when the day was over they called me up to the palace and i can't remember who said it, was it him or me. that spicion that suspicion became stronger throughout the election process unfortunately. and i had established quite a good relationship because i was relieved, he was going to read choose his candid it and finally

at first, i wanted to bring in. [inaudible] i said, let me think about thisi came back and we had six meetings but i didn't succeed obviously. why did he want to bring him back on board if he could see the turnout was needed in order to win the election? it's very simple. at that time there was a turn in the direction with more reliance on that kind of forces and less on the technocrats. we work very closely as it was

less panicky. there were institutions created and we must allow them to do their work and try to insist that they do their property. that had to be there. i remember during the period this is anecdotal. the second day that he was there he was in helmand and i saw the president before and i said mr. president, can we go down to the office because you never know. so they went downstairs and i said to the president it was a

very emotional meeting. if you do not accept the second round and then i accept that strategy because if the president doesn't follow the constitution, then there is no role for me who has insisted on following the constitution. and it was a meeting that lasted 20 minutes, 45 minutes. there is a certain kind of intimacy in peace kind of things. he came back and there were things happening in the ballot boxes and the next day the president announced he would go for a second round and the rest you know. the president continued for a second term and you said he had all of the opportunity during the second round. i think president karzai suffered through these five years in the fact that he never

had this 50% mark, therefore i think he felt he didn't uite he did not want to what was required in blames that on the obama administration. >> can i just add of the debate? i think that the illegitimacy question is really interesting, and you and i had discussions about this also. in terms of public perception one thing that i have noticed over the past five years, karzai was not challenged. the opposition, for any of the opposition politicians to challenge his legitimacy, but i think we throw it out there also that publicly he did not get challenged the five years. yes, personal pain to him absolutely, but in the public discussions he was not challenged.

>> that think that brings us to the end of our time. obviously a topic which is much bigger than two hours allowance, but from my discussion even though i've lived through some of this and seen the others, fascinating and revealing. of want to thank all three panelists and all of you for coming and for your questions and they this will be the last time we host this kind of discussion. i think for the first draft it was six terribly good. so i think that three of you very much. thank you. [applause] >> it is still not known who will succeed president car line. the u.s. official said that the audit began thursday and 23,000 ballot boxes have to be checked. [inaudible conversations] >> the malaysian airliner shot down over ukraine was the topic

of three separate briefings today at the white house, defense department, and state department. here is portion of state department spokesperson talking with reporters. >> go ahead. >> consider this an act of terrorism? >> i think, again, we do not know the origin. of course any time the loss of innocent lives -- we see a loss of innocent lives it that is a horrific act. woolsey the investigation through. i will not put additional levels on it. >> the act itself, is this an act of terrorism? >> again, i will not put additional labels on it. >> do you realize it could have been an accident? >> i think we are not ruling out -- well, we do not feel it is was an accident. we feel -- at think you heard the president and a massive give definitive remarks on this, but we are going to see the

investigation through. >> president biden yesterday stated that this was no accident . those remarks? >> there have also been remarks from the president and from ambassador power as well. >> i want to make sure because i think that you muddied the waters a little bit here. >> abcaeight. >> you do not leave this was an accident? in other words, you do not believe that whoever fired dismissal was not aiming for something else or to put another way, you believe lover fired this missile intended to it and take down a passenger airplane? >> i was not stating that. i think dan not going to go farther than i have gone here. >> in other words, it may have been an accident in terms of whoever fired this thing thought that they were hitting a military target?

>> correct. again -- >> that is a mistake. that is an accident. >> there are a range of ways for defining it. thank you for your clarification >> you're not saying you know what you believe that this malaysian aircraft boeing 747 civilian plane was targeted by the people fired dismissal? >> we do not know what has been stated and what i stated today. >> and issei, we don't feel this was an accident you are expressing a preliminary conclusion, correct? >> that is not my intention. i think we have been pretty clear we are participating in the international investigation and will let that conclude. there are a range of events and information available from what has happened on the ground recently. >> going back to square zero. >> i hope not. >> accident and mistake at two different things. and if you are saying we don't feel that this was an accident that means you're saying it is possible that this plane came

down from the sky because something went wrong with the plane. >> well, let me be clear here. this happened 24 hours ago. there has not been an investigation under way. we are participating in that process. i am not going to prejudge it beyond that. i do not think i will have much more to add here today on that. >> accident, you mean when you say you don't feel this is an accident, whatever the motive of whoever fired dismissal, they were shooting at something and not a function of the plane. is that what you mean by accident? i think we are getting fairly high up here. when you say accident you mean the engine failed or something like that, is that what you are saying? >> there is no evidence of that today. i have nothing more in terms of analyzing what exactly happened here, but obviously there is a range of contextual and permission from what is happening on the grounds that is relevant. >> you can see all of the state

department briefing on line at c-span.org. >> c-span2 providing live coverage of the u.s. senate floor proceedings and keep public policy events and every weekend book tv now for 15 years the only television network devoted to nonfiction books and authors. c-span2, created by the cable-tv industry and brought to you as a public service by your local cable a satellite provider. watch as in hd, like us on facebook, and follows on twitter >> next, a look at africa's economic future. much of the discussion centers on the goals established by a u.n. high-level panel on development created by the u. n. secretary-general in 2012. from the center for strategic and international studies this is an hour and 15 minutes. [inaudible conversations] >> good morning, everyone. we have just been waiting for my colleagues, daniel runde, to

join as. of -- one minute. please be patient with us. let's start then. my name is jennifer cooke current director of the africa program here at csi as. welcome to everybody and a special welcome to our guests today, dr. abdoulaye dukule. we are here today to talk about the post 2015 development agenda this is a set of agreements that was adopted in january of this year launched and then larry of 2014. a set of principles that was developed in a broad input is the tory process whose focus really was to give african forces, government leaders, citizens, private sector legislators, and regional stakeholders a greater voice in

laying out a global development agenda. a global agenda, but also an agenda for africa. for over a decade -- here is my colleague, daniel runde. for over a decade that global development agenda has been shaped to a large degree by the millennium development goals. i think most of you are familiar with them. eight international development polls established at the millennium some of the u.n. in 2000. all members of the u.n. at that time, 189 of them, agreed to the set of goals that will run through briefly. i think most of you know them from eradicating extreme poverty and dagger, achieve universal primary education, promote gender equality, reduce child mortality, improve maternal health, combat hiv aids, malaria , and other diseases to ensure environmental sustainability, and to develop a

