more diverse versus less diverse information. what i have in mind is jefferson and talking about the success of the virginia declaration of rights argued that it was, when you have lots and lots of little religious groups, collectively they were in favor of religious freedom because they were concerned about domination by larger groups and you might not expect that dynamic if it were one big group versus another big group trying to dominate each other

it's, i'm not unwilling to make the claim that there won't be any cases where a mass migration from one group to another could be detrimental. clearly using israel as a case study there are countries that they would be very detrimental if they allow that. there isn't a framework like that at all. in general, i generally am sympathetic to the notion that the more diverse immigrant stock would be better. there's part of this wanting to shrink the welfare state, but the people usually say bad things are coming from the

fractionalization literature but i don't know how much that speaks to immigration because almost all the data is from sub-saharan african countries are from american cities where the diversity wasn't the result of voluntary migration but actual slave migration. i don't think the evidence of the people who are skeptical, i just don't think it speaks to the immigration very well. i do think, by the the way, in terms of policy implication, if more open borders generates more wealth but their exceptions to the rule, individual countries each put up there own barrier of whatever their exception to the rule is, as long as not every countries exceptions are the same we could get most of those trillion dollar bills off the sidewalk because they would just shift where they're going to from one higher productivity place to another. i think there's room within a

pretty much open border stance to allow for exclusion of individual countries where it could be unique. >> ryan, to ask a question about the paper we all worked together about this, we also took a look at american state and the impact. i was wondering if you could describe, just for a second those. >> so if i recall, i'll just set it up for a brief question, sorry to put you on the spot like that. it was a little bit more negative than it was across country. it was a little bit more negative than the result internationally and been talked a little bit about blowback in some of these examples. you think some of these big statewide anti-immigration movements like in arizona in

2010 or california 1994 or georgia, south carolina more recently led by the party that claims to be the republican party, do you think about would be an explanation for some of those movements or partly one of the reasons we don't see the thinner ashley is because most deal with this pretty well and there isn't a lot of blowback. >> i would caution using the state data just because the data that we have is so much higher quality the only other thing i really have to say is that i think it's incredibly ironic about those who are saying they are anxious to protect american institutions are at the

forefront of trying to destroy the rule of law which i think are most important for economic freedom. >> i think it's important also on the panel when we talk about economic freedom, we are not talking about the ability of labor to move across borders which is also in and of itself an important component of this. we were just talking about a lot of the other aspects of economic freedom. >> at this stage, unless anyone has a question for anyone else, i was going to open it up to the audience for some questions. a few notes, please wait to be called on and identify yourself, the organization you are with and wait for the microphone and please ask a question two. >> all-star in the back right there. >> she discussed the foundation, the question i had, you hear you hear a lot about the institutional impact of open borders and migration, and

economic freedom and what have you, but if we are going to just compare policies and apples to apples then we also have to consider the institutional impact of restriction is, what does that do to institutions of freedom. my question is, the u.s. went through a quasi- restriction in some from the 1960s and other countries have their own policies. is there anybody, has anybody done this or is there anyway to isolate the impact of restriction is him on institutions, especially institutions of freedom? >> i believe there is a paper that's either just published or forthcoming by joshua hall on actually the ability of migrants to immigrate to other countries and when there is a greater ability of these migrants to

move out i believe it's measured by freedom of the world. i think it's called exeter voice or something like that. i don't know of any on the restrictions it's a move toward socialism but that's not worked out at all actually for using the data on, you can only go back to the 1970s. also, just a restriction, visas are already in the index of the difficulty, or how many countries in any given country can come without getting a visa at a time. this is already.

>> i just very briefly, i wrote a blog confirming what ben said about the casual, that time from 1930 to 1970 when immigration was heavily restricted in the united states, you saw an increase in expenditures. capita and meanwhile, when it was open and the 40 her. after that, you said doubling in real terms. capita. while itself i can't make it possible claim there, think at the most it seems when they restrict immigration they also rollback a lot of other types of economic freedom at least in the united states and that one small case study next question? >> wait one second the microphone.

>> this is more in the way of a common than a direct question. it seems to me that the high hypothesis of undermining traditional cultural values and institutions goes against the common logic because the people that you're talking about are the discontent and the disenfranchised to want to leave the country who are dissatisfied with their own country, the idea that the russians would want to establish a soviet union in israel is not exactly the reason they left russia in the first place, however, they exist in this in a way has been the glory of this country, the freedom that you say, as a matter fact neil ferguson has a book about how empires flourish and decline. anyway, it's nice to hear the evidence, as much as we can get

it. >> can i just address that come i thought that was a very insightful point and it touches on a hobbyhorse i have. people often use them.import an expert with migrants and are you going to import mexicans or are they sending us their best, that sort of thing. this isn't just an attitude, it's just wrong. there was a time when the united states imported labor by force. people in bondage were brought that way. that's not what migration is now. it's people choosing to move. the policy decision is either you have struck that or you don't. there's no subsidy for immigration or forcible immigration, there's no importation of people and for that reason, when people get concerned about if we import people from honduras, are we

going to import their institutions as well, that's not anything like what's going on. what's going on is that some hondurans are choosing to move and the question is do we obstruct them or not. those who choose to move are very different than the ones who don't. the vietnamese people who are here are not typically vietnamese to enough polys that are here are not typical. our policy discussion has to start from that point. >> thank you. >> right here in the second row. >> thank you. i won't repeat the previous comment because that was going to be my lead-in. there really is a difference between the question as to whether they bring in their institution and the question as

to whether the increase economic freedom. the israel example seems to me illustrated that. the russians who came to israel were anti-communist and they had notions of free market. if anything, your evidence suggests that they undermine the traditional socialist institutions that may have been on the client to begin with, but it doesn't matter. it's not evidence that they didn't bring in their institutions. the same thing can be said about the turn of the 20th century, the immigrants were jews from russia, they brought value that were positive in terms of free market but the question is did they change the political outcomes in the united states. those are two completely different questions.

