long time. we are training in baghdad to members of an elite group against terrorism. we are training the iraqi army. we work hand-in-hand and are aircraft's are mobilized and since september 2014. all of this has allowed us to reach extremely important results. i'm thinking of liberation of falluja which is a major symbol as it was the first major city controlled by isis.

i'm thinking of the cut of isis from the rest of the world and taking of kyra which would make it possible to move toward modal, one of the major centers of the terrorist organization. all this makes it possible for us to see the moment very soon i hope when isis will have lost its territorial domination in the area or near it. this will reduce its capacity against us and modify actions over the long-term. we know that, as i mentioned, the terrorist attack of november november 2013 were planned and

designed and prepared for syria with the protection into france and the migration flows and transfers resources from the middle east to europe. this material loss should also allow us to hit directly deep propaganda machine of isis. this machine, this incubator which makes it possible to mobilize people who have weak minds or are fanatics, who are insiders and take alone the initiative of terrorist actions. i would like to mention here that the use of weapon in rudimentary and violent way with the only objective to kill. what they want to do is terrorize.

what matters is to hit the french republic and the idea of liberty closely linked to the holiday of the 14th of july. jews whose integration into the french republic was one of the earliest in the western world in 1789 and journalists or press cartoonists was the case in the attack against charlie. we must attack and destroy the empire of isis because it is the heart of this organization and it's an objective that we are about to reach with the coalition. they have lost about 30% in iraq in 20% in syria. its resources are reduced now in terms of oil and the flow of fighters helping it is

progressively being reduced. at the same time our action allow us to gather an important quality of intelligence about isis, the fact that the group has left where many were in transit made it possible to get information that will be useful to protect the national territory from the threat that the french fighters, about 680 french were member of isis, to date 680 were members of isis. 187 have been killed and about 200 came back to france. but they keep hitting us in france and belgium, in the u.s.

and elsewhere. it is our duty to reduce as quickly as possible face of backing up in order to hit it with decisive strikes in order to disorganize it in a definitive way. this is why the present phase of the operation in the president of the republic announced an increase of military contribution. the aircraft carrier will be deployed again and the support that we bring to the iraqi forces and other forces will be increased generally. this faced with the size of this challenge we must have a common answer and the united states in

this perspective are more than ever indispensable. the u.s. and france are two major targets designated by the propaganda of the jihadist groups. the kind of threat on us remain very similar since the individual responsible for the mass killing in orlando to the foreign fighters who are an extremely dangerous threat. fight against isis, against islamic terrorist groups in many ways in which we work together with our allies on all theaters. this is true in syria and this is true in iraq and the excellent quality of the work relationship i have developed over the past few months in difficult times of france has allowed us to have a shared strategy.

it is true as well in africa where today france is fighting against al qaeda in the islamic migrant and other jihadist group with the help of the united states in terms of intelligence, transport, supplies et cetera. these are extremely precious elements and france also benefits from the support of the united states thanks to those on the special part,. [inaudible] which allows your country to bring aid to states fighting against terrorism with the same strategic objective.

through this closeness, and made it possible to bring our military relations to the i'm resident and level in our recent history. of course i am in streaming happy the fact that the aircraft carrier in 2016, it's also an extremely strong sign about the high level of interoperability between french and american forces. this was the first time that a foreign admiral was in charge of a task force including american vessel. in the same order of a dia, during the military parade on the 14th of july the fact that

they were overthrown by an american plane followed by two french helicopters was very important for me because it symbolized an operational operation which is extremely efficient. our corporation is also extremely strong in terms of intelligence exchange within the special instructions given by ashton carter to the intelligence agencies which led shared instructions which i have given to my own services and to the french ministry command. this opportunity has been verified so many times allowed us to work on difficult tasks like this. in libya the fact that isis has been pushed back is a very positive signal. we support the national government which was at the head of the inclusive security system. this effort must rely on the

constitution of a real libyan army, an an army which is not putting together a number of militia but would represent the diversity of the country. this effort must be strengthened by the application of embargo to libya for isis and al qaeda which has been recently authorized by the security council with a very strong mandate given to this mission. france contributions to this mission to guarantee control of the suspect vessels which feed the terrorist groups in libya with weapons. further to our fight against jihadist terrorist groups is very close relationship between the france in the u.s. should also allow us to face the threat of force and other challenges which are emerging in terms of

security. i think for example, like the president, france and nato defends the alliance. we do not threaten anyone but however we have to guarantee the safety of the united states of the allies which is the most fragile member and this is the reason why france will take part in 2017 to to defense the troops in the east and specifically in estonia. among these challenges i also have in mind the southern china sea where we maintain that it is necessary to contribute to reduce tension guided only by international law which guarantees freedom and maritime space through international order.

if we let this right be challenged somewhere it will be challenged everywhere. in another respects, political this one which comes to mind the way we will have to go along with the british exit vote in the field of defense. it is not up to me as minister of defense to give my opinion on the will of the british people or to comment on political decisions or positions on the wide diplomatic mechanisms to be used, but i cannot take my attention from the impacts that this major decision will have on the strategic balances of the future of europe. i hope we will be able to find

stability. there's some cause for concern here that we have to look at squarely. there are three kinds, i think. first of all, we have to avoid that the united kingdom would not go back onto itself and it could be totally absorbed by it separate regime. in the interest of the british, it would not be in their interest to turn their back on europe or the world. that's why we have written in the british press and that's what we will keep telling them. in the same way the thing that it is not anymore indeed interested in europe to look at the separation with revenge. secondly, we have to avoid this uniting europeans within the

european union because this would have a negative impact on the unity of nato which we have just reaffirmed in washington. thirdly we have to avoid that europe would lose its position as a major act of security as a complement to the american power the exit from the eu of the only nuclear power could reinforce the position of countries which do not wish to see europeans take charge of their own security. this is a major subject. first of all the state of mind in berlin, as shown by most recent german information, again i will continue to work closely to propose to europeans to

reinforce the defense of europe in the interest also americans which regularly go for a better sharing of defending the two sides of the atlantic. i'm confident because we still see the signs of the british will to keep working with the rest of europe and to maintain a strong presence on the international scene. i'm confident because i see the obligation of france and europeans. first of all, france will continue to help with the united kingdom and extremely rich defense relationships, cultural pragmatism, the uk remains an important part of europe which has the will and capacity to intervene in the world. it remains a nuclear power in a very strong world. the strength of our defense relationships, strengthened by

the treaties that we have and the strengths of our links will allow us to go up against all temptation of a strategic step back. paris and london have recently developed the concept of a joint expenditure or a force which should be able to have a joint force in such a situation called for it. for the more we work to relaunch the european project within the security policy. the exit vote is the symptom we have to acknowledge. we have to acknowledge the cause and give a sense. security is the major issue for our society and europe will be a major actor of their own security or it will fail. this is a file in which we are

working. any troubles, strategic and political context, ladies and gentlemen, i am convinced that the french american friendship is stronger and more important than ever. it has shown in the fight that we are waging together now against the jihad terrorist groups which are threatening us. it also gives us a special responsibility to go along with the geopolitical changes with the british exit. further than the interest that we are sharing at the moment, the american french relations is deep because it does go back to the past more than two centuries of strong solidarity when we are about to commemorate the century of coming into our nation and the first world war.

this friendship is a real story and when there are people on both sides of the atlantic which are calling for closing up onto one solves this as an element we should never forget. for all this reasoning in the electoral year for both our countries, i wish that the french-american friendship grows even stronger and that our defense relationship keeps deepening. we all have, including yourself, we all have a major role to play in this. thank you very much for your attention. [applause]

>> thank you very much prime minister for this very powerful speech. i'm delighted to be here with you and i welcome you at bookings. thank you for the last introduction and thank you for being here. one of our defense experts here at bookings and research for the form policy program.

minister, i read your book just before you arrived and i recommend it to the audience and there's one point in particular that attracted my interest and there is one sentence, there is no internal enemies. in the fight for syria and iraq is in syria and iraq. these terrorists on national territory is criminal. before asking mike to take over for his comments, i just wanted to remind everybody that the french military is quite involved in protecting french citizens. let me turn to you and perhaps ask you some comments about the

speech and how you see. [inaudible] >> thank you and good afternoon. mr. minister it's an honor to be with you. i would like to begin my brief remarks by thinking our brothers and sisters in france for the alliance that is now 240 years old. you had a very tough independence day last week. we had a very good and happier, luckily, independence day ten days prior and it's the 240th anniversary of the united states which exists largely because of france and it continues to protect itself and its citizens working with france. i just want to say thank you. also, i know that all of our hearts are with you in this difficult time but especially in france in recent days. secondly i wanted to underscore my appreciation for what you said in your speech about what

we are doing today, together. on the battlefield and intelligence cooperation and in so many other ways into very quickly highlight two main aspects. the main aspects or simply this. many places we are working together, hand in glove in iraq and syria. in afghanistan through 2012, the second key point is that in many places france is doing things that are much different and complementary to what the united states is doing for which we are thankful for enormously. this is the case study that we have a most prominent example. it also has very important relationships throughout much of the middle east and north africa and the tunisian model, the tunisian model in some ways represents the best last hope for the arab spring and i want to wish our brothers and sisters in france well and commend the

french for their role there. france's doing things that are leading the way. they're doing things that are complementary and it varies across the entire broader middle east region. i think that is worth underscoring. france is an independent actor and very often a good guide or advisor to our action and the debate we have internally is often very healthy as you pointed out in your speech on a rock policy we disagreed and many americans would look back and say france was right, but regardless of who was right we didn't dwell on the disagreement. we focused on the fast forward. that's the other point to underscore. finally and i'll stop here, i still do have some questions and concerned about the state of overall western policy in this brothers drug against violent

extremism. call it what you will, depending on which convention you are following or which party you're a member of. i think we all know what were talking about. the point is that were doing relatively well in some places and we have a long way to go in others and the two specific countries in the broader middle east where i'm still most concerned about overall western strategy are syria and libya. i'm not yet persuaded that we are on the right track in either place so maybe i'll just leave it at that for now hoping that will come back to these issues. this is not a critique of french policy, this is just a questioning of american policy in regard to syria where i think we are more clearly in the lead, maybe european friends are more clearly in the lead in libya. both these countries, i think we have to ask if we've settled on the right strategy or if we need

to have a little more fundamental debate about first principles. it's an honor to be on the stage with the french minister and i appreciate what they are doing to help with our security as well as their own. perhaps you can answer to that and i'd like to know also on this washington summit that you've been taking part on today which is coming on tomorrow, do you expect an international coalition to produce results and do you expect the united states in particular, you alluded to this in your speech, to provide some help to the current wave of terrorism that is taking place in europe? >> in order to answer your question i'll come back to what

you said, as i said earlier and i'll stay it said even stronger right now, as i mentioned the reason why we absolutely have to attack the very heart of isis that is to say the territorial realm of isis because their territory has the will to create a caliphate. it is also a place where the organized terrorist action in the entire world. in france, we have been hit many times, the u.s. as well. in others, tunisia, indonesia, egypt, it's a long list and i've forgotten some. it is from this place that all these actions are planned and the number three, this is what i was calling in the incubator,

but it's to say this place that spreads certain contamination, the individual act, the lonely wolf that we saw in nice, you saw it in orlando yourself which gives people who are not quite right in their mind and action which is then claimed by isis so in order to stop this since we've started the coalition, the coalition exists, it is alive and well, it started with the newport summit, it brought results isis has lost a lot of

surface and land and they're losing a lot of real estate, they're losing their image. they are getting weaker. their image is weakening. there about two lose and they are not always winning. thanks to the coalition, isis has seen its income quite reduced. as soon as the coalition was well organized, when we supported the iraqi forces, we supported the kurdish forces and we also intervened on command centers, on financial resource centers such as oil fields and on logistic points.

now what is left. [inaudible] over 30 people and now we have to go through the next step to create some time but we are in a new concentration. our aim now is the to send in decision centers in the major centers of isis action. it's virtual caliphate and physical caliphate is there. they are the ones who encourage all this lone wolf everywhere and so we are now working on our different plans of action.

our global security is at stake, not only the security of the local countries, i think think what we are discussing is going the right way and i wanted to answer that. you asked me about two or three other topics. isis is in libya and that is a major problem. with some who came from the middle east, but they're not the majority. with some local freelance is also with other foreign fighters

, in the state that has a hard time existing which is dislocated. we have to be extremely vigilant so that the actions that were going to start in the future be globally plan together in serious and iraq but also it should be in the same logic as what we intend to do in libya. we ultimately must support it. still not quite secure and we have to intervene with the national libyan army and different militias that are

coming from tripoli. all of this has to be unified around a national union government that's recognized by everybody and validated by the security council. we have to see that they help us eradicate isis and libya. libya is a country that is quite special because beyond isis it's a place for all kinds of trafficking weapons and drugs, human beings, migrants, everything is trafficked and unfortunately if isis groups were to lay their hands on all these traffic loaders, it would be a lot worse for security. that's the way we are moving right now. when i say we, we with all the

pressure that we can use, the action that is going to take place, thanks to the naval force that will control the task of the european union but also with the security council, as you mentioned the interior enemy in the book that i have written i said that on the exterior the enemies on the interior are criminal. of course if their vocation was to take over that would be one thing but their intention is to destabilize. that's why i say they are criminals and they should be

treated as criminals. you also mentioned the presence of our armed forces along the international territory. this is new. it's never happened before. to have like we have now, 10000 troops controlling the national territory. [inaudible] in the airports were people gather and especially in the summertime when we have different cultural, but, this this is not the mission of armed forces. in france we have what we call. [inaudible] which very regularly decides on

the different orientations that the country wants to take or the future security and future defense, this exercise started in 1972 and since 1972 there were five or six white papers. every new white paper is a necessity for our military to ensure the protection of the territory. this is a vocation of an army. >> we had different invitation when we decided to do away with the draft because back then in france we called it the operational defense of the territory because we had a draft for this kind of mission they

asked themselves what that can be but this was in the white paper in 2008. it says that our armies have to ensure protection and in the white paper i wrote a lot of it for 2013, we have repeated it, we have commitments with figures so the president, when there's a crisis, the president can mobilize on the national territory a certain number of troops in order to ensure security. this is a long story except that it is not written as such in the white paper. i think i answered part of your

question. >> i was wondering how you felt about the transatlantic operation at this very moment, especially when it comes to terrorism and the emergence of the new actors that he is talking about in his book and the fact that there are lone wolves as well as organized attacks that we've seen in europe. do you feel that services are cooperating enough perhaps at the european level and the transatlantic level? >> excellent question. it very easy and difficult time to say were not doing well and obviously there's a lot of room for improvement but i'm still struck at how well we are cooperating in many domains. let me begin on the russia issue because the minister spoke about that as well. even though americans are often

frustrated that most nato allies, unlike france do not meet their goals for burden sharing, of spending 2% of their gross domestic product on their armed forces, most year. forces don't. forces don't come anywhere close to that standard and french debt france does. despite the fact that were frustrated by burden sharing we made commitments together to sustain the right amount of military capability in the eastern nato state. i saw personally we can have plenty of disagreements about this, of course but i think it's just about the right response, clarifying if there were any doubt that nato sees an attack on one as an attack on all. there can't be any appearance of daylight between us and the

summit largely because of french leadership accomplish the goal that i think it needed to. that was crucial. also the european union, with or without britain has been sustain and economic sanctions on russia which i consider the other key pillar for dealing with the central european crisis of today they are a lot more vulnerable on this front than we are, a lot more trade with russia and the fact that europe has held together, and in my opinion will continue to hold together in the reality of the british exit vote on this issue, i think the the return of russia has been, despite all the problem and lack of burden sharing, the difficulties of how to handle the situation, we've been together as an alliance and it's been very, very important. on the intelligence sharing, and i'll finish on this point, there's obviously a long way to go. our colleague just offered a suggestion to france

specifically that it creates something like national counters on terrorism, not unlike what we created here after 911. our good friend nick rasmussen runs it today and assembles information on terror watch list and collects the information in real time it's the way in which new york city and other cities worked to cooperate through the joint terrorism task force. there have been a lot of things we've done but there's been a lot of things that france has done and i think france probably has a ways to go in improving its domestic coordination, but they're good. i remember back in the 1980s and 1990s, a lot, a lot of colleagues were studying france

for how to deal better with this terrorist threat because we started to see al qaeda rising in the mid- 1990s and france in many ways showed us the way on how to deal with the kind of threats that we have experienced since then. yes there's a long way to go but i would say france is one of the leaders in this area along with the united states at this point. we need more countries like france and britain and the united states, a number of continental countries need to up their game. overall i'm fairly impressed, even in these dark days how well we are holding together as the western alliance. i'd like to ask you a question about knees first part of my question would be how do you

reassure the french public after such dramatic attacks and secondly on the military, how do you deal with a military force that is a little bit overstretched? also the domestic ones. basically the job of the police, and i'm sure it's a stretch, this is obviously a big problem for a country of certain size but it's not unlimited. there's no military service, as you mentioned in your talk so i would like to hear your views about this issue. it's obviously been a big shock to a lot of us including here in

this country. >> it's based on very strong confidence and also it has reached all levels. carter had decided to provide special instructions about intelligence and we did it with reciprocity and this led us to establish incredible trust in

many fields and this is now going to stop. that they confirmed it comes to training or intelligence to this decision. first of all, i will be more modest than you were and i will defend my case. we are not 2%. [inaudible] we are 1.8. but we want to reach two points.

but we need to have unity and make sure the basic core is reaffirmed. there could have been that i think we are able to take the right decisions to make sure that this will be a reassurance for the eastern countries in relation to their concerns about russia and this reassurance is based on reality and it is not going to lead to breaking up the silo. in russia, you also have to keep

a possible dialogue and other threats were also taken into account. [inaudible] they must make sure that what is at stake in terms of cyber and military defense, make sure that these things, which did not exist a few years ago and also the subject of sharing with the european union. i think this summit can be useful and it has made it possible to reaffirm. now andrea during the french, it's true that this is exactly

what isis was looking for. fear is the most disease to prevent our way of living to create divisions among us and to make the people in elected position can overcome these. this is not done overnight. you mention the army. the fact that the armed forces are present, also contributes to reassure the people you also have to realize in our situation 11 individual, out of his mind had a sudden death wish and because there is this

ideological speech which is propagated by isis to do terrible things in germany, we've seen another person try to hurt people in the train. this is going to continue to go on and it is going to stop only if we arrive eradicate the ideology, that destruction formed by the coalition that we talked about earlier but also to make it possible. [inaudible] our country, but not only our country will have to fight for

quite a while. we had to be determined and show unity, we have to show determination. it's a long-term fight but we have to do it. it would be easier. now on the question you had about the sides of the armed forces. yes, france has a strong defense , we are intervening today in the coalition and we are also present in lebanon. we have forces present in various places in the world, we are a major country in the coalition against isis and terrorism and in the framework.