global partnership for development. i think we have seen a lot of success in setting these big, ambitious, aspiration of targets on some of the majors human development challenges as a motivator and incentive and something of a measurement. there have been critiques on that for progress. but also criticized for being particularly -- for being heavily focused on kind of the external elements, and external interventions and funding and not focused more, let's say, on the needs of african citizens rather than on building up capacity and kind of working on the aspiration. so we are going to hear today from dr. abdoulaye dukule, who is the president of liberia and

johnson sirleaf, special envoy for the post's 2015 agenda. he is here today to present the common african position, why is different, what motivated it, and what is the next step in bringing this to fruition. it is a real particular pleasure today to introduce dr. abdoulaye dukule, an old and very dear friend of mine on a voice is america program in the midst of the library and more. we're talking about -- abdoulaye dukule is a man of many hats, a filmmaker, writer, a journalist. he wrote brilliant analysis that captured some of the stories of the civil war and the aftermath and really a poignant manner. it is such a pleasure to see him now working on the building

africa and liberia toward the future and recovery and reconstruction. it is wonderful to see him again during this important work. i will turn it over briefly to my colleague, dan runde, who has been doing more than i have. so why don't we turn to you. >> i will be brief, and i apologize for being breeze. mr. abdoulaye dukule, thank you for being here. i am a great admirer of president johnson sirleaf. i think the high-level panel, i suspect you have something to do with that. the report that came out a year ago is an excellent report and reflects obviously liberia's experience and her experience and aspirations for the future. i thought that what i think is particularly interesting about that report is the reflection of the changed role that the high- level panel saw from the year 2000 in terms of the role

of investment, cost and impact of conflict on development which i'm sure you know quite well, but also the opportunities around the role of investment in trade as well as domestic resource mobilization which encompasses both local investment and the ability of countries to pay for their own development through tax revenues as well. i know that is something that is of great importance. i also find that what i took away from the high-level panel, a serving as a catalyst, a supporting actor in other folks central active development, if you will. i know that we are coming to a point san on the post-2015 development agenda where there has been a panel held. they sent a report back in there has been a series of conversations called the open working group. collaborative, as you know,

collaborative in this. i think everyone has had a chance to weigh in. at some point it will have to be a small group that will go off in a room somewhere and have a real political process because you cannot have 35 of these goals by you in standard it has been an excellent way as a form of organizing principles. i would say that much of the progress that has been made has been because of growth in china, india, or some specific targeted social program in places like brazil, but assistance has had a role in it, though there have been other factors that have been as or more important, frankly. and so i do think we do not want to screw up something that has been pretty good. you have eight simple organizing principles. whether rate is 12 or 13, i am not sure it can bear to a much more. when the questions i have been asked and i hope you answer is when i met with various folks, japanese, canadians, u.s., the

britons, what are your pet rocks going into this process? what are you going to fight for? what is africa going to fight for in terms of what it's too wet three additional things it wants to keep in this process because there will be a political moment which is partially why i suspect you are in town. it is a pleasure to have you. i think the fact that the room is the lead we have so much interest reflects the fact that this is africa's moment. we are pleased you are here and it is nice to meet you. >> good morning, everyone. i am pleased to be here. to start with your first question, i think the problem responding to what was done for africa is simple.

galvanize and focus our attention on issues. externally driven. so by 2010 the head of the states of africa made at the african union. and during that meeting they decided the end leges will expire in four or five years. we have to be prepared to know -- we have to be prepared and we have to have something to say, whatever will happen after that. and they decided as well who will set up a system, set up a thinking group to start thinking about how to reoriented post-2015. and first -- and how does africa take care of what has changed on

the continent. it because a lot of things have changed, not only in africa since the 2000 nbg, but i round the world. so having consultations on the ground, every country on the continent. last year finally in may decided that, well, now has come the time to put all of these ideas together, reduced these priorities and say, how do we now posies into a framework that will not only reflect africa's priorities but also see how we can negotiate with the rest of the globe. whenever it is, it has to be satisfactory. we are lucky as an envoy of the president to be part of that process with the u.n. post-2015

consultations among members from different parts of the club, indonesia and britain the same week we handed over to the secretary-general a report that even met and decided that, well, this is the time to create this group still creating a group of experts. they say, we start with the political process. we will eliminate as you head of state's. to head of states from each of the economic regions of africa. two from west africa, two from north africa, two from central africa.

you have eastern africa, chad and condo. and southern africa. and we set up a secretariat at the head of the cwa you a president was named to chair the process. and we have been having meetings the big problem was to how do you reduce the priorities into a workable framework. after many meetings, the first round of the high-level committee state work held in new york in september in the office of the u.n., the first thing we did was to drill down the idea of priorities. let's see what are the issues

crisscrossing the continent. the main issues. we came up with the five pillars. the five powers that sort of will be the engine for the development in africa, but also serve as our entering to the world. it was not just about africa's priorities per looking at where the world is going, the kind of world we want to live in in the partnership want check create, establish. one of the biggest problem -- eyeballs a problem, but one of the down sides was that the partnership was not taking partnership becomes an important aspect.

among the pillars we have structural economic transformation and inclusive growth. it was very important, important to the president. she said it and kept repeating it. normally -- no matter what you do, no matter how you deal with social issues, if you do not deal with the economic factor you still have problems because that is the source of inclusion, a source of extrusion, where people are excluded, where people feel that they are not part of the process. therefore it was very important to have economic transformation not only in liberia in africa but also are around the world. i think it's a global crisis we all experience in the last five years showed clearly that we are all interlinked in iceland and into housing and then from housing to vacancy and some

countries are still feeling it, especially in countries coming out of conflict like liberia. the second issue is technology. innovation. if you need to create a new set of economic order you have to have people who are able to sit and think and say, what are our natural capacity? what do we have on the ground in africa, and how do we transform africa itself from within without expecting everyday somebody from the outside to tell you this is what you need to do, how you define development, define science. we have homegrown science, homegrown innovation, homegrown technology to deal with our issues so that we can participate in the global process from an african perspective but not simply

sitting there on the receiving end of the issues to lead the third one was people-center development. the main end of all development issues should be human beings. that includes health. i remember in the nbg we are talking about education, education for all. in many countries in africa we have had up to 80 to 90% achievement of growth, but the quality of education is becoming an issue. so how do we create quality of education? taking kids off the streets and put them in the classroom, but providing quality education that allows them to be able to prepare himself for a decent life, get could job and be able to live as a human

being. also human-centered development takes another perspective. twenty years ago when we were talking about development it was more like how many white elephants can you build, like a big house, big hotel that no one can stay in, highways into the desert. now we are saying development is about simple, little things. people being able to have clean water, mother's not dying by giving birth to my children not dying of malaria after six months of life cannot be able to go to school, not having to work ten months to get to a primary school where there is no teacher or classroom. basic issues, basic health care, basic education and basic needs to take care of transportation.