>> it's well appreciated. may be if we could've been fairer on that. my response is not that immigrants don't impact institution, it's to the extent they do, it's in in a good way. that increases our productivity. >> i would say, not only do i think it's good because i value freedom, but for talking about does it impact the trillion dollar bills on the sidewalk, our measure of institution is one that's associated with institutions and economic growth and anybody who's doing the utilitarian thing would also think that. >> thank you, wonderful comment. >> right down here in the second row. >> thank you. this is a very interesting session. to take it a step further, i agree, 100% with all you said, but i have a worry here and the worry is the following.

it is possible that in an indirect effect of migration is that of strengthening some of the natives in a sense so the uk has voted to get out of the eu. that's a bad policy decision that is probably not going to improve their institution and they made a point of connecting these directly to the fact that they are getting too many immigrants. so here's the point, the following. the serious question. there is overwhelming evidence that shows the effects of the immigrants are positive but the image is that of responding to this by closing, by making some potentially political institutional decision which could be harmful in the wrong way, what should we look at in terms of how can we manage the benefit of immigration without

the nativist response which could be harmful to our institution. again is not the immigrants were making these, the response and sometimes the ill-informed response that could create this and i think it could be a little bit of a realization. >> i think that's a great question and essentially the quote that i started with because it was the nativist low back that he was talking about. i think the vote or the verdict is far from out on whether braxton will be a net improvement in freedom freedom for britain or not. i think it quite possibly could be. i do think when we look at europe in particular, the nativist and blowback in light of the refugee is cause for concern, although i'm careful not to extrapolate too much from some of these things in europe the social dynamic because they think a large part of problem in terms of blowback comes from

their own lousy regulations. laws that make it impossible to dismiss workers, these are things that price immigrants out of the labor market. then they arrive but they can't integrate into the labor market. how do you deal with that? the natives resent the people who are leeching off, not integrating into society and you get this vicious spiral that i think is largely a product of the lack of economic freedom in labor markets and a lot of european labor markets. it's a concern i recognize. >> in the paper, although it wasn't on screen, we couldn't find any relationship at all between more immigrants and were scores in the freedom to trade internationally. that subcategory contains a lot of variables that really capture a lot of what people are concerned about with the british exit vote.

>> that this was a fascinating point and i wanted to mention two things. remarkably, henry george, at the time of the proceeding there is another argument for it and it was precisely about the presence of the chinese in california that was leading to demagogic politicians. in other words he was making precisely this case. on the evidence, certainly in the case of the exit vote, was areas were there not a lot of total and workplace exposure to immigrants that were voting to exclude the most. there could be evidence that i'm not aware of that the presence of immigrants is causally associated with closure to trade and immigration at the national level, but certainly i think there is good support for what will just call contact theory at

the local level, economic and other interaction to the opposite of support for cultures [inaudible] >> so understand what you're saying in the context here but in some places the response. [inaudible] >> for sit in the u.s. it goes the other way. i don't think we have definitive evidence that more more immigration, even at the local level supports support for demigods as what was feared in the 80s. >> just to catapult off of that point, there are a few papers whitten by a few political science professionals at uc

riverside trying to look at immigration laws that are passed. this was around 2004. there was the arizona law and new ones that were passed. georgia, south carolina mississippi, alabama and some other laws. but they found was that the rate of flow to areas that had not received hardly any immigrants at all prior to this was a pretty good predictor in this literature of where these types of laws are passed. the contact theory, if you waited a certain amount of time, those things, there was not a reaction in that regard or, if you got to the point that had a lot of immigration, for multiple decades or centuries before, you do not have that type of reaction anything about the south were a lot of these laws are passed in south carolina, georgia, alabama, mississippi, these are areas that have not seen an inflow of immigration from a broad sense since the early 19 century.

this was really a cultural shock in a lot of ways. in california is another example of this in the mid-90s, in 94. ninety-four. there's a vast literature and political science about why it is that hispanics and california went democratic when they did and they basically said because the republican party declared war on them at a very stupid time. there's also some evidence that california was one of the least racial diverse and ethnic newly diverse states and went to the most in a very rapid amount time and people freaked out about that. >> maybe the answer is to have a steady flow from lots of different places to lots of different places in the u.s. i think we have time for one more question from this gentleman right here. >> wait one second for the microphone.

>> thank you. the conventional wisdom is that democrats would tend to be on the side of ranting citizenship to the undocumented and that would expand their voter base they are less enthusiastic about it because it might encourage democratic voters. i just wonder how your narrative fits in with that. does your wisdom agree with that? just your comments on that. >> our work on economic freedom freedom -- it's not clear that they're spending more than the democratic party and i'm persuaded of that during the presidential cycle.