[inaudible] this means that we have to make the decision to strengthen the defense budget and recruit more foot soldiers of the army which are essentially responsible for securing, what is been done, and the weight of the presence of the foot shoulders, their long term presence, is heavy, the situation should improve within the next few weeks but it also away as a nation that we have to guarantee our own security. this is a question for us. >> we would like to ask a few questions, we ask that you asked real questions not make a speech

because we just had a speech by the minister so i will take three questions. i asked that you identify yourself and the minister will answer. >> thank you very much. no one has mentioned turkey. how does that affect your ability to fight isis in iraq and syria. also many personnel have died in libya when i thought you said you supported a unity government for libya and the general has not been willing to sign on to this agreements why wonder how you explain french support for general history. thank you.

>> okay, i was also going to ask about turkey but which do you see of what you call virtual -- to subside even if they fall and the risk of having them inspiring acts of violence and terrorism over france and parts of europe over the next how many years. >> i basically had the same question as barbara but just wanted to add a question, if you

could describe what the special forces were doing in libya and what part of the country they were operating in. think you. >> they are not going to make comments on activities anywhere. [inaudible] we have an institution which is the parliamentarian division to intelligence. it's the only place where anyone in the world, so i cannot answer

this question. on the question of libya, i think i was very clear just a moment ago. it seems, but i will repeat if you want. :

was itself a victim of isis. there were terrorist attacks on isis, one of those countries which is threatened by isis that isis is trained to destabilize. secondly, turkey is essential to a secure border between turkey and syria. the operation which is still going on if it goes to its success and in necessary light of it should strengthen security along the border provided that turkey is willing to guarantee the closing of the border.

we need turkey in particular to do this. it is also in the interest of turkey of course because it is itself a practice so i don't know what the question was really but if it was about turkey but following the what is recently the recent events in turkey, i hope so but as for us, the major fight is fighting isis. we need that partner there. in the conditions i have just mentioned . this is what i could tell you concerning turkey. now, we are asked the question was ... the local isis, this is going to be a long fight. west the question? from the moment when the broadcasters become silenced,

it will be much easier. but it's going to be a long term fight because others can take over later on, maybe not with the same strength or the same power but they may reproduce at the same time so we have to really aim at the death machine, radical sectarian philosophy as isis which can seduce weak minds and it's avoid a dramatic situation in the future but i was pleased to note the question was to work on this together. to fight against the isis action and the caliphate on social networks in particular. we have to renew messages to

mobilize, this is essential but it takes time. when we will first eliminating the platform itself which we have of course but that's not going to be enough michael, would you like comments? >> much of the thrust of what the minister said, to me the importance of the us turkey and nato turkey relationships or the rest of nato with turkey in regard to syria is less about intellect even though that's been played off a lot in the american press and it's more about the operation along the border. because the insulin base is convenient but it's not essential. we can figure out workarounds if we need to, they are convenient, theyare not cheap but they exist . by contrast, any kind of a meaningful cooperation along the border today and then in the future if and when any of these safe haven concepts that general address and secretary clinton and others have discussed, these begin to blossom. we're going to need to reinforce them and also

provide relief within them in a way that will require cross-border movement on the ground and that requires turkey so for that reason and also for diplomatic reasons to get to a place where we can actually negotiate some kind of a settlement, i think we are going to need turkey. i don't believe we are on the path right now by the way, i think the united states led policy of trying to negotiate a strong unity government to replace president is not promising. i'm much more interested in a confederation or bosnia model concept but be that as it may, when we get to a negotiation that has some promise we are going to need turkey and that as well and if we get to a peacekeeping force which i believe any key steel in syria would ultimately require, we're going to need turkey's cooperation for that also so turkey is important more on the ground that it is for intellect in my judgmentor it . >>. [speaking french]

>> to questions very quickly, the gentleman here. >>. [speaking french] mister and mister, that makes three of us. he is from laurent. me too. and you, almost. so the three of us. you said quite likely that criminals were people out of their mind but unfortunately most of them are not doing enough performing their first. action, some of them have already been on the police file so like i said, mickelson is more of the message. would it be possible to have a stricter policy not with people who have a type of

staying friends and perhaps to expel. what is the country or the spirit of unity that you mentioned? the answer is very simple. first of all i'd like this presently. i hear the distinction, really. between two types of terrorist actions. on the territory of certain countries. those which are organized plans and means for just got out of mosul or raqqa. francis military as well and the law enforcement in general in november of 2016. in such movements, we have to fight against them through intelligence, concentration

and with other countries. also we can fight by destroying their central core but the other subject which is far more complicated is what is happening in india, one where one man totally unknown by the police and others becomes radicalized very quickly and then in fact there are no proven links between him and isis except that isis is claiming. this is not going to be but what he did was not indicating that there would be a possible radicalization in the future. if those crimes were real.

but my major concern is the fact that this kind of risk again happened anywhere is totally unpredictable so we have to fight the source. against organized groups, since the events in question, legislative measures have been put in place on a mission that will fight against terrorism which make it possible to acquire information very quickly. maybe there used to be some holes in the cover, now those holes have been filled and we have to use these systems. one last question because i happily. >> thank you, my name is simone and i'm at american university. you've emphasized the importance of the collaboration between france

and the us. i'm curious to know how a possible means of mitigating any concerns should resources be reduced any further and cooperations that are currently going on. >>. [speaking french]. is that question, yes. >> i think that today the relationship is already at a very high level. there can be, i'm talking about the ministers of defense and military action. intelligence, actually. my wish is that this level and i make no, i don't have anything to start politically but if we can maintain it

like this like hot like it is now it would be an excellent thing in terms of planning a relationship. >> minister, we have to thank you for your candor and your very strong words. we feel france is in good hands for the defense. it's not giving up, that's for sure and thank you for coming to brookings. we wish you a successful summit together and look forward to seeing you again at brookings. in your work as minister or with the president of the british region. [applause] any answers you can guess, i'm with you. [inaudible conversation]

>> coming up tonight on c-span2 if the cd in prime time starting at eastern. also will hated discussing his life and career and respond to your calls and questions. mister hughes most recent book is showdown: thurgood marshall and the supreme court nomination that changed america. that will be followed by a science writer natalia hold on the rise of the girls which she chronicles in elite group of women's contributions to rocket design, space exploration and the first american satellite and coming up just before midnight it afterwards with mcdonald, author of the war on cops, how the new attack on law and order makes everyone less safe in which she was leasing in america. she interviewed by john jay college professor dolores jones brown and ethel tonight beginning at eight easter here on c-span2. and on c-span three, it's

american history tv in prime time starting at eight with a history of immigration in america. at 9:20, it's a discussion on the origins of the epa to chinese exclusion and how popular culture is negative chinese just stereotypes. coming up after 10, rabbi lan sussman thoughts about congress and an annual seller in the housefrom 1923 to 1973 . see american history tv in prime time tonight starting at easter on c-span three. every weekend, td has 48 hours of nonfiction books and authors on c-span2. here's what's coming up saturday at 9:15 eastern. fox channel: eric boling looks at the values and virtues that help build america as a great nation in his book america, benign virtues that make our nation great and why we need them more than ever. and it 10 pm eastern on afterwards, karen greenberg director of fordham

university center on national security talks about legal questions arising from policies of want to fight the us war on terrorism in her book growth justice: the making of the security state. as remembered is interviewed by holly stephan, author of the black matters. >> it's important to the american people to understand that there are nuances to these laces, that not all terrorism cases are the same, there is an entire special case from those who are accused of wanting to plot and found with evidence like the subway bar to those who are really just aspirational. >> on sunday at 7 pm eastern african-american history professor carol anderson discusses her book white rage, the unspoken truth about racial divide which chronicles where black progress and history has been met by what she called white rage area anderson discusses her book in opposition to the advance of lack movements still exist today. go to booktv.org for the

complete weekend schedule. >> this sunday night on q and a, university professor emeritus james edward smith on his biography of president george w. bush. >> maybe bush's worst fall is the fact that he is a born-again christian who brings that ideology into the presidency. he believes that he was god agent here on earth to fight evil . bush called president sharad of france on the telephone trying to get friends to join in the attack and during the course of that conversation he told sharad that we are fighting god and magog before the final judgment..in my dog are creatures in the book of revelations in the new testament. that's the center of the universe for many evangelicals and fundamentalist christians and bush generally believed that.

bush genuinely believe that he was god agent here on earth to fight evil sunday night at the eastern and pacific on c-span's two and day. >> british defense secretary michael fallon testified before a parliamentary committee. the conclusion of the nato summit in warsaw and the findings of the british iraqi war inquiry known as the chilcot report. he told the members of the committee that the uk is still committed to working on defense matters after the decision to leave the european union. this is about two hours. x. >> good morning everybody and welcome to this national session of the defense committee considering the 2016 nato summit and also the lessons of the chilcot inquiry. and welcome secretary of

state, congratulations on your reconcentration in your post and what are other two guests care to introduce themselves for the record? >> i'm a pisces of defense. >> general security policy. >> thank you very much indeed. the first question in our first action which is on the nato summit comes from ruth smith.>> good morning. it's been a few weeks so i wonder if you could outline for us what are the most important new developments that came out of the warsaw summit in terms of our security and that of nato? you very much german and good morning. this is a successful summit, it demonstrated the unity and cohesion of the alliance, it's an opportunity or us to show british leadership and we made progress on further nato reform and cooperation between nato and the european union but very briefly let's

touch on each. in terms of unity and cohesion we agreed a clear posture on defense and deterrence and bracing nato's position not simply in east but the south. we demonstrated british leadership of course by recording our achievements again of two percent of gdp to defense. we noted that 18 other members of the alliance are now increasing their defense expenditure. we were one of four countries to commit to lead a battalion in transferred province where the alliance has agreed to deploy in the three baltic states additionally contributing three troops to poland so we played a leadership role in that.

and we have, we saw some success in the community what we've been encouraging for some time which is further nato work on cyber and on hybrid warfare and on closer cooperation and it's a key point of the community that we communicate between nato and the european union so this was a successful summit for written but more importantly perhaps, it was also a successful summit for the alliance as a whole. >> madeleine. >> in the course of the summit, you communicated the emphasis on the challenge to nato posed by russia. you are aware secretary of state that we completed our report on russia. implications for security which is all we have and an increased understanding and resources of the russia approach in the uk. we used to have the soviet studies research center, it

later became the concept study research center. also between reinstating such a center, are you considering increasing our understanding and capabilities of understanding rushes defense and strategic posture? >> well, generally yes. we were seeing that in your report and we are looking hard now about how we improve our understanding of russia. both through our work in russia itself and at home. in itself as you will know there have been difficulties in bringing the defense section of the embassy up to full strength, not difficulties of arms making what we are working hard to restore that full-strength which improves our understanding of russian military but also of course some help to understand the relationship between the two militaries. at home we are looking again at your report particularly

with the number of russian speakers, the number of people we have specializing in intelligence on russia. i can't connect to restoring the center as it was what you are certainly already seen an increased emphasis on our russian analysis generally. and may i remove my jacket? >> by all means, yes. >> if i could answer that, i think as we said before in the previous action we have, we certainly increase the number of staff that we have working on russia as have the foreign office as well. we increase the number of starting defense intelligence and through organizations like the development concepts and doctrines center and defense academy and so on we see an increase the assets that we have two academic

expectations and there are a number of particular organizations and individuals in london and elsewhere who are actively engaged in. >> can i ask about the advanced section center and what was put into that? this is a right to extend our russian expanding capability? >> with the advanced research assessment group that used to exist, there's a long story here. you mentioned the soviet studies research center which became the complex is research center which became the advanced research and assessment group which was disbanded some time ago and i think i cited previous evidence, the work that used to be done in that group is now gone by various organizations across the fence so it's more diversity if you like and giving us more access to access to a greater range of inputs from

academia and so on but we are not planning to reestablish it. >> before you move on from that subject, thank you. i just on this point? russia has famously been described as a mystery wrapped in a riddle inside an enigma and that does suggest that you really do need a unit or a team of dedicated experts and that currently is what you used to have and it's perfectly understandable that as russia went down in our list of priorities and certainly after 1991 that you wrote it up but russia is now risen backup very distinctly and while you talk about having these functions attributed around the proper cause of the defense establishment, is it not time to do a serious study as to whether dedicated unit of russia experts should be reconstituted? >> mister chairman we have in

effect established a new policy unit within the ministry of defense which focuses on russia and the immediately surrounding countries. as i said, we would strengthen the staff in the defense intelligence area . the unit that you focus on didn't use to solely focus on russia. russia happens to be an interest of one or two of its members who had some access and publications and so on but it wasn't solely focused on russia so my view would be that the arrangements that we have now give us the breadth and depth across policy intelligence and order outreach to academia. >> how many staff and thus this unit have? >> the policy unit? it's growing all the time and is about 15 at the moment. >> 15? and how many of thosewould be russia specialists ?>> i'd say at the moment i think probably around eight but we

are what we are seeking to do is make sure we make the best use of our speculation so specialists and so slightly and he was to pick out an individual but for example recent naval capacities in moscow has come back to lead the something dealingwith russia inside that unit so we're making best use of the knowledge and experience . >> thank you very much. >> i think it should be said to the chair that we've gotten into where i want to go next. in that case, on russia, on our understanding of our intelligence our whole capability about russia has been less fit or talk for too long and i think what the commissioners saying is that all we doing enough? do we risk the unit, we have about 15 or the need for russian specialists is becoming increasingly urgent. and just a little bit worried that the ties that i'm

getting suggests that the only the committee seal is not really in the minister of defense? can we have some assurance that there is a recognition, that there is an urgent need to have that wind and greater depth and understanding of what russia is thinking and why it's acting the way that it is doing. we were certainly caught nothing over ukraine to come in. >> let me say in general terms, let me give you that assurance and we need to do more in russia but we are doing more, we are building our capability and our understanding and i certainly accept that there's more to be done to continue to focus on what russia's aspirations are and to better understand how it's likely that russia is likely to react and what is next moves are at home and abroad and indeed in the middle east.