and how do you stop people from creating more dangerous because there is nothing to do in the village. so how do you organize the village so that we don't have to rushed? number four was environmental stability, natural resource management and disaster risk management. this is very important for africa because we -- if you look back through history back 400 years ago africa has served as a place where things are taken from, human beings, resources, gold, diamonds, slavery, everything else. how do we change that process? we cannot do it alone.

we have to work with other people to do it. and also climate change. we say that africa has an issue with climate change. we are facing the consequences of what is happening around the globe, but we have not created the problem that we face whether we are part of the solution, we want to be part of the solution, negotiate with people on how to mitigate climate change knowing well that we are not the primary responsible of climate change. that idea happened before we even got to this point of development. the financing and partnership, sometimes when we talk about africa in terms of development we think about somebody coming in with a bank book to write a check or somebody coming in and saying, if you do with this we

can do that. but can we change that model and have home-grown economies that take care first of all of africa needs. how do you care that and transform economic and anti you finance that? taxation, mobilization of resources, a lot of resources in african not being tapped me because we have always looked at outsiders to come with solutions so therefore we pay little attention to our own potential. that has to change. that will change also -- i will give you an example. between 50 to 60 billion a year. but at the same time three to 400 billion go out legally or

illegally. i remember two or three years ago i was listening to npr, the secretary of commerce of the u.s. was talking about how do we stop companies from moving their headquarters and to other countries so they don't pay taxes in the u.s.? well, so we have something -- we both have to fight this. how do we fight like to make sure people working on your land, people spreading resources pay their due taxes so that they don't come up and say, oh, we need a tax break for five years and at the end of five years they have made enough money to move to the next country next two and struck the same process. this has been going on in africa for a long time. companies that work in liberia and get tax break for five or six years. at the end of the six years they have enough money to get to sierra leone and say, hey, we have new ideas and can do this.

so how do we stop doing that? and also the money that moved from african economies going to tax havens, usually another african country, europe, american banks, the caymans, wherever. how do we create a new partnership where the financing partnerships really is partnership, not what we have, this old concept of you are my partner but i decide what you do, what is on the table, what is, you know, feasible and not feasible. and here two weeks from now the african presidents will be talking to the president of the u.s. i think that will be part of the discussions, but these are issues we need to talk about. if we talk about partnership, you deciding as a big brother

what is good for your market and what is good for my market at the same time. that means there is no partnership. big brother small brother thing. that mentality has to change. and can we change that? we think that is possible to change. we think that africa has changed in terms of governance, in terms of being able to a know what their resources are and in terms of the whole global outlook, economies. russia is not the same russia from ten, 15, 20 years ago. china is not the same china. clean air is everybody's problem i think these that the issues, but i gave you five, but they're is a sixth one that came in at the african summit in june, and that was security. before the head of state adopted

the government they said, we like what you have, what the committee has done, but there is one important aspect of issues in africa that we need to tackle , police and security. if you don't have police or security whenever you do is throw out the window. i will give you a good example of sudan. south sudan, everyone was excited about south sudan being independent, the end of the war in sudan, one of the longest was of all time in africa. the african development bank wind and invested something like $400 million in infrastructure, but now what is left, the old cars, burned down cars and the $400 million investment is all going through the window. so without peace and security your not going to be able to do anything. our problem with that was -- one problem with this is that there

is a group of people and the u.n., nations that control around the world. they shut down discussions when we are talking at the high levels. no, you can't talk about peace and security. this is part of the mandate. therefore, just talk about safety, human safety, other things, but peace and security in the same sentence, no, you cannot use that. in africa we are 27 percent of the u.n. we will talk about it and put in our mandate, our agenda, how we negotiated around it, what terms will come up with the political discussions, that is a different thing. but is not -- we don't also seek peace in terms of parts on the ground. that you need to have jets flying over.

but the security council force send troops to any conflict. you already have thousands and thousands of dead people and mostly young people, women, children, the most vulnerable. the funny thing is that the most conflict, the army always survive but everybody else dies. so we are looking at this in terms of peace building, putting an end to inequality, and driving something that will maintain society where you don't have to fight for their rights. i think most part of the continent now you can say africa has changed in that light. we have three generations of leaders in africa. it who has greater ideas for the

transformation of the continent? integrating the continent, economically, militarily, financially. they did not have the means to do it. all of the sudden somehow there was a transition in the 70's and 80's, and every day you had a new military leader running some country. and that crystallized the idea of africa being unstable, insecure, and not worthy of investment. that idea went on for almost 20 years, but now we have a new set of leaders from senegal to south africa. 90 percent of the leaders are elected and accountable to the people, not to the west or east as it was in the 1980's. in the 1980's if washington like you you could be in power for 50 years. if russia let you you could be

in power for 50 years. that has changed. the elections took place elections are not perfect, but they take place. people respond to ever the government now response to the needs of the people and therefore we have a new africa. i think in that sense africa has changed and we are capable, we are able to look at our problems from within and say these are our issues, these are our problems. but we are not doing at in isolation. we know that the u.n. process will be a global process, 200- some countries that have their own interests and developing the african position. some people, the world economy, more important, some talk about

how day yield -- regions came with interests, consumption patterns, climate issues, homeland security. we say, yes, these are of beautiful ideas for negotiation. we will sit and talk, but for the time being we will focus on what africa wants to do, where africa wants to go and what world we want to live in 20 years from now. we have some development. besides being 27 percent of the u. n, africa will be they youngest continent in 20 years. it may be time out of seven young persons of working age will be living in africa. africa will still have tremendous natural resources. africa will be more than a billion and a half consumers.