>> based on that point, there is an interesting paper by these fellows, i used california riverside where they take a look at this. some immigration, to a point, it's not just the immigrants who affect divisions that are voting but also the way in which natives react to the immigrants presence here and how they change their voting pattern. we mentioned earlier the impact of immigration on the social welfare state on europe and just to give you an example, there was a pool of norwegian that was done it asked do you support a basic minimum guaranteed income for everybody in your country and 56% say yes and then they said immigrants and minorities are going to be able to give back to in support for that. there is a point at which the native reaction to foreign immigrants can bind in such a

way that the right wing party boosts natives in an amount more than what they lose and sort of of -- then there's a point where it goes the opposite way and there's a huge surge. if certain right-wing parties in the united states were a little bit more strategic, they could be moderately opposed to a flow of immigration, pick up all those dissatisfied voters but not be very angry or proposed policy that would do harm to immigrants and therefore not lose their vote so catastrophically and probably come out much i had. thank you very much. with that, we will have to wrap up -- it is my hope that the

great research that was presented today and the work that they will continue to do will hopefully have an impact at informing our policymakers and informing the electorate so the government can make some wiser decisions going forward on this policy than it has in the past. i want to say thank you to all the presenters today, some of whom came from across town and some who came from across the country for coming here today and presenting and i want to remind all of you to please join us outside in the garden here for beverages and snacks. take you very much. [applause]

[inaudible] [inaudible conversation] >> this labor day weekend book tv brings you three days of nonfiction books and authors. here are some featured program this weekend. saturday night at ten eastern, "after words".

her book how everything became war and the military became everything. >> congress is not going to make up and say we can triple the budget. that's not what happened at the military, for the foreseeable future is going to be asked to take on this wide range of tasks. and let's make sure military is good at it. >> on sunday at noon eastern in-depth is live from hillsdale college in michigan. happiness is a serious problem. why the jews, still the best hope. and the ten commandments. join in the conversation with

your phone call and tweet from noon to three pm eastern on c-span2. eddie p.m. eastern, former white house correspondent kate anderson brower profiles the ten first lady since 1960 in her book first women, the grace and power of america's modern first ladies. she speaks at politics and prose bookstore here in washington d.c. on monday, mary roach on the science used to improve the effectiveness and safety of the u.s. military part. also why the public has lost faith in their political leaders. buyer fear jean edward smith on george w. bush and senator trent lot talk about presidential politics. go to booktv.org for the complete weekend schedule. >> book tv focuses on the latest nonfiction books. in-depth focuses on a life three-hour look at one authors book with input from viewers.

"after words" is a one-on-one conversation between an author of a newly released nonfiction book and the interviewer who is either a journalist, public policy maker or a legislator familiar with the topic. often with an imposing viewpoint. "after words" airs every saturday at 10:00 p.m. eastern. we will take you across the country visiting book festivals, author events and book parties where authors talk about their latest work. book tv is the only national network that devoted exclusively to nonfiction books. book tv on c-span2. television for serious readers. >> book tv recently visited capitol hill. >> i am right now, i just picked up a book called white donkey. it's by a veteran of the iraq war and he has a famous, strip as well. it's a story that he wrote about

the experiences he went through in iraq and his friends went through. i'm very excited about that. >> what drew you to that book? >> as an iraq war veteran i'm always trying to understand when i went through what others went through and some friends thought this would be a good book for me to read do you have anything else on your list? >> i'm going to try and catch up on hamilton books and i was recently in chile so i've been reading a lot. >> i have a great list for the summer i am reading a lot about the constitution we are going to

have some fun with that, and have some fun toward constitution day in the fall. i think people are interested in finding those documents and studying them. some other things too, there is a book i want to read and it's called bringing out the best in people. i think every once in a while, to get a new perspective on how lead a team, i always say you lead people and you manage assets. i've always been a big fan of the covey books with the leadership principles. i think this will be a good book to read, kind of motivational. there's an interesting book and it is called fluke. it looks at the mathematics and

the science behind no 1i want to read that book. i think it's so interesting how sometimes something just seems to happen. >> let's see, the summer i have poured through a couple good books. currently i am at the middle and i'm a graduate and i'm reading a book called end zone by john bacon. if your michigan fan it's a great read. i also have a favorite that i go to frequently and it's the master the senate by robert caro that i find, very interesting. i'm history not, i love reading history and that's my favorite historical book. >> i've been reading three books right now.

i've been reading dead wake erik larson which is the book about the sinking of the lusitania. i just finished a book about how policymakers, when they're not specific, can create legal problems for citizens that were unintended. it's a fascinating book for policymakers to read. then finally am reading a book entitled defiant. it's a book about the recounts of prisoners of war in vietnam. >> what drew you to those three books? >> i just read all kinds of different things. i'm a bit of a history buff so defiant and deadweight were things that were normal for me. also the authors of those books tend to be normal for me. i think isaac storm and things like that, he's been good. the one, i have a libertarian

streak in me so i wanted to just make sure when it comes to criminal justice reform that we do those things right and get some historical perspective was really helpful. >> book tv wants to know what you are reading this summer. tweet us your answer booktv or you can posted on her facebook page, facebook.com/book tv. >> now has blood's interest and involvement in the ongoing conflict in syria. participants talk about why has blood is involved, whose funding them and the implications for future conflicts between israel and and on. it is a shiite militant group and political party based in lebanon. >> good afternoon welcome to the washington institute. my name is david and i'm the director of the organization

here. it's great to see so many people here. it's the dog day in washington. we are also joined today by television audience via c-span for their broad interest in today's topic. anyway, let's take a moment to silence your mobile devices. this has been a series of events in washington in recent weeks commemorating the ten year anniversary of the 22006 war. really, the location for today's event is so well-timed it could've been because they do play hundreds of forces to battles are raging to help offset the regime forces. 2006 was a costly war, especially for lebanon.

