we see the jihadists in sigh -- sinai carried out attacks. >> that was true before the regime fell. >> they thought they stomped it out. >> yeah. >> they kill all the ring leaders of those attacks. >> great. let's throw it open for the audience. wait for the microphone, identify yourself, ask the question rather than making a statement. the gentleman here. >> i'm tom getman, former ngo executive, and ocha board member in the middle east. thanks for the extraordinary detail. we're wondering more about what's happening in the northern part of syria in regard to

turkey. you mentioned it is an open border, come and go like early on, and i'm wondering with the russian taken plane and the shelling, what your assessment is of turkey in the conflict. on a personal note, how badly is the damage? >> yeah, turkey has a big dilemma on its hands. fist of all, you saw the influx of refugees. they don't have the infrastructure to host them. the condition of the camps, some of the covers are bad. you have to walk far to get to the bathroom, sanitary areas. they don't have access outside the refugee camps. another problem that turkey has is in the region of hata iring's, there's a community, and these people don't want to have anything to do with the

serians. we had protests every day. i mean, every day they were protesting by left wing groups, and against the syria, and there were marchs. once they were tear gassedded by the riot police. hearings have been told, refugees said they shouldn't be in certain areas, i mean, for their own good because the locals could beat them up. turkey has that problem, and it's trying to push -- trying to pull the west into this, especially with what happened this week. turkey is a member of nato so any attack against turkey is an attack against every nato member, but the nato members vice president stepped up to the -- haven't stepped up to the plate. >> i wonder why that is? >> they don't want to involved in this. united states don't want to get

involve in these things right now, and so turkey, with turkey's strong response, it's really trying to then draw, lay the tracks for the syria, and then hire civilians, and then say look what's going on to the western powers. turkey's in a bad dilemma right now. i would not want to be there at this point in time. >> [inaudible] >> just what -- i don't know, i have not seen the areas. what i read, you know, it's been burned, damage to the -- a beautiful place when i visited there, and everybody that loves syria, you know, loves the middle east, islamic monuments and whatever, we cry every day about what happened. we grieve. >> yes mapp in the front. >> thank you.

mark from george mason university. thanks for the conversation. i'm intrigued by the suggestion that a solution could be allowing the regime to retreat to the all white heartland on the coast. i'd like to press you on how we could insent vise them to do it. it's like you're offering a carrot, but in this situation, a stick has to be applied as well. peter referred to it -- what can get them to actually accept this solution? also, what do we know about the ethnic composition of the region? how is the region in other words? is there another population there that's up happy about this? also, the whole regional reaction to essentially what will be a de facto succession. how is this going to be responded to? thank you. >> this is why i like to talk to

my old friend, mark, great ideas to think about. basically, what we knee to do is we are givenning an insentive, and they'll find everything's lost and they have to go in or threaten the use of force that you're going to escalate. the west is going to get involved, and then they realize it's going to be all over for them. at that point in time, and them they have to move into those areas, and they realize, you know, somebody comes in, a barry goldwater moment with nixon, you know, saying it's all over. the problem is we don't know how the regime functions, and we don't know who is making decisions, and the regime -- times are delusional in what in sees and what it does. the option works on a rationale agents for basis, and if the leader is in the rational, then it's not going to get done. >> yeah, but, i mean, is there

any evidence he's an unrational actor? yes, there is a lot of evidence that bashar is not a rational actor. basen odd discretions of people who met him and talked to him. he says different things to different people. he's very moody. that's discussions of some res with -- of some issues with him on that level. >> like bipolar? be specific. >> i would think that that would hit the nail on the head. >> interesting. that's not really being much addressed in any of the coverage. >> well, people don't really talk about things like that. i mean, you can't say those things with certainty, and then you bring in what gives you the right to say things like that, but he doesn't have the stability that we see with others. >> right, but if you look at the

exit strategies of the guys that have gone, only in yemen has there been a successful gorgeted exit of a form -- negotiated exit of a former president. yemen was a somewhat democratic state by regional standards. i mean, there were political parties with some degree of freedom. there was a more -- it was an authoritarian democracy for one of the better term, and it was -- it -- whereas -- >> [inaudible] >> right. syria seems to be a slightly different animal. yes , yemen, there was -- yemen there was enough space to compromise. >> the regime can't negotiate with the opposition. even worse in egypt. what would happen is in egypt, the ruler is a pharroh ruling

with out anybody. the last defense minister was moved aside in the 1980s. he wanted to be the vice president, and he was not, and he was minister of defense. the regime never had any dealings with the opposition groups, the labor party and whatnot. they were just dcht have -- didn't have power and didn't have that relationship. whereas in yemen because the state is so weak, he always had contacts with other parties. >> do not exist in syria at all. >> no, there's no political parties there. you're not going to get anything. >> right. that would suggest it's going to be hard to do the deal. >> it's a negotiation between the regime and the west. the regime and the, you know, the rebel stand behind the west saying, yeah, okay, we'll do

that, but, you know, the arab revolt, the arab spring, only in outside of syria, only in libya did we see violence. tunisia fell fairly quickly. the security forces didn't use violence against the protesters. just a few hundred died in egypt, and that was before the tanks were rolled out. yemen, he used violence as a tool to extract confessions. he knew he was out. he knew he couldn't continue. he wanted to get those acorpses that he -- assurances he needed. only in libya with the country lost in a few days, did we see any level of violence that approximated what happened in syria. that's because, gadhafi, was very upset and wanted to get his country back. he -- the level of violence also was very low compared to what we saw in syria.

they talked about ben gay cy to- benghazi to be massacred and whatnot, but now that we know what happened, the level of violence against libyans was low what we see in syria, what the people do in syria, almost horrible atrocity. >> gentleman here. wait for the microphone. >> i'm william from enterer gnarl, and that segues to the discussion about the political opposition. the u.s. government has been trying to talk with the turks. my understanding, and i hope you know more about this than i do that the dsnc really is not an effective organization, and which leads to the fact there suspect anybody for the -- suspect anybody for the u.s. or the syria or the u.n. or really anybody else to talk to about

cutting a deal or finding a way out other than continuing bloodshed. can you talk about the political opposition? >> that's a great question as i said in the talk. the only absentee is the great debating society. the national congress, the opposition group created in the aftermath of the revolution. these guys have no support on the ground. people don't know them. their names and faces, inside the country, and they think we don't care. they are not in the country. they distributed aid, and they are quiet, but they are not anywhere close to the front lines, not gaining what they need, there's a lot of fighting, and a lot resigned. the islamists are taking over, certain facts are supported, you know, qatar and the french are trying to really mold them into

some type of cohesive organization, and it's not working or going anywhere. i don't think you'll see anything out of the snc come out. that said, there are certain people that, you know, i think would be good leaders, the people i've met with good ideas. they are upright individuals. they don't have an agenda, just syria's interest, but they don't have the legit ma -- legitimacy to do anything on the ground. >> given the degree to egypt or syria, was the arab awakening worth it? >> well, you know, that's a very tough question, peter. depends where you stand, and it also depends at what point in time you look at it. these the birth pains of it, it takes a lot of time to transition. you need to really build institutions.

you can't just impose democracy, and would have been a transitional phase. i remember when the clinton administration came in office in 1990, they had the assistant secretary of state to talk to mubarak, and they wanted him, you know, they wanted him to liberalize the regime. if i do that, the islamics take over. that was that. and then the americans focused on the peace process instead. we made mistakes in the middle east, and we should have pushed for some type of opening that so we could have had a process, and not just something that comes out of nowhere, and that is a problem, and people are very frustrated in these societies, and they are not going to understand that democracy takes time, that the regime -- that the government's are not strong and stable. you are already hearing a lot of backlash against democracy and countries like egypt and libya.

they want strong leadership. they want stability. >> like the no nostalgia of rusn society. >> exactly, but that didn't happen a year and a half after it was gone, but it happened in egypt. he was seen as a standard bearer of the former regime because he was the former transportation -- general of the former transportationist, and mubarak named him prime minister of the cabinet. >> you know, i guess egypt could -- is it, you know, there's certain models of societies which are sort of somewhat democratic, but also have a strong military, a successful model would be turkey and less successful model would be pakistan right now. is egypt perhaps a less successful version of that? >> well, the military's always going to be strong in egyptian society. first of all, you talk about the threat of israel.

they need a strong military. the military also controls i think between 10%-15% of the economy base. the military gets a good portion of the budget for defense spending. you're going to have a strong military in egypt and it's the strongest institution. when all else fails, look at the military. in libya, the military was torn apart after the loss in the war in 1987. gadhafi dismantled it. you're always going to have that in egypt. what i was surprised was the swiftness with which the military leadership took over power after mubarak fell. collapsed with such swiftness, and when morsi came into power, he just fired every. that was interesting. >> perhaps heart ping.