we are doing more but there is more we can do. >> what you expect russia's follow politically and militarily? will it make more or summit? as it given any indications for our defense and security in the baltics? do we know? do we have any understanding of how they responded with a mark. >> yes you do. russia's reaction has been relatively restrained but it may not be complete yet, there may be more to come. there's been a meeting of the nato russia council since the summit which i hope helps to explain to russia the renewed posture of nato. and i think it's also important to remember that russia's reaction to warsaw actually began before warsaw in response to previous or prior announcements on our

forward presence and in response to the completion of the ballistic missile sites in romania but that back in may. so so far, reaction has been relatively restrained but there may be more to come. >> thanks very much. if you want to come in? >> just a question, mister secretary, presumably if these experts, what expert we got, other than cdi's empire which actually meets across the security steps as well is for their expertise and other good links across old methods of gaining information and intelligence, whatever on russia with the security services, dc hq and cdi, so

my question is if this policy or is this intelligence the people are doing? >> this is much morejoined up that used to be. there are much better links , much was a between us and the agencies but mister watkins i think will tell you exactly where these officials are completed. >> it's also a question that the new units as i mentioned is actually within my staff, that part of the policy staff. there have always been russia experts in cdi and their area, those have been strengthened and those at the secretary says are extremely good links between my staff and the russia experts in the front office and between cdi staff and russia experts . >> that's the reassurance i wanted, thank you very much. >> and that's on the russian language portions, i think there's a dedicated staff for the russian section and for the president, it's been enough and we have to take in

consideration the massive task that you have but it's not just the issues of language courses and intelligence, it's twitter, and look, where the staff within these programs and entities to forward rts or at least to be in russia though the big questionreally is mister chairman , is when it comes to the task and our rule, what is the number one mlb, is it russia? is it rack, is it syria or what is the number one priority? >> to answer your first question, clearly the staffing units are military and personnel and civil servants so they are subject to the normal rules about dealing with the media and so on so they would not normally to the media. but many of the academic experts that we talk to,

we've before talk to the media all the time and we share much of our analysis with them and we draw some of our analysis from their work. in terms of where they're focusing, clearly there are development within russia itself which we discuss a previous session such as people nation of the national guard and things like that. it's russia's activities in its immediate neighborhood whether belarus or ukraine or wherever but also further afield and russia is very active at the moment in syria though the other thing just so you know we are taking across the board is what we are looking at what russia is doing in the asian-pacific and southeast area so we are looking at all assets of russian behavior. >> i think it's very well that the mod is using its officials in this way but i think the committee still

feels that there is a role for the more independent group of actual experts who offer them clever officials warned gaining expertise as they go along. the experts who can actually challenge the orthodoxy that might be pervading at any one time and this is a topic that we will be coming back to you but i think we got to move on now and asking douglas to talk about the rotational format that's being put forward for the baltic states. >> thanks very much mister chairman. i touched on some of the reaction that you might see from russia following saw. and that's by nato and also in the format for extra battalions, that does not violate the nature of russia. obviously russia does not accept that. how well are you prepared for the russian deployments to

form new battalions in the section? >> could you repeat the question? >> yes, is just from michael's question, the rotational format of the four battalions and how nato's claim that that does not violate the nato russia, that russia is not accepting that section and in light to how you are going to care for the russian response to the four new battalions? >> we are very clear that the deployment of this new forward presence does not contribute the following act, there is no definition in the act of substantial forces but i don't think there's any way that you could claim that the rotation of the battalion in each of the baltic states amounts to substantial forces . the forces there will be

rotational in each of the four host nations, they are not going to see more than 1000 personnel and you have to set against russia's decision back in january to form a three new divisions in the west and five new strategic nuclear missile regiments that involve tens of thousands of troops whereas each of our limits as i said is going to be less than thousand each. i think it's also important to refer back to one of the key principles of the founding act which is that the party to the act must respect the sovereigntyand territorial integrity of allstate . we are deploying in the invitation and with the blessing of the government and likewise with the deployment to the company in permanent, that can be said

of russian activity either in crimea or in eastern ukraine. so far as the deployment itself is concerned, we are deploying to british companies that will be enablers that we will supply as well. plus the headquarters element , we are looking at adding to that some armored vehicles and javelin antitank guided missiles, mortars, various other enabling capabilities and then some reconnaissance and logistics and then we would expect the other countries that are going to ask to add on top of that two companies on their own. and the whole battalion to protect its presence in estonia. i heard from the spring of next year. >> i think you explain the case very well and good work. this year, your actions

will be perceived on the other side of the board from our actions but i think our community to the court explained very thoroughly some of the discussions that need to be had with russia going forward so can you tell us a little bit about the discussions you have planned for warsaw with for example the russian ambassador to london and communications you had with your numbers in warsaw. explain fully what the intentions are from the warsaw summit and how we can avoid any misunderstandings. >> the forces that you placed there are not just on the four stars, the baltic states is important true, in terms of regulardiscussions with the russian ambassador in london, nor do i have regular

meetings with my opposite number in russia . there is dialogue at the senior levels of the government obviously between the prime minister and the russian president and between our foreign secretary and the russian foreign minister. the defense dialogue is conducted principally through the nato machinery and afterwards also the meeting of the nato russia council on 13 july which covered the situation in ukraine and a review of the current situation in afghanistan but was principally dedicated to the alliance explaining the measures that had been adopted at warsaw and this is the essence of the alliance policy, to make sure that the steps that we take to reassure our members or to deter russia artfully explained at each step, there is total transparency in order to reduce the risk of misunderstanding or miscalculation at that

meeting on 13 july the alliance explaining the various measures that were adopted. obviously there was a response russia and concern about this particular positioning but of course we did not have the proper explanation from russia as to the three new military divisions but it was interesting on nato's flight. what we do have from russia was an openness to further dialogue on risk reduction. russia has proposed deepening the military exchanges between the alliance and russia including the proposal by finland that military aircraft in the baltic should have their transponders switch on in the unlikely hood of accidents or miscalculations and we welcome any russian interests to risk reduction is

extremely welcome and influence. but i would conclude by emphasizing that although it's important to explain these measures to russia and it's important to keep the pressure on russia so far as their interference in ukraine is concerned, we are not as nato returning to business as usual with russia. what has happened in the crimea and the ukraine cannot simply be now put aside and forgotten and should be forgotten . >> if i can interject, i need to bring the feisty into the discussion and can you explain to us please how this rotational system will actually work in terms of the numbers. why is the rotational system, is this to try to send a signal that there are no sort of great permanence about any particular body of troops that it's just, and would it be true to describe what you are trying to do as to make it clear to russia that there

is no way in which they will be able to carry out operations in any of the baltic states and analogist to what they did in ukraine. >> on your last point the answer to that is explicitly yes, this is a show of solidarity, it's a commitment of nato allies to those nations that feel vulnerable to exactly that sort of threat. where describing it as an assisted presence and as you say we are rotating forces around. we think that is the best way to demonstrate that solidarity and we think it's the best way that we can extract capability values on that deployment, we're not doing this simply as a show of military force. we're doing this in a way to extract benefits by working with allies and improving interoperability and developing the host nations capabilities as well as our own so there are all sorts of

reasons we decided on that rotation. >> thanks very much, carry on. >> sometimes i nato openly expansionist organization, but what would be the effects of the access to nato members and what did he actually brings the table with mark from your point of view what could be the potential concerns of nato succession? >> i would describe nato as openly expansionist area we have always made it clear that membership of nato remains open to those countries that can fulfill the membership criteria. and can command theunanimous support of all existing members . for example, that requires unanimity so this is not nato simply opening the door to any country that fancies membership. there are a number of pools

to go through. we don't accept that russia or anything else could have any kind of detail on nato membership, future membership is a matter for the members of nato to decide. so far as montenegro is concerned, montenegro has now completed the various, has met the criteria that are required and attended warsaw as an observer and its membership accession i hope will be completed by earlier october to pass through this house as well as the other place, it has to be ratified by the other member states including congress in the united states. and it will only be complete when all the eight allies have completed their national ratification processes. you asked me what this meant, i think it does demonstrate that membership is open to those member states, to those applicants that can satisfy the criteria and also very

obviously sends a strong signal to the western balkans of the alliances, the benefits and membership that an alliance can bring in terms of some stability to that much trouble region. >> any concerns? , any concerns about the montenegrin? >> we have wholeheartedly welcome montenegro in the session as the rest of the alliance and the ratification procedures will be completed as quickly as possible. >> secretary, could we touch briefly on breaks it and the consequences of exit for nato and nato eu operations and the end of the summit said something about closer operations a close union. but to what degree was britain's departure from the eu discussed and in what way

do you think that it will affect the way that nato works or the way that the eu works?discuss. there was a discussion obviously, the results of the referendum and were analogous to be sort of emerging topics and i don't think it's any secret that there wasn't a single member of my cali defense ministerial colleagues would have wished for a different result. they are all concerned about the security of our continent and they all see membership of those and also members of the european union, they also seem members of the european union as complementing. the strength of the alliance itself. so far as our own opposition now, cooperation with the european union is going to remain important to our shared security interests. those interests haven't

changed. and we also have a continuing interest on the closer relationship and even more interest in a closer relationship between nato and the european union which is reflected in the communiqucs, it's been a long-standing british preoccupation that these two organizations should work better together, should avoid duplicating each other wherever possible and should complement each other's strengths. finally of course there are a number of interlocking missions insofar as migration in the mediterranean is concerned, there's a nato mission in egypt, and nato mission in the central mediterranean. in essence they are doing the same thing, trying to break the people smuggling models and to rescue those lives at risk at see and we are contributing navy ships to both operations.

>> presumably we will not take part in eu operations or eu trading on the other. >> well, let's be clear. first of all we remain members of the european union until the moment we leave and we remain for members of the european union and we will continue to participate in what is called cs tp, missions and some of those missions and the missions that we've contributed to. >> my question wasn't about now, my question is once britain leaves the eu, that presumably will no longer play in a bilateral way. >> what is happening now will influence opposition in the future because we participated in these missions because there is a british national interest in these missions but we didn't do it just because we want to be europeans, we had a fading interest in suppressing piracy off the horn of africa

for example. we have a very strong interest in trying to curb illegal migration from the african intro into europe, we had an interest in these particular missions and we have invested blood and treasure as at least one member of this committee knows and bring peace to the balkans, we have an interest in making sure that you mission is successful though i don't myself see the british interest in some of these missions diminishing. of course we won't be members of the european union, we will be participating in the same way but we will early have a national interest in the success of those missions because if they're not successful, our trade and our security and our immigration will be affected, all those affected in the case, honestly and you said you wanted to ignore those cases of course in australia but in doing so in a bilateral basis, uk is going to agree

to do so as a member of the eu. >> certainly, we won't be members of the european union . but we will have to look carefully at where the british interest is. as there are already some examples of non-eu members participating in cs tp missions where it's international interest to do so. i'm not going to prejudice . >> we can get you some examples. >> mister watkins has been. >> that will be the basis on which we ... >> i want to be clear about one thing, we have not set out a set out on a negotiating strategy, that is not a matter for me, that's to be finalized across governments so i'm not going to speculate now. on whether we are going or not going to join a particular csc military operation. just make thepoint that these operations that we are in already , there is a british national interest in them beingsuccessful , whether we are there or not.

>> to give you one example which as a country i can't remember precisely what mission isinvolved in , if it's norway, norway does in the csc team essence. >> what you are saying is the brexit does not inhibit our future cooperation militarily with eu military missions weather in the context of nato or not we've not taken a decision, we're not at that point yet. the new government is only a few days old but there's no reason why it should inhibit either cooperation bilaterally without the allies in europe with the northern group, with those eu members were members of the jeff and the key alliances with france and germany and there's no reason why it should inhibit future cooperation with missions that are in our direct interest but we've not taken

a position on any of those individual missions at the moment. >> let me point out that we join these things not just to be good europeans but there is a british interest in our staying . >> there's a regional presumption that we're not members of the eu and we still have these bilateral agreements with the eu , but we had increased importance in nato so the euwill be lessened because we are no longer members of the eu presumably , presumably therefore that means that nato and our presence will become more important i think as we leave on partnership i think it will be in britain's interest to strengthen our commitment to our other alliances whether it's nato or the relationships we have with the united states bilaterally with france and others and other multinational relationships, we have around the world and our participation in the coalition, our participation in five i, the five powers

agreement, and asian-pacific, i think you can take it that as we withdraw from the european union, yes we will have to demonstrate our international leadership by meaning more heavily into these other alliances so the broad answer is yes. >> many thanks. secretary, my question is, the question is how is this summit impacted on nato intelligence? >> my background fundamentally, you raise the five eyes, we've got three eyes with a nato as one knows and that means that we can share intelligence pretty accurately with three nato members, the 26, perhaps not and presumably having served in nato for a number of years in the two appointments, what are the problems for

gathering intelligence and the use of intelligence in nato is that each officer within the intelligence organization within nato has a direct line back to his capital, his or her capital and yet has to produce on nato products, as it were which is actually much lesser then perhaps national intelligence would yield up. it is a big problem or nato to actually produce seriously good intelligence assessments without compromising national security sometimes. so i get back to my original question, is there, have there been improvements as a result of the summit in trying to solve the dichotomy on the one hand between the requirement to give our own intelligence sources good and pure and the fact that we want also to contribute to the nato alliance to give nato some kind of decent

intelligence assessments? >> you are right, there is tension between the intelligence capabilities particularly with those members of the finalized community brain and you know, some of the restrictions on sharing that intelligence because of the way it sorts. sharing more widely but i'm happy to report to you that at the warsaw summit the summit did adopt what is called the joint intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance initiative will i hope maximize the resources that the individual members of nato have and in hands the interconnectivity if i can describe it like that between the different intelligence systems that will help improve the training and expertise of the intelligence functions in each of the different member states and i hope to better procedures for information handling and information

sharing. there is quite a way to go on that as you have drawn attention to but we did make progress at warsaw. >> the reason for my question, as a member of the nato parliamentary assembly i have to resist quite strongly and other british members than a man by some other parliamentarians in the nato states to actually insist that all intelligence should be shared equallyamong nato members, this particularly came from countries like belgium . and i was quite, and others were quite robust in saying you must be joking. there is a dilemma here. when i search the nato we reckon that anything with nato secret classified on it took half an hour before the russians had so there's this huge leakage there so it's a big problem. i just rose the matter because i know you understand

that and i am raising it for the committee to understand the real dilemma when someone says nato secrets, that's the last bloodied thing it is. sorry for the use of language but it seemed i've seen it breached so many times . >>, yes, there is attention to that as the alliance expands there are more members to consider but what i want to assure you all is that everybody recognizes the problems, not least because of the terrorism that they are facing in western europe and the need to show intelligence more swiftly. the problem is recognized and we have thisinitiative now to improve the opposition. >> one soldier to another , i'm going to spin on just one question. the recent communication responding to the hybrid warfare nato as discussed and actionable implementation

plan, would you be prepared to share in a broad brush stroke what they are and potentially what our role in that might be? >> so far as hybrid is concerned, i think nato and individual allies well understand that. the threat of activity that is designed to introduce uncertainty and ambiguity below the article 5 threshold , it's becoming a real issue for the alliance. i thinkthe lessons of ukraine have been learned . it's unlikely that the next use of hybrid tactics will be the same as the tactics we saw in ukraine. but it's important to develop the alliances agility and responsiveness to be able to respond nexttime we see these kind of tactics . now, what the alliance agreed

to stress on the country in hybrid warfare back at the end of last year, there is an implementation plan, i will going to detail on that if you like it is now being agreed and there was a joint declaration at the warsaw summit between the nato secretary-general and president to the european council, president to the commission and in seeing and getting nato and the eu where there is a road to hybrid warfare because of the forms in which hybrid warfare can take in getting nato and the eu to work much more closely on a coordinated approach between the two different institutions. the prevention and detection and analysis and information sharing of hybrid warfare, cooperating on the response which is strategic messaging and communications and then building better resilience on

the targets. those institutions about state that are most likely to be vulnerable to hybrid warfare.>> thank you very much indeed. >> what is your assessment of the next central conflict in europe in the near future and are you prepared? >> just the first part. >> what is your assessment of the next regions for potential conflict within europe? >> i think one of the successes of the nato summit is we do not exclusively focused on the eastern border where significant reassurance was required and met by the deployment of enhanced forward presence and we discussed but we also look and an entire session was devoted to some of the pressures on nato for the side and there are rising tensions in at least two

parts, one in the black sea region where the militarization of crimea is causing particular concern and in the romania and bulgaria, countries that are not that far away and are seeing increased naval activity. in the black sea area. and of course in the mediterranean itself where we see enhanced russian naval activity off the coast of syria but we also see smuggling of arms by daesh from syria out along the libya franchises of daesh along the coast, very much closer to the nato border so there are these areas of tension. i don't think it would be wise of me to start speculating where the next conflict is likely to break out but there are these fractures in the alliance and we recognize that.