120 dead israelis and nearly $6 billion destruction. ever since there has been quite a bit attention but relatively quiet. a large part it suggests an understanding among the parties about how damaging the next round might be. this pulsing form marks the rollout of the enterprising young scholar who i will introduce in a moment. the monograph focuses on the improvements in the capabilities largely gained during its deployment in syria. these improvements will make the next more ferocious and devastating than the last. the deployment in lebanon has been costly and controversial. as we hear about the military

dimensions, it's important to keep in mind the context and consequences. i just returned from several days in lebanon where things are not good. there's close collaboration and coordination between the lebanese state, armed forces, security forces and has bought. on the political front it's a real mess. we have two years with no president, no chance at a new electoral to bring a new parliament, a failed national dialogue, political paralysis that goes well beyond the garbage crisis and the news just last week that the leader of the pro-western he movement in lebanon had lost his company and is facing acute crisis. the former head of isf and member of future movement is the election victory and is running

on a highly spectacular sectarian platform. lebanon faces the ongoing challenge and push of mostly sunni muslim refugees. the children among these are by and large not attending school and may be susceptible to radicalization or at minimum, the kind of sectarianism, but it's nothing short in my view of a ticking time bomb. to discuss hezbollah's point in syria and its new and improved capability as well as the dynamic in lebanon, the institute is really please to host them for today's policy reform. he recently enjoined the anti-defamation league as a

terrorism analyst. he's a visiting fellow specializing in shiite politics. they arrived from lebanon and it arrived in the institute on monday. we're honored to have her. they served as the manager of the premier on my new site. those of you who are familiar with the reporting recognizer profound courage and insight. we are really pleased to welcome her to our first event as a fellow and now, without further ado we will start here. >> thank you for this introduction and thank you all for coming. in my first discussion starting this research, i talked to a former friend of mine and we were talking about the fact that back in 2006 we would've said they will send thousands of fighter to fight and people will

probably call us crazy. here we are in 2016 and has blood has done all that. there was a bunch of analysis over the years and. [inaudible] military experience, losses of many fighters and injured but when i read all of them i sort of felt that a lot of them didn't go to in depth. what actually is happening at the same time. that was the starting point of my research. let's take a step back for a minute. when you talk about the president in syria, a lot of call it. [inaudible] they are divided into different geographical commands so they are contingent is on the eastern command. we have between 5,008,000 fighters. they are fighting. [inaudible]

they are also training a lot of shiite militias and it's important to know that they have numerous establishments in syria were talking about weapon storages and training camp and they're also doing that. then we have various types of fighters, that's a unit that was established after the 2006 war. were talking about special forces and it takes a long a year and a half and this is an elite force. then we have forces from all the hasbro unit and that's a crucial point to make because just remember when we talk about fighters in syria, were talking about all of the fighters, almost every fighter was in syria at some point during the last five or six years because

they're rotating in and out of the battle. then we have part-time fighters that were talking about on a day-to-day, they're not fighters but 15 days the year, they are serving on the battlefront. then we have new fighters in 2011 they needed more and more fighters to go to syria so they fast tracked a lot of the training many fighters are just train for or 90 days and shipped into syria. there are positions here and definitely but most of them are rotating in and out. it's sort of encompass what they are doing. we did the bulk of the work. to tell us about the area and the people who live there, they also followed hasbro orders. it's important to me because it's by no mean.

[inaudible] >> they are leading the battles, there it is the elite horse. this experience changed has blood. let's take a look of the strategy. if you're going to talk to a lot of folks in israel, the strategy during the second world war was not losing. why not losing, first of all they know that they can defeat the idea from one battle and have very significant capabilities that were talking about the events capability and eventually, if it's going to be an all-out war they will come out on top. they want to show they can endure. [inaudible]

they also believe in the idea. [inaudible] that was in 2006. they worked on the strategy a little bit after the war. then in 2014,. [inaudible] was a very smart one in the journal and he said, you know what, i'm i'm not sure the strategy of not using remains in hezbollah today. why not? prolonging the fight doesn't work in their favor anymore. they are knee-deep in syria, they don't wanted to divide their forces. they also don't want to waste all of the strategic weapon. what i mean by that? this is an iranian project. iran put a lot of money and effort to put all of the weapons in lebanon.

they just want to have a deterrent against an israeli strike in iran or any other operation. after they were a little bit annoyed that they just wasted all of their missiles on a war that didn't even relate to us. they made in order not to use all the arsenal. what is the bottom-line? has bella should want to shorten the warp it how do you shorten the war? you actually go on the offensive. >> you have units that go into the north and take a hold of different villages and use a lot of rockets to interact and sort of try to influence the decision maker to stop the war as soon as possible. >> the first one is more defensive in nature and the other one is more offensive in nature. i tried to look. [inaudible] what has changed in syria? the not losing strategy, if i'm a fighter what is my role? i'm defending my village.