so these are issues we need ten think about and take seriously and would like to be able to discuss with the rest of the world so we have copies that we brought. i would like to pass them around, and then open it up discussion for the rest of the time. >> thank you very much, dr. abdoulaye dukule. excellent. i think there will be lots of questions as well. kind of what is interesting to me about this set of the pillars is it opens up a whole new range of players in kind of the development agenda. i think the k-9 or very much focused on, you know, government -to-government and philanthropy. turn that off. it with this one, you talk about structural and economic

transformation, very much investment, banks, private equity and so forth, talk about science and technology, it brings a whole new community, you know, and i think the partnerships from the united states and other partners is a promising area of growth and expansion whether agricultural, health on a whole range of issues. on the natural resource management obviously that is a big one. we have been doing work recently on the new energy producers and big, new funds of will and gas coming out of east africa, how will that it managed. interesting and the capitol flight issue, co-ceo nine a couple of years ago, the african progress panel put out that excellent report talking about the shell company

in the condo, tax evasion, tax havens, tax avoidance, and that think at the same time they g8 at the u.k. summit was very much focused on setting global standards for transparency, tax enforcement, rules on beneficiary ownership of these various companies. so i think this agenda but is very well with that one and the natural resource management. i am going to turn to dan to see if he wants to take the first question. and then we will up and out. we will take a couple at the time. we will not go, i don't think, for the full hour. we will see how the questions cover. >> thank you. a very interesting. i would be curious about the issue of the role of china and africa and how you think about it as a driver of development.

how they saw china, and i got a variety of thoughtful answers. interested if you have of you about china as a development actor in africa. i'm curious about that. >> yes. i have my idea about china as a driver of development, and i think i have also my idea about the u.s. as a driver of development. i have my idea of china being the new kid on the block in terms of development in africa they have a lot of cash. one time someone asked the president what do you think about china. she said, well, they promise and usually they deliver. so -- and africa has a lot of needs. they're is a downside, of course , we don't want to be

dependent. it is the same cycle of dependency that, you know, you don't want to fall into. you do not want to fall into china being the factory and africa being the consumer if you go to the car where ten years ago you could by hand made things by women in the market , they are made in china now i saw all of these blacks because of the nation's. let me see. i looked and it was made in china. you know, another low of china, i think ploy starting to think, okay, china. you have the money, resources, but africa has its own agenda

and she it should not be driven by the interest of china. it should not be driven simply because china has money. it easy money is also easy problem. >> good morning. thank you, dr. abdoulaye dukule. i am hybris simmons. one of the things you mentioned was a new africa. we just had our first commencement at which president johnson sirleaf was a keynote speaker. earlier that day someone said we were producing a new breed of student. can you talk more about the new africa? >> hi. i am with the global development network. we deal with research capacity in developing countries. i am wondering, how does this

process working on the nbg work with the agenda to thousands 63 and communion vision for the future of africa and the process overlapping and how is that working ? >> do we have another? >> yes. a new breed of student, i think the emphasis is on the quality of education. universities when first opened by the president and we talked about it, and the frightful example, now talking about creating science labs, agricultural labs to deal with products that are coming from maryland --

>> marilyn, liberia. >> marilyn, liberia, yes. produced in liberia and how to transform those to change the economy. they don't get up in the morning and say that have to get a job but can work in a factory, an office, and i can work as a scientist in my own country to do something. i think that is what we call the new breed of students. i think it is also part of -- a central part of creating a new sort of education and new curriculum that is based on africa's needs cannot based on where africa wants to go and also based on africa's resources . on the question of 26 to three, 2063 is long-term vision that

has been developed by the eu -- a you, african union. that is a 50-year plan take something, but what it says is essentially that .. 063 agenda is african agenda, not something we are negotiating. primarily for negotiation that the long term vision of where africa wants to be in 50 years, 20 years, 30 years, an african agenda and has been developed by africans for africa, and that is not really looking at outsiders and saying what outsiders can do for us but what africa can do for itself. and i think what africa can do for itself has released started. the fact that we are able to do

-- to come up with the position after four years of negotiation and discussions is something that, you know, points in the direction of what was being talked about. as long as we are have 10,000 different solutions we will never have one tangible solution. we have to have one, and africa has come up with one. i think this is the only region in the world where 54 countries agree on the same development agenda. i think we can sell it. i think we have enough advocacy to be working with us. it -- >> hello. my name is wendy was the american red cross. you mentioned that disaster risk management is one of the priority pillars for africa. the network of red cross

societies in africa, they are very strong with disaster risk reduction in cooperation with the communities. that is where their real strengths lie, these thousands of branches in africa working with families and people. do you feel like disaster risk reduction is being adequately addressed in discussions within the open working groups right now? thank-you. >> yes. i think we -- as i said at the beginning, we think that transformation of development processes through economic transformation, taking care of basic issues you can address all these issues. i think the nbg were more focused on social issues and sort of emphasized the social aspect of problems faced on the

continent. we think that the social issues are important, but they are linked to bigger problems, linked to economic issues, economic exclusion, economic separation between the regions. so i think those issues are taking care of. if you look into the document you can find it on and that au website. we have all those issues. but as goals and targets, but i think -- and we also say this whole thing is about giving african person his or her place in the world as an actor, not just somebody who is standing on the sideline to watch the plane go by. >> let's take a question there.

i have a question. it goes to dan and to you, abdoulaye dukule in terms of you talked about that peace and security element getting pushed back from the u.n. because it is kind of not considered so development-oriented, let's say. but i wonder, where do you think this will face kind of the biggest challenges? and, dan, you have done a lot of work on the u.n. you just at a dinner with the u.n. where do you see the kind of gap between this set of pillars and what is being proposed by the other actors which high follow less? >> i would just say i think these are very interesting colors. i think that they do reflect much of what is in the high-level panel report. i do not that there is less discussion, perhaps, in the

economic power around rule of law and governance perce. i am also interested in how the african position is thinking about things like corruption because i do think this is about africa taking matters into their own hands. as you said, 90 percent of the countries are non democratically elected and it is a very different african and 20 or 30 years ago. secondly, i do think that the brand is -- i think the perceptions are catching up to the reality. they're is a lot of significant amount of progress made in africa. apply saying it and people are thinking and doing things differently. so what would be curious about the issues of rule of law, governance, and specifically if corruption is one of the most

important things that in many -- if you look at the polling i suspect in many african countries is one of the most important and pressing issues, how you think of that sweet of issues in particular. >> the government's agenda itself does come up in the high-level panel report. it will make the final cut. i hope it does. >> i think the overriding issue in all of this is governance because we know that without good governance you cannot maintain. so if there -- is there in the back of our mind and on the table. at every discussion we talk about good governance. we look at governance -- thank you for raising the issue because we look at governance not only at the level of the nation also has a global issue.