>> further afield, at least jimhammond has appointed he wants to come in , you referred to the civilian policies. if we could just question what their effectiveness is, in other words there's a structure of the storm me, it's lying there and not breathing, they're down and reconnaissance. i just like to get your steps or your ideas on how you can improve it . the crimea, it's a supreme example of dining and's how is that going to affect, and criteria, the priorities for it. again, i'm keen to see how it can become warfare. >> it needs to become warfare. the alliance and some of the members ofnato , they will fail to predict what's going

to happen in crimea and of course failed to predict the intensity of the insurgency that russia had fostered in the eastern ukraine, these things work predicted accurately. surveillance wasn't there. the response was a little fragmented. i think that was all wake-up call. it's not simply in intelligence but also getting the alliance to look hard again and itself and to reduce the clock decline in defense ending that led to the commitments at both royal summit which led on to warsaw but mister watkins may be able to answer more specifically. >> i would just add to what he said earlier that one of the things we have been arguing for since crimea, since ukraine in 2014 and the whales summit onwards is that nato needs to become more

adaptable, more flexible. it needs to be better able to anticipate and respond to these sorts of events and that's obviously not just the intelligence array but also more broadly so there has been extensive work over the last year or so on improving nato's intelligence arrangements, that especially in theinitiative that the defense secretary mentions . the scenario that is fraught with difficulties for all the reasons that have been out eloquently already but we are pushing ahead and we are concerned to make it better can i ask the vice chief what's the specifics acceptance arrangement you have within the military, the british for uk military and do you feel the fact that you are so surprised by what happened in ukraine and

crimea, then changes and have such changes been made? >> i suspect the first question about how as you and michelle said we had drawn down on russian expertise and russian intelligence specialists in the intervening years but that is something that we've been addressing now for some time and the comments that secretary of state peter made earlier about developing both in the policy area but also in the intelligence area are absolutely valid and their area of quite considerable investments. i would also highlight the fact that nato collectively is absolutely addressing the challenge and this gets back to stuart's question on having the best leverage that. on the more recent question of the effectiveness of our isr and how we can leverage the nearly 29 nations more

effectively, there is a question there in that we have or many years now committed our ed sensory aircraft nato, they have been passed by nato especially with those of other nations to the objective set by nato and even today with you sensory spoke to me south of europe but also more pure in support of nato plans so there is a way of doing this. i think one of the challenges that as nato nations many of us are quite tight on iis capability but there are many programs in place across the alliance to develop that and as we do so i think the opportunities of collaboration will grow . >> so to north korea, there was emphasized strongly in the communiquc from warsaw, i wanted to ask if you are preparing for any military

confrontation that we might have from the north korea and south china sea. >> there's no direct nato row in korea. obviously we condemn any ongoing nuclear activity by the people's republic of korea. and we continue to emphasize that activity is in violation of the security council resolution and we want north korea to put a stop to these publications and start re-engaging constructively with the international community and we work as the united kingdom within the united nations to maintain that pressure. we were instrumental in drafting the latest resolution to submerge and that you will see contain some of the toughest measures yet restricting the transfer of technology and doing more to impede north korea's

efforts to develop a deployable nuclear weapon. there was also the suspension by the european union on 27 june with the uk supported that to condemn the missile tests so those are the forearms with which we bring our particular influence to bear on what happened, what is happening in north korea. >> you think there would be any point in the future where north korea could be a direct challenge to the security mark. >> certainly its development of nuclear weapons is a very direct challenge and yet another reason why parliament was white yesterday to endorse the replacement of our foregoing gunboats, too many nuclear weapons out there and north korea is a very good example of a rogue state developing these weapons in a most dangerous

way, why we have to continue to protect ourselves. >> thank you very much indeed. john center. >> you welcome the fact that the commons yesterday was highly action given the opportunity to vote on what was clearly always going to be a very substantial market. can i then look at the summit communicator referred to security threats in the black sea region and entities in there, what would you say the severity of the press that caused nato to deepenits security in the black sea region? >> first and i welcome what you said about yesterday's vote . it's a vote and a vote we promised in the treaty defense review before christmas, you know i've been pressing for some time and it's slightly delayed because of the referendum. but the majority achieved last night was really of

enormous significance, a much bigger majority than the previous folks and sends a very strongsignal to our allies around the world . and i'm sure mister chapman wouldn't want to delay my departure this afternoon to washington to be able to convey the full significance of the vote that parliament took yesterday because i want the american administration and all our allies meeting in washington this week to understand yet again that britain is not stepping back but stepping up to its commitment. going to the black sea, we are seeing increasing militarization of the crimea itself . we are seeing insurgency activity in the area, in the very south, southern part of the insurgents, of the provinces that are affected.

and there is obviously a real threat there to romania in particular. we are seeing increased naval activity through the back and forward, through the bosporus and that's a concern, it's a concern for romania, it's a concern for bulgaria and it's a concern or other countries like greece and it's something we need to keep our eye on. i think i was the first defense secretary for some time to visit romania. last year the romanian visits came here for a bilateral meeting earlier this year and we've looked to see what further reassurance we can offer countries like romania . we have staff officers to the nato forward nfc, the nato forward integration units,

based in romania and we're looking to how we can deepen military cooperation with these particular countries. >> before we move on to your next question, i have to attend a statement, james, would you like to make a brief ... >> you will be talking most about your country, particularly the way chilcot affects the decision-making process in the days ahead, a specific question i want to ask you very briefly, is given the three parliamentary votes which chilcot is now saying developing as well, would you agree that it's a most calling argument that having elementary immigration of troops as a way we had them in 2003 that the two

options available will be one, a return to the use of the prerogative and well out of the bottom and probably done or the other alternative would be some form of uk war powers act under which the prime minister executive would operate with the essential act. my question really is, is there some discussion to be had there in the aftermarket of chilcot? >> there's clearly academic discussion and i noticed some have published on this particular area. so this is always something to reflect on again after chilcot. i think you answered your own question, the genie is out of the bottle and i can't foresee a situation arising where parliaments wouldn't want todebate a combat deployment . involving substantial numbers of british troops or planes

or warships. and i see real differences with the war powers act that might lead to definitional problems as to what was being deployed and how significant that deployment had to be before the act was triggered and so on so i think we are in the position, the convention has now built up in terms of a substantial combat deployment should be debated and should be voted on where appropriate. by these powers subject to the qualifications of the previous prime minister has always set out weather there's a vital british national interest at stake, it is impossible to consult parliament in time or whether some proletarian catastrophe which have to be dealt with quickly. >> one is risk is that people will vote, parliament will vote in favor of your mac, in

that case but also increase possibly on other cases that parliament will vote against doing something which actually turned out to be the right thing to do and some people have said that you yourself perhaps and argue the case that the syria vote in september 2014 so even arguably, i quite accept your definitional questions and we wouldn't want this to become a matter of the courts so i'm sure that the question of drafting act in such a way that would then allow the executives to act in a way they wish to act with the authority of parliaments by particular book. >> i'm always ready thinking in general terms, i prefer to conventions that involve rather than the legalistic approach of trying to decide in some paragraph actually what constitutes a particular mission or a deployment which i think does lead you into difficulty and i'm afraid it does we do more of the difficulties. parliaments, typically follows the wrong decision in

the first boat and i think there were a number of people we spoke on the chilcot debate still believe did the right decision back then although they may have been misled about the information about the intelligence about wmds. you know, i think it's probably wrong to start off by saying parliaments can't or shouldn't debate and decide these matters. >> before we revert to chilcot, can i raise the announcement on 17 july that right where our friends are in the eu and being appointed by the prime minister to conduct a review into the use ofreserves in the army . that raises the question that with the independent reserves commissioned in 2011 and the reserves in 2013, why is a new review necessary?

>> we've made considerable progress now in recruiting reserves. a lot of focus on that through advertising and encouraging the regular units to team up with the reserve units in their area and so on but i think it is right to look more broadly now at the reserve numbers as increased particularly in the army to look again at the possibilities that openup . how our reserves can be used in future and also whether the boundary between the regulars and reserves is the right one, whether it is too artificial for example, whether there might not be ways at different stages of peoples career of encouraging more flexibility and movement, i noticed that we have significant numbers of regulars leaving the armed forces who want to be reservists and we may have

people who want to move from the reserves to the regulars. is the boundary between the two to formidable, that's one of the things that they haven't finalized the terms of brexit but that at least one area alongside where we should use reserves but i think that it would be useful to have another look at it. x any idea where that's in your report? >> this was only announced a couple of days ago and finalizing the terms of reference for mister french law and i can't by the way think of anybody better to do this, a former armed forces minister, he himself-served as a reservist and you know, he's ideally suited to carry this out but will we still then have a minister to lead the reserves in the new structure? we will have a minister that deals with these issues including thereserves .

the minister will be dealing with the new minister, i'm sorry. the same minister, mister lancaster will be dealing with our personnel issues, people issues generally, that includes regular service but it also will include deference and reserves so you will be able to look at all these issues together. >> just finally asking, this review looking at those sort of issues that you just start going forward, or in any way reviewing whether in fact the number of reserves coming forward has frankly been inadequate to fill, to replace the numbers of those who will be going out on a regular basis? >> i wouldn't agree that it hasbeen inadequate . we have some time yet to meet the target that was fixed . the numbers coming in in the last two years have gone up and up and i like to pay tribute to the former minister for the reserves, he did a huge implement to drive

up recruitment and focus activity in this particular area. i want to look forward now to how we can find more opportunities to deploy reserves and as i say to look at dmaking the boundary between being a regular reservist more flexible. but i'm not yet actually finalized in terms of reference so your input at this stage is very welcome. >> on that specific point in terms of reference, one of the issues on the inquiries of the report about women coming in and out, it's one of the issues we have women leave the service at some point, it's almost impossible to return and that is affecting the number of female officers in turn. that might also be a point of inquiry. >> that exactly it and i want to say exactly that

exploring, we need to do better in terms of recruiting women into the reserves and we need to understand women's priorities won't change at different points in their career and why we are losing too many people that we would like to retain and can we make it easier for them to come back again after a short break without you know, losing some of the advantages they might have had by saying all along. and can we look again at the liabilities that a reservist has to expect, those be more flexible at different stages of somebody's life? that's exactly the kind of area i hope we will look at. >> thank you very much. in the remaining time which is just and a half an hour, we'd like to focus now on the chilcot report and the lessons from it and john, if you'd like to draw this yourself? >> what measures if any would

you say training to absorb the lessons and the analysis of the chilcot report? >> first of all, we welcome the report. it tells a very important story about our recenthistory of . , a military campaign where we could clearly have done better. it concludes that we did not achieve our strategic objective although our troops fought and fought well, the initial part of the campaign clearly we could have done better and we need to learn from that and establish why we didn't do better at what time so we are looking at everything till has said about the ministry itself, about some of our own decision-making processes, the way in which advice is tender both to ministers and from military commanders to

very senior ministers, we are looking again at the armed forces as to how we can improve the structures there and the ability of ensuring proper challenge within the armed forces to avoid the dangers of groupthink's, and of course we will have another look at our equipment process, some of which were improved for the afghanistan campaign but there may again be further lessons in terms of getting the equipment as needed for particular campaigns to the front more quickly so there is an awful lot there but we need to pick up on and i am quite sure as i said and when i spoke in the debate lastly, i spoke in the debate on thursday, we are not at all pleasant about this. we believe the ministry has improved since those days but i suspect there's a lot more

to do. >> wouldn't there be any sort of dedicated unit within the ministry that will troll through this huge volume of material in order to extract lessons and make recommendations? >> the short answer is yes. i got the capacity to do exactly that, to call right through the records and make sure that the proper lessons are learned and then how they are working at the moment. >> will there be findings be made public even if in a slightly redacted form? >> we can report on how we get on in the findings and more importantly how we are implementing the changes that you would like or expect to see and i'm happy to look into that. >> can you tell us who's in charge of the unit? i cannot walk back to our

earlier question, that has to be a response to the chilcot report in due course and it may be that more summarize some of our initial work in how our findings are going to be implemented. >> if i just asked another question, can you tell us who's in charge of the unit going to be trolling through? >> i'm in overall charge of everything? >> i appreciate that. even someone with your superhuman capacity for work might not extend to how many millions, i just wondered what you were able to tell us who these officials are running this? >> mister watkins will describe the structure of the team for you. >> that would be helpful. >> basically we had 17, we have a director in the military defense which has been dealing with increased and investigations and so on for many years. you have set up a team within that directorate, some of whose members are sitting

behind us and they are also doing just what the defense secretary said, trolling through 2.6 million words, i think i should make a point about the report is that it doesn't contain a sort of simple table of recommendations and conclusions. the findings, the conclusions, the lessons are actually spread not just across the whole report, not just an executive summary that deepens some of the other reports so they are going through it at every single volume, line by line to pull out all that information. >> maybe they didn't have enough time to prepare a summary. but can you just tell me who's in charge of this team and this unit? >> is currently being read by doctor hutton, doctor hutton who is actually sitting behind us and he is taking forward the work on my

behalf. >> thank you very much. sir john chilcot judged the decision to deploy a large-scale force, the potential combat operations was taken without collective ministerial consideration of the decision and its implications. so if it's not too early to ask this question, how will the mod and the governments crisis management organization now better prepared to provide advice assessments, strategic options and appraisals of the consequences of potential conflicts, in other words assuming it's not going to be so for government next time how is it going to work? >> it's already mister jen not just for government because in 2010 the then prime minister established the national security council which meets every week and indeed is due to meet this afternoon and meets every week and comprises in a not

simply the most senior ministers of the government but the heads of the various agencies, the chief of the defense staff and permanent secretaries of our office and all those you would expect and prepares briefing material, prepared by the national security secretary at, all those who attend that counsel so there is no danger of the decision like that of that magnitude ever again being taken by people in the prime ministers study. >> so would you say that this new machinery would be adequate in relation to the conflict planning and delivery seen as one of the main windings of chilcot is the hopeless inadequacy of preparing for what would take place after the military phase, the initial military base being successful? >> the international

development at the member of the national security council and one of the lessons of chilcot which we've already implemented is that the stabilization planning has to be in the overall plan right from the outset. we have across government stabilization unit, we see officials from that unit participating now in our exercises and in our training and i think that is one lesson that has been learned from the experience of chilcot is that this has to be essential and that is something that we are thinking hard about in respect to libya and syria and indeed back in iraq itself. >> you anticipate the next question, if this machinery is so fit for purpose in the new machinery, why did things go wrong in libya?

why was there apparently insufficient appreciation that removing that dictator in that country would lead to the same sort of messes as removing the previous dictator in iraq? >> let's be clear that the initial action there which was fully authorized by the international community was at the request of the arab league. the initial action was successful, it presented the massacre that would have taken place in ben ghazi. the view at the time and you can appreciate mister janice i wasn't there at the time of the view at the time was that thereafter means to respect the position of the new political authorities in libya to had little appetite for foreign assistance required and requested and i think that led the west to

overestimate their capacity for establishing the order that was required and of course as you now know they essentially this integrated into different factions by the middle of 2014. >> is it not the case that the military advice given to the national security council seems requiring to libya that notary advice was given by the chief of the defense staff was that it not be asked strategic interest to remove the dictator and that was rather brushed aside by prime minister at the time and what this leads to and it was surprising that you heard from this committee before is the question of whether or not the military representation needs strengthening when decisions

of this sort are being made so that the purely strategic considerations of whether it is sensible to remove an unpleasant dictator without regard to the chaos that may follow can be more strongly forward and that's why although it's a great step forward to have a national security council, this committee has consistently ingested that the chiefs of staff should have more of an input into itsconsiderations send just the chief of the defense staff ? >> through the chief of the defense staff who not only attends national security council but tens of the meeting of officials that preceded in the days leading up to the national security council. so he will always be careful to ensure that he does have the advice of the chiefs of staff. i can't comment on what happened on the particular, leading up to

the libyan operation. want i can give is that sitting alongside the chief of defense staff in the years tha >>ide? >> absolutely not something along the lines in taking the opportunity to wish you well.n.

but simply cured washington to see what people said asu are safe.t, so just ask the question since that government was not prepared to respond with there is one called for redemption for depending its demand for the planning to be implemented. >> i am not quite clear from the scottish representatives

to be contracted out on nuclear defense to the united states or france that is sending i simply couldn't understandably which that nuclear umbrella if they cannot even defend themselves but i will leave that debate for later. half full. >> i will turn to the question they want to. >> i had exercises large scale exercises which the

french which said combining the joint expedition reports in this exercise to helpmr stabilize the security areas >> could you respond to that? >> cry will say planning the post conflict situation instabit stabilization is in a much more systematic process the and it was then.doc we have produced in reflect on our doctrine for the provocation on stabilization which is a very good read.s i recommended to you.m but it is produced by the minister of defence in ended the

reflects the true spirit seedd natalie f. the minister ofofis b defence be careful of those lessons that you candor and a and apply because each said tuesday its is different for a thaw so but we have sought out with a series of a generic lessons in the first may see little bit clearer with the importance of planning. go and other lessons of cross government coordination with the of local authorities andti

all of which are reflected in those documents. >> i will just jump in on that support and absolutely we do recognize there is a balance of this security government development to ensure you have that axis to tailor the balance the second point with the stabilization community with a mutually the understood place now and the third is

with the ngo an ad that said deeper one better werke with government and a large group of ngos with specific security issues so we have a number of various -- areas. >> so every single situation that is a different scenario of planning. >> and with that approach that is treating people to make sure those different c scenarios so that idea when we have the planning process thais about challenge your

introducing. >> rekeyed the findings with less defense intelligence by sas and the intelligence committee. sova you are confident this could not happen again so now what mechanisms insurer -- insure this?c >>. >> but the jorc exist before but it has been significantly enhanced and

there is more independence to the assessment. we are regularly briefed on the analysis of the various countries and the issues in front of us. and also it is more widelyuatio based and i cannot see ae situation with the advice that we got with theal intelligence they would ask us to act on would be limited to such a small number of sources as appears to be the case in the intelligence. >>. >> secretary if i can justmy of expand there seems to be the

slightest idea that the general public opinion is a lack of willingness to engage as that is matched with the ever increasingly t dangerous world that we live in. ab can we confirm to the this committee there is absolute no plans whatsoever that the people that we are asking of what they require in have increased the ability to protect themselves wherever. >> certainly in terms of governance we will deploy where we need to deploy to keep citizens safe and you will have seen the retiring chiefs interview at the

telegraph on saturday where he picks up exactly on this point that we do need to learn those right lessons for those situations where we intervened to in the wrong way. and where we don't interveneed again that means we have to work harder to explain the need for intervention and to get over it many of the issues although they may seem far away from ourct threat. shores can become a very direct threat and to that extent whether peacekeeping operations in somalia or sudan to our continuing presence in afghanistan, we have national terrorist groups that can bring terror to our own streets so even

yourself included we have to share to our constituents there is a very direct national interest with thesegils issues that are much further back hoping to stabilize these fragile states that are affected by insurgency improving the training into professionalize and reform and the defense ministry's helping to eradicater downstr corruption all of these are part and parcel better further upstream to keep oure country safe. >> but with the politicalself, r situation between yourself and the prime minister and the service chief and the top of government at the

moment there is no aid to keep us safe and we have you seen. >> no. for to give you an example with deployment of another 250 troops to our iraq in addition to those that we already have to do further training of these engineers and medics as they are headquartered it is an additional contribution we have increased our commitments and deployments in afghanistan over the summer so there is no risks to making these additional decisions in the also made it clear to our friends in europe in the way that they can assist in then we are

ready to do so to share intelligence. >> and has that been offered to the french government inm light of the tragedy? and then meeting with thee french president very shortly. >> but they knew they had those capability gaps and it is a signal begin impact on this resulteo it was concluded those should be clearly communicated in by response do you insure the