my values and small teams between ten or 15 people but the purpose was to defend their own villages. if someone in syria, if they see it they say i don't need to defend my church, i need to conquer that one. that means they need to seize it and use different tactics and strategies. we are talking about hundreds of fighters that need to take a hold of the village. if i'm a has bluff fighter, some of them, this is the first time they didn't operation. this is what i'm doing in syria, you change the paradigm of how you see the battle. the second thing is the russian factor. russia became a big part of the syrian civil war and different elements on the ground. they had some presence on the ground but most of their soldiers are hezbollah, iranian militia and syrian regime.

you had different battles, other villages and in the back it was the russian artillery and russian air force. we talk about that operation you need to make the distinguish between the different parties. were talking about an advanced military russia and this was the first time they discussed how to design military campaigns. the other thing is sort of a reality check. they have very advanced capabilities but i also saw how they operate in syria. they saw their electronic warfare capability and technology capability. the idf has the same if not even better in some aspect. we are in a problem right now. maybe we should stick to our

defensive strategy. they also do not have a decisive victory. russia didn't take all of the leadership of the rebels, they didn't target all of the weapon storages that they have so has blood is able to see that there are some blind spots in all their capabilities. they can use it for their advantage "after words" in the fight against israel. now regardless of what side, i believe it will take time to implement because it has blood still in syria and to keep them across all levels of the organization, it will take a lot of time. there are some military tactics that are better. first of all to increase the effectiveness of its drone fleet. we know in the early 2000 they had had drones. we saw them in 2004, the recon a reconnaissance shown them. we know they had iranians drones

and in 2012 and 2013 we saw more incidents of them sending in the reconnaissance drone. they use it for reconnaissance and attack and we just saw this week the footage that has bluff put online that they're using a drone with admissions to target the rebels. this is the first time that they are doing it in syria. they're not only watching their own drone operations, there there watching the syrian drone operation and if i'm a drone operator, i'm thinking now i know the system but i know the weapon system better. i know the optics better, the mitigation better, the sort of makes them think of a different mission to be more effective against israel. haslett has a lot of investment in their drone fleet recently. the second thing i want to touch on short range rocket threat. we talk a lot about their racket arsenal and that long-range it's very accurate but one thing that

they miss sometimes and that's actually the short range rocket. in syria we start we have a very heavy payload. can really terrorize the population and it doesn't cost that much in a certain amount. [inaudible] are really concerned about that, were really concerned about that they're using mortar and rocket but not the long-range one. the shorter one can be intercept maybe we should focus on this little bit more. that's something to keep in mind. i want to talk about, we have altered complex operation but i

want to talk about the military. there are a lot of people. [inaudible] has blood is focused on syria, we don't need to worry too much. it doesn't mean they can manage one. instead of the number of fighters, even with the commitment, they still have thousands of fighters in south lebanon. they talk about it as having 45000 fighters among the 21000 are syrian forces and reservists the number of fighters in syria, even if all of them are syrian forces, has blood has blood still has more than 6000 fighters very capable ones in south lebanon. when the war starts, these will be able to stop it and then all the fighters in syria are going

to come against israel. the other is to examine their readiness. at some point they will go to iran. there are things that, if you want to fire a rocket you can't do it in lebanon. they're going to say what are you doing and second of all israel will be able to. >> that stopped. [inaudible] they kept training in lebanon and every time they wanted something, where did they go, they go to syria and fire on the rebels. they fire on other organizations. families told me their experiment lab, you want to examine, go do it in syria. if you want to test weapons, go to syria. no one no one actually would mind about that because there are so many people who don't actually know what has blood was doing there. then, the reinforcement?

, one of the most important things that i think took place is them emerging as one force. has blood, even before they trained the shiite militia in iraq, they bestow some other other. [inaudible] when you fight together and bleed together there's a relationship that can be broken. i'm thinking, wait a a minute. if i'm a fighter and i have a friend from iraq, and my friend sees me fighting the idf, getting hammered thinking wait a minute, there is the chance of reinforcement from different malicious. militias. that will extend more to the fight against israel. that something also to keep in mind that was sort of the military lesson. i want to talk little bit more

about the shift. [inaudible] >> they join the fight against the idf but then something happens. first you have to remember, there's significant losses. 1600 casualties, 5000 injured, i heard one time someone said 60% of the losses are actually from families in south lebanon. it's one of the most. [inaudible] that means most of the people in south lebanon, if you're shiite, you know the one who died in the war who was injured in the war and that creates a lot of agony for the community. suddenly people lose their

providers, they lose their brothers, there's a lot of pressure inside the community and it leads to the reduction of social services which is very important and they're spending so much money, you're still here and wired to helping us. has blood was able to maintain a significant support and how do they do it exactly? first of all it's an unnecessary war against. [inaudible] every time they speak and give a speech, you hammered this message all the time. if you're not going to do it, it's got to be flush with terrorist. a lot of people believe there was numerous. [inaudible] most of them will say the number one threat to the country is the sunni extremism.