she asked the question about the security council. okay. if you ask me to create a democracy at home and i create democracy at home and am working with you, how can we work as partners? how do we connect as people who are not paid in small but all working on the same level? so the issue will come up. why do five countries have the right with veto a single issue or any issue that affects 200 other countries in the world. that for us governance at that level is also a problem. it is not just corruption, yes. when they're is a corrupt man maybe someone is correcting him. so you have got to look at it both ways.

there are corrupt people in africa. they're taking funds from the coffers. maybe the banks are also corrupt . who is responsible for the banks, and who benefits from those funds that are taken from africa? we have to look at that issue. partnership to fight corruption, not just looking at africa and say, yes, africa is cover-up. corruption comes with money. anywhere there is money there is potential for corruption. then we say, why don't we sit down and have a forum on corruption. in two weeks from now we will have a meeting in monrovia on accountability, a forum on accountability, what is accountability, how do we do we, how do we account to the people and how do we account to the rest of the nations around us

that we are doing everything right, we get out of it. so we talk about accountability, corruption, covenants, but as first inside interest and also a global issue. accountability, if you promise to do -- there are lot of promises made to read week have grown enough to know it will never happen. okay. people want to help, yes, they will help, but that is not the issue. accountability is a problem if someone promised to build a highway and in the middle of the highway they say, oh, we have budgetary problems at home and cannot finish the highway. trying to finish at a highway that leads nowhere. and is to be blamed? who is accountable?

a new global framework has to have the issue of accountability , not just receiving aid to be accountable but those promising aid to be accountable to fulfill their promises. >> on this issue, i think this is an important point. both the technology and civil society and democratic governance more accountable as i see more language about this, accountable governments. i think aspiration of democratic governance, but i also think your point about accountability for donors is a good one. i do think what i say here in washington, the rise of china as a donor mean that there are other games that task. if we dropped the ball on things like not building a road in africa, well, as your president said, when the chinese say they are going to do something they generally do it. so i do think it is going to -- my argument has been that china

and africa is something that we can bemoan or we can learn from. my thought is, we ought to become more active as a donor and think about how we bring trade and aid to the conversation. i don't think we should sell out our principles necessarily, but i do think that things like being able to bring aid and trade together or if we say we are going to build the road we better do it. because if we don't if i am glad. abel take my problem down the street to the chinese, and i actually think -- i do think it is a sobering exercise for the donor world to realize that there are other players in globalization that can help solve these problems. so i think that is an interesting point of accountability going both ways. ..

>> and i would like to point but it is a two-way street and corruption is a two-way street, so it factors into the developed countries that have to be held accountable as well, so thank you for this important insight. >> china is a two-way street as well. >> yes, china is a two-way street and i think that as well and i thank you for putting that out there. [inaudible conversations] >> please speak into the mike.

>> i can be scheduled to go to 1130, but we can go 15 more minutes. >> hello, i just want to recommend a book for everyone to read called fragile by design, written by a faculty member from stanford and harvard. it's all about making in power. and it says that they are absolutely intertwined, they have always been, and it has always been corrupt. so the question is what degree of corruption are you willing to tolerate. so i am impressed by your fifty-year project because we are so sure termini thinking in the united states that the stock market doesn't go up in the next quarter will be over project on the project, the fact that you are thinking long-term and recognize all of these things, we have to learn how to work together in order to get there. so i want to congratulate you for that.

we have a set of incentives and metrics in this country that i think are of a great service. so i would argue, for example, in both economics and political science and international relations and our universities, most of the top faculty learn what they are teaching in the 60s and they are thinking, they're thinking hasn't changed. they are still teaching because there are no incentives to learn new things and i just have to have whatever they talk about what their with her friends. so anyway, all i am suggesting is this and it's true and it's a real problem for what we are dealing with today. i was there in 1960 and things have changed a lot. and i think it's really impressive and i feel good about that. thank you. >> thank you so much.

i am with new rules for global finance and i wanted to pick up on the tax issues. noting when they talk about this in the context of development, they say that we really have to do capacity building. i'm wondering if the african finance ministers and tax administrators, if on a continental basis you can save this is the capacity building and here our preferred instructors. if not, i will work with you. [inaudible question] >> we seize the microphone. >> hello, i am mollie and isolate the center for development. i would hope that you would touch on the measurability of some of these charges.

i know one of the greatest strengths was that they had these specific percentages and numbers that people could actually tangibly measure to varying degrees and there is some discussion about this. but looking forward to the new framework, what has been your experience comparing the progress from year to year because i think that has been a huge strength and development is focused on the ability to measure impact. i am curious what your thoughts are on that. [inaudible question] >> hello, i am from pixar global, i have a question related to financing and i would like to know what you consider the impact of this think going forward as it starts in south africa and other countries can then apply to be a part of this

new development bank. thank you. >> i will let them talk about this because i have heard about it and we set it up a few months ago and what it is, i am not sure. now we are talking a lot about this that we don't know and the problem has been a great deal about this, but we are not capable and we do not have this measure. people say, well, we have 30% of kids in schools and we have 90% of this or that. but how do we measure them sometimes we rely on numbers given by the multinationals and those who have an interest in keeping numbers as they are.