>> yes, that's also true that he moved towards democracy if you're going to have that type of a -- you have the civilian leaders really assert their power so forcefully and early on. >> in pakistan in 2002, the pro-taliban parties controlled two out of four of pakistan's provinces, and in 2008, they got 2% of the vote losing control, and they lost control because they had not delivered. how would you see the fortunes? you sort of addressed that in the opening remarks, but is it too large a movement to make a general prediction of them? they obviously got 25% of the vote implying they are doing well in lots of parts of egypt. how would you assess their political prospects or too early to tell? >> it is too early to tell. we don't know what's happening with the parliament right now. they can say, well, we didn't

get ministries or give us any power. with that said, what can they deliver? i mean, they're not going to be able to reform egyptian society. the things they want, the things they want to put in the constitution are just shocking that you can't -- you can't have any type of insulting to anything that has to do with religion in the country or whatnot. the structures they want to impose in society that people are not really going to go for that, and they are not going to be able to also -- the religious side, people want -- they want economic progress, people want jobs, end to corruption. they want more responsive governments for the society. that's not going to happen because you don't get that with democracy. you need a complete change in the way people think. you have to move from traditionalism to modernity.

you put a thin layer over traditionalism. .. spur national sentiments and feelings that the americans want to keep you under the site and have no respect to for you. egypt is the greatest ally.

every sin the astronauts of the 1972 war, when henry kissinger went to seize the.answer.both a map on the table and said the israelis on the side of forces and we will able to move our forces here. that is the beginning of an american egyptian relationship. >> in a sense, there is a defense treaty. >> a quick provost for camp david and you can't start stipulating democratic conditions. do we really want to alienate their session stability in the region, do we really want to alienate the country that is the pillar of the american support in the region? would need to work with new leadership in fine, goal and move towards them together hand-in-hand. >> morsi seems to have said, since the muslim brotherhood was sort of stand.

i mean, what is the basic position? >> there's going to be no movement on the treaty. it would allow the military to move more forces then. that's what you hear on the street. but the funny thing with that is a return to israelis allow them to move our forces then, they didn't do that. i think the israelis allow this to the present its spring back into the cyanide? >> into his own seat, which borders israel. they allowed i think 20 tanks. but the egyptians never did that. historically since the egyptians took over, but only stationed about 75% of the forces they were allowed to under the camp david accord. >> interview, it is extremely unlikely the treaty between israel and egypt would be in any way significantly changed,

amended? >> they may want to get more forces and their not because of the situation, but they're working on it. now when we talk about if there's going to be a problem between israel anisha, my greatest fear is they are both moving forces into these regions. the egyptians have this problem. what happened in august 2011, when there's a jihads incursion into israel with the israelis respond in hot pursuit and they killed the egyptian guard, he created a big collaboration in egypt, which led to the storming of the israeli embassy. tensions are very, very high. so there's not this type of isolated incident or event. they could lead to a real, real big problem.

>> lady here and in the two there. >> hi, public international law policy group. while growing prospects to use the for u.s. influence in the region, especially given the security problems in a recent embassy attacks and challenges await governance and weak institutions. >> a great book to read on that it's not too much promised land by aaron david miller. he is a great section on how strong we think we are in the region and what we can get done and what the people on the ground think we can get done. we need to work with our allies. we need to talk to local intelligence services. that's a big problem now. we've lost contact in the intelligence services that we provide information about the bad guy.

>> at huge cost -- i mean, it's not like there's any great nostalgia for the egyptians, right? >> the thing is we have a great relationship. at the end of his life, gadhafi, when condoleezza rice visited a think in 2006 or 2007, i think nixon's visit, vice president nixon's visit in 1967 or 68 was the big achievement of the bush administration put forward that they brought libya back in the cold. yes, there were human rights violations and yes there were a lot of problems. but that didn't change the type the services really benefited from the coordination they had. >> i mean come in a sense the

whole qaeda was in some ways his intelligence services as much as anything else. i mean, it's not an accident your brokers critical milestones while he was -- >> they played a very virtual. >> not an accident that also hear he became a radicalized in prison. he became radicalized in became radicalized in a jordanian prison. >> i'm familiar with all of those. >> services really the big question for all those is, if you accept the idea, and i think it's uncontroversial that al qaeda and groups like it really came as a result of these authoritarian regimes. many of these regimes are going, which suggests more political space for islamists, which may be nonviolent. and that is the whole. but i think it's a reasonable

one. would it have been better to have none of the democratic openings in the chines don't place camus also brutally repressed groups, but also know we created them. or is there some other -- >> like i said earlier, depends what time frame are looking at. we are look at the right short-term of these revolutions of the september 11 attacks. this is what happens. and 10, 20 years in the next generation, the societies will transition to more strong, democratic states with strong state institutions with more security and stability and everybody's going to be happy with what looms. but going back to your point about the political islamists, the problem is a lot of people are going to be disgruntled with what the political islamists were able to accomplish.

the real hard-core people will say well, they are just as bad. they didn't give us what we wanted to say they became disenchanted. and then the al qaeda affiliates come up with these ideas that democracy as an idol, the 2009 speech, democracy of the contemporary or modern idol, where you have people like abu unlocks the -- i can't remember the name of his lecture. these guys will talk about democracy being a new form of idol worship. go build to say see, we told you about this. >> iraq has been a sort of experiment about a lot of the same issues. i mean, where do you where do you see the jihads in iraq right

now? [inaudible] >> have a come back? do they have any validity now? had to change their ways? >> is too soon for society to forgive them for what they did. >> and i think that less than also, as one of the turning points in al qaeda's fortress was the attack on america in jordan in 2005, which killed almost entirely jordanians. lack of widespread coverage in the arab world. so i think in iraq people saw what al qaeda like regime would impose on the population. i think i ran this quite a lot of understanding of this. >> troop. i think about a month after that people were very upset. i mean, colleagues took out full-page ads in the papers announcing the attacks.

it is a real backlash against that. but she see a lot of that appeared in a country where an attack is carried out, people usually supported tax outside their country. >> to talk about what happened in benghazi after the attack. >> and ghazi -- libya is very different because they are very supportive of the west for what they did in overthrowing gadhafi as opposed to other countries, where no one asked for american aid and got military support. but the point is i used to live in the admin. and in yemen, people were very supportive of attacks against the american military and american civilians. they were supportive of the 9/11 attacks. but today there was an attack in yemen, the al qaeda sponsor -- >> same thing happen in saudi

arabia in 2000. we have another question over here. >> i'm brain that govern, veteran intelligence professionals for sanity. i was there to broaden the discussion to russia. i used to know a lot about russia and i think i remember they are very interested in syria. how serious do you think the russians consider what is happening in syria? was the word on the street or in diplomatic circles as to how far the russians will go? >> i can't really talk about russian foreign policy. it's not my specialty. i've a friend who's very good at it, but that's not me. >> did you have a question, sir? >> i am mike beard and i wonder what role area has played in the area?

>> excellent. iran is playing a big role in supporting the syrians. we know that they are training them, offering all types of aid. they can't allow syria to follow because the contrary some weapons to hezbollah, which is iran's really big ally in the region that it could exert influence of power against the threat that the israelis. so we'll do everything in its power to sustain a steering machine. however, it is not the money they would want to have because of the sanctions regime against it. the economy is really being pummeled by the day. a lot of internal stability problems. so they can't extend all the aid that it wants to. given logistical support and

military training, we've heard rumors that their training should be the paramilitary units , alawite units to go run and indiscriminately kill people. there's a lot of evidence of that, a lot of talk about that. >> our alawite regarded a mainstream shiite? >> they are not very happy with them, either. >> responding to the regime and to basically supporting a group they regard as heretics. >> it was more pragmatic when they started the relationship. the iranian stated in ally on iraq started the war with them. so they were able to reach out because the whole region was

against them. saudi arabia, kuwait, they were scared and used iraq as a shield, the protector of their interests against a rainy and said they were there after the gulf war. but when we look at the shia alawite relationship, what happened at the end of an era, be sure to bring in the islamists but because they were scared that the french would claim that they were lost christians, a french priest, a great orientalist claimed these were questions, so then what happened is the whole issue became politicized when searching islamic scholars gave fought for their legal opinions

saying that the alawite were muslims. they issued fatwa in 1940 say not. and outsiders were able to get because sadr to offer in the mid-1970s, saying that they were shia. and we also saw this i think in the 20s, maybe 30s and 40s they start sending youngsters to study in the cemetery. i think it nosh out where it was. there was an integration and came back with books and what not. they have never been considered. what happened is that she is so there's two groups called tall race, the mainstream and iran, iraq and lebanon. and then you have extremists, we

are cut off. these are extremists and they found right now in some areas in lebanon and yemen and syria, they are deify allah. if you read some of these alawite attacks, it is amazing what they say. so they are really outside the islamists will. they don't bandwidth at me type of form. these people are just heretic. >> any other questions? gentleman here. >> added genomic and the heritage foundation. burgess when i and a new positive or given enough, or should we give more? and what kind of aid?