when i'm talking about the core support i'm talking about the fighters and the families and they still get the salaries in the social services and maybe there are other people, but if you're a fighter and has blood you can count on them to take care of you. the third which is probably the most important thing is there's no a alternative. there are organizations that represent the lebanese people to share community but these organizations don't pay salaries, they don't give social services and if you're shooting lebanon, the only one that doesn't is hezbollah and were talking about a country that doesn't allow you to quit your job and look for another one right now. after all when we talk about important takeaways from all the syrian involvement, and the strategic military involvement,

you saw in 2012 and 2013, they retreat back to lebanon and lost 20 or 30 or 40 fighters. this is an existential. [inaudible] [inaudible] they lose their military capabilities and the resistance. second of all since it's been strengthened, what i mean by that? if you would've asked me before the syrian involvement, i'm talking about this action by iran, syria and hezbollah and i can pick about other organizations in the region but syria was very powerful back then. they supported has blockaded them weapon. today, i would put them above

syria because it's a much more stronger part of this access. one day when the syrian civil war will be over, hopefully very soon but realistically probably not, they will remember that they brought their fighters to syria. they will put their neck on the line for for them. has buzz the only one that actually put their neck on the line. both of the partners are going to remember that. third of all, many ever militias will receive better training. as i told you even before the syrian involvement, it has been a great trainer for many organizations in the region, for shiite militias in iraq. [inaudible] a jihadist llama, a lot of organization see them and they get training.

>> both the u.s., you can see what they're learning right now in syria. it's a lesson for the future because we probably see them in a few years doing the same. >> thank you. >> thank you. [applause] >> hello. thank you all for this very interesting presentation in david thank you for your kind welcome and i'm also very. [inaudible] will talk about syria on what has changed in that aspect. i'm going to talk more about the social and economic situation of the shiite community and has blood's involvement and especially among the shiite

community. this is based on some interviews with hezbollah fighters in syria but also based on the southern suburbs where most of the shiite community are. i've been visiting the states and i am originally from the south. i know a lot about this community. i've seen a lot of changes since 2006 until now. before we go into that, i would like to talk about the three main pillars that has blood trends are based on. when hezbollah started in 1982, it wasn't. [inaudible] they are based on three main why [inaudible]

services include education, health services and also the services that the government should provide and they don't. of course,. [inaudible] the liberation of the occupying was very clear for everyone that of course there was something called the national resistance before hezbollah started but this was eliminated and then had a lot killed by has blood because they understood resistance is very important to the people, especially in the south. they hijacked their system and make it their own and that's very important to lobby their community. three, the the collective memory of the shiite which is tied to the battle. this collective memory was very important for has blood to link it both in peace and resistance at the same time. the. >> it's very important in that the sense that it is today our

resistance against israel. these three pillars were linked together in a very, very organic powerful way. not only has it mobilized the shiites, it also gave the shiites access to lebanon's state institutions, economy and political establishment because they were victorious many times and managed to organize themselves wellin this work that well for them. :

a fascination of some of the leaders. it has always been accented with we will retaliate with the right time in the right place. become a joke material. it means that it is not a priority. we don't want to start a war with israel right now. it is too much of a headache. i'm not saying that they are not ready to start but they don't want too. this is not their priority. the third one which is a collective memory everything is defined in order to maintain the link between these three pillars. we have always seemed seen it.

it spent years in syria they come back with a lot of dead bodies and defeat. it was a big blow for the community. although they did not call it defeat they look for that media. they would never mention it. a step back. it's good to be back and forth. deftly not a victory. no more resistance for us and lebanon. it has led to this.

for the first time three years ago described them as the shiite faction. it is isolated. and it's almost impossible for them to get hired. they have to look at this as the only source of income. my opinion and changes within the idea. it was there.

they look at it as a dream. they wanted to join the resistance and be part of this. they did not ask for money they needed to do that with structure. to make sure no one as a volunteer. of course things have changed completely since then. it is like the resistance goes corporate. they defer to their missions in syria as the job. i have to go to my job i have to go to work. at the beginning i do understand . i thought they have another job other than fighting in syria. then i understood this is a job for them.

it is no more of the resistance that used to be doing 2016. they were anxious and they did not like what they were doing. was deftly a job for them. why is it a job. it's one that they don't like. is not when they are proud of. to sign a two-year contract. there is no more complications. now it has top -- stopped. they have to be any compensation.

it's really a divided in three or four major areas or neighborhood. if you go to the poor neighborhoods you see them coming through. you see kids in their fancy brand-new cars. and the poor people they are not educated. they had families to support and nothing to do. they see the officials going to private schools and driving brand-new cars and not even thinking about it. basically if it wasn't for this job a lot of these people have nothing. these people would not had any jobs. this is official -- a vicious

vicious circle they are stuck in. another thing that has changed is the attitude of these fighters especially the fighters. it is surprising how you see that. it is much more disillusioned than those who are just sitting there in lebanon and listening to the rhetoric. they understand a lot of things that the people who are not involved in the work understand. when they look at the iranians for example they told me that many of the fighters that are here they were really disappointed with this. that's a very different ideas of the iranians. not only their fighting skills and expertise but they also treat fighters with arrogance into spain.

i don't know if you've heard about it. this happened before that is how they see them. they also have a problem with that. they would sell it to the highest bidder. they can't do that anymore. if leave the officials behind. the russians this is another story they are completely different. they know that they can do in

syria. it means like the strong guy in the good guy. he is a shared name. and if you look at the way as it is fighting in syria that stretches from the coast. it is on the border of lebanon. and it links that to the south of lebanon and you see along this corridor is also working a lot to change demographics. they are basically pushing them out of the corridor into this corridor.