because that is where they get their funding from. so we have to do a lot of that. so nine the finance ministers have had a meeting and it was part of them minister of finance and development and they talked about this issue of capacity of the highest label and you're not you are not yet comfortable if you do not have the capacity. and sometimes it is mismanagement and it's not knowing what you're doing and sometimes they buy this instead of that and that is not what you need for your problem. so what level of corruption and we want to tolerate a zero level? well, they need to get it honestly. so i think the reality is

measurability. >> a couple of self-promotional things in here. we did a report on governments and economic growth and i recommend if you're interested in not. and we have also done something on the size and scope of corruption as well and so it's something that i just want to reference ahead with domestic research totalization and taxis. if you look at just this, the u.n. had statistics of that in the year 2000, thing like $100 billion was mobilize through taxes fees, domestic research mobilization, and not all of that is part of it. some of it is formality and people paying their taxes and

it's a rising middle class and it can exclude all the amount of leakage that the doctor is talking about and that is a lot of money that is being generated by taxes and because there continues to be tax evasion and other challenges. and so if you look at this it is about 50 or 60 and i think we have hit the high water mark. so if we have this, there is a lot more of this and so it is five or six times or seven times the amount of foreign aid and i think that we will see that continue and african countries that have discovered oil and gas and mining. so there's going to be a lot

more government money in government coffers. and it will be a challenge for a number of countries. subproblem on this tech stuff is that this is not a very sexy or compelling topic. there are no political constituents that are going to get a congressional earmark to use this and to pay for this with our orders and that includes how it is darn done important because that is where the money is. but it's very difficult in the american system to find money or force money because the foreign aid dollars are spoken for. and everyone agrees that this is important. but the bureaucratic politics in washington as to how to allocate those monies, i am not saying that they're not valid and

important projects and everyone who fights and dies on that for their piece of that pie will tell you why their slice is the most important. but there's a lot of leverage their and we ought to be thinking about that report specifically on this issue and if you have trouble sleeping at night, i hope you'll read it. i would like to talk about this briefly and i think we need to look at it as a purely political exercise. i know that there's a lot of news stories about this froth and sizzle and i am highly skeptical and i think it will ultimately die with a whimper. but to the extent that we are not tending to this in the united states and other participants in the international zone, that countries don't feel that they are fully participating, some of

these issues, i will not agree with all of them, but to the extent that shareholdings do not necessarily match this, and there are going to be defections from the system and people exiting out. they played this and when cyprus had a problem and the russians said we will bail out your banking system if you give us this with the imf, there's something called the initiative that is basically an asian self-insurance imf. so there's a world bank side and then i am outside to this. a lot of problems, the first is what currency and they said they want to create this. i'm not going to hold my breath and i don't we can use the yen given they don't think they're

going to use euros and so if they are not using that, i'd be curious to see if they would be talking about rubles. so i'm not holding my breath and i know there's lots of press releases and i don't think it's real. and it a lot of that is part of the declaration. but i am thinking russia and china and then finally like things that include what happens. relations are a two-way street and what happens when this new development provides a long to exit eyes this and they are kicking turn out as this with the zambian elections that one on chinese engagements and are they going to pull out and do i

really believe that they will bail out the chinese if there is a mega financial crisis, i doubt it. it's interesting but to the extent that we don't take care of this which is a topic that has to do with this and the shareholdings, then people are going to take this and go somewhere else and that is the think tank's term for that. to the extent that the united states doesn't tend to its garden, this is partially a republican problem and the administration for not selling this and we are the only one of the countries to not improve this. so there's an lots of technical stuff around it and people are going to take their bat and ball and try to do things like this. and so if we fix some things and

make some tweaks, we would be able to talk about this. so about 10 years from now, this is the biggest thing and you can say that you're totally wrong and this won't be three years time. and i think we talked about something very important and once that is done, do you not need a bridge with all of these things? like was said two weeks ago or three weeks ago, how can we get the u.s. to agree? >> it requires responsibility and a part of that because president obama has cut a deal

with republicans. and so i think that you should cut a deal and they need to find somebody who can make a deal and not spending a lot of political capital on this and they have other things in their inbox. they have tried, but i'd don't think it excuses republican inaction. but there's a number of things that i could list for you that you could get an easy deal with republicans on and so it's a political conversation. i think the merits are there and this includes republican leadership and responsibility. >> taken a couple more questions, yes, sir. so let's take these as the last two questions. >> hello, i thank you,

mr. ambassador. and we had this whole power initiative and the ambassador said that she wished that africa have come before and so i just thought that that was interesting from not that perspective. he didn't say anything about agriculture and all. >> great, thank you. >> hello, everyone. think you so much i wanted to ask if you could speak a bit more about infrastructural development as it contributes to the ability to accomplish the goals that are listed under this. thank you. >> it's a good way to end, particularly with the summit coming up and maybe you can just a little bit about kind of the next steps as he wrapped up.

including what you hope to accomplish there. >> so there are conditionality's and many conditions that the u.s. market was a part of. but there is electricity and i think that we have the structure and the biggest problem in africa and i think that we still have big issues with

infrastructure and if we can't come up with something, i think she thinks that this is a historic moment. and that includes about this on the table with the whole continent and we start with dialogue. and i think that this is always part of it and so let's start it with a real and tangible issue and this includes letting the department not only be labeled as academia or the politicians, but also between the private sector and we talk about

economic transformation in an issue that goes with the private sector and they are part of the conversation and hopefully it will be the private sector and that includes and i think that it is on all of these issues in a new way of dealing with africa learning how to import this with different sectors of the market and i think the u.s. has been very shy and maybe has to do

with this with the two continents for the last 500 years in the u.s. has been very shy about africa and then say, okay, there is a market and there is a rule of a lot and other possibilities that can be a part of this. so thank you. >> thank you very much and thank you to dan. thank you all for joining us and i do think that there are mixed feelings about the summit coming up and the point is right that there is a beginning of a dialogue and may be maybe getting over some of our phobias about africa and on notion that somehow making money is kind of unseemly for the united states an investment or trade would

drive the transformation. we have structural transformation as the number one seller and inclusive growth and outputs the electricity issue that you mentioned in the agricultural issue that you mentioned and the infrastructure issue that you mentioned right at the center of that. so please join me in thanking the doctor and we will look forward to allen's presence. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> rob woodall is our guest on this weekend's newsmakers. he talks about his new rule as republicans on the committee

chair and other issues of the day. you can watch the interview on sunday at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern on spam. >> now you can keep in touch with current events using any phone anytime c-span radio on audio now. call (202)626-8888 to hear public affairs forum's and today's "washington journal" program and every weekday listen to a recap at 5:00 p.m. eastern on washington today. you can also hear audio of the public affairs programs beginning sundays at noon. c-span radio. call (202)626-8888 and long-distance or phone charges may apply. >> a proposal to split california to six states say they have collected enough signatures to be issued on the ballot in the general election.