practice does not exist today? there really is no conscious decision of anybody of that select committee whenever that may be but what we haveur e seen over the last 12 months how we look after our people the prime minister's have said things that are not correct there is no accusation of misleading information so how do we insure that they represent the facts to the public or to us that are absolutelyu saying the right thing? >> they should be as correct as they can be and i am sorry to hear about those specific allegations you are making. i will have a look at that i

am not aware of ministers giving miss or incorrecto. facts but it's i am happy to do something about that but the question really relates com of the examples of the chain of command with thoseut challeng capabilities or equipmentt and simply was not this is the supplied that is a question i have passed i came in at the tail end of the afghanistan operation as the equipment was being broughteir, back but when i asked those who served, i am pretty clear that the military got what they thought this they need it in there was no restrictions of those capabilities that was provided. >> it is probably worth wi

emphasizing that is set out the perfect equipment in each case it could be slightly different of what they require to be resets that enables us to reset those equipment capabilities ahead to be able to move quite quickly from what was originally planned.more is >> it with those gaps of capabilities and that was deployed do you have the internal machinery obviously

with those capability gaps. as you are secretary of state and defense in rehab deficiencies in other areas and now we have the deputyhat is chief to insure that there is the equipment in the support program.capa i am pretty confident that current officeholder would come to tell me if there was the capability not providedirst

half if our people are best.sc >> go back to the first part of the discussions today really with up joint task force. this is a body that would be intended been to be put into the field as the name implies with short notice in the event of a high style or aggressive move to a nato ally are you satisfied maybe it can bring in the vice chief at this point, are you satisfied that if the balloon went up in the joint task force was prepared forv rapid deployment because of

the interagency that developed in the baltic states, are you happy there would be people that would speak truth to power to reform their superiors what gaps there might be in the readiness of the force to do what it is tasked to do in the emergency? >> the shorter answer ist yes. i would be informed of any de concerns it is important to a size as defined by nato with that decision of the north atlantic council the k responsibilities lie within nato the kind of certification if you put it like that but those sources

are ready to deploy is really a matter for nato if we supply the right force but i'm confident i will hear about that. >> i think first the point is to deploy quickly to detour in not necessarily to respond but you get it there during a period in order to deal escalate that tension and its capabilities are designed to bring back combat capability that can pack a punch.i >> if we were in the game of responding to retract common than we have the ability to tailor those elements to the

nature of the environment that they would do so with nato to major our collective ability is in hand. >> use satisfied if there are any gaps in the structures or formations, capabilities that you know, that? >> we have selected thoseere ab can pacities on the basis of defensive terrorist and we're comfortable with that first element that can pack a punch and defend itself ifse,e that threat manifests itself in a specific way if it wash about response than we would be looking to bolster that with the allies. you alrhere was any deficiency, awaited the that you are satisfied you are already measured in place?

>> a comprehensive and likely threram of capability enhancement that will be delivered with the likely threats that they might face so i can give you thatrding assurance. >> says it does seem those support of the service personnel and their families especially to those who are mobilized, i am sure that the duty of care is on the government's agenda so what futuchanged for them to support regular service personnel and their families from any future conflict?

>> the support has improved for since iraq we now have the covenant to ensure those members of the armed forces are not at a disadvantage compared to other citizens when they go out on military service rather is uncases they get special consideration if they have been injured or debriefed of that duty at all includester improved immeasurably since the initial campaign in iraq but also the support where there are injuries fast or as a death there is better support for the families than what existed before with those officers are nott always appointed to support

for anybody killed in action to act as a focus for that concern with those visiting ar officers trained and supported by the defense academy with the chaplain center and a number of others especially with the availability of mental health services and clinical knowledge and policies with traumatic brain injury mental health program that existed before and proper points of contact and some of those wounded personnel who have returned so we have learned a lot from the campaign and continue to reprove the services available from what was born not in the latter stages of the campaign in afghanistan.

>> we have one more topic secretary, something which >> thankhave addressed the subcommittee and we will now ask the last question. >> is essentially the first talking about the military covenant its if it works there is a steady out that says that 17 percent of people think it works and over half have not even heard of it this in these numbers are fantastic but we have to change how we look at this which is what it means to them and how theyngs

can access and once weo change the way we look at these we will get a real difference of how we lookvents. after people in the way that is for another day. do but in t but with the u. k we alsoof have an investigationbe allegations of ill treatment by armed forces in iraq thin in particular to insurely reasonable treatment this they have to make very hard decisions in extraordinary circumstances evolve i know on this particular issue of to have worked extraordinarily hard to expiate the process but the fact remains we garsten -- we are still told one thing

no soldier will hear from another viet they are turning up their faces threading to arrest people going to old girl friend'sion i houses from fifth 2010 and the impression is it is completely out of control.t then it goes back to my previous point that is not a personal campaign but for the head is a difficult position. so what do you think if that is fair to the servicemen and women? >> first i will respond to your point on the covenant i do thank you are right to have to make sure it isat

working in practice and more people are aware of it in those allegations not just your ministry but it is very important to me that all branches of government whether clinics or the big companies do abide by it notoo just to sign it is this implemented on the ground we will continue to look that situation stage by stage we need to make sure more people are aware.ged under but it is important to step back a little bit we are obliged under the law ofallega this house as well as parliament under international law as well for those members of the

armed forces it is a legal we w obligation and we have to do it and if we don't then we would expect the international criminal court to be more involved in investigating these allegations against members of the armed forces and in successive rulings that judges have made it clear that will be more likely if we don't demonstrate that these allegations are properly looked at. to my mind what is reallyhat important is to separate out those serious allegationsma from the others and to make sure that those serious allegations are related thatct are investigated properly and we know exactly what happens so with a service personnel, we provide

training to a system of what is required and then through duty of care we offer specific allegations of course, nobody can protect what i tst a force allegation it still has to be looked at what i think is important we devote energy to deal with these allegations that don't have any prospect in deal with those as quickly as possible so the team can start toes focus on the more serious allegations. >> gone back to questions.ot hat why is france for the unitedecol states has not having this

problem? and second, nobody misses the point we have to investigate allegations. of course, . we have to uphold those standards that we work bloody hard to achieve. we need to do that but i find hard to except that to bear the brunt of alll servicemen and women in terms of how long it takes to investigate, the the truthices adopted by the team and the truth is there were many soldiers not just private but commandingc officers that were betrayed by the process so don't misunderstand the point we must investigate those allegations but it does suggest something somewhere has gone badly wrong. >> as far as other countries are concerned to recognize

those criminal courts there in mid different position than ever reservation and we have chosen not to do that we have chosen to abide by these international organizations if we had done that we may have deterred a whole series of these particular clubs and it is important that whether credible allegations of conduct are were properlygated. investigated they do have to be investigated and it is c important that we clear away those that quite clearly how cannot be stood up at the moment with thenly been one court-martials and under the

procedure i believe there is only a one summary hearing as a result with a series ofd. cases so maybe very few can be substantiated.se. >> sur un of prime minister and the attorney general are trying to advance the cause but there is somethingow, entirely a problem to make it real with united states or any other allies worry are asking men and women to bear the brunt of the situation that we put ourselves into. >> we have subscribed to the international criminal courts with that international machinery to bring people to justice there are benefits for being. members other countries took a different view.

>> i think it is an extremely complex situation there are a number of the sugget factors and france was relatively late to the signing which does seem to operationrred the sorts of claims in france also with the nature of the operations with iraq and afghanistan it was classic counterinsurgency operations mae in that providedthat tur opportunities to make ae' number of those cases so there are factors like that. >> certainly companies have

as well. >> if they are right with a small proportion of these allegations so far and as of vague example is there a plan within the industry to develop proposals to be put out to government to try to protect our service personnel from what is clearly an organized effort by a small number of legal servants that they themselves are under investigation for misconduct but which have a terrible after effect over the individual elec lives? >> there are those proposals put forward from the manifesto last year for

example, to better recover cost from those thee unscrupulous law firms from this industry of falseinging pro allegations stinging in bringing those proposals forward to limit the time period such actions cannot be brought forward for a certain pouring with otherore litigation to ensure that those that are deployed have immunity from this kind of prosecution there is of a package of proposals that we are continuing to work. >> then just finally, one final suggestion commit has been brought to my attention where the ministry is quite good at supporting service personnel even those that

have retired from the armed forces that once it charges have been brought they may be bewildered and uncertaint what to do when approached that of the blue and told they are subject to investigation. is there any one-stop shop in the form of a dedicated number if they are told they are facing charges for contact they shouldo immediately bring before giving any statement to any sort to anyone who wouldld approach them? and if there is such a number, candied highlighted on the web site andservice persn publicized with those support charities of that

service personnel in particular and threatened with legal action to getting contact and by ringing a particular number. >> that is an important point i do believe there is such a number back will get back to the ministry that are publicly publicized among the veterans who may be approached that of thece in blue to try to recall something that took place many years before. whe >> so this looking afterbat people and fundamental of

combat power in this suggestion it is extremelyre thm basic thing you insure thatur ps committee there is a real understanding it is ay. fundamental part. >> and we have the duty of care. >> we think -- thanks to all witnesses today we are now concluded

>> has ben and experience to be a young delicate i go to the convention and i have to say thank you for being here and ultimately it has been a good experience all lowe's a lure skeptical of young people but i fink we will have a good impression on them and ultimately the party treats young delegates walls in a guy and concerned bomb making america great again. please have to look what was left so join us to support from pantalets make america upgrade to again stick it is important that the grass

roots is heard with our platform and rulemaking in decisions i and the ted cruz delegate the biggest is to take back america. >> i and the state representative from ohio firm the speaker pro 10 in the house of representatives. we are delighted so appreciative of our governors message of what we are doing with the agenda that is good for the nation in then to leave the country for word. >> is never too early to get involved want to get started on the future and i was

inspired to represent them and it has been a great experience so far. is a great time so far. ♪ moderating the discussion was talk show host john hockenberry national governors' association is chaired by governor herbert from utah. [inaudible conversations]

civic s chairman of the national governors' association for the 2016 national governors' association meeting we are honored to be here in des moines, iowa and appreciate the opportunity to gather together to talk about important issues facing our states in the nation and. thinks to simon estes who gave is that wonderful rendition of the national anthem please give him a round of applause. [applause] and a little more poignant

today is as we gather together tragedy has taken place is one of our own governors had to go back to nevada to take care of the issues there as a tragedy has occurred. as i see what happens in france yesterday with 84 victims there and to americans that we know of with dallas texas and in minnesota and another's to recognize that our thoughts and prayers are with these people and friends and family was just take a moment of silence on behalf of the victims

>> thanks for coming her garner your schedules are busy in rio appreciate you taking time to participate in our summer meetings. but it is day presidential electioneering and things are going on with the different parties also want to recognize our distinguished guests we have all of these folks here we're honored to have them i will recognize a few. the governor and ambassadors from vietnam, a singapore

and the senator from canada this is his last up -- last time with us by the way. we're honored to have you here we wish you well we also recognize we have special guests from the white house with governmental affairs in the year honor to have them here with us today i will take the time to recognize our corporate sponsors those and help us to put this on and for over 30 years the national governors' association has partnered with the private sector recognizing a lot of the work that we do we appreciate natalie their financial contributions but intellectual to help us understand policy and get policy correct and make sure

the marketplace works as effectively as a key in on behalf of our citizens we appreciate their financial support in being here today with us so please give a round of applause to our guests in corporate sponsors for making this possible today. [applause] i will recognize our director and his staff for the work they're doing to put this on we appreciate the hard work you have done leading up to this thank you for your work before i turn time over to our host governor branstad, we need to take some action of an adoption of the rules of procedure which is appropriate to for us to be in place for today's activities i would entertain a motion to proceed to adopt

the rules of procedure? >> so moved is there a second? any discussion? all those in favor? opposed? the motion carries. it is approved. by the way under the policy process we have adopted policies to years in the winter meetings if anybody has questions palissy and a davis and she can go over those with you if you have questions or need clarification so with sad governor be are ordered to be here in your beautiful state in des moines, iowa we appreciate your hospitality gives all of us of a chance to visit you in not have to be running for president to do it. why did you come forward to make an official welcome. >>.

>> governor herbert thanks very much and also fellow governors and gas, we honored and pleased to welcome new to the 2016 national governors' association summer meeting on behalf of first lady chris branstad and that people buy well welcome to our beautiful capital city we hope you enjoy your time here we are proud to have this in the convention center which was the old vets auditorium where i watched a lot of basketball games than wrestling meets it has been renovated and made into a wonderful place to have meetings like this you may have noticed there will have a convention hotel next door in a lot of other exciting things going on to help all of you enjoyed the reception last night in our

beautiful state capitol building restarted renovation in 1983 in my first 16 years as governor and i am proud to say it is now done although one of their rooms had a fire so we still have some work to do on that. [laughter] will we certainly hope you enjoyed last night in this is the 21st meeting and have attended but it is the first i've had the honor of hosting sow thanks for the opportunity for the governors to come together to share ideas with each other in solutions that work in our individual states and i have learned a lot from these meetings over the years and copied some of the great ideas from other governors we have a lot of great defense ahead of the the next couple of days in tonight we have a taste of

des moines governors and spouses are invited we hope you will enjoy a local cuisine from some of the best chefs in the state of iowa after terrorists hill we will move to the world food prize in the east village to hear the des moines metro of products in the other guests will already be there and tomorrow in addition tweeting in the evening a special night at the iowa state fair grounds to experience a small sample of what i went to get to enjoy each year with the iowa state fair and nothing compares to the iowa state fair recently named the best they fear in america i am proud to say that a fair grounds as well have been totally renovated its so some of the activities will be open, not the whole fair grounds but it should be a great time and enjoyable opportunity and an

opportunity to taste porkchop on a stick and other specialties we have at the iowa state fair we look forward fifth to many productive discussions over the next few days and also how want to note we may have noticed on the first level coming up. we encourage you to check out the eye with history pavilion about the office history and our f activities pfft so please visit the ruth. fifth -- also to sign up with the community service projects for the eye with two banks this is a wonderful program where we packaged meals throughout the world also for those here in our own state on

sunday morning several of us will be participating and we would incur a jew and governors and others that are here to participate as a way to give back to help people in need in the state and around the world we honor them proud to have you in des moines, iowa and we hope you enjoyed this summer meeting. [applause] >> thanks to chris and governor branstad and all of those involved in the eye what contingency to make this a success today. as we start today's opening session i want to recognize our great chair from virginia who has been very supportive of my initiative and has been a great addition to our team and we appreciate all that you have

done in looking forward to taking over in a few days. initiatives that i started in hopefully everybody still has the cards we passed out to was interested about states finding solutions and improving lives as states really are those elevators finding the needs to those that they serve and with unique and innovative ways as respective states should do it has been a quick year as we have had this initiative and really it has been encouraging to me as we have seen the different things their respective 50 states or five territories that have accomplished good and wonderful things. the motivation behind the initiative is to make sure

the public is aware of these successes of our respective states that governors are accomplishing great things and many times in bipartisan ways with the republican and democratic governors are finding success throughout the country dealing with of problems they have faced and the respective states and sometimes we're lost in the shuffle with this functionality we see in washington d.c. so the ability to highlight the states is important for the public. we created a book you have your table that highlights the limited experience because there's so many we could have split is examples of what you we're doing better quite remarkable really is understand as we come together at the national governors' association we have opportunity to share best

practices and learn from each other of maybe to incorporate in our own states to make modifications to represent our cultures or regions of the country or politics that this association and networking capability i have found to be very valuable the policies and the solutions have been innovative and relevant to the times certainly good for public policy and good for the public is you we're doing things recognizing all we do in government has to do with people and helping improve people's lives and you we're doing that in such a great way we have three examples of for the sake of time we will highlight three of them i was for example, again governor branstad has taken

a significant review of what we can do to help returning veterans significantly to transition back into civilian life and find employment and jobs economically. fit is the home base daiwa programs and in virginia and the governor has created cybersecurity teams the commission is doing significant work helping to prevent the hacking going on almost all states are now having a challenge with a cybersecurity of millions of attempts per day on our systems by those who like to attack in his commission brings secretaries from state agencies with relatives backgrounds to help combat that's as have more sophisticated attacks

thrall states. and did my state of utah natalie what we have done economically but we also recognize the need as a safety net for those who fall through the? for a variety of reasons and we addressed in a very positive way is in utah what we can do to stop particularly intergenerational poverty and devised a plan going forward that seems to be working well if anything about poverty rate is one-third lower than the national average which is a significant reduction in use poverty is 50% lower than the national average in those respects our 29 different counties to address their needs we have

collection for retract families finding out what is taking place economically and educationally, health wise to intercept this and stop the intergenerational cycle of poverty and doing so with the governor in the legislature working together with the department of health and juvenile courts with the rising generation to give them the tools to break that generational poverty cycle. i am proud of the work we're all doing in our respective states we could go on and on with our colleagues to highlight many different success stories for i will conclude then we'll start panel discussion with the card that we passed out it helps to remember the states are laboratories of democracy is not by accident but by design our founding

fathers talked about united states of america in james madison said trying to get back constitution ratified talked about the powers given to the new stronger federal government. those powers are few and defined this there is the enumerated powers found in the constitution and he said to the states will the federal government take away our abilities under the articles of confederation? they said not to worry although they are designated few and defined those given to the states are numerous and indefinite think those lines have been blurred and it is time for us as states to reinstate -- reassert our unique position and we are in better positions more nimble and closer to the people for us to act to solve problems as

demonstrated by the governors of the success stories you have provided costs that are highlighted in the purple block purple by design of bipartisan success, so we will have an opportunity to have day "in-depth" discussion to highlight the successes so we have day peabody award winning post with us here today john hockenberry vanden assembly panel let me introduce john hockenberry. he has reported all over the globe as a journalist and has spoken at conferences around the world including the famous it ted talk conferences that we know so well for the past years jesus to the public radio program the take away we're

fortunate to have him as the moderator of our panel here today please welcome john hockenberry. [applause] in behind me the state solutions panel the case worker for intergenerational poverty here in utah. [applause] the cio from chesterfield county virginia's. [applause] also veteran home base from iowa to have all the special guests will now turn our time over to john hockenberry. >> it is great to be here i have been covering these conferences for decades ago

back along way this city have been on my show many of you that i aspire to have on the program the idea is to take news events that are compelling that have looked emotional and political significance and have some suspense in the think them through six so we have a way to react to them that is not purely so emotional or brainstem there is a lot of brainstem in politics these days and i am sure you are aware that and our idea on the take away is to empower people to think and then to talk in understand the conversations are better as a result. in many ways what you are doing here in the state is an example.