>> it's a great question. the thing is libya doesn't need any aid decodes it has all the oil wells. it needs help in building institutions. it means experts to bring in judges being to build up technical capacity. libya's oil money can support all that. anything would be an state they can get on their own. i just don't have the experience necessary. >> the islamic fighting group which was once aligned with al qaeda is an affiliate of al qaeda in a piece with the regime and not of course was a peace deal with gadhafi. to what extent was that held on the islam that fighting group. what is happening with that group? >> they have accepted the play by democratic rules.

he's part of a political party. you have ali's brother, a member of another party. i think the ideologue is also played for political gains when the revolution talked about a guy named mesabi, a security official. there have been extremists, libyan ally who they say was detained in guantánamo bay. he has come to some element of extremism. we are not sure if he was involved in what happened on september 11 or not. i don't excel. but by a large-company ally the ally has just like the g5 in egypt, they denounced violence and move to the mainstream

society. >> somebody and back over here with a question. any other questions? >> if i could get a second question. you look at various transitions that have gone on in libya and syria, the leadership doesn't have any accent. you know, they're going to get shot and run out of town, where in tunisia and yemen, certainly also somewhat in egypt there was an exit strategy for them. could you talk about the supporters of al-assad and they see their backs to the wall and they have to fight to the death or they're going to get killed in other ways? is there any way out of the? >> that's a big problem.

basically the regime is just beating the alawite's most horrible stories about the sunnis and what they want to do to them. these people really have their back against the wall and need to be smarter. it's just a doomsday scenario for them. the other minorities, you know, you're talking about christians. many christian groups -- [inaudible] off the top of my head i think it's a alawite% to 12%. it's not a small population. it's pretty big. it's not cohesive because you talk about pre-course. you're talking about searing christians, small numbers of protestants and what not, historians. so these groups support the

regime. behrmann burrs are part of the security services. since they are all so scared time. >> this has been a really deep, well reported and he also took a lot of risks to gather this information, so we're very grateful you came and spoke about it. >> the original presented the risk was peter in afghanistan a long time ago. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

>> can refocus on the issues and not the personalities and the bad? i think there is a need, if we could take a poll here but the folks in the gala perhaps come a real need here to focus at this point i'm in need tiered >> how do you respond? >> i agree with him. >> i think in general, let's talk about these issues. let's talk about the programs. but in the presidency, a lot goes into it. kerry goes into it. that's not particularly specific to strength goes into it. that's not specific. standing up against aggression come that's not specific in terms of a program. this is what a president have to do.

so i'll take your point in think we ought to discuss childcare or whatever else it is. >> and you, too? >> prophetess handset. >> there's not ifs, ands or buts. i'll take the place because i'm at the american people want to talk about issues and not tabloid journalists. so i'll take the place and stay on the issues. not just for the record, i don't have any spin doctors. i don't have any speechwriters. probably shows. [laughter] i make those charts you see on television. [laughter] but you don't have to wonder if it's me talking. what you see is what she got. if you don't like it coming back to other choices, right? >> i want to say one thing in fairness. the ideas expressed are mine. i worked on this for 12 years and i'm the only person up u.s. have been part of washington in any way for the last 20 years. so i don't want the implication to be that somehow everything

they say is cooked up and put in her head by somebody else. i worked 12 years very hard on the real problems and real people. i'm just as sick as you are about waking up defending myself every day. >> on wednesday, the supreme court heard fissured the university of texas at austin, the affirmative action policies in higher education. abigail fisher was denied admission to the university of texas at austin in 2008. fischer sued, arguing that

racial minorities with worse credentials were accepted ahead of her because she was white. she contend that the schools use of of race in nations violates the u.s. constitution's guarantee of equal protection. a previous court ruling allows race to be one factor considered to achieve diversity. this is an hour and 20 minutes. >> well, i get to say that this is case of love and 345, fisher of the of texas at austin. and you get to say -- >> general suter trained me too well. chief justice and members of the court, may i please the court. the essential issue here is whether the university of texas at austin and can carry its burden of proving that its use of race as an nation plus factor and the consequent denial of equal treatment, which is the

central mandate of equal protection clause to abigail fisher met the two test of strict scrutiny, which are applicable. >> before we get to the court to raise it on its, the question of standing. if the injury is projection by the university of texas and the answer is, no matter what, this person would not have been accepted, then how was the injury caused by the affirmative action program? >> welcome to justice ginsburg, the first injury before the court was the use of a system, which denied equal treatment. as a constitutional injury. part of the claim is premised directly on the constitutional issue. >> texas versus the station that entry. this is mere use of race is not

admissible injury sufficient. >> it was litigated on its merits and the question was, whether it's a phase could carry his case went on summary judgment, whether it's apparent that his complaint, which said he was denied access to the graduate program at the university of texas was not sustainable. they're subtle factors in this case that are quite different. first the constitutional entries such as the court has recognized a. second, the fact premise she could not have been allowed and under any circumstances never tested, wasn't raised, comes up in a footnote. >> can i go to another site? she's graduated? >> correct. >> she does claim to desire after her application to go to the school at all. she was permitted to apply the summer program and get an automatically she didn't. correct? >> no, that's not correct, your

honor. she was not automatically admitted. she was submitted and rejected. you're talking about the cat program for more she could've attended a different university in the texas system. it has she been able -- >> she's graduated? so what measure of damages will she get or will she be entitled to? >> that issue of course is bifurcated and we preserve the ability. >> you have to claim the injury. so with the injury you claimed that will sustain a claim of damages? >> the denial of her right to equal treatment of the constitutional and a jury in another south of the certain damages. we started the case before was clear. >> you still haven't answered how lesage gets away from that. give me another damages question. >> if we then were to assert damages contingent upon the fact she should have been admitted was not omitted, we would then have to prove that up for the use of race should be admitted.

that is the thrust of lesage. whether we can prove it is something you can't tell on this record clearly asserted. i would point out that texas said there was no way to determine that issue. >> we've had cases involving alleged discrimination in the state contracting. and we have the required the person who is discriminated against because of race to prove that he would have gotten the contract otherwise, have we? >> no commissary. >> it's been enough there was a denial of equal protection. >> that is correct in our first premise. the same issue was raised in bakke. he couldn't have gotten into the middle-school, therefore has no case. in footnote 14 to justice powell's opinion, that is a matter of merits, not a matter

standing. i think the same type of contention was made with respect to the louisville class plaintiffs whose son had been admitted to the school of his choice in the corset damages are sustained standing. there's a light damages claim here and i don't think there's a question. >> her claim is not necessarily she would've been admitted, but that she was denied a fair chance in the admission lottery. >> just as when a person is denied participation in the contract the moderate, he suffered an injury. >> yes, i agree with that. >> if you're going to their merit, i want to know whether you want to ask of grutter. mr. grutter said would be the buzzword nine years. i know the time class, but only nine of those years have passed. and so, are you? and if so, why overrule a case into which so much thought and

effort and so many people across the country have depended on? >> justice breyer, we have said very carefully we were not trying to change the disposition of the issue in grutter. could they be legitimate, compelling interest in using race to establish a diverse class? the problem we've encountered through the cases there are varying understandings, not of the legitimacy of the entries, but how you get there. is it necessary to use race to achieve that interest? >> the question is your point is toaster to satisfy grutter? is that what you're arguing? how do you want to argue right now in the next 10 minutes? i'm interested because i've a very short time that my question and i need to know how you're going to argue. >> justice breyer, our argument is we can justify grutter a

property right. >> masculine that specifically, but take away the tent are sent solution. see the only plan were the one that is before the court now. no 10%. this is the exclusive way that the university is attempting to increase minority enrollment. then if we have no 10% solution under grutter, but this plan be unacceptable? >> i think there are be flaws under grutter come even if you assume something away that can't be assumed away. it is not of texas five. there is a top 10% program. >> question is, can you have both? it seems to me that this program is certainly no more aggressive than the one in grutter.

it is unpacked my modest. >> i don't agree with that appear them explain why. in order to satisfy grutter come you first have to say you're not just using race gratuitously, but in the interest of producing a critical mass of otherwise underrepresented students. so to be within grutter's framework on the first question is, absent the use of race, would we be generating a critical mass? to answer that question, you've got to examine the context of so-called soft factors that are in grutter. is there an isolation? the members of minority feel they cannot speak? >> one social studies at this university did set that minority students overwhelmingly, even with the numbers they have now, are feeling isolated. so why isn't that even under your test? we can go back to other substantial evidence is adequate, is necessary or not.

why does their test fail? >> welcome in the survey -- a random survey is not reported in any systematic way. it evidently interview students and it was all about classroom isolation. >> was it done before or after they announced the decision to reinstitute? >> it was done after president fulcher had made the declaration they were going to do it. >> it was done before, which came on this tomato after a decision. >> i believe on the same day. >> and this goes to justice breyer's question, do you think grutter helped there's no more affirmative action in higher education after 2028? >> that was not -- what i'm trying to pinpoint as we have such a limited time and to be the one thing i want to pinpoint, since you are arguing it is properly understood as he say that.

looking up we have a two-quart bowl. in two courts have found, it seems to me, but here there is no quota. it is individualized, and it is time noted, tempted after consideration of race neutral means. each applicant receives individual consideration and research not become the predominant fact. so i take this as a given. and then i want to know what precisely it is the grutter required that makes us different from grutter data was not satisfied here? the two cores there are the same. maybe that's enough. >> i'm not sure we agreed with those quotas. >> whippoorwill for two courts say it, where the urban something connected with facts to overturn. >> so that's why mentioned, particularly the case of

considering alternatives that work about as well. i think that is a legal question. >> there are facts and there are facts. if i might try to answer your question, there was no effort in this case to establish even a working target for critical mass. they simply ignored it. they just used words and said we've got to do more. so they never answer the critical question, which grutter asked. can we create a critical mass? that is a flaw that we think is in grutter. we think it is to restate that principle. >> that is a normal fact that we exceed quart holdings on. but that there is or was not a critical mass. >> a weird kind of a fact. it's a judgment. >> justice scalia, that is correct. in addition, the coarse and

fine -- >> you need somebody critical mass was? i am looking at the number of blacks from the university of texas system. pre-grutter, when the state was indisputably segregating, it was 4%. today, under the first barak grr system, the 2% is enough for you even state population is up 12%. somehow they've reached a critical mass is just the 22% increase? >> would help of the demographics are the keys to underrepresentation. >> i'm not going to quarrel with you that the demographics alone were being used. i would be somewhat concerned. which you can't seriously suggest that democratics aren't a factor to be looked at in combination with how isolated are not isolated your student

i.d. has been putting itself to feel. >> i think if you start to split out subgroups of minorities, you mistake what i think is the proper threats. >> it might be insulting to some to be thrown into a pot. >> why did she seriously suggest that? whether she seriously said just the demographic makeup of the state has nothing to do with whether somebody feels isolated, that if you are in a state that is only 1% black, that doesn't mean that you're not isolated so long as there is 1% in the class. >> we should take that position because it seems to be right. >> justice calleja, it is not a balance and we -- the court has constantly held not a permissible interest and that is something we certainly agree with. trying to respond to justice sotomayor, and in the framework

grutter, it does this person, member of the so-called underrepresented minority, a concept we don't necessarily accept, are they isolated? are then able to speak out? think we've always said if you have a very large number, as texas in 2004 with a extensively made the decisions to reinstitute race, they had 21% admission percentage of what they call the underrepresented minorities. they also had about 18% of asian-americans. so on campus come you are talking about 40% of the class being minority. >> the test is in your opinion, that the proper test of critical mass is, is the minority isolated unable to speak out? that's the test. that wasn't in grutter or was? in your opinion what is. >> the reason he was satisfied they are not here is?