since then, a local station reports that opponents to the idea have filed a complaint with california secretary of state, questioning the but validity of the signatures. timothy draper is the person behind the proposal. he recently spoke about it at the commonwealth club of california in san francisco. this is an hour. >> welcome to today's meeting. the place where you are in the know. you can find us online and on facebook and twitter and our youtube channel. i am gloria duffy, president and ceo, and i will be the moderator for today's program. i am pleased to introduce today's feature speaker. venture capitalists, the founding partners of the company, and he is the

individual behind six california and it would divide california into six states. i think most of you know and i won't take much of your time and without much ado i will introduce our guest speaker today. thank you. >> thank you so much. it is great to be here and i thank you all for coming. i'm honored to be able to speak here. i thought we would do is i would speak about what i am doing for about 10 minutes and then open it up for questions. so i have had a wonderful career

and being in the venture capital business i have been able to hold onto things and create major changes that we have all sort of experience including what is an icon that we never thought would change. so we were able to fund it and get it going and get e-mail going and suddenly we can communicate with anyone around the world and you don't need to chop down a tree or lick poison or put it into a gas guzzler to get to somebody. you can just send it and so similarly i thought the same thing and that was her way of talking to somebody in the

world, and then sky came along and made it so that we could all communicate. and in fact we can communicate via video so that we don't even have to travel to see other people. so the phone company has changed significantly and so i have always thought in terms of that from this includes driving away that we have been able to. so now it is all electric and it's great fun to drive with a terrific change for the better. and we have also funded companies that have created rings like the smart grid or solar panels or solar roofs that will transform our electricity. why not make a little change and

try something in government? why not go after something and allow the creativity of entrepreneurs to be able to think about how you can change our government for the better. and why not start your and i grew up here when the u.s. was part of education in california was first among the 50 states, i was being educated k-8 in california. so we benefited from this education. when i got my kids i thought well, they must go through the same program and it turned out that it was really the same

program and my daughter had all of the same teachers that i had and i didn't quite know what was going on is like a very active in education and was appointed to the state board of education and there were some things that didn't make sense and california have gone from first to 40th and educate and today it we are warty today we are 47 and today we need to understand that education is a precursor to the economy and that is kind of what happened here in california. so if you had a bad education, the same thing happen one of the

things i noticed on the state board of education, they asked can we use this money to build a gem. in our great wisdom at the state board of education is how can you take wealth away from children. and they are swimming in that they have more cows than people and in a sense they had plenty of milk. so why was it that we were making that decision? and maybe we really need to make it all more local and we need to be closer to the school and so then i got very interested in creating this for education and i worked very hard on an initiative and that went down in

flames and we ended up with 30% of the vote. so i went back to my work and i thought, well, i will be by example and then i started on another thing which teaches entrepreneurship and so then i got this great news. and i started to panic and how could it be that california just keeps looking like this? it turns out that we are slipping in other areas as well. and so we are losing jobs like

crazy. jobs are going out of this state for many reasons and we just lost 8000 jobs because of this and we just lost 3000 jobs at toyota about three days ago and we lost 2500 jobs and sony and disney because the movie business is now moving out of our way. and tesla has decided that they will build an enormous part of this and one of five states. so we are driving business away and many people are leaving and there's a whole town in tennessee and so something is

wrong in so we have one of the highest in the country and back 40 years ago we used to spend 26% on infrastructure for highways and waterways and all of the things that the streets provide and now we spend 3%. so if you are stuck in traffic, it is because you are not spending anything for infrastructure here in california. so i put my hat on to try to figure out if there is a way to improve this. and i thought, at well, you have

had extraordinary people and these are really good people in government all the way through and many of them are truly extraordinary people. the senators, and that is a really big overstatement of what we want. a method that all of us feel like that.

and to give us a refresh or start this from a good blank slate. that was when i thought and that is very much similar to what i see in the venture capitalist business to create startups and started states. those that will compete with each other and allow each of these state to do for us whatever we are trying to get them to do and to allow them to give us a choice. so this is all sorts of things that have come out as a result of this and so people have asked

me why don't you just do two things. well, right now we have one state and we pay the most and we get the worst service. and it's really because it's kind of a monopoly and way back when at&t was a monopoly and they broke it up and those six companies gave us all much better service and then they all got more and i believe the same thing can happen. now if you were to break it into two pieces, that sense of competition and choice will not be there and you will just have two monopolies. and we have always been we the people. and so i have always felt that

the government worked for us. and so recently i sort of felt like it was the opposite that i am working for the government and that is what i do. and so i thought, if we do this, how do we create this? well, i work with a lot of experts to try to figure out how best to do this and we do certain lines and then we thought it's possible that will take a long time for the federal government to be approving the six states. so why do we make it work immediately for some of this

dynamic and so what we did was we set up an initiative that allows all the counties the ability to self organize and each county can choose which state is best for them and then they can actually move, they can move to another state if that state accepts them. so there is a little bit of that dynamic that can go on even before the federal government says okay. so will the federal government ever allow us to have states? well, i think somewhere, sometime, it will be one of our parties and they will have it in

their best interest to have this. i don't know if we will be the democrats or the republicans, but one of those two parties sometime in the future will politically want to have this and i believe that it will eventually happen. but after it passes and for the federal government says yes, all of that time we can have our counties have a lot more power and they can self organize into states and we can be well represented. one other thing that the initiative does is that it makes it very clear as the state as a mandate and they have to do something, that they have to fund it. so as a result the counties will be able to say that we are not

going to do it unless you fund at and that will make a big difference and it will encourage more business and certainly those counties to be closer to their constituents. it's not hard to get your county and by doing that you will be closer to the government and i think that most of the people that i talk to, they say don't change anything about this and i say, let's talk about the status of. i mean, how much worse can we get? and they say oh, no, you can't change it. and then all of a sudden in their heads, and say what would that look like. and so as soon as we get to that

point, they know that this is going to be better and the whole state and everyone who lives here will be better off. so other people have asked me, won't this create the richest state in the silken valley and the poorest states in central california and what will be jefferson. and actually we have to turn that around. in the current regime, those are poor states because somehow the government and the way they set up is not working for them. so imagine if you live in central california, decided that we would like to be a manufacturing center and we would like to take all those jobs for various reasons. and it might end up being the wealthiest state. so i think that we have an

opportunity here and i've run into people and way up in jefferson and they have been trained to do this for a long time and they feel like they are getting taxation without representation and the people in central california feel that sacramento is doling out water wonder about a time and making them fill out forms the whole time. but the silken valley would love to have a government that is efficient in technology and l.a. would love to encourage the movie businesses to stay in los angeles and also san bernardino in that area, it would really

benefit from manufacturing. so each of these six states the way that they have been drawn does have personality. and so with that i think that you have some questions and i would like to open it up. >> thank you so much. [applause] >> kim, please feel free to sit down. okay, thank you to tim draper. i want to point out that we do have the map of the six californias proposed. they are the six state. and let me start with the question.