ion that the des moines, iowa marriott i remember the old days when governor connally would ride a horse that governors outside of washington he would lose the blue suits and the red tie not so much anymore but this you get them in their natural habitats -- has an antelope hat you may get him to wear but again this things have gotten so corporate in every walk of life even in journalism is the same mario cuomo i used remember the old days when autograph the bill of rights and highlight some places he would have thought of he was the free rein people believed him. [laughter] and bill clinton was too young but this reporter were

always get him the year because all the democrats were scared and didn't want to do anything but branstad was around back then. [laughter] but seriously we lose sight of that face-to-face human elements of governance that is the best practices of what this panel is about i and a product of the state initiative when i had my car accident that resulted said in a spinal cord injury that was permitted back in the '70s, the federal options were given on social security or social security costs to now was in college at the time and they said here. that was it for by said i would like to get a job in a federal case worker said don't do that. you will lose your check.

ply vocational rehab counselor had a bunch of ideas for some for stupid semite that thought i should unscrew the nuts onto bolts instead of tony and i studied math in college but ultimately they furthered my college education for i was studying mathematics and the thinking if you would suspect at the state level in michigan never going to become a journalist to spare the rest of my career criticizing. sorry about that you created a monster what'd is a good kind of monster think about terrorism and the increasing tension is racially and otherwise in society and how politicians have to deal

with those in how each of you have had to in will have to come it is clear that this election may be decided to the extent one can a has thought through what you do when the truck comes to an american city like ended yesterday in france or the candidate that just reacts with the brains to reaction because in a time of crisis and you have seen it all at the state level, if it is a burning building or an earthquake or earthquake or financial crisis, what is the family losing? the ability to function and sustain the selfie and in the crisis, the helpers' their closest to home that matter most in you are the boss of them as my kids like

to say you are the ones to direct the individuals that our closest to the crisis to empower them to make decisions to approve their lives it worked for me progress so much of the debate around federal policy comes down to a state's rights argue before the supreme court it is a historical issue throughout history we cannot allow states rights to be a wedge to prevent governments from happening states rights is important in having that autonomy and power to do what needs to get done is important we cannot allow states rights in arguments over states' rights to prevent those pieces of the first responders counselors it and people who represent governments from doing their work three of those are with us today is a first of all,

thanks for coming that was a sincere in applause because you do do the work on the ground that are the best practices we should all think about when we think of government and governments what is it about the states that attracted you to make decisions that affect the rest of your life? the state governor in their programs available and that to your great surprise allowed you to make decisions that changed your life? the neck that was reintroduction into public service actually the four went to local government and public service this reintroduction to help people and has seen the resources available at the state have taken help at the local level it has been very impact will. >> now has the state and local partnership worked how have you been able to change

people to say yes we can help you? believe have a saying that is we are better together these partnerships are incredible of the local level and with the state we put a number of programs into place by december security assessments collaborating another even since standards were procurements expects to receive this day as a full partner. >> does that mean you actually do for small dash do stuff? >> sometimes they do stuff that is true. [laughter] >> clapped a task force and does something. [laughter] yes we do collaborate like that but we do get kingston reuse each other and follow each other's recruiting guides and collaborate to have standards line

information's security and availability. >> if you have a state policy have is that in how are you to take citizens in crisis to move them to defer place? >> in utah i feel i am blessed because there is a caring behind all of our policies really want to help them so in my particular program have autonomy to set a schedule that works with the people that i am working with. most offices are open 8 a.m. through five pmi have the ability to go to my participants outside of those hours if needed if you have somebody in are encouraging them to work but tell them to have to work pretty between those hours hours, is a lot easier for

me to get to them so we can plan ahead for their future to work towards that employment which is always the goal but some are starting at a much lower level in the policy has given me the opportunity to work with people at that level spec a policy is enacted we will create incentives to go from welfare to work or unemployment to work and then the numbers don't work out so the conclusion of the federal level is they didn't want to work but what do you see in reality? >> the reality is most of the people is they don't have the stability to work for the basic skills in place where they don't have a home if you don't have a home it is hard to keep a job the tissue put out all the other fires so my job is

to learn how to manage the fires so they can see them coming to maintain employment i can find anybody a job but to have them keep the job is up to them but we have to work on their skills. >> is there a tiny went out of your way to see people after hours a superior would say you're not supposed to be doing that you're just to mark the fourth man write the check? >> there has been times when before this program it did really get it started two years ago the next generation in kids' program but before that i was a case worker and i did have a supervisor who would question the extra things i wanted to do we have to be careful to accompany people to work but it is a 19 year-old girl who was

terrified it will be a huge impact on her so we did have to negotiate carefully some were more supportive than others. >> but the best practice coming out of this program and others is we have shifted from the abstract incentive model moving from one situation to another to the last myall consultant model into whether programs are coming the information and, as their needs and you are coaching people to make the last mile business seen as a charity but policy inaction in. >> right. one of the policies in particular that is really helping i have had the same people for two years were a lot of caseloads will shift because there is a lot of turnover whether they work or don't i'm helping them to stabilize long-term so their children have a stable

foundation. >> to other state workers involved do the same kind of thing? is there an army of people like you coming down the pipe? you have to feel blessed to live in utah of but with the whole country is this a skill that scales and transfers? >> i think it does i have been in a lot of what dinars that two new generation approach and that is the david driven part it is successful i think that can go to other places to really help because a parent is not an island 20 try to get a parent a job if they have kids they have not learned how to advocate for themselves than they don't keep that job very long.

>> it seems like at the end of the day you actually have with the annual lot of data about the behavior of people of a real state of economic distress that it went up the chain can be influential to design new policy that would help is anybody listening to you? >> again i do appreciate the executive director of the governor has been supportive of the work that i am doing they do hear those success stories and every success is a step in the process because we take people from intered generational poverty and they have been supportive to move people for word now that health is stable enough their children are graduating from high school action there two

sisters i just had a graduate in june because we could advocate with the school to get in there to help them. >> that is something they should be proud of and you should be proud of in the state of utah should be proud of that is a partnership we like to see. brian? >> i joined the air force 89 wanted nothing more to do than get out of violence in this small town to me 24 years to move around the world to realize this is for one to be and raise my children spinnaker really terrible thing happen to you causing you to come back? >> just my family. [laughter] but when you leave the military is very hard i interviewed for two jobs in my career that i had to start putting together her resume a i had to translate from military speak in to

what ever speak that people understand that i am a leader and a manager and i can do that and i and intelligence officers conspired on people there isn't a big market for that in the world. [laughter] >> not yet. >> challenge do that anymore [laughter] >> what attracted you about the state in what was it about state programs that were more responsive they knew ever thought? >> i was at the air force base in omaha to retire and get a job and stay or go back to maryland to nsa but the incentives to move back were great the military homebuyer's assistance that pension taxes and all those things i couldn't find a reason not to come home. >> in terms of the partnership we're talking

about, a state and local, what that your expertise how have you been able to use that in the state partnership here to change things on the ground? >> i found the biggest problem we have was information technology i recognize the federal government send me a degree so would to take those skills from the federal government now i just use those in the state. >> so you find, again if you want to see really old machines like textiles, you go to the smithsonian if you want to see inching computers you go to state government. [laughter]

>> so what kinds of changes could you make and how did you get the message to make some real changes. >> you have an extraordinary degree of autonomy. >> my boss says he cannot ask permission anymore just eight for forgiveness when you screw up. that is a great thing and i hope to make things better through the lives of violence i want to come back and serve again with of finance authority and continue to do good things for people. >> what kind of changes as

sin innovation in center. >> that would be able to explain to people what we're doing things and they will listen to a little-used the summer driving but that is what i am hoping to be the communicator to help them to understand why we have these policies into things. >> so how hard is it to influence change at the county level? becking quiet brian is talking about his change of culture many localities had their culture in chesterfield county we've had that since 1749 so it can be hard to change it does require communication in a lot of explaining in a meeting with people and putting things in terms that they can relate to some rigo

to the cyberspeak and put things into their own terms. >> what kind of power adapters were they using two-pronged? >> i only have the iphone five. [laughter] but seriously with a culture that loves the way we have done things for the past 150 years, it is up to the state to come in to say we'll do things different sometimes there is suspicion of the federal government but how does the state and local partnerships make that easier? >> there is not as much suspicion with the state at though local level was there is the federal side we're trying to stay close so i know what is coming. . .

>> everything from elections to licensing and all kinds of things we associate his paperwork and form filling will be barcoded and will be a much different kind of transaction. have you thought far ahead on some of the technological potential that exists in the way that you can see it? >> it's a magic ball kind of question. >> if you could register a vote

in a nicu, and neonatal intensive care unit and they're all set when they turn 18 and their registered. >> it's a good question because our society has reached a tipping point. we have moved from being formally technology enabled to being technology dependent. citizens have an expectation which is the amazon expectation when you do it transaction with government you want to shopping cart to take care of all of your transactions in one place and one time. they want want to register to vote online. it is meeting citizen expectation at the local level with technology which we spent a great time focusing on. we try not to be on the bleeding edge of technology because you can pay a price for that in terms of stability and security. we tried to be on the leading edge of the technology not on the bleeding edge. speemac, due describe you describe that bleeding edge versus leading edge? >> that's a tough question. i not sure i understand.

>> do you see a different way of transacting information in the future given your knowledge of what technology is capable of question. >> at some point some kind of scared about. the the technology is going to bar and i do not like sometimes there's too much tracking of people. i would not pay for anything with a credit card, it was cash only because he did not want anybody to know where he had been. i can feel that i do not try to do anything bad so it doesn't really matter to me. but it is scary i think. the future could go too much data. >> very quickly, and aspiration that you think given your success so far that you will be allowed to implement over the next five years question. >> given my success. >> yes, what what you know that you'll probably be able to take

the next step, sort of i really want to explore here and i really want to do it. >> some of the thing that i would like to do in the next few years is one of my goals is to start getting our participants, they're good on their own, but there have been some programs where women are able to get together and talk about their experiences, form a support system. that is really what a lot of people in intergenerational like. either the they want support system where they are the support system with all the limited resources. >> and the support systems really work. >> they really do. >> it's like the longest functioning support group for angry, white males in american history. it has been doing great. that was a cheap shot. okay, all mine. you, barry, what you think you'll be doing in the next year or five years that you're confident the empowerment that

you have experienced will allow you to do. >> i'm confident we'll be able to use more technology for citizen engagement in chesterfield. a former county administrator was very fond of saying that we are better with the citizens when we can partner with the citizens in the process of government, we are better. so, partnering with them through technology using things like social media and things like predictive analytics and letting them actually come in and tell us what they think about our budgeting process and so forth. we are dipping our toes in the water now and i'm confident in the next five years will see a more mature and progressive approach to that. >> i hope to work with the leadership, the homebase iowa to my talk to jason who's in charge of it and said let's figure out where the next steps are and how we can make this better and how we move forward and make it better for veterans to come back to iowa. so we do not lose that great training and leadership ability, we bring them back and can use that for state.

>> and brian, is that you are barry who is doing the pokémon goes seminar later on today? >> thank you so much. thank you to to the panel they have done great work, they are available to talk to if you want. thank you for inviting me, it is great to be here and i will be back for session this afternoon involving direct investment in the united states that many of you have experience. thank you so much. governor. governor, i will turn it back to. >> thank you john we appreciate you for taking the time and we appreciate you being here with us. thank you to the panel for sharing your expertise with us. let's give give them another round of applause. [applause]. >> we have more now from the recent nj meeting in des moines. coming up next, japanese business officials and american executives sit down for conversational conversational foreign investment in the u.s.

the form is moderated by john hockenberry. [inaudible] >> we'll decide to directly invest in your state, we could get as many governors as possible to sit down. i want i want to say that i really enjoyed the previous session. i have done a lot of reporting on opn catastrophes in various communities around the united states, and it is such a difficult problem and it is so frustrating, but having spent a career trying to get in the same room and on the same program as many of you as i possibly can, and some of my colleagues who worked at "nightline" i know

they have tried to get as many senators as possible to simulate a real working group session between elective leaders and policymakers and stakeholders like the doctors in this case. working on really hard problems. it is so hard to achieve in television and a broadcast. i really had a strong feeling here that everyone in america should see just how engaged everyone was in that last session. i think it would be such an important optic to see how engaged and authentically involved in solving a significant problem that everyone was here, regardless of politics and it was really a striking and wonderful thing to see. we will shift gears and talk about something very different, and many, and many ways part of the problem in communities that have meth

addiction problems and opiate problems the fact that there are few opportunities for other kinds of meaningful roles in the community and direct investment and investment in your economies is a way of changing that. i want to introduce the panel and we are going to see this issue framed in a way that may be is a little more illuminating and inspired than some of the rhetoric that we have heard about trade treaties over the past several weeks and months. because when we do talk about trade, were also talking about the direct foreign investment and i think direct foreign investment is a boom, it is bennett an extraordinary boom in america and is remarkably untold story. i would like i would like to first recognize that the governors were here from japan. [applause].

it is great to see you mixing with the governors hear from the united states and in many ways, part of the mission here is to create these relationships. all of you were telling me before, we have an hour and half really to get to know each other and to make all of that happen. let me and it is people on the panel here on stage to represent the mechanism of direct investment and people have benefited from that in the united states. directly to my left is dennis kerrigan who is executive vice president of zürich north america and vice chairman of the organization for international investment. [applause]. please welcome him. we also have the president of the gym and external trade organization in new york. it is a company that monitors business conditions for japanese companies in north america and is always looking for new

opportunities for japanese companies. peter is here with us, vice president of panasonic in the united states. [applause]. we also have the president of tory industries america which shows the building economy through generating alley with innovative ideas, technology, and products. welcome. and finally we have the executive advisor of toyota motors, of course no panel could be completed without toyota. >> thank you on behalf of the organization of international investment, it is a a trade association more than 175 global companies with u.s. subsidiaries. i like to take the governors governors as well as the nga for giving us this opportunity to talk about an important topic. what i would like to do is frame

the issue of foreign direct investment in the u.s. and then also look at the specific lens through japanese companies who have u.s. subsidiaries and the tremendous positive effect they have had on the u.s. economy. let's let's start by framing foreign direct investment in the u.s., or fdi. as you you can see, more than 24 million jobs supported through foreign direct investment that the u.s. subsidiaries of global companies, that more than 6 million workers directly employed by those subsidiaries. you have another 18 million ancillary jobs supported, a multiplier of the 3 - 1 which is quite conservative in economic terms. from a compensation standpoint studies have shown that the subsidiaries actually pay wages 33% higher than the normal

average in the united states. if you're measuring the historical inflows over time it has been more than $2.9 trillion. if you think about the market share of those inflows, the u.s. has 23% of the market share which is a positive figure, no doubt. that is actually down from the year 2000 with the u.s. was actually capturing more than 40% of those global inflows. in my experience with that shows is that it is a very competitive global economy right now. countries, regions, right now. countries, regions, as you know states are fighting very hard for economic development and economic investment. i know as we go on today we'll talk more about what we need to do to make sure each of your states is competitive in seeking foreign direct investment. >> if you talk about what the

impacts are of this fdi, it's really interesting. we look at manufacturing which is a crucial part, crucial part, i know many of your state economies, pound for pound foreign direct investment actually shows up very well in the manufacturing sector, particularly skilled manufacturing. among the community actually 37%% of the fdi jobs are in the manufacturing sector that is a disproportionately higher than the regular u.s. economy which is about 9%. 2,000,000 manufacturing jobs provided by foreign direct investment in the u.s. right now, that is 18% of the manufacturing workforce in the us. basically, one in five manufacturing jobs in the u.s. is the result of global companies operating u.s. subsidiaries. it is because of that that they often highlight manufacturing as a key benefit

of having positive policies toward foreign direct investment. likewise from an innovation standpoint, research and development, u.s. subsidiaries of global companies also show up well pound for pound. definitely punch above their weights. u.s. subsidiaries of these global companies spend 53,000,000,000 annually on our nd. it is about 16% of the r&d spent in the u.s. right now. if you think of u.s. right now. if you think of fdi companies be in 1% of the u.s. firms, you can see what a disproportionate investment they are making. lastly, exports which is one of the good stories, but maybe one of the untold stories about foreign direct investments in the u.s. that they often invest to sell products around the world so it comes as no surprise that u.s. subsidiaries produce 23% of u.s. exports and i know we'll talk more about the positive effects that japanese companies have had. japanese japanese basic affiliates produce more exports in the u.s. than affiliates of any other