there also creating a state kind of that stretches from the south of lebanon up to the coast of syria who would basically maintain no matter what happens elsewhere it would maintain the flow. this also adds to this not only the target translated. so what do we have now? we have an exhausted army a draped community and disillusioned fighters. the poor are dying and they are thriving. we have an isolated community that cannot be accepted we have a deeply injured party in lebanon.

it is ready to do whatever it takes to maintain the control. until now we don't have an alternative. as long as they are not united they could not substitute an alternative. but the real alternative doesn't have to be at this point a political narrative i think the economic alternative that would help them become citizens is very important at this point even in economic alternative is not interested in giving them alternative.

they are so needed for those. although they no longer believe. thank you. >> these are two excellent presentations and a lot of food for thought. if i might ask each one of you a question we heard on the panel about the support or change of priorities for the social services on the decline have you seen any boost or increase after the iran deal after the use of funds and on an unrelated question you talked about that.

the new capability. for you all of the body bags the secretary i think in a way has fueled support for this clinging to that. you are under threat as a community but we had have at the same time these aloof videos they are captured in syria and seen terrible things about what they're doing there. telling a very different story and you spoke about quite grumbling has there been aside from yourself a mona fiat out there.

of course. after the nuclear deal i think by on to what we are hearing they are paid more and i'll think i think someone has an accurate measurement just sort of show how much money they have more than what i give them before. i think it's easier they have a lot of this. we saw different reports talking about this price of oil. it is much easier there are a lot of actions by the u.s. treasury and we saw in the testimony i think a couple months back they said it's in the worst financial situation ever. i did not see any numbers i can tell you if he was correct or not but when you said that. what do you compare it to.

i would say it has much more money. you're talking about two or three years ago i'm sure the place with this access is becomes much more important. they will keep giving them the money as much as they can't as much as they can sustain it. they have to lower the salaries. i don't have any alternative. to get a salary cut how is it preparing for that. since the 2006 more until today and most of the focus it was going to the north and front. they know the different scenarios about infiltration for example and in the last two years it's actually changed a little bit of the terrain they are changing that. in order for them to be able to put more observation point.

if you've ever been to the israeli border they have different heights they can could infiltrate if they want to fit it really need the tunnels. they can use to their advantage. the idea was to need a little bit of that. and it's a lot of training. i will be a much bigger war and we need to train our soldiers and reservists that as is a situation. >> thinks. >> you are asking the lebanese community. they still believe that they are protecting the border that they are starting to realize that it's not just about the border.

this is hurting lebanon. you are talking about people who are criticizing is that your question? you have a lot of people who are criticizing. it is the usual. but what is interesting really what is interesting is on social media there's a lot of more younger voices not just from the shiite community but from the other controlled areas. these are not only expressing themselves on social media they are also going to small grant -- grassroots initiative. it is interesting to follow. did you notice anything from the municipal actions that

showed the diminished support. this was not really different from the 2010 elections. there were a lot of people before they were involved in syria. i think what was different it went viral people talked about it a lot. and the interesting thing the interesting part was the buyback. hard-core control tom. it's like that capital. it's a big shiite city. and this year another moment that is affiliated. they ran together and there is

another list that nobody knows we have heard only one name not the usual independence they ran against and got 48 percent of the votes. that was a really interesting aspect of it let's open it up for questions. speak loudly because the microphones are on the ceiling. thank you. i had two questions thank you for a fantastic presentation by the way. i'm very much interested in the military operations. and the second question is was it just dynamics. and how do they reflect it.

what were your recommendations. >> first of all the relationship between them the talk about the leadership level in the fighters underground. it's like they said there are a lot of things. they are in battle and the rebels are coming and you suddenly see all of that. i don't think there is trust but some different battle fronts they left them in the battle. they are in still good coronation. until the serene involvement it was a chief of staff. the guy was involved in every military aspect of the organization.

when he rose in different commanders we know that when they came to the weekly meetings who died a few months back the cooperation between the leadership themselves as very close. they both see them as one of their best partners especially right now and i would say also the personal relationship which i heard repeatedly they were strong even before which was different when they came to power. it was a lot better and other factors the relationship today is very close and i don't see it there. we don't need that anymore.

let me just say something i think the u.s. government has a robust military assistance program that is basically the cornerstone of u.s. policy that and the desire that they elected any president. the funding was hundred 30 million year. the real issue with that in the way this reflects in u.s. policies is that while washington is imposing or working with them to try to curtail the financing working with the central bank to limit the close accounts at the same time we are cooperating in a note robust fashion with the isf in the general security in

these forces are with no reservation collaborating and passing information on. internal security force. there's no question about that. this administration doesn't appear to have a problem with that. i will do my best to speak up. i two-part question on opening question. recognizing the improvements that the organization has made as a say on the battlefield the enemy gets a vote. obviously the idea is prepared. it is not the same as fighting the idea so how much do you

think the experience that they wouldn't mean if indeed there was another conflict with israel and also as they noted extensive losses how much does it offset would you say the flip side of the same point. if your organization is so disillusioned if there was to be a third war however with that miraculously transform and what it suddenly become energized and passionate about fighting the israelis or with the degradation that they've undergone over the last four years also show them fighting the israelis? >> is going to be relevant