>> and grutter, the court assumes a small number of minority mission looked at as a whole, only as a whole in grutter would've yielded about three or center for% minority russian and a classic 350, which means about 12 to 15. >> so what are you telling us is the standard critical mass? at what point does the district court or university know that it doesn't have to do any more to keep allies to desegregation but as happened in a particular state over decades? but it's now stuck at a fixed number and has to change its rules. >> it is not our burden to establish the number. it was a burden at the university of texas to determine whether -- >> well, they told the district court. he took a study astuteness. they analyzed the composition of their classes and they

determined, in their educational judgment, that greater diversity, just as we said in grutter is a core of their educational program and one that includes diversifying classes. so what more proof do you require? >> welcome if you are the grounds that need to be proved, who approved in all fairness, justice sotomayor. >> in the evidence, what more do you think they needed? i think all i hear you saying in your brief is the number is fixed now. they got enough. no more is necessary. >> what you're saying in a brief as they generate a substantial number of minority presence on campus. >> that's enough which are saying. >> that thrust upon them the responsibility that they wanted to essentially move away from equal treatment, they had to

establish a purpose were trying to generate a critical mass of minorities that otherwise could not be achieved. >> tell me what about use of race did not fix the narrow tailoring, but the narrow tailoring that grutter required. how is race used in a way that violated the terms of group. assuming denise bair. >> put aside what was necessary and inappropriate last resort in a quest for diversity and critical mass, this is not without limits. but i'll put that aside. when they come to your question. if you think about narrow tailoring, you cannot tailor. if you have no range or understanding of what critical mass means, you can't tailor. >> so you have decided quota. >> now, huge difference and

important put out by the university of texas. having a few as to what would be as defined in grutter allows you to evaluate where you are. >> something grutter in fact. >> i think it is very important to distinguish between the operative use of that, in other words, that's where we are and we will use recent till we get there every year in consideration of each application. you should not be doing, you shouldn't be setting those coming shouldn't be setting quotas. he should set an individualized assessment of the applicants. tell me how the system doesn't do that. >> this system -- it's not narrowly tailored because it doesn't fit.

>> do you understand that the university of texas thinks is the definition of the critical mass? >> i don't. >> simply reiterates the language of grutter. they have no definition. they can't fit. >> mr. rein, it seems you are relying entirely on the 10% is enough. it's not minorities through the 10%, so they don't need anymore. i tried to get you originally to focus on forget the 10% plan. this is the entire plan. >> let me tell you if you look outside the top 10, the so-called ai/pai admits only forget the top 10 generating approximately 15% minority admissions outside of the target in grutter. it is vastly different. >> i'm talking about only the

non-top 10% of the so-called underrepresented minorities about the top 10. the top 10 is also a generation. >> this was before the adoption? >> now i'm confused. i thought the 15% figure was the one arrived >> 10% is much higher than in 2004 for hispanics and african-americans. these are the category sees. asians was over 30%. isolating in response to justice ginsburg, the non-top 10 admissions. those are her 10% that year and the average very close to that overtime. so the total generation is a combination of the two in fact,

but the ai/pai system was about it, s. texas said, the first thing they tried to accommodate to the loss of the ability to use restrict late, so that was their first response, to look at a more balanced admissions programs between academic index and personal achievement. so it is not a system -- >> could you comment on this and then i hope we can get back to justice alito's question. you argue that the university's race conscious admissions plan is not necessary to achieve a diverse student because there've been so few people -- so few minorities. i'd shuttle without reading the brief. there's so few, what's the problem? >> lets us down and resulted in the admission of many minorities. then you come back and say this

shows we were probably wrongly excluded. are you saying that you shouldn't impose this hurt or this injury generally for so little benefit? >> yes, that's part of it. the second is the question of alternatives. if we take texas at his word and say they happy going on with the way they apply race today, we try to measure what difference is it making them could you achieve the same thing with a reasonably available race neutral alternatives. that is the question asked in rein. they're supposed to to analyze that. they didn't look at it. >> produce a race neutral alternative to 10%% plan? >> the race neutral alternative includes an extension because it's a major generator of

minority admissions. >> and that's okay because it's racing show. but is it really? the only reason they instituted the 10% plan was to increase minority enrollment? and the only way it works is if you have heavily separated schools. and worse than not, if you want to go to university of texas under the 10% planned, go to the low performing schools. you don't take challenging forces because that's how you get into the 10%. so maybe the university is concerned that that is an inadequate way to do with it. >> justice ginsburg, a lot of that is speculative. we don't know, they've never served the top 10 admits to say

wow -- >> for 10% and is not imposed by the universities. it is not their option to say this is not good for education because people take easy courses. it is impose restate occam is that? anyone the top 10% of any school in the state gets in the university of texas. >> it is a matter of law. i am simply saying they could choose to extend beyond where it is because it's capped at 75%. but that's not the only option, not the only alternative. what's the alternative is they could look at the yield. the percentage of admitted minorities are they encouraging? >> out to get you directly to answer. before hotfooted in the 10% plan come and looked on african-american side that it averaged about 5% per year pretty steadily.

then after 10%, what donna's little bit. a little bit, not a lot. 2%, 4% maybe. and the nature deuce grutter ends back up to 5%. is that about? is that a little? for several thousand omissions up sirs in the united states. several dozen universities. and what is that we're going to say here that already was said in grutter that would take hundreds or thousands of how federal judges dictating the policy of admission of all these universities? you see what i'm looking for some certainty? you saw what happened, saw the numbers. >> i will answer your question. >> you can answer later if you want or not at all. [laughter] >> i'm perfectly happy to answer your question. i think that the increase in african-american you look at his

pre-grutter. it was generated before 2004, so i want to make sure the record don't depend on race to do it. minimal change with the use of race. that's what we say an alternative of service while in increasing yield or indeed in the re-weighting the pai come a critical element so you put more emphasis on the socio- non-mac factors in my sunday essays, come academic measure. so there's lots they could do. >> tell the universities how to run and how she way qualifications. >> is not the job of the court should tell them how to do it. it is their job to examine alternatives available to them. >> tell me again how grace and their use of race overwhelms those other factors in their system as it's created. >> the question is not whether it overwhelms them. they say -- they had their admissions that would not have

taken place but for somebody else would've had that place but for the use of race. picking to answer your question fully, you have to analyze race neutral alternatives. that was the critical question. the outcomes were so small that they are readily available. >> perhaps you could summarize by telling us from your point of view, this plan fails strict scrutiny and one or two were both levels because the object gives inappropriate or ill-defined and because of the implementation is defective. which are both of those are you arguing? >> would've argued both and continue to argue both. >> when is the strict scrutiny under both of those categories? >> under the category -- the first category as a means of a

compelling interest or we don't believe they shown any necessity and should have been a last resort our first resort. in a nutshell, they failed in other respects. he put a narrow tailoring, we say they didn't consider alternatives and their treatment as we pointed out, asian americans and hispanics makes an incomprehensible distinction we don't worry about asians. there is then a lot of patients come measure, forgotten. they are in nexus that they share the texas population. if you try to find individual comfort levels, percodan between african-americans and hispanics -- >> council, you are the one who assumes they are valuing different races. but asian numbers have up under however these structured this

pai. as i understand, races balanced against other issues like socioeconomics, the string of the classes people took. so even a white student. who goes to an entirely black or entirely latino school who becomes class president would get some points because he has or she has proven that they foster or can deal in a diverse environment. that's understood the plan, that it's not just giving you a plus because of race. it is combining that with other factors. >> there is a plus because of race. many factors in the decision. might i say that the white student president of the class in a different school is a measure of leadership. leadership is an independent

factor in the pai. he's not getting a point because of his race. he's getting that because of his leadership. but his recent tour criteria to argue for anyone. it is an independent add-on, something they can use to boost a pai score or element in any way they like as they contextualize it. is that it's not necessarily, not narrowly tailored. it ignores alternatives and gives disparate treatment to asian-americans because they are minorities as well enter the extent it depends on the classroom factor, there's simply no way to relate or fit what they are doing to the solution of the problem, which they use as a major foundation of their proposal, which is the nonfirst first classroom. certainly dishes no correspondence there. i see my time expired at >> we will corporate all time since questions have reserved you from resorting.