nation. a little bit about my company and our story on foreign direct investments. zürich zurich is one of the largest insurance companies in the world were proud to be doing business in the u.s. for more than 100 years. starting on state street in downtown chicago and were about to move in october toward north american headquarters in schaumburg, illinois which is about 50 minutes from o'hare. you are all invited to the ribbon cutting. please see me afterward. >> so that is what those fdi insurance premium by. >> absolutely. >> it's over 700 square-foot facility facility at a cost of more than $400 million, provided more than 2000 construction jobs including 700 vertical construction jobs and it is a sign of the positive effects that pro- fdi policies can have on a state economy as part of our work and decided to build our new headquarters in

schaumburg we actually had an economic study commissioned by the university of illinois which showed we showed we had a 1,300,000,000 dollar 3 billion-dollar effect on the state of economy each and every year by way of metrics we have about 3000 employees employees in illinois and another 7000 around north america. another 40,000 globally. so there are good stories to be told. if we dig deeper particularly on the positive story respect to japan, if you look at the historical inflows, japanese companies have actually vested more than 373 billion in total over time making them the second largest investor in the u.s. economy. if you go back just one year or two ago in 2014 japanese companies invested 34,000,000,000 in the u.s. economy which was the second

most behind the dutch, and 2013 japanese companies invested 44 billion in the us, which which was number one for that year. it is a very positive story, obviously japan has a very powerful effect on the global economy and as you can see the amount of outward foreign direct investment they have had globally in the white bar chart has been rising over rising over time totaling 1,200,000,000,000 in 2014. u.s. in 2014. u.s. has done a great job attracting investment. at the same time if you look at the red line which is the relative percentage of japanese investment, the u.s. is falling behind. the red line shows in 2000 we are attracting 57% of japanese outward direct investment. that is dropped to 31% in 2014. one of the questions we will explore is what policies can we change to make the u.s. more competitive in attracting this global market share. to dig deeper, a very positive

story, japanese direct investment in the u.s. supports over 800,000 u.s. jobs and those workers earn over 65 billion in total compensation. if we move move to manufacturing, critical part of any state economy the investment supports 348,000 manufacturing jobs. that is 43% of all japanese inbound investment. turning to the export site, companies coming into the u.s. to invest, to invest, to sell their goods to the rest of the world, japanese companies exported $69 billion for the goods annually and they invest almost 8 billion in rnd. so that just framed the issue. were very active in trying to create a level playing field for companies who want to do business in the u.s. what we call in sourcing

companies. it is a very positive story and with that i turn it back to you. >> thank you dennis. i want to get each one on the panel to give a sense of what they view as the opportunity in the united states for japanese companies and investment, asked quickly as you can. i want to get a quick comment from the governors who are here and then i want to have an opportunity for you to interact because i know you have to go at 3:30 p.m. and we do not want to disrupt the schedule. i want us to begin on a good footing here between governor to governor relationship and governor to governor communications because i do think that bypassing the middleman in this case, washington d.c. has a great impacts already and we can see some of those right here before very ice. please begin.

[inaudible] >> japanese with the u.s. has been increasing so briefly i will talk about the background. so after our visit with the prime minister 2012 we started with a japanese company has increase during the two years and they increase to 15 years, now are u.s. this for japanese investment. why? we have been conducting a survey for the japanese companies and all the activities for 25 years. in the u.s., more than 18 person japanese companies have a

positive business profit. this is second-highest since 1991 and higher then europe, asia, and china. japanese investment to u.s. has. [inaudible] significantly and now it's asia and europe. they're still maintaining high level, taking into account. [inaudible] and this trend will continue. so when i have top executives they are lending money to japanese camp me but it is only increasing in the u.s. some told me they look at the u.s. increased 50% just three years.

>> let's stop there and that fact. that's interesting that bank loans are stalled and investment everywhere the world but the united states. with interest rates this low it would seem this would be a boom that anyone in the united states can take advantage of. hold that thought right there. let's get a quick outline for me what you think the principal opportunity is here the united states for a japanese japanese investment. >> i might mention first off that while bank loans are positive, there is a threat threat to further investment for foreign-owned companies in the u.s. under a proposed irs recommendation, so-called section 385 which would treat loans from your own parent company overseas as equity and in turn raise your tax obligation. so companies like mine worry a great deal about whether regulations like that which are

intended of course to stop and versions, quite understandably there tried very hard to ensure that we can maintain here in the u.s. investments that we need and we do not want them outflowing, the same time we think this particular regulation has gone too far and we hope the irs will not rush to judgment at the end of this calendar year which they are currently planning to do and will rethink how things are defined so companies like mine which literally rely on investments from our parent company in japan for example, to build the giga factory with tesla and nevada which will bring nearly 3000 new jobs to nevada, we just announced a job here two days ago, to buy refrigeration company and invest hundreds of millions more in that activity in misery, or to buy audiovisual software companies in texas, but

frankly, we are headstrong because regulations go through the weather propose. the upside is the u.s. is perhaps the only place, the primary place these days where every other global economy stalling or slowing dramatically, ours is dramatically, ours is still improving, albeit not as much as we would like. this is the perfect opportunity for us to take it vantage in my company is constantly looking. >> so their employment and skill labor issues that are essentially permanent but also cyclical issues that relate to this particular moment in time being very -- for this. let me get your sense. >> the companies is producing the materials, it's a slightly different from the industries that is contributing to the consumer directly.

but also for this meaning as long as the u.s. has a very positive meaning of the growth, there some scepters of industries. also the nature of the industries use energy so that energy advantages also a strong benefit that we could enjoy in an area like the united states. the material come the common composite is used for structures and their two big giants in the world, one is in u.s., what is in europe. for all the materials so so now 1 billion-dollar investment is carrying on that is supporting a big program.

[inaudible] >> so certainly some regional advantages a great experience of that in the south again, working in the background as long as there's growth in the u.s. economy the kind of industries that you support are going to be positive investments. >> also here in the united states. >> competitors of the nuclear energy. >> and with toyota, give us your view and the will get a view view from the governors in here from the audience. >> thank you very much. almost 60 years since we started business here in the united states. it is a long time. and long time commitment and growing together with the

community is our model and actually that enable us to grow together with the people here in the united states. so short-term advantage might benefit a lot but at the same time their credibility for us for the community and the commitment from our site also benefits a lot. so i would like to touch upon the issue of a workforce development. that is also beneficial for us and at the same time i believe the community in the states. >> okay, thank you very much and will come back to all of you. they apply more to say. this is your chance governors before you leave, if you have questions for investment panel here and also have you interact with the governors here. do any of you have a question on your mind, how come toyota seems

to favor kentucky all the time? often not not me, this is an example, a time task those questions in the governors over here can maybe give me some advice in dealing with the investment and business folks. anybody want to be daring? >> unfortunately we do have to hop out momentarily so this question may need to be answered after really. i think all of us have people in this room want to hear the answer to this. was that a rhetorical question by the way why toyota chooses kentucky. anyway we are grateful it's a wonderful relationship or the question i have reach of you and each of your respective companies, investments, electronics, automotive, et cetera. what is it that not any individual state might do, but what is it that states can do to

make it easier for you and your companies to make investments in the u.s.? there is a great geopolitical unrest. there is this opportunity of people looking for safety and yet there are barriers that exist as a result of maybe its taxes or workforce development, maybe it's, i don't know what, i don't want to leave the witness. if you witness. if you could tell us from each of your perspectives what is the one thing or two perhaps, if those were out of the way maybe it is a repatriation of dollars of profits, maybe the ability to invest without taxes, what are those things, specific to states as possible so that we can individually and collectively start to address them and make it easier for you to do business with us? >> that is the essential point to before you leave, i want to give the governors here from japan, the governor, who is here, please if you could stand and the current governor of. [inaudible] and japan.

did you want to say something particularly to the american governors before they leave? >> yes i just wanted to make one point the importance of the relationship between the local governments for attracting investments and growing those investments and businesses. this is actually a case with mexico but we developed very good relationship between the mexican state and the investment and jobs growing very rapidly. based on these relationships. that is what we are looking for with the u.s. states too. we are looking forward to further discussions about those. >> that will guarantee a call back, right? you get a call, maybe not from

this office but from your office. >> governor branstad, and colleagues, i am very glad to hear it because of the leadership allows us to be here today. thank you so much. first of all i like to ask press my condolences about the france incident. this summer, we had nonoaud the world was permanently destroyed but in the city, children were go through their day in peace.

this is is a statement of president obama. this statement moved to us, japanese people in the statement was conveyed to through their words global network. we share the same values, they're attacking the same type of job creating, social welfare, and healthcare and things like that. we can share this practice between united states and japan. so we do hope to enhance this type of conversation, dialogue between us. >> to amplify that, the weapon that fights terrorism is cooperation, not isolation. anything that can reduce the propensity of people to live in isolation, to isolation, to reach out and embracing

communities, that is the antidote to terrorism. governor branstad. >> well i wanted to mention that i've been to japan 16 times. the first time i came to japan, mike mansfield was the ambassador and he did a great job of convincing me that we need to really build a strong relationship, even before i became governor we have a sister state with japan going back to 1960. we have, i found a the midwest, u.s. japan association which represents japanese prefectures in america states in the midwest, and also companies from both countries. that has been a great vehicle and it is going to be in missouri this year. lasher was in last year was in tokyo and it's in japan one year in the midwest the next year. that has been a great opportunity for us to exchange ideas and to work together.

we are very appreciative. we have a number of japanese companies have invested in iowa and we obviously do a lot of business in japan as well. i want to welcome our japanese guess and say how much we appreciate the relationship over these very many years. thank you very much. >> i gather you folks have to go. thank you so much for your time and i know that our japanese it governors wanted to give you a sense of respect and thanks for your hospitality here. thank you you so much. we'll give you momentarily. [applause]. >> let's talk about workforce development. that seems to me to be exactly the kind of thing that americans do not think about when they

think about the positives of the u.s. economy. there is all kinds of we don't have enough stem education. were behind the rest of the world in this, that, the other thing. no no. . . ji hirai >> so including at least the 4,000 employees needed at the level of that the consumer can evaluate. the quality is there.

so our motto is the workforce is the -- needs a human element. the human itself makes the point and when we want to expand the facility and have them next line we also need the people. how can we recruit those people at the same time that supports the needs of the people? maybe employ and the same thing could happen. >> you need 4,000 people to operate the two lines? >> more than that. >> i mean you guys have robots, come on. why not just do robots? >> yeah. i believe the human is the manufactureer that decides the quality and decides our business

itself. >> just again, talking about workforce development, do you work with educationalal institutions? >> so i would like to show my presentation sheet. >> so i wanted to briefly address the challenge that we all have whether in private industry or the public sector, i think, and the workforce government. because we believe the key to making this is to get 43 people to seek ways and identify train, skilled technicians of the future. we have successfully collaborated on the way the state and the manufacturing technician program. and as you can see here, we now

have partnership in eight states. and look forward to supporting any of the other states we educate the younger people in the states. that is what -- >> i should mention, too, these workforce development issues are not just in the manufacturing or the s.t.e.m. area. we starts a first of a behind apprenticeship model with the grant from deparliament of labor and support of the department of commerce, we part under -- partnered with a community college where 20 students are going through the program and work halftime for pay at our facility and halftime go to school learning the insurance business. at the end of two years, they will graduate with an associate degree and have a job waiting

for them. illinois is the center for insurance and we have another insurance company signed up and two insurance brokers to provide the jobs. it is not just manufacturing. you can apply these workforce development models into the knowledge work which is important. >> go ahead. >> if i may, john. >> peter? >> just to mention on example not unlike toyotas. making batteries in the new tesla giga factory that panisonic is building will take upwards of 3,000 new jobs. for all of those, because these are skilled jobs, these are not just material management jobs. but they are largely skilled jobs. and the skills rarely regularly exist all in one place in this country or anywhere else. we are working with universities

and vocational schools to create long-term educate programs and training programs that orient toward the skills needed for those jobs. we have, in our overall case in north america, operations with 12 major universities. georgia tech has an auto motive innovation campus and takes in students through the course of undergrad and graduate degrees. in new jersey we are focused on this in grade schools. we are improving the overall curriculum and manage the schools most effectively even while we take co-op students, as

many as 500 a year, to grow the excitement for science, technology, and related skills that are basically required for electronics and the kind of business solutions we are aiming at. >> if i am a student and i want to take advantage of those opportunities what is my front end? what door do i knock on? >> you can literally knock on my door. but also through the universities we coordinate with. for example, the new jersey institute of technology, rutgers university, and a few other schools, monmouth and others -- monmoth. as students arrive they are told about industrial or corporate opportunities. we interview them early in, in our case, and try to decide if there is a reasonable placement for those students. >> does every job have too a

placement at a particular facility in new jersey, for instance? it occurs some of the governors or the staff in the room could pilot programs starting with the community college for direct investment. woll would panasonic view instead of students comes from alaska or texas, developing the same skills in their state, even if there is no panasonic facility. >> we typically work around the panasonic facilities but they are open to anyone looking for an entry-level. our human resource department doesn't just do the paperwork but they follow-up with the people. a television or camera company. less than 15% of our business is

in those arenas. the things you don't know us for are under the hood in the car, they are in the airplane, aviation system. >> did i mention the battery factor? >> 7,000 of those go in your tesla model-s. when that factory is completed, up and running, fully up and running, it will more than double the entire world's output of lithium ion batteries for ev and in that case all going to tesla which is growing. >> let's make sure no headlines like last week. >> and the expectation on the workforce i see it differently. the nature of the business, the industries handing out the new materials, sometimes the people in the united states don't have

enough knowledge to contribute to the development of the technologies. the expectation of the workforce is to just absorb the technology that is being transferred from japan and comply with the know how and making copies. this is one of the first things expected. all of the workforce in the united states to follow. this is what is expected in the first states. since we started the operation, the people started reserving all of the knowledge and then they expect them to develop the design and capabilities through their know. so it may take five or ten years at time. so that means it is up to the industry. so the workforce, we are now

heavily supported by the universities like georgia state and other units are helping our facilities. but the page of the area in company, we have started operations where all of the technologies are. we don't expect the u.s. people to develop or design all of the material. this is a kind of history and i think this is kind of a quality of the workforce we expect the u.s. people to do. >> i want to talk about that because i think you really are describing the inflection point or transformative moment that exists in global trade and global investments and how in this environment of also fear of

change that that moment could be squandered in some way. we will talk about that in a moment. but how do you see the broadest possible potential in the united states beyond manufacturing? beyond battery riz -- wizards and people good at designing car parts. beyond insurance, even. >> sure. no the so-called industries in japan to the united states so if that is the case of usually showing us the employees central and south america, but the industry started the business force and go to the bigger s

cities like chicago, houston and dallas. many industries, like toyota, try to move their head quarters from california to texas. now the other, supporting industries like accounting, and there are so many possibilities for a movement happening in the united states. >> do you see entertainment in asia centering in nashville or memphis or possibly even california? let's do a quiz. you will enjoy this. raise your hand if you know descendants of the sun? raise your hand if you know desce

desce descentants of the sons? it is the biggest television in the world. it is the biggest tv program going and it is produced in asia. it has a billion viewers around the world, all on sort of live stream and you know, it is an example of the entertainment business that is moving away from hollywood and it is finding huge audiences, but the production techniques still need to be done and that is a skill we have here in the united states. can you imagine a jay pop studio in nashville? could jetro facilitate something like that? >> yup. now, many developed a business here in the united states and

some were, i shall say japanese creator did a good job, very detailed. so they have other advantages. and u.s. creator has a dynamic expression. so that is kind of what i see we are supporting. >> the university of colorado denver has a program in the art department you should definitely check out. definitely check it out. dennis, what is this moment and how can it be squandered with the rhetoric we are hearing about the trade packs and the things that ignore the numbers you were presenting a moment ago? >> i think it is important to be specific in our language. the negative rhetoric is quite general about foreign companies and ignore the good stories

about global companies with u.s. subsidaries outsourcing the jobs and people are surprised to hear about the companies. companies like ben and jerry, anheuser busch, dannon yogurt. these companies are global and made the affirmative choice to do business in the united states. we are are in a global competition looking to make investments. the united states is one of the largest and most competitive marketplaces in the world. companies will probably not pull out of the united states but the question is where will we spend that incremental dollar we are competing against? latin america and whether the group is allocating capital around the world where will they chose to maybe? the rhetoric doesn't help in the argument.

just like tax policy, trade policy, regulatory certainty, workforce development, infrastructure which is something i hope we talk about as well. all of these issues come together, that constallation our corporate partners look at. that is why the rhetoric can be very damaging. the key would be to move the conversations to specifics and talk about companies like ours that have tens, if not hundreds of thousands of workers in the united states, who are making a very good wage and contributing to the u.s. economy. >> peter, let's talk about the infrastructure, where and what needs to be improved, and what do japanese investors think about declining infrastructure in certain parts of the united states? and answer governor bevins question about what needs to be removed and what is the low

hanging fruit here. >> two points. a state should be careful as should the feds not to impede innovation and innovation includes cross fertlization with other places overseas. companies like ours bring intelligence and share intelligence and help grow the innovation in the united states. states have been very focused on this which is terrific and there can probably not be to be much focus to help countries like ours and american-based companies improve their efficiencies and operations and advance to the next level. my company went through a really bad patch about five years ago. we lost 15 billion dollars. if we did that one more year we literally after a hundred years would have been out of business as a $70 million company. >> i cannot lose $15 billion in one year. >> one year i am done.

