he votes very, very, very rarely on the house floor, and if think that is in part a reflection of his belief that the speaker needs to move himself or herself out of the debates and conflicts in order to be seen as someone who really has the whole house and the interests of the whole house at heart. >> host: we have been talking with catholic university proffer mag threw green about his book "the speaker of the house: study of leadership" published by yale university press. here's the cover. you're watching booktv on c-span2. >> talks about anti-u.s. base protests around the world in the philippines and japan and interview. this irpart of book tv's college seater. ...

when do they actually affecting policy. in the second question is about post government allies be done one hand they face pressure and from civil society at a domestic level, but they also face pressure from the united states to maintain alliance obligations . once in the valleys those governments balance between these two forces in, the domestic and international level. >> host: when you looked at the 700 plus bases around the world that the u.s. has, how many of them are welcome to in

these foreign lands? >> guest: the majority of them i would say are actually welcome . you are looking at -- 700 bases. probably more. they just cannot be declared war are secret bases. i would say -- it is hard to say whether they are welcome, but the host government accepts them. i would say at least 75%, they are not contested. the majority of bases are in places like germany or mainland japan, but the few that have been contested seem to cause lots of problems for u.s. diplomats or the u.s. military because we see those as hypocritical. >> host: such as where? >> guest: and okinawa, there has been a long-running feud in okinawa where the open now once have been upset about a specific base. in 1995 there was a horrible rate case or a school girl was gang raped.

the okinawa and demanded justice, but under the statute of forces agreement there were placed under american custody of the american military. so as part of the deal because it would really mess up the u.s.-japan alliance relations the u.s. agreed to relocate that base. the name of the base was the plot aerostation. they said there were relocated to the northern part of okinawa thing. well, that base still exists. they have not been able to move forward because there has been so must propositions about creating a new base. he looked at the space it is smack in the middle of the city. school has to stop. in the past they had to because of aircraft, helicopters coming in. and because of things like

environmental concern, noise pollution, crime around the bases. there has been this opposition. the okinawa is one place where we see such opposition. the philippines, of course, in the 1990's we had two major bases there. >> host: when you say major, we are talking hundreds of thousands since bt when it closes its of 14,000 troops. >> host: and hundreds of thousands of people depended on that base. >> guest: right. not only for security but the local economy. a domestic economy. of course because of opposition from activists, from nationalist politicians eventually they gave the americans the boot and we had to withdraw and not just from the major bases but all military, all u.s. military had to withdraw at the end of '92. >> host: do you think that we would have still had the bases if the volcano had not exploded?

de. >> guest: right. i think they would have maintained at least about another seven to ten years for certain. juneau's of the strategic environment would have persisted i no there was a lot of damage because of the explosion at the time. it rendered clark air base almost unusable. at least for civic naval stations, the largest base in the pacific outside ally. in the u.s. military expressed that they wanted to maintain that pace for at least another seven to ten years. it would have -- i believe that it would have continued to exist >> host: what are some of the geopolitical ramifications of the closing of that major philippine military installation >> guest: right. of course there is the pacific command. many of -- in terms of the

functions, they were dispersed to okinawa, some went back to why. in the long run the u.s. military is adaptable. they were able to make do, but these days just given the strategic climate right now with china's growing maritime assertiveness, uncertainties and tensions between the islands, between japan, south korea, china, southeast asian countries , there is some wishing that the u.s. would return to the philippines. right now we have worked out this deal where we, on a rotating basis. there have been rumors that the philippine government may want the u.s. to come back. my personal take is that we probably won't have permanent forces. won't have a large military presence like we did in the past but when we say rotating forces or visiting forces, they come in and out. it is almost like defacto having

a continuous u.s. presence, military presence in the philippines. >> host: where else have there been protests against the u.s. presence? >> guest: in europe -- i mean, there are always pockets of protest whenever tragedies happen in italy. there is something sliced by an f-15 leading to the tragic deaths. you had process relating to those specific instances. where you have seen larger protests rate is not just in my backyard, but something that galvanizes much of the, at least you see and touch base opposition at a national level. we have seen this in italy, the expansion of an airbase in northern italy. there have been protests from

2006-2007. it has died down a lot, but they are still ongoing. we have seen protests in ecuador which is highlighted in my book which eventually closed down as well. and you -- and then, of course, afghanistan and iraq. it is hard to say whether it is activists or civil society. the insurgents, obviously islamic extremists that don't like the u.s. -- who don't want the u.s. military to be on their soil. in terms of the government, we have seen opposition from politicians. as we have seen, there are no -- we did not believe that large presence in place that we assume that we would because the government -- in afghanistan is still up in the air. so we d.c. the opposition to u.s. bases. not just in asia.

they tend to focus a bit more on asia, but we see the sun really all corners of the world. >> host: other locations in the world where even the government would like us to lead >> guest: so the national government, in the past, yes. a lot of times when you see regimes' change, when you see -- we saw in libya or a run after the revolution, you know, of course u.s. forces had to leave. today do we see government and opposition? it is not as direct. in the ecuador case this was in 20007-to designate. u.s. bases became a major issue in ecuadorean politics. and then you do see certain elements of the government wants the u.s. bases to leave. they're able to play up the nationalist card.