>> for two overriding reasons, the mission plan before it is constitutional under this course presents. first, it is indistinguishable in terms of how it operates and taking race into account has one modest factor among many for considerations of applicants in totality from plans this court has upheld in grutter and the court-approved in bakke plan. >> i put that in the narrow tailoring category. it is narrowly tailored to weigh grutter did you not to with the need to did i think most of the arguments have been centered on that. >> that is right. that's the second point is going to make come the holistic admissions process at issue here is the necessary counterpart to the state's top 10% live and works to offset the systematic drawbacks of that law in achieving an interest that is indisputably compelling universities interest in

assembling a probably diverse student body. >> i need to figure out exactly what these numbers mean. should someone who is one quarter hispanic check the hispanic box or some different box? >> your honor, there's a multiracial blacks. students check taxes based on a determination. >> suppose a person is 1% hispanic. >> your honor, to make that determination, your honor. if anyone in party of the application daily to some honor code, that could come out. >> what a pilot for some unwanted hispanic to check the hispanic box? >> i don't think that issue would be different than the plan in grutter. >> no college in america, ivy

leagues. >> 18% minority. >> your honor come the same make a determination is made in either situation i'm aware of, race is taken into account. >> they have to self identify. >> how do they decide? a lot not just a critical mass in the school at large, but class by class. somebody walks in the room and looks to see who looks asian, looks black, hispanic. >> the university has never inserted in indexing and diversity in any single classroom. except that the guy one dimension of student body

diversity. >> i don't know what you're talking about. it is either a factory that is probably in this case are designed. i do they look to individual classroom diversity are not? and if so, how do they decide when they are divorced? >> the most important thing in the 30 minutes is when given an opportunity to challenge, i understood to not ask the court to overrule that. this court recognized the classroom is the most important environment for the educational diversity are realized and so the university of texas and determine whether it reached a mass looked at the classroom. >> i'm asking how. do they require ever to check a box or do they have some unfair at this person looks 132nd hispanic and not enough. >> they did a study, your honor, that took into account the same considerations in discussing the enrollment. >> what kind of the study?

>> from a supplemental joint appendix. >> it doesn't explain how they go about classroom by classroom deciding how many even argue. >> hirsute lesson each classroom batteries identified. this! each cluster in the university knows which students are taken as classes. you cannot if you gauge go back to my paycheck on the farm. >> that's a yes or no question. you go back to my paycheck on application application form in deciding whether economics to a one has a sufficient number of african-americans or hispanics. ..

>> no, not on a per class basis. >> but class. >> you're looking at the classrooms, your honor. what that university found was -- >> how many are non top-10% members at issue here admitted in each class? >> your honor, we did not look specifically at that determination. what we did was to try to find the percentage in this. we concluded in 2004, again,

before we did the classroom study, before the issue was adopted, and at that time there were no taking race into account , and will be included was edgy like that african-americans, for example, a 90% of the class of them must -- >> i don't understand your answer. the total number of african-americans in an internal plans. >> yes, sir. >> you know the total number her were admitted that it the top 10%. >> we do. >> your honor -- >> what is the value? >> i don't know the answer to that question. at the time the class from diversity study was conducted it was before the commissions process at issue here. two dozen 3-4. so that determination has been as important as just finding out

or african americans or hispanics, underrepresented minorities to present at the university in such numbers -- >> what is that number? what is the critical mass at the university of the you are working toward? >> your honor, we don't have one. >> how are we supposed to tell whether this is tailored to that gold? >> to look to the same criteria this court rejected the notion -- the notion. >> it does not vary from state to state. >> it could very. my friends throughout this litigation, 20 percent as critical mass, and that this blood big deal the different minority groups. >> what is the university of texas think about those questions? if the critical mass for the

university of texas was dependent upon the breakdown of the population. >> no. >> it's not at all. to the educational benefits of diversity on campus, and that think we actually agree on what that means. [laughter] >> can you explain? you were trying to before. what seems to me the critical question. why do you have that 10 percent solution? of this substantial number of minority members. why was that not enough. >> make a couple of points. first, if you looked at the numbers, we don't think it is, but if you look after seven years of racial diversity among the extremes caught even worse. 2002 african-americans dropped to 3%. the other part of it is that you looked at the admissions of the top 10% plan.

taking the top 10 percent of racially identifiable as schools may be the diversity ellis appear on paper, but it does not guarantee diversity that produces educational benefits on campus which is one of the considerations that the university took into eight counts. >> why? >> because, your honor, as is true for any group. and the plan, as this court approved specifically recognize this. you of representatives with different viewpoints of individuals within the same ratio group here just as you would outside. >> what fun to five what kind of viewpoints? >> anyone with experience. they experience in their lives. >> racial diversity. >> you're talking about something else. >> it directly impacts the individual impact in this sense. the minority candidate who has shown that your's she has

succeeded in an integrated environment, showing community service and the other factors relate to, precisely the kind of candidate that will come on campus, help to break down racial barriers to look across racial lines -- >> likely to be included within that some% rule. and when was that adopted? >> 1998, your honor. with respect to your factual point, it is absolutely wrong. if you look at the admissions a we site on page 34 of our briefing shows the breakdown of applicants under the present his plan, and i don't think that although the percentage plan certainly helps with minority admissions, by and large the minorities who are admitted tend to come from the segregated -- >> at that those of purpose of affirmative action to let to help students who come from underprivileged backgrounds. you make an argument and the guy

never seen before. the top 10% plan, lots of hispanics and a fair number of african-americans. you say, well, it's faulty because it does not man enough african-americans and hispanics that come from privileged backgrounds and specifically have the example of the child of successful professionals from dallas. that is your argument? you have an applicant whose parents are -- let's say one of them is a partner in your law firm in texas and the other is a corporate lawyer and they have income that puts them in the top 1 percent of earners in the country and parents with graduate degrees. they deserve a leg up against, let's say, an asian or a white applicant whose parents are absolutely average in terms of education and income? >> no, your honor. let me answer the question. the example comes almost word for word from the harvard plan

that this court approved. >> answer to that question being know. being an african-american or hispanic is a plus factor which is our point is that we won minorities from different backgrounds. rio out of our way to recruit minorities. >> what you're saying is that what counts is raised above all set. >> no, your honor. -- >> but that is a necessaries bonds. >> well, your honor, what we want is different experiences that are going to -- >> you want under police of a certain race and privileges of a certain race. that's race. >> no, your honor. it's not race. this is the opposite. in the decision, for example, this court said that failing to take into account differences among members of the same race was a disservice. >> with the reason here, the reason you're reaching for the privilege is so that members of that race you are privileged to be representative, and that's

racist. >> it is members of this a racial group bringing different experiences and to say that if you took any racial group, an ambitious process that only to degenerate people from a particular background, you would want people from different perspectives. that is the interest that we are discussing here. in interest that the harbor plants to civilian dobbs. >> i understand my job under our precedents to determine if your use of race is narrowly tailored to a compelling interest. a compelling interest you identify is a critical mass of minority students at the university of texas, but you'll tell me what the critical mass is. , supposed to do the jobs? >> your honor, what this court president says a critical mass is an environmentalist since -- >> but when will we know if you never reached a critical mass? there has to be illogical and.

dior use of race. what is it? when will i know? >> here are, this question, of course, implicates itself. understand my friend not to challenge that. that diversity is a compelling interest. will we look to ending the court can review the termination, to feedback directly from students about racial isolation. did they feel i spokesperson. >> conduct a survey in ask students. >> that's one of the things. >> as the basis for our constitutional determination. >> that's one. >> the other is we did look to enrollment data which showed, for example, among african-americans >> we all agree they 3 percent is not a critical mass. >> but when we have an environment in which -- >> however i supposed to decide

whether you have an environment within a particular minority it does not feel isolated. >> part of this is a judgment thatthe is the gators are going to make. >> when you tell me. that's fair enough. >> on all. look to the criteria we looked at. the enrollment data, the students. we also took into account diversity in the classroom, the racial climate on campus. >> would plead% be enough in new mexico where the

looking at this every year. once -- once we reach that point of course we're going to stop. >> some of this stuff you would agree with and some you don't. >> well, i don't know that i disagree with -- >> and i would like you to answer. the argument based on facts. the game is just too small using a racial -- you don't need more.

so how do you answer the argument as being too small? >> first, consideration of race has increased racial diversity. that is page 138. secondly airport to the fact that african american hispanic submissions did not increase. so this has had an important impact on diversity of the university. >> in terms of diversity, how do you justify all asian-americans? de have a critical mass of filipino americans? >> the common formula that is used, country of origin. >> do you have a critical mass? >> your honor, we have looked to whether or not we have a critical mass which is precisely what this is and asked us to do. if --

>> a jurisdiction. >> before you get to that. suppose you identified a numerical category, numerical standard, numerical designation for critical mass that is x%. given the course of the admissions process can the admissions officers checked to see have closed their coming? >> no, your honor. we don't. base 389. >> you can not? >> do not be monitoring. >> of that would happen, would it be allowed? >> it did. >> interacts? >> no. there was one of the things he pointed out. we don't have that problem. >> i'm asking whether you could do that. >> i don't think so because the majority did not understand it to be monitoring for purposes of

reaching a specific. they do not monster -- monitor price the only one of your holistic factors that appears. >> well, all of the factors are taken into account. >> i'm sorry. the question was whether race is one of the only holistic factors that appears on the cover. >> that is true of the cover. can i make one point on jurisdiction. >> we will give you more time because it will give him more time this. >> first of all, i cannot show that she was injured by any consideration of race. 415-416 of the joint appendix. not in the fall 2008 class, no matter what their race. >> are you arguing this she does not have standing in the article? >> yes, tell your honor. >> you address that in your briefing. one footnote. we have an obligation.