>> that reversed the thinking of the senior management and our focus is on things such as infrastructure development. for example, we always had a big business along the lines in japan which is the home company and where things started for 50 years before coming here, but a great example is our work now with the city of denver and the governor in colorado and mayor hancock in denver led the way to create a smart city. and our contribution includes everything from smart street lights that also include security cameras and facilities, data analytics to move the traffic more smartly, an energy infrastructure with excel energy, a new microgr-grid with high energy storage capacity to use that is not used to store

the energy that is used when generated. our company is a large solar energy company for medium and large size businesses and now utilities. we have created entire smart cities in several places around the world. the first being in japan and the next being outside of tokyo. a second one is underway and we have three underway in china, one in singapore, one in india and now here in denver. the effort is to rebuild and retrofit your question about infrastructu infrastructure, overcoming the issues of old infrastructure with new solutions, both the hardware and software. >> how bad with the infrastructure issues in the united states? we have seen op-ed pieces in the united states describing our airports as, i will not even use

some of the words that have been described. you travel, president obama has even said it. he traveled around to singapore and asia and comes back to the united states and the airports are just a mess. >> there is a feeling that you get of pride when the infrastructure is working wonderfully. but what does that mean in terms of attracting investment and attracting business? >> with the governor's help, and we have a long history here in the industry. we have 30 years in kentucky. this here is a very memorable year for us. 30 years in kentucky and 30 in indian and west virginia. alabama, 15 years. and mississippi plant have been

in operation for fives years. >> americans will say that has nothing to do with infrastructure. that is because you have cheap workers in those states. >> and adding to the ability of skilled labor, i may miss elements we consider for having a plant in the states. like local farct factors of land availability, and infrastructure, highly access, transportation and water and electricity availability. and factors that affect our members to stay and leave. like the cost of living. those are also affect a lot for us. beyond that, predictable regulatory environments is also very important for us.

we have a long commitment to the area. we are growing together with a common interest which means migration is needed. >> predictable regulatory environment could mean no regulations or steady regulations that don't have the political whims or it is regulations that work exactly according to you and nobody else. how do you work collaboratively to come up with regulations that are meaningful for consumers but benefit you as well? >> we have discussions with the states and the regulations should be for the consumer or resident and at the same time for the plant or for the business. we need to collaborate and thinking of the long run is what we are thinking about.

>> one of my role as chief legal officer for north america -- >> and you detected stable regulatory environments anywhere in the united states? >> yes. insurance is heavily regulated at the state level and the edo's get a lot of credit. they have been quite helpful and i understand your point on predictable regulations but it is not lax. i call it regulatory certain. we want to know what it is and we will adapt. it is that certainty where we can make the right investments. we know that our products are appropriate and we know that things are not going to change radically from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. to us it is really important. one thing on infrastructure. i didn't want to lose that thought.

when we did our study five years ago on where we would locate head quarters we did a transportation study and found our employees in illinois flew seven million air miles out of o'ha o'hare. so having an airport with international and national flight was particular. infrastructure is more than roads and bridges. rail transportation, not just personal, but freight and supplies is crucial. right now it can cake more than two days to get a freight train through the chicago area. it is a definitely choke point and that requires federal intervention because we need supplies whether it is at factories or etc to eliminate that choke point is important. it is not just roads and bridges. it really goes to freight, it goes to airports, and it goes to

some of the high tech infrastructure. >> communication is infrastructure. the need for more licensed and unlicensed spectrum which the fcc is addressing is absolutely crucial to all of our businesses. communication among our businesses, with our direct customers who are suppliers and sometimes with the actual end customer. >> in five years, the clock is ticking. i think john chambers said something like this recently that in five years if you go into the a community and there is no wi-fi people will act like, you know, it is flint. and that is not to disparage flint but there will be a sense of wow, things don't really work here. and the terror about flint was partially the dishonesty that was dealt with, and we don't need to discuss that here, but something you completely trust

didn't work. we are getting to a point where people trust and expect a high bandwith infrastructure in communication and wi-fi. we are behind, correct? >> just as the gentlemen this morning from chesterfield county said about delivery of government services. they expect it to be like amazon. we expect your smart tv to work, your cellphone to work, and you expect an industry, all of the communication infrastructure you need to be flawless. always available and always on and flawless. it is usual infrastructure. >> let me answer the question about regulations. a lot of people say that despite rhetoric of the campaign corporations are only in the -- interested in lax regulations. the japanese have a track record

of honoring regulations and building respect within the relations of the communities. can you describe what that is? >> we have conducted the quantitative study on each reason when we need to invest in the united states. many states. and the family has a very very good contact. but there are factors and regulations that are defered to the regions. and if they have an international apart there are reg playings that tend to be very tight. -- regulations. where the population is not so high, they tend to be a little lax or lose -- loose.

you have to bring up the good benefits to the business. they are taking into account those factors and we would decide the site. i would have to say that everyone said of the communication with the people or the dialogue with authority is a very, very important factor for us to decide which region is the most beneficial site. from this point of the bill, the u.s. is responsible for everyone and the state extended very kind for us or precise support to analyze the outcome from this study. including 10-20 years in business and that would help. >> once you chose a place you think is ideal, then your approach is to honor regulations.

to be the best corporate citizen you can be in that community as a way atmosphere building the long-term relationship. that is what you do. i am not being naive. >> we have to modify the area or the facilities and adapt to new regulations. these points are very important. if the two parties are very stringent and never accept what the other party says it is impossible to achieve the business on this side. from -- so i think that is very important and usual to

relationship of the officials. >> let me ask a big idea question here of you, peter. it really look like the idea of japanese exports are coming from the united states. and the attempted tax capitol that is wiggling across boarders all over the place. are we seeing this in politics and in the concerns in the muslim population. are we seeing a challenge to the whole idea of national, national governments as institutions here? and that there is a tension

between let's go and no nation state bottlenecks versus we have gone too far and have to pull back to 1910? >> good question and obviously one being debated in politics as you said. i think it comes down to education, knowledge, awareness of what globalization is already, what it is likely to become and when it is right or wrong to infer that something about it isn't happening. example, the inflow of capitol you have heard about. the growth of jobs, the higher wages coming from foreign and direct investment. it is highly unlikely that most people who are concerned about globalization and principle know those facts.

but it is also true that if a trade deal seems or is seen to somehow undercut you, and your family and personal stake in life, of course you are going to be upset. >> that is different from seeing a trade pack as being a user patient of the government. you are being run by a world government conspiracy. >> exactly. if the government is involved in trade negotiations i assure you no one else is interfering and everybody is having a tough time at the table. that is what your trade nuknowings -- negotiateators do. they are compromises and i think

the tough part for any nation state is staying on top of the changes that are occurring internally and externally so they have the education and social services and outreach support and the basic government support that is needed for their societies to continue to thrive. my own company went through a bad patch and we failed to f foresee the changes. we lost almost three years of our corporate growth, really sank low, and had to completely confront every single decision we made about what to keep and what to grow and focus on. the same is true with countries. it will be a challenge for all

nations in the world. >> we will get the slides and i have been messing up the production by skipping around. >> i would like to pass upon our committee hearing. >> 17% of the people we sell two in the united states, and more than 90% of the parts and material in the american-made factories are managed here.

likewise, 75 or 70% of the vehicles sold produce here in north america. when it comes to honda, over 98% of vehicles are produced here. people i would like to touch on the trend toward localization contributing to new e ports. last year, we exported about 150,000 vehicles which is relative to 10% of our u.s. built from the united states to more than 40 countries. for example, in europe and the

region including korea and the features are free trade agreement benefits not only japan but for the united states and for our business here. we are working with the u.s. gr for example when it comes to the so-called cost. the u.s.-korea free trade agreement benefit the businesses here in the united states. >> we look at the age of 2000 and at the time we requested going to set-up a facility next to their facilities because of

the security of the material and the u.s. implemented there is a rule that classified materials be made in the u.s. by the u.s. and it is a finally approved. but it is once the rules are implemented there are no ways to say apply these advance materials only u.s. industries so it does matter for the business of of us and the united states. since then, we started to locate all of the facilities in the united states to secure the supply to our customers. but as i have said, the first case, just the making of the product with the technologies that have been transferred from

japan, since then those companies started designing the technologies along with the expectation and local demand. and these were histories and nowadays trade doesn't depend on too much for the direct business. some companies who are standing on the same stage we have experienced in the past, maybe it is the same. so the free trade is very much matter to all of the people. this is my opinion. >> questions and this is an opportunity to give an elevator pitch to an idea that could fly in one of your states. question right here. >> good afternoon, i am from the chinese embassy and very much impressed by the success of japanese investment in the united states. right now it is true that japan

is number one investor in the u.s. and china is doing the catching up. the u.s. is number trading partner number two with china only after the eu. now we have about 600 enterpr e enterprises doing business and investment in the united states. this year is a step to double the figure. we are negotiating in the united states on the bilateral investment treaty. it will be a big release of potential in terms of chinese investment in the united states in the next five years. i have a question from my japanese friends. what do you think of the future

prospect of chinese investment in the united states? >> thank you. >> the challenge is to just go in and definitely as you mentioned china will be the -- it isn't a problem. although some people argue the transpacific partnership is an attempt by east asian nations to equal the playing field with china's advantages and i think that is a fair assessment that ttp is inclined to try to contain china's growth. do you believe that? >> i don't think so. >> you think it is equal across the board in asia? >> yes.

we welcome the ttp and we all welcome the competition and we have firm competition in terms of correlation. >> so what do you think about chinese investment in the united states? is it a competitive threat, do you think? >> i think so. >> yeah, it is a playing field in the united states. we should be fair and no need to worry about the nations: it is the same rule and material and different technologies and computers to satisfy customers. i think it is very fair. >> how do you see the emergence of china as an investor in north america am >> i think it has been successful. smith field foods is a member of this. we are coming from the same perspective of providing a level

playing field for all countries to compete. it is actually a great blessing to have countries wanting to fight to get into our markets. hopefully it isn't that difficult as we move forward. but providing the things we talked about in terms of a level playing field and certainty will attract that investment and it comes down to if we want a resilient economy and one that can adapt to the global economy we need foreign direct investment, homegrown businesses, large u.s. companies, small u.s. companies. but we need the investment to come from multiple sources if we can ride out the global recession. >> we are promoting for the japanese businesses and overseeing. at the same time, we are directing things to japan and

now we are -- one of the targets in china and we have maybe five or six facilities in china and welcome chinese business in japan. we don't have a worry about chinese business in the united states or japan. >> in terms of the investment and age investment narratives i heard a crazy conspiracy theory. in 20 years, apple will be an asian company and samsung will be an american company. what do you think? >> we support the deepening of the corporations between various countries including united states, china and japan. i think all companies are emerging for the better benefits of human beings. >> will apple be a chinese

company in 20 years? >> maybe. maybe. >> you wonder if those labels will apply even? these are global companies competing in a global marketplace and companies change their head quarters from time to time. we obviously have a foreign city in our name and started in switzerland but more of our employees are outside of switzerland so we provide ourselves as a globe company baseding switzerland. so maybe the labels will fall away. >> question. >> thank you. my name is david and i am president and ceo of the national u.s. arab chamber of commerce serving as a bridge between the united states and the 22 arab countries. i want to thank the nga for putting together this panel and thank our japanese colleagues to be here.

it a privilege you made the long trip to the united states. i would like to share a few observations. we began the panel discussion by saying fdi generates exports. i would respectfully suggests that exports can also generate fdi because once you get a critical mass of exports going out of the united states there is a likelihood that you will create more capacity, build more factories that would attract the fdi. that is the first part. so it doesn't sound like an asian discussion, u.s. exports to the middle east and africa have been doubling every four years. there are very few places in the world to which u.s. exports are doubling every four years. despite the bad news we hear from the middle east and africa there is a lot of good news as well. on the other side of the coin, if you look at the fdi coming

into the united states from the middle east, we are looking at unprecedented levels of investment in the united states and that is a reflection of the growing and excellent relationship between that part of the world and the united states but also a recognition that the u.s.' economy is an engine of growth and is a good place to put money. to the point made by our japanese colleagues, the rule of law is very strong. finally, our distinguished moderator started out saying cooperation rather than isolation is an antidote to fight terrorism and i agree with that a hundred percent. i would go on to say economic development and the jobs that economic development creates are also extremely important. if people have jobs, they are invested in the economy, and less likely to get up to no good. former secretary of state colin powell once said that hope

begins with a paycheck. and i think for purposes of our discussion today it is important to keep that in mind. >> let me ask you a question. how much of that investment in the united states is sort of fear of declining investment opportunities elsewhere? you said the united states is a robust economy you would want to invest in. there is talk that a lot of cash luquidy from the united states is being invested versus the long-term investments the gentlemen here were talking about. >> what we have historically seen from the arab world is long-term investments in the united states. typically the arab world looks for long-term partnerships and not quick fixes. the investments are being made

by funds and direct commercial business including here in the great state of iowa. i think it is a reflection of challenges in the region and the drop in oil prices, i think that is true, but it is also a reflection of the relationship with the united states and who do you want your partner to be for the long term, the united states is a pretty good partner. >> other questions? >> is korea doing something right in approach to business development in the united states? and particulary ma -- particulay marketing. i am samsung invested well but marketed as a global brand very well. what is the meaning of that? >> when it comes to the industry, they are just starting

to produce the vehicles here in the united states with the japanese automakers. but we have not. i believe there are also going together with the community and long-term commitment. >> you seem naul them following same path? >> i hope so because that is a global company and business. >> let's have a little fun. >> how long have you been coming to the united states? one year? >> up to five years. >> for you? >> almost fives years. >> you governors have had some educational experience in the united states so many years you have been coming back to the united states back and forth, yes? and how many years have you been

going to japan, dennis and peter? >> 30. >> i am in europe 6-10 times a year. >> for almost 30 years, you have had a chance to see japan. is there anything you still won't eat? >> honestly speaking it has nothing to do with broccoli but if i had the honestly say something it would be sea cucumbers. >> is there anything you guys won't eat in the united states? >> no. everything is okay? barbecue? breakfa breakfa breakfast cereal?

no problem. other questions? what time do you have here? >> one question and wrap it up. >> i would make comments rather than questions. one area that we should be thinking about widening investments and trade is small and medium companies including startups. now, you know, all of the services are large or huge global companies, but i think there are many chances among small and medium companies in japan and in the united states and of course other parts of the world including china and

although there are other challenges with regard to those, you know, small and medium companies, actually increasing in foreign investments and trade. and one is the matching issue. you know, matching with partners in the other country and also, you know, matching with the slice that you want to invest in. so you know, again, in this respect there are a lot of things that the government including local government can do. and now, you know, innovation is coming from those small and medium startups. so this is the them i think we should be pursuing.

>> if a state proposed one of these economic, you know, field trips where they hop on a plane and come over and the governor is there and maybe the staff and there is usually representatives from the biggest companies in the state. you would be very enthusiastic ? it is specifically devoted to middle size companies and planting so that would be whether it would be interest in entertaining for many of the states represented here. that is great. >> that sounds terrific. >> you want to give us a comment? >> to add to the discussion there are some points for the industries and in my case i would like to present one point. human resources main target and

main concern among japanese companies, for example, nike corporation, this is the top line of air conditioning and manufacturing in the world -- dican -- and it is global since 2012, i believe. at that time the leadership came to be poplar because of they have a great training facility and for a japanese company to bring up the human resources

main concern. so previously remembering that. the united states has a great education system and great people here. but we have to bring up good resources. >> i think the quality of this conversation here and the engagement you have all shown is just an example of just how much can be demonstrated in a very short time with the people getting together to share best practices, enthusiasm about business development, the kind of fun we can have from different cultures, as well as using the various talents we have as americans and japanese to really create a much more powerful economic entity. it is competition, issue, but it is the kind of competition where everyone wins.

i think we should continue this conversation somehow. let's talk afterwards. i love these kinds of conversations. they make great radio shows. but that is my selfish interest. i want to thank the governors he here. it was a gesture of respect and i know the governors would agree. thanks to peter fanon and i guess the box of sea cucumbers is in the mail. thank you so much. thank you so much and i am john

hockenberry. [applause] [inaudible conversation] [inaudible conversation] ...

>> at 10:00 p.m. eastern on afterward, karen greenberg, director the university center national security talks about legal questions arising from policies and laws enacted to fight the u.s. war on terrorism in her book, rogue justice. the making of the security state. she is interviewed. >> i think it's important for the american people to understand the nuances to these cases. not all terrorism cases are the same. there is an entire spectrum of cases from those who are accused of wanting to plot and founded evidence like the subway bomber in new york, to those who are really just operational. >> on 7:00 p.m. eastern, african-american history professor carol anderson

discusses her book "white rage, white rage, the unspoken truth of our racial divide". ms. anderson suggest in her book that opposition to the advancement of the blacks still exist today. go to book tv.org for for the complete we can schedule. >> coming up on book tv, interviews with authors of recent nonfiction, next on in-depth, historian will haygood, author of "showdown". natalia holt on the role of women in the development of rocket technology. later, heather mcdonald discusses her new book, "the war on cops". you are watching watching book tv on c-span2. >> next on c-span two, our in-depth interview with author will haygood, the author of "showdown". and the