they talk about national sovereignty. and from the standpoint of domestic governance, you might understand, there is no other -- really its power to flip the question around, if the chinese are russians had a base here in the united states and camino, something happens, an accident or a crime bill in hand, there would be a large outcry. "we don't call them domestic bases, military bases all around of course there could be even oppositions to bases in their own country. but you take a different -- it is almost level when you have a foreign base on your own soil. and so in certain times you have seen governments not wanting u.s. bases in their country. so today japan -- japan, okinawa 2009 you had prime minister

yukio come to power. he did not want to be rid of all u.s. bases, but he said, you know, he campaigned with the pledge to relieve the burdens of okinawa ones. he wanted the air base to close, but he did not want any replacement facilities in okinawa. so you do see politicians, governments at times oppose u.s. bases. of course at the end of the day the united states, sometimes comparisons are made to the empire, but at the end of the day governments don't want us there. we can make -- bacon not renew agreements or they can terminate agreements. so it is possible to see governments oppose or not wanting the u.s. military in their country. >> host: professor, at times of political uncertainty is the u.s. more welcome?

i'm thinking of south korea. >> guest: so in times of political uncertainty it is -- that is when you can see different democratic forces unleashing. so if we go back to south korean democratization and democratic consolidation, of course if your regime is highly autocratic, if you are extremely authoritarian there really are no protests clamp down on the protesters. but it is in this time of democratization when you can see societal forces. i do think that there is a time of uncertainty and a bit of on stability about bases. the trick for the united states where the balancing act at the united states has to play is on one hand we see -- we place an emphasis on security, stability, not only stability for the country but the region. at the same time we want, you know -- we want to encourage

democracy to of democracy. in a case like south korea, yes, there was a bit of uncertainty. at the same time even when you have the transition to government leaders, the south korean government, they -- their case is somewhat unique in that you have a direct designee. and they -- their is a consensus that we really have our national security almost guaranteed by u.s. military, by the u.s.-south korea alliance. so although it does cause some concern and consternation for u.s. policy officials when there are these transitions of, when they're is a political instability, if government leaders firmly believe that u.s. bases and the alliance relations that they have with the united states is central to their own national security, to their own national defense then i think in

the long run the u.s. -- i think they can breathe a sigh of relief under those circumstances . >> host: how much resources and time is the u.s. banned building relationships? >> there is no cookie cutter approach. for the bases we are seeing today and for example, sub-saharan africa, djibouti is a good example because we are flying drowns out of there. i'm sure in that case there is some discussion among diplomats and policy makers and military officials. for them it is almost like a quid pro quo where they are exchanging foreign aid more money basically to have access

to not necessarily building american bases, but they are using whatever infrastructure exists. so there it is much quicker. of course overtime the relationship can and should develop if the u.s. wants to continue using the bases there. for countries that have -- where we have seen u.s. presence of for a longer time, of course we have to continue to manage alliance relations and cultivate our relationship with these countries. as i said, security relationships require partnerships. if another country believes that we don't face, and threats, share the same values, it is easy for political leaders of the host government to say, we don't have the security threats were share the same values as the united states.

why do we have thousands of americans. it is a partnership and does require a lot of diplomatic work to maintain that relation. of course at the local level it is one thing that i tried to mention in my book as well. i think base officials can do it more in terms of public relations, public outreach. in countries where we have had longstanding relationships with germany and japan and south korea, italy, these community programs to exist, but when tension occurs, when communities are blindsided when that decision is made without letting others in the community know, if it is not explained well why we continue have u.s. troops in our community, if that is not explained well people forget what the purpose that is.

if this isn't shared continually denied think you can run into the not in my backyard problems which can later escalate or be used by the nationalist politicians to really push their own government on foreign policy issues like relationships with the united states. >> when you think about the potential effects of the u.s. boeing back a lot of its overseas bases, what would be the effect on geopolitics? there are different views. if you pull them all back you create vacuums. we have seen significant troop cuts in the last 10-15 years. but even for europe i think

europeans would be nervous if they realize that. with a paramilitary, the command structure is very much agree with the u.s. military. maybe not so much for their own defense within their own country, but within the permanent -- the permian and southern europe and balkans extending outward, i think there would be a lot more concern and nervousness if the u.s. were to suddenly pull out in new members, germany, you know, italy and poland had to foot their own military expenses. the united states is the least distrusted actor. many have argued that the u.s. is in some ways the linchpin for stability in the region. it is not -- again, there are

different views about whether the u.s. military presence as a source of stability for instability and further militarization. at the moment even to democracies who are members, japan and south korea, even they can't really trust one another. so of course the united states were to remove all of the troops the first thing that japan would want to do is raise their self-defense. let's not kid ourselves. the military. it would give them the right to expand and become a normal nation. so japan begins to build its military, how would that make the chinese feel, how would that make the koreans feel. so it would not make others nervous. the same with southeast asian countries, the philippines, vietnam, indonesia. they have concerns about china's

rice and china's maritime ambition. there would also feel nervous. so in that sense, having the u.s. military there can put a lid on potentially escalating tensions the may spiral of control. >> nominees servicemen and women currently are based overseas? >> guest: i would have to check the facts because it is always changing. >> host: an estimate. >> guest: don't quote me on this. i'm familiar with asia. 27,500 in south korea. about 50,000 in japan. and of course the u.s. is the other theater. i would say there are about to the 300,000 troops abroad at any given time.