would you give us was one footnote in which he said it is hard to see. >> and there is another part of that which goes to the relief she has requested. this case began. that has fallen and is undisputed. the only thing from this case is the request for monetary damages. it is focused exclusively on the request for the return of the missions. the reason why that is not is that she would have paid the admissions fee no matter what policy. >> what about jacksonville. forced to be part of a process in which there is -- >> that injury is not sufficient

declaratory incentive relief's. >> your friend told us that the real issues are being segregated in the process is still available. >> that is not an answer. the only request is additional. it says that explicitly. did not remedy the injuries suffered. >> the injuries she suffered. it is not the only injury. she had to pay an admissions fee for a process in which she was treated fairly. why should she get her money back? >> address the injury. she would have paid even if

texas did not consider race. and they're for the payment of propagation does now remedy the injury she is complaining about. >> if this is easy, do it. if not, don't. last year all of the year of four. and admissions officers, the only place that has that information you are both here. so if you can agree on what that number is, i would like to no it. >> i do not have specific numbers. some the best universities in

this place for 30 years or more. >> curiosity. how many people are there in the affirmative action department, do you know? a lot of people to monitor all of these glasses and do this assessment of race. a large number of people would be adequate job. >> one of the things that we do monitor is the racial climate on campus for all students. i don't have this specific number of people. it is an important part of the educational experience for all people at the university of texas.

>> thank you, counsel. >> thank you, your honor. >> mr. chief justice, and may it please the court. important to focus on what is or more precisely what is not an issue. not challenging the reaffirmation of the principle of that justice's opinion the student body diversity is a compelling interest that can justify the consideration of race. colleges and universities across the country every line and a principal, and it is a vital interest to the united states that they continue to be able to do so. the koreans arrest is insuring the nation's universities produce graduates who will be affected citizens and effective leaders in the increasingly diverse societies.

the datasets agrees. >> i understand that differently here is how we understand what is going on? and i will address it directly to make it a bit of context. the top 10% plan does produce some ethnic diversity. the problem is the university kaftans role that diversity in the same wave can with respect to 25 percent of the class's. my understanding, at universities it generally do not grant a preference for privilege but make individual decisions about applicants who will their glee for the educational mission look for individuals who will play against racial stereotypes

by what they bring to the african-american society, these hispanic who has mastered classical greek and look for people who have a demonstrated track record that if you have to applicants who are absolutely the same well-educated parents, one false group that is given a preference. is a marginal case. the last position available in the class under the texas plant one gets in and one does not. do you agree? >> no. >> you agree that is an incorrect statement of the bank's or that is an incorrect @booktv correct understanding? >> i think it is both. >> there is no automatic in texas. this is right. they describe the process as

being their race is considered the broader vision of diversity. >> hypothetical is that the two applicants are entirely the same and it is the ability to give a racial preference come it's certainly has to mean that in the hypothetical given by the the justice that they gain in the ellen does not.

a factor that can make a difference in the evaluation of the application. if it doesn't we have a clear case. this opposition has to be that race is a determining factor. the less it is a determining factor in some cases they are using race when does not serve the purpose. >> it can make a difference, but it does not invariably make a difference.

>> it makes a difference in some cases. >> but not necessarily in this situation. >> with that is the thing. in some cases it will make a difference. the sale would be true of appalls this. >> that is exactly right. the point is it is that a mechanical factor and with respect to the implementation of this -- of the compelling interest it is clear that although the petition is challenging burma this plan meets every requirement and addresses the concerns that you raised. it did address the concern. there is no quota and everyone competes against everyone else to read it is an individualized consideration and because of the

way the process is structured they do not monitored. but. >> the supposition of the question is truly impossible. enough of identical can that is because there are not identical mechanical factors than accept that and% plan and the dippy i a, factors are so varied, so contextual reset that note to applicants ever could be identical in the sense that they have hypothesize. >> that's correct. >> as i understand it raised by itself is taken into account. they take race into account. the district court found and you are not challenging that it makes a difference. >> yes, but the key is the way

makes a difference. it makes a difference by casting its accomplishments of the individual applicant in a particular light or the potential. what they are looking for principally with respect to this individualize consideration is what is this individual going to contribute? what they bring to the table. >> it is the correct answer. if there are two applicants were that gpa, the great drama that is a wine, as a two activity, work experience to my community service, a socioeconomic status, single-parent home, s.a.t. score

relative, if you have a situation where all of those things were absolutely identical then the person would be admitted on race. >> not necessarily. [laughter] >> i'm trying to make a single vote -- simple point here. >> you don't like that. before your time runs out led me ask you another question. you devote a lot of attention to the military. bring your arguments. >> of the rotc program for commissioned officers of texas has other plans on top. >> our military, hands-on pipeline now well qualified and prepared kits from diverse backgrounds who are comfortable exercising. >> in the don't want to cut you off.

you have a marginal who wants to go to the university of texas at austin. maybe of races take into account the canada it could send. if not, maybe not. the candid it will go to texas a&m or texas tech, but your position that he will be a military officer. >> i don't understand the argument. >> the point of educational diversity and what the university is trying to achieve is create an environment in which everyone develops an appropriate sense of citizenship . everyone develops a capacity to lead in a racially diverse society and so it pared its every applicant from the university of texas. 43 percent of the officer corps comes from the rotc. >> what is your view on how we

tell when the university has attain critical mass. >> i agree with my friend the critical mass is not a number. a very ill-advised. >> i'm hearing a lot about what is not. of what like to know what it is. our responsibility is whether this is tailored to achieving critical mass. >> may i answer. >> oh, yes. >> thank you. [laughter] >> i don't think that this is a situation in which the court simply afford a complete difference to the university's judgment. has achieved the level of diversity that it needs to accomplish its educational mission. the court has to make its own independent judgment. the wave that they would go of making an independent judgment is look at the kind of information the university

considered and could be information about the composition of the class, information a backlash from diversity, retention and graduation rates, information about the specifics of the university's context of history. a history of racial incidents or trouble are not. and then what the court has to do is satisfy itself that the university substantiated its conclusion based upon that, based on the uprising considered . needs to consider race to further enhance the educational goals that have been identified as a compelling interest. an idea of the s and number of minority enrollees g tired the burden is going to get harder to meet.

a few scenes out want to touch on. first, as we have pointed out, that really relates to merit and that want to make clear that we do not accept the premise of the footnote that she would not have entered under any circumstances. in fact, she was considered for this hour program. >> limited to a injunctive relief and the return of $100 as

written. >> no. it said in the end of other damages. at the point that we're writing it. >> alvarez, we said in the end other all the damages, is negative, what you actually see, in turn to relief for the return of the $100. >> i am saying we never had their virginity to develop. >> we set you cannot manufacture stanley after the fact. did you ask only for interactive relief? >> the only specific number in the complaint because of the point in time when there was filed was the application fee. >> and you would have paid that no matter what under any system of the nation's you would have paid the same $100. >> you have paid a fee in return for a fair processing of the application, which she did not

receive, and we think that is a claim that will be sustained. it is not tested at this point. because of the ways -- the way the case was bifurcated, we did not develop the additional damage. it would reserve the right to amend. as things have progressed -- >> damages. >> no. >> and then had the you get around? >> what was pointed out, other kinds of financial injuries which were not a ascertainable at that time because we were trying to put her in -- >> a better job because she went to a different university. >> that is one of the things they suggested. differences in cost. i am just saying, these are all reserved questions and did not go to standing. in this you. i don't think ever completed my answer. where we stand, we recognize in

the words that the solicitor general's just issued that there is an interest which is cut in diversity. could you recognize it at all? will we are concerned about is universities have ready to be green light, use race, no end point, no discernible target, no critical mass in the circumstances, reduced to something that can be reviewed. as long as you don't cross to lines, determinative points. we will fill this with who we deemed to be underrepresented, you are okay. intended to say this is an area of great caution. it raises all kinds of red flags . making a determination whether really you are interesting, a critical mass, the dialogue in the interchange, the

intellectual interest. >> you are not suggesting that if every minority that got into a university got into only the physical education and in this particular university that does ago education program included all of the star athletes, so every athlete in school happens to be black or hispanic or asian or something else, but has now reached critical mass of ten, 15, 20 percent at the university could not use race? in the holistic way. >> well, if you are saying a differentiated department of physical education like the second college. >> note. every one of their students who happens to be minority will end up in the program. you don't think the university should consider it needs a

different diversity? >> if that were the case the factor that is causing it and you are assuming his choice. you have a critical mass of students. that is one of the base problems. they never asked why if 40 percent of students are minorities are they not in the small classrooms. you might as the question what is causing it. >> the same thing when they say we're looking at the holistic nature, that student. >> they don't take into account your interest. when they comes time in this system to allocate access to different majors the do that in no way it is basically premised on academic index.

two-tier admission, only here focused, their preference goes to admission as such, not sorting people love by major's. i think our answer is will we see what has been -- has been perceived as a green light. go ahead and use race. otherwise a highly questionable and the abominable sorting out, that an unchecked piece of race which we think has been spawned the deficit be corralled. >> is started all of this often 1978. in the different from how race is used in our military academy? >> too many questions. a very different world. holy individualized, comparing individuals one that sun -1 to

establish the platonic idea of the class as educational. this is not what is going on, not an individualized i will look at you. i will score you, but at the .7 mission i am not admitting people but categories. that relates to that justices question. at that your hypothetical is entirely fair begins in the way they do their system you can figure out that two people would have had the same bia score, but more race. it is an error. dawson to boost the component of the score. it is not infrequent. many candidates we will support this same pai and then you boost some of them. we don't lose all of them minorities. as a studio today from a we want to boost the ones that we like. we want the affluent minorities

who we think will improve dialogue. that is contrary to the fact that they give points in the same system for socioeconomic disadvantage, but it is purely race commanded comes to the ultimate question. where is the end point? if your nothing to it cases success. if you cannot say, we don't have critical mass. we refuse to say what it is, there is no supervision, no scrutiny, no and. so what we said goes right back. you can clarify. a, b, c. and we have set in our brief, that would be satisfactory. to the extent that you have is surviving, side-by-side, there could be enormous confusion. >> you want me to go read, but get the underlying determinations and critical mass, look exactly how it has

been done in texas, charged that help you see, and i will then find enough of the difference and administer by to work 3,000 federal judges to deal with programs like this. that is the point? >> if you clarify the need and the necessity point, if you then look as some of the other deficiencies and clarified the particular consideration of our recently available alternatives, if you then i attribute that, though weakness of the program to the absence of factors, i think that you can fashion a result in this case which may or may not have to be overruling. it is a matter what you want. clearly restate what it is that allows the use of the classification which is what we are talking about. it is a narrow window. >> you just want to cite eight.