and so we are trying to raise issues, or do you really want this to happen? >> this is serious and this is an opportunity and i'm looking at it as an important opportunity. and we have really been living in this we have not been active in our creation or re-creation of our government. and california has been benefiting from the pioneers they came here and the way it was set up originally and how he had the best education system and the in the country and now i think it is time for us to get involved and take it back and

think of what your state could look like. because do you really feel that it's important for every california's senator to have this? refilled the department of education has to have 3000 people? mean, let's talk about this energy focus to the local level. we have had many politicians who have seen all of these problems and so there has to be something fundamental that changes and it has to be structural and fundamental and it's a one-time opportunity for all of us to grab a hold of this and do something about it by re-creating the way this state

is run in this new world and this new technologically savvy world and here we are, i think that we could have six of the top 10 states in the country and even if we are average in the six states are average states, we are all way better off. >> what about the resources that are shared statewide remap the water system and the electrical grid and how would this work with a single entity and the waves already that up. how would it work six entities? >> a lot of that is done in this way from colorado, for example, we get a lot of our water from colorado. i think it's going to be an

interesting negotiation between some of these states that have a lot of water and not much money and a lot of water and not much money. i think that it is a nice way to negotiate there. we have set it up so that senators and six assembly people and 12 county supervisors will get together and negotiate that. and if they cannot come to terms, it would just be divided up in this way. so the education systems, i believe that we all want those to be more local. and we are all better off in the k-12 education and in the higher education arena, we've always had a good and competitive environment among think it will continue to be great.

these special deals that people have if you live there and you want to go to ucla and you want to get a deal, that may continue and it may not. and then with the electrical grid, it is ready for reenergizing and the infrastructure is not working and that is part of our electrical grid. and they can both use pg&e and so i think that we are actually going to have a very positive and interesting negotiation.

we think this is a manageable number of people to look out for the best interest of each of these. >> someone in the audience wants to know how you decided these boundaries. >> yes, we grouped certain counties together and there were many different issues and i have had a lot of different experts working on this. but i do know that there are two counties already who said that they would like to move. >> but they would have to be contiguous.

the two are not going to disclose that. >> we will let them speak for themselves and the people that i speak to are quite excited because they feel like no one understands us. we are in the movie business and no one understands us and sacramento doesn't do what it needs to do. and we have had discussions with some business leaders who say oh, you live in california, and they didn't even try to keep us.

4000 or 10,000 jobs, they didn't even try. and it is beyond belief. and so we have this. >> toyota last and occidental petroleum, sony, disney, each moving 2500 jobs out. and it's that's not good. we lose all of those jobs and then not only -- i mean, california is one of the states for people who live below the poverty line, these are people that you don't really see, but states with good education that

attract a lot of jobs and those numbers are more like 80%. so yes, leave the status quo. 20%, 30%, we present, we will end up with a very poor calculation. and i think that we are making it a status quo that is not working and it hasn't worked very well for about four years. and now is the time to make a difference. i will help to put this in their and create us in all the states can go on operate independently and then it is up to you. >> is continuing to flesh out the proposal, how are the

populations in many of these different states? >> i think it means members of the population. >> jefferson is the smallest state in the l.a. region would be the biggest state. but our state is way bigger in the united states. so if you actually took california and flipped it over to the east coast, that's 50 states and the east coast. so are we being well represented in washington? well, it is that area and a population, the population is a little bit different. it makes up about 55 million

people and still a ton of people to try to represent through one centralized ivory tower. >> okay, so this is interesting. how will the six started to continue? and so there will be a start up an organization cost. >> yes, they are going to pay a little bit. and for a little bit of time it will be sort of new and we will sort of have to adjust and individually we will still have more good weather here and we will still have the ocean and we will still have pretty much what we have and it will take some of this to shutdown the old state and that will pay for itself many times over if we go through

that short period of disorientation. >> with talk about the state of jefferson who talks about this out there. the industry is pretty dead, what's the economic basis of the economy? [inaudible] >> there's a lot of that groner. [laughter] >> i think that they make do. it's not like the money makes it out there. and you are not seeing any of it. it somehow gets to sacramento and some of it gets to washington, but i'm not sure how much of it goes to these areas. i'm not seeing a lot of that money flow up and so those people, i think that they are

all thinking that they have been trying to secede from the nation's and they think that this is just, you know, why are we even paying this in our own little world of their. >> it says state of jefferson and it is there. >> any questions from the audience? please come to the mic. please feel free to come through and ask your question. >> a lot of the problems you're highlighting, couldn't you put it in a category of economic inequality with them last 30 years to proposition 13 is being a fundamentally organization of the public finances of this date that resulted into the stratification of our communities? >> so in your new state there's

no prop 13, there's a different program and we don't have this big part of inequality. so you have an opportunity because this is your new state. so that is the status quo and that's what we're stuck with now. if you want to change it, this is your chance. >> yes, sir? >> we are really part of the high standards that we have a quality and things like that in one of the problems is that people says it makes it so that we compete with other states. but we may have to compete with the central valley and other parts of what is now caliph onan and will that force us to reduce our standards? >> once again it is your stayed and you can create your own

environmental standards and you can work with the other states to make sure that those standards are high enough. and yes, i love the environment as well. my favorite investment is this because we didn't have to cut down trees or use gasoline and we still have incredible communication. so i think you have a great opportunity and this is your opportunity as well. >> okay. >> quickly talking about the question and we will have some great capital stock. so we very important in the way that it generates this at the taxpaying case in the central

valley as well. so basically how can we even talk about there being equal competition because will those people be able to fund themselves to make all of those investments happen. so the problem is these percentages. so how do they make them? so if you can picture this then we will start very unequally in the world, which is the same for all of them and then at the end we give everyone the same chant. >> it's great and i'm glad he posted it in that way. ..

they're mad. so, their starting point is where it is now. if they create a new state and it's their own state and they can control that state and they can attract business to that state and make things happen