>> host: are we growing in africa? >> guest: we are present as growing in africa cannot in terms of numbers. again, with the way beijing's strategy is set up these days we prefer having access agreements are what is considered lighter facilities. we don't want to leave a heavy footprint. so as we are establishing more agreements, that's for sure. i mentioned the use of drones, technology, we need basis, the need to land somewhere. there is more growth the beijing access to military presence. would not say it is significant. it is almost nostalgic, but that is part of the changing nature, i think, a beijing strategy. >> host: activists, alliances -- activists, alliances, and

anti-u.s. base protests"" is the name of the book. professor of politics here at catholic university. thank you for joining us on book tv. >> guest: thank you so much. >> visit booktv.org to watch any of the programs you see here on line. type the author or book title in the search bar on the upper left side of the page and click search. you can also share anything you see on booktv.org easily by clicking a share on the upper left side of the page and select in the format. book tv streams live online for 48 hours every weekend with top nonfiction books and authors. booktv.org. up next from book tv recent trip to georgia the story of william and ellen graf to made a daring escape from the bonds of slavery in macon, georgia in 1848. >> your talking about william and ellen graf to are a couple who were enslaved here in macon,

georgia. they're road in narrative in 1860 and was published, running a thousand miles to freedom. standing in front of the home in which alan craft was slave. on the plantation, united because williams honor had taken out a loan. he did not have the money. so he mortgaged the slaves in order to get the money. when the bill came three could not pay it. so the slaves were sold by a bank. the same owner that had bought palin but william perry said they ended up on the plantation together. they were married, but they knew that, as allen said, she did not want have children while she was slave because she knew what would happen to those kids. she said they could not take it.

we get this portrait of allen and william who was supportive they wanted a normal life. they wanted the same kind of life to you and i had. they were denied that because of the laws slavery. that generated an incessant desire, unquenchable thirst to leave and to get out of the state of georgia and to leave the south. in 1848 they decided that there were going to leave. the plan the trip for four days they took up tonight. they left. they went to savannah. and from savannah they caught a ship. charleston, north carolina, made some stops along the way. and then they found that they ended up in philadelphia. but then once in philadelphia in

philadelphia as there would be in boston, massachusetts. and so they help them get to boston where there was a free black society, about two or 303 blacks. and for quite some time and help them get themselves together. they helped with health issues as well and so they kind of built them up and then they sent them out of the country when they found out that there owners after the slave act has sent this patrol out to try to return to slavery. very interesting because the president of the united states was contacted and appealed to by their owners, previous donors to bring them back. they should return to georgia.

he, in fact, sent a military patrol after them. so they knew they had to leave. the society helped them escape. they went to maine. they caught a ship and went to england. ellen was extremely light skinned. she could pass for white. they use that as an advantage. so alan masqueraded as an indigent white man to go on the journey. she was tormented she and rheumatism and something was wrong with the right arm. then it is slang for right arm. she cut her hair. her husband cut her hair. he bought her a pair of green glasses, glasses that were shaded green. and then they check the big handkerchief, like a scar and tied it farmers begin to the top of her to touch into the top of

for peso would not show the she did not have a beer any kind of facial hair. a new have to register the hotels and establishments along the way because they were intending to leave georgia and get to philadelphia where there was of french society. they knew there would be safe there. the new along the way they have to make certain stops. it would have to register. she would be the one that would register because he was pretending to be heard attendant car servant. he appears as an indigent white man and got away with it. he actually got away being called her slave. so that was very important.

a time when the war in northern cities, halifax where they went to a hotel. here is where north anti black sentiments can. there are going to check into a hotel. the proprietor said you can't check in here. looking and william, you can't chicken here. don't allow black people. she can. your master can. and so william did not fight it. he said, well, okay. she is the room and i'll go somewhere else. she checked in. the room was upstairs. when she checked and of course people who worked there and all that. she ordered dinner, but she ordered dinner for two instead of one. and the hotel staff including the black people who were in the

tell had a conversation wondering it was going to show up to have dinner with her. the black guy was a slave. even more amazed when he walked up the stairs instead of knocking on the door and allowed him to come he just opened the door and 110. there were just dumbfounded as to what was going on. she was an owner. by that time she was discarding her male clothing. she appears and a woman. white women did not travel of with black male servants.

so she really had to put on a good act. and then you get this the real sense. then both collaborated. the need to get the sense sometimes that he's laughing at the system and laughing at those befooled. the impact was great. this single fog on the mind of slaves was to this gate and to not just escape and go the south carolina, but escaping get out of the south and never go back. most slaves that escaped went to canada. canada to and participate in the slave trade. the fugitive slave act did not apply.