>> i'm sorry? >> you just want to go there. we want to tell you, once you reach a certain number then you can i use race anymore. >> i do not want to get it, and the only way one can read the -- reach that conclusion is to assume that it is end at unlimited mandate. defer to the use of race. that is of the acceptable. >> thank you. the cases submitted [silence]

>> secretary of state hillary clinton spoke as saying the state department cannot prevent every act of violence. >> we were frightened to use them. but nobody ever knew whether he was serious or not, whether he meant it. of course, to be credible as a deterrent you have to be credible. he never told anybody, and i was

fascinated by that notion. talk about the loneliness of command. what could be greater than that. a guy who ran the allied invasion, liberated europe, but now he is president and has even greater responsibility and a time when nuclear weapons are new, so that just one or two, building an entire arsenal. in hydrogen bombs. i we going to use these things are not? and he used them as a tool, embraced a this unusable weapon as a tool to avoid any war.

>> none of them are very hard. the first job is to welcome my friends come that the ambassadors of morocco, honor the you came to join us today. second, someone to ask then after our keynote addresses done that urinating your seats to help get the party out of the room. my third task is to introduce somebody who probably needs less of an interaction than probably anybody in washington. a legend in washington, retired lieutenant-general -- colonel in the air force, national-security adviser, a graduate of west point, holder of a ph.d. from columbia. he is a model of judgments here

in washington, a counselor and trusty, and my pleasure to introduce. [applause] >> good afternoon. it is a pleasure to meet to be able to stand here and introduce our speaker today. it is a testament to the importance of north africa, global security that the secretary of state has taken time to address this conference on the transition. the forces that are surging through the arab world right now have many of their origins. some of the most promising opportunities for positive

change in the region also have their origins in democracy. we have also seen tragedy, but we cannot forget that we have also seen tremendous hope. that hope which motivates us today. secretary clinton is no stranger to this topic in has been putting energy into strengthening both the u.s. bilateral less a share with the company's 55 countries, and the ties between those countries themselves says she came into office four years ago. her term as secretary of state follows a distinguished career in public service. a lawyer in arkansas, first lady of the united states and the united states senator from the state of new york. she not only has the highest approval rating of any member of the u.s. cabinet. she has, as well, talked to the

gallup poll as the most admired woman in the world, besting the previous record of eleanor roosevelt who held the title for 13 years. as america continues to engage in whatever draft we are extremely fortunate to be served by a public servant who is engaged in challenges the end out and cares deeply about the issues and how they affect america's interests and to believes in an even brighter future for the people of the middle east. please join me in welcoming the secretary of state duma the hon. hillary clinton. [applause] >> thank you. thank you all. thank you very much.

a special word of thanks to a friend and someone who matt admire greatly. his many years of distinguished service to our country is a great tribute in every respect. thank you to john all-german and csi as for hosting this conference. in transition, seeking stability in an era of uncertainty. i also wish to our knowledge the doctor for his strong support of this important conference and members of the diplomatic corps as well. why are we here? why is this conference so timely? well, to start with, what happens in this dynamic region has far reaching consequences more our own security and prosperity. we know very well that is most

important to the people of this region whose aspirations and ambitions deserve to be not -- matt. recent events have raised questions about what lies ahead, lies ahead for our their region, what lies ahead for the rest of us who have watched with great hope as a general scowcroft said , the events that have unfolded. a terrorist attack in benghazi, the burning of american schools. these and other seeds of anger and violence have understandably led americans to ask, what is happening? what is happening to the promise of the arab spring? what does this mean for the united states? well, i certainly think it is important to ask these questions and toseek answers, as you are

doing today. and let me come on a personal note star with what happened in benghazi. no one wants to find out exactly what happened more than i do. i have appointed an accountability review board has already started examining whether our security procedures were appropriate, whether they were properly implemented, and what lessons we can and must learn for the future. we are working as thoroughly and expeditiously as possible, knowing that we cannot afford to sacrifice accuracy to speed. and, of course, our government is sparing no effort in tracking down the terrorist to perpetrated this attack. we are focused, as we must come on lot more needs to be done right now to protect our people in our facility.

we had another terrible attack yesterday. i strongly condemn the killing of a long time even the employee and our embassy. we are working with authorities to investigate this attack and to bring those responsible to justice as well. [applause] but, throughout all of this we must not only focus on the headlines. we have to keep in mind the trend lines. we have to remain focused on the broader strategic questions posed by these democratic transitions and their impact on american interests and values. let me start by stating the obvious. nobody should have never thought this would be in the zero. i certainly did not. however, it is important to look at these full pictures, to weigh

the violent acts of a small number of extremists against the aspirations and actions of the region's people and the government. that broader view supports, rather than discredits the promise of the arab revolution. reaffirms instead of letting mobs in extremists speak for entire countries. we should listen to what the elected government and free citizens are saying. they want more freedom, justice, opportunity, not more violence. and they want better relations, not only with the united states, with the world. i have no illusions about complicated this is. after all, american foreign policy has long been shaped by debates over how to balance our

interests and security and stability with our values in supporting freedom and democracy. recent revelations have intensified these debates by creating a new birth of freedom, but also by unseating old partners and unleashing unpredictable new forces. as i said last fall at the national democratic institute, we have to be honest that american policies in the region will always reflect the full range of our interest and value, promoting democracy and human rights and a feeding terrorists, defending our allies and partners and also ensuring a secure supply of energy. and there will be times when not all of our interests and values a line.

we worked to align them, but we do so acknowledging reality. and it is true that we tailor our tactics for promoting democratic change to the conditions on the ground in each country. after all, it would be foolish to take a one size fits all approach regardless of circumstances or historical trends, but in the long run, the enduring cooperation that we seek and that our interest and our values demand is difficult to sustain without democratic legitimacy and public consensus. weeks bore the revolution in egypt began, i told arab leaders gathered in don that their regions foundations were sinking into the sand. it was clear, even then, that the status quo was unsustainable

, the refusal to change was, itself, becoming a threat to stability. so, for the united states supporting democratic transitions is not a matter of idealism. it is a strategic necessity. and we will not return to the false choice between freedom and stability. the and we will not pull back our support for emerging democracies when the going gets rough. that would be a cause leaves, a strategic mistake that, would, i believe, undermine both of our interests and our values. now, we recognize that the transition is not america's to manage and certainly not ours to win or lose, we have to stand

with those who are working every day to strengthen democratic institutions to meant to fend universal rights, and drive inclusive economic growth. that will produce more capable partners and more durable security over the long term. today these transitions are entering a phase that must be marked more by compromise than by confrontation, by politics more than purchased. politics that deliver economic reforms and jobs to the people that can pursue their liveliest and provide for their families. politics that will be competitive and heated, but rigid in democratic rule and norms apply to everyone. ..

>> times when some will surely ask it was all worth it. going back the weightings were december 2010 is not just undesirable impossible. this is the context to shave our approach going forward.

let me explain where that lead says -- lead us. after all where the revolution started to stop a dictator from slaughtering his people. last month we saw a disturbing five months but look at what is happening on the ground especially in light of recent events to be aware of violent extremism it would never erred drain away reservoirs' after decades of dictatorship. nor was it enough time to show security forces to replace there repressive ones of the past.

extremist tried to hijack bid democratic transitions. while other terrorist groups try to expand their reach one from their stronghold in northern mali. but they did not represent the millions of libyan people who want peace and deplore violence. in the days that followed followed, tens of thousands of libyans poured into the streets to mourn ambassador stevens. who had been a steadfast two ambien of their revolution. one sign read thugs and killers don't represent

benghzi or is lauber out on their own initiative the people over ran extremist bases and insisted that militias disarmed and except the rule of law. that was as inspiring as the site as it we saw in the revolutions. it points to the end dimmed promise of the arabs bring. by starting down the path of democratic politics, libyans and arabs across the region have firmly rejected the extremist argument that violence and death are the only way to reclaim dignity

and achieve justice broke in tripoli the country's transitional leaders condemned the attack. they fired the top security officials responsible for benghzi. the government issued the ultimatum to militias across the country. disarm and disband in 48 hours or face the consequences. as many as 10 major armed groups complied. now militias and extremists remain a significant problem in libya. but there is an effort to address that now has taken hold the throughout the country. as libya grapples with the

challenges of forming a government, the international community needs to support its efforts to bring these militias to heal and provide security for all of its citizens. this past february students of civil society activists shared with me there fears and extremist seeking to derail their transition to lasting democracy but also there hopes the responsible leaders and accountable institutions would be strong enough and willing enough to turn back that challenge. we have seen that today play out. early drafts of the new constitution labeled with men as complementary to men. but to be sure is active civil society raised strong objections and eventually

the national constituent assembly amended the tax to recognize women's ecology. civil society is wise to remain diligent and exercise their hard-earned rights to safeguard there new democracy. like the hundred destination women who recently took to the streets to protest on behalf of a woman charged with indecency after she was raped by police officers. these competing visions of tenacious future were put to the test when violent extremist attack to the u.s. embassy and burned the american school nearby. how did the to the sinn people and government respond? first, the government increased security around our embassy and promised to assist with repairs to the school which they have done. they publicly committed to

confronting violent groups to prevent tunisia from becoming a safe haven from international terrorism. following through is essential. those responsible must be brought to justice. the government must provide security for diplomatic missions and create a secure environment for foreign residents and visitors. the rule of law must extend to everyone throughout the country. the country's leaders took to the airwaves, newspaper, facebook and twitter to denounce both the attacks and extremist ideology putting their own political capital on the line. the foreign minister flew to washington to stand with me and publicly condemn the violence. we continue to support these changes that are occurring in libya and tunisia and

those leaders and citizens to understand what is expected them if they are to fulfill their own hopes. the situation in their breast of maghreb is different. morocco and algeria have not had revolutions but recent the events have also tested there bellevue's and resolve. when citizens of morocco called for change moroccan society under king mohammed mohammed vi answered with major constitutional reforms followed by elections and expanded authorities for parliament. feel at islamist party leave the new ruling coalition along with the brady of other parties preface 13 years in the opposition. they were thought to engage

all moroccans to create jobs and fight corruption. we continue to urge them to follow-through on all of their commitments for political and the economic reform. last month with anti-american protesters across the cities of morocco, the foreign minister travel to washington for our first ever strategic dialogue. he could have avoided the cameras but instead strongly condemned the attack and benghzi embrace the broader partnership with united states and pledged his country would work toward democracy and the rule flop. -- rule of law. algeria also has much to gain by embracing the challenges that taking place around it. the government held elections in may and invited international observers to

monitor them. it moved quickly. with diplomatic missions including the u.s. embassy to diffuse tension in the street. algeria has a lot of work to do to up old universal rights in create space for civil society a message of the burden person in february. on the one hand strains of extremism the renovations as well as the broader region and the misstates we have seen actions that would be hard to imagine a few years ago. elected leaders and free people in arab countries standing up for a peaceful pluralist future. it is too soon to say how

the transitions will play out. but not in doubt is america has a big stake in the outcome. last month at united nations i met with leaders from across the region. i told them each that united states will continue to pursue a strategy to support emerging democrat -- democracies as their work to provide effective security grounded in the rule of law to spur economic growth and bolster democratic institutions. we've made those our priorities. to leverage new partnerships through the g-8, andrea step up our engagement with the arab league to sign the first ever memorandum of understanding for a

strategic dialogue. we recognize that words are cheap. when restock about investing in responsible leaders it has to be followed by a actual investments. we have mobilized one more than $1 billion of targeted assistance since the start of the revolutions. appeal bonded ministers and has requested a new $770 million fund to be tied to concrete benchmarks for political and economic reform. i urge congress to move forward on this priority. let me briefly address the three parts of the strategy starting with security. the recent riots underscore the challenges of safeguarding public safety and free society and

security forces. for decades they protected regimes. now it is to protect citizens especially against the threat from violent extremists. al qaeda and the islamic maghreb has launched kidnappings from northern mali but now with the ethnic conflict allow them to carve out a larger safe-haven they're seeking to extend their reach and networks. we're using a retool we can to help our partners fight terrorism and beat their security challenges. we recently imbedded additional foreign service officers with regional expertise to better integrate our approach but diplomats and military personnel are working hand in hand. across the region we partner

with security officials of these governments who are moving away from the repressive approach that helped fuel radicalization and help to provide strategy's grounded in the rule of law. were hoping border guard -- border birds upgrade their equipment so weapons don't flood the region even more. roping prosecutors build forensic labs to produce evidence that stands up in court. days after the riots in tunis we will know train police and other justice officials but we were pleased they agreed to host an international training center to help officials develop these to protect citizens security and

liberty. the nation's of maghreb and not the first to struggle with the challenge of protecting the new democracy. would of the issues we learned training finding in the equipment will only go so far. we will demand accountability that is necessary lasting security. it takes a change in the mindset to make those reforms stick. in all my conversations with high-ranking officials, particularly in tunisia and libya the people were often victims of security forces. imprisoned, exiled, beaten or tortured. now to find themselves on the side the security forces even of the new regime takes

a mental change. they admitted it is a responsibility they now understand they must assume. the united states steps upper counterterrorism efforts with the support structure with particularly al qaeda closing save havens, cutting financing, countering ideology, the counterterrorism partnership both the capacity of 10 countries to provide training and support so they can better work together and prevent attacks. we're expanding work with specific terrorist hotspots with prison and schools. the maghreb social challenges fuel the

revolution in. and calls for reform. in order to succeed the democrats -- the government needs to show they can deliver concrete results. that is the second area to focus on. work with enterprises that create jobs as an alternative to radicalism bringing women and young people into the economy. providing capital in training, updating regulations, investment laws, a trade policies, private sectors can flourish. establishing a to be shut american enterprise fund with a capitalization of $20 million to stimulate investment in the private sector and provide needed capital. opec is helping to address

long-term constraints to economic growth. we provided export training for small-business owners and job training 200 of young two nations. i am proud of the $10 million scholarship fund which we launched to help to nation's students study at american universities and colleges. also working with economic issues with the new libyan government wants it is formed is what we're looking forward to. now it will create new jobs and markets for their products. today, north africa wants to be leased integrated region in the world. it does not have to be that way. opening the border from algeria and morocco would be an important step to move to

the integration. the third key area is strengthening democratic institutions to advance political reform. not an easy process. political progress has to grow from the inside. there are ways we are helping. the united states has trained hundreds of lawyers and civil society activist and offered tutorials to candidates in the run-up of the recent election birkenau we encourage civil society to draft a new constitution to protect the equal rights. similar efforts are under way tailored to local needs. none of this happens in a vacuum. the transition occurring is

linked with developments across the wider middle east. egypt is the largest arab nation, we have seen the new elected leadership say the success depends on building consensus, speaking to the concerns of all egyptians of faith and community. we stand with the egyptian people for universal freedom and production. we made the point* of peace relations with its neighbors and the choices it makes the home in whether or not it filled its own promises to its own people. is flawed regime continues to wage war against its own people as the territory

slips from its grasp. i announced major contributions of humanitarian aid for the civilian opposition and we remain committed to increase pressure on the regime. where we supported negotiations to achieve a peaceful transition we're working to present al qaeda and other extremist from threatening the emerging fragile democratic institutions from providing a safe haven. when i met with king abdullah we talked about reform to move this country to democracy so with all these places and many others , united states is helping those nations chart their own destiny to realize

the measure of their own human dignity. it is a word in different cultures one egypt's 10 observed freedom and dignity are more important than food and water but it does not come from avenging perceived insults the special with violence that cannot be justified but responsibility for yourself in the community and around the world they focus on fostering growth and they are pulling ahead. building schools instead of burning them not encouraging their rage in powering women

not excluding them to more connections with the wider world not shutting off the internet. i remain convinced people of the arab world to not want to trade the tyranny of a dictator with the mob. there's no dignity. the people of benghzi told the people out the when they rejected the extremist what they hope for. so did the leaders when they challenged and those who spoke out. that is the message we should take from a last month. i want to close with one more thought about what happened is in benghzi for

all the men and women in the state department, a very personal. diplomacy has to be practiced in dangerous places. we send people to diplomatic post to 170 countries around the world some of those are in war and conflict zones. others are in unstable countries with no u.s. military presence that is the reality we will never prevent every act of violence to achieve perfect security. we cannot live in bunkers and do our job but it is our responsibility to constantly improve reduce the risk of

people face to make sure they have resources they need. of course, nobody takes that more seriously than the state department. chris stevens understood diplomats must thunders -- operate where soldiers cannot war no other boots on the ground and security is far from guaranteed. and like our brave colleagues he volunteered for his assignment. last year our ambassador to syria was assaulted in damascus by thugs but he insisted on continuing to meet with peaceful protesters to serve as a

living manifestation of support people covered his car with flowers. chris and robert represent diplomacy at our best. they know when america is absent there are consequences interests of further in security is threatened. you will continue sending the experts to dangerous places. united states will not retreat. we will be demanding gauge every rather in the world including those are places where america's interests and values are at stake.

that is the best way to honor those we have lost burger also how we ensure our country's global leadership for decades to come. thank you very much. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> notice the drop-off of

attendance? [laughter] good afternoon. good morning. thank you for being here. before we start i thought i would say of what you would consider a personal privilege, assessments of winners and losers working with the vice president for two years, i took extreme pleasure in watching fed debate last night because of the way he demonstrated his passion and wisdom and the joy he brings to lose the job of serving the american people as vice president. and working with this president