against this idea. the attack i focused on i think that doesn't matter which strategy you choose advanced eventually. it will be an offensive one that could change to shorten the war. i would say this i think for a lot of veterans they thought the army. i think they know and they want remember how they can fight isis but they know that they don't have the america before that have very accurate missiles. i think that has resonated in their mind. i would say this. after 2006 there were a lot of fighters that were not that experience that joined the organization. as they cut their teeth the

first time in the battle and for them they don't remember how i might be taught in different classes but a lot of military men know the best education is regained on the battle not in the classroom. they see it there. and another 20 or 30 young fighters. maybe we should try again against israel. even if they don't infiltrate that front what happened in 2006. we just couldn't took control. in the past they would just retreat and wait for the next one there is a chance right now we will take that. if you take companies and incorporated with the drones and artillery. they know how to do it right now. they learned in battle that

was the point. >> short answer yes. it will definitely bring back the motivation they are resisting and fighting for your own land is always straightforward and fighting there. the longer answer will be capable of doing that. these people need to replace them. it needs more than three years of training and leadership. is a straightforward straightforward yes and no. in terms of strengthening and

bringing back the community and yes definitely another war with israel. >> thank you. [indiscernible] the large refugee population i concern and do you think they can tolerate it. there are probably 4 million there. these are refugees they are not in lebanon. definitely if we asked them

about what they think about it they are the reason that they didn't really that they didn't really they came from the other areas where they had push them out. they know they are there as refugees. if we get to some of that. but also the entire military intelligence. i don't think this is happening at this point.

it was wildly suspected that these bombers were going to go down there and target the shiites. definitely. they had convinced me that they do not want to work with israel. now rather than later. i think the question and every time someone says they will never go into a war when it's not on her neck the legitimacy and the support of the public in terms to ask you to execute a war if they want a war against this they need to go to the public to support it. i don't think they're gonna do it. i'm not sure that you supported.

they support the war. they about kidnapped two of our soldiers. we can't be concerned about this one. i don't know that they would want a war. i can see three different scenarios why a war could happen. this one takes another in my mistake killing two or three high commanders. they will retaliate i think it was six or seven or eight attempt missiles. if they were getting the big convoy between ten and 20 soldiers dead.

we would need to do something. they tried it before maybe they can and try it again. in that scenario. people say that is still trying --dash mike -- strong in the lebanese front. it killed five israelis. we have an incident in 2015 when it was arrested in cyprus. if they think they can target it as well abroad. it is also in x escalation. what does israel want.

it was more desires from one. they had been planning that. and also they had been the main priority is this affecting the economy of course so it is not only that

it creates a desire is for lebanon. so far has below is not influenced by this measure they have their own independent economy but also because of the decrease of funding recently they've always been really good at taking advantage of the economy. this indirectly influences the economy. it is absolutely looking for a need for that. what is the contribution.

[indiscernible] >> with this sanctions and measures they are talking about the money laundering and drug trafficking. it's been affected by sanctions. they had been exposed. the money comes through lebanese banks.

be careful of that. this is negatively influencing the economy and when these sanctions were first put in place it was at the time. they talked about that. four minutes and 21 minutes about the sanctions. >> i think you can't answer that because no one actually knows when it's actually going to end. as long as they keep filling the ranks with new recruits and the level of training they have today they are still fighting there with a thousand. maybe one day.

they will be able to reduce the presence there. right now in lebanon there is a potential for having a presidential election. it looks like that some of them have come to terms with the prospect that the allies. can be president. and the only problem with that is they had decided they don't want him to be present. what is a critical goal. do they want a total takeover. i don't think they want a president now.

i really believe that because they haven't really supported any president. in practice they are not working there. they are much more comfortable with wheat -- week state institutions. and we haven't had the parliamentary elections for a long time. this gives them more freedom in order to go to syria and do whatever they want without the strong state institution. the weaker they are also although this is not an issue a lot of people are questioning whether they are actually supporting and in order to lead to the change of

the power sharing system which would give them more power. it gives them more power. it is not on the table yet but maybe this is always so going there. and political maneuvers. it would be perfect. he is looking to convert the community to the reference. with another significant figure. how does this competition look.

with another significant figure. how does this competition look. with the situation now because the majority has been following it for such a long time. they have a few of followers and he used to be there. the reference now but i have to say that recently i've been talking to a lot of people who are changing their reference when it comes to social issues. a lot of people are going back there has been a lot of competition. it is a small thing here and

there. you see it happening. a lot of people following there. my question as do you think the relationship between that community or they have incentives. they have the same political interests. they have common interests i don't think there is anything in common between them it's not really. even in lebanon they don't. there and the north. in the north.

and they are somewhere else. >> the guy that was in russia they are being motivated. i did eventually. they're talking about that. it's not that we have strategic conversions. if one of the redlines is been broken in syria and when i

took it to moscow back and december and i talked to one of the people i actually thought about the fact that if we were there to go there that's what he said. >> let me ask one final question of both of our panelists. the u.s. priority in syria is obviously the war against isis i don't even think it's on the radar screen. in syria.

from the ongoing financial pressures the u.s. is putting on. what should the u.s. be doing right now to curtail these capabilities. will start as a would you do about syria. i think the u.s. is doing a lot of financial actions. they also started to do a lot of actions there designated by the u.s. treasury. i would say we talk about a lot of that in cutting the floor every day there actually

against the people. they're acting like this is okay. when i do that. i think the focus that you said is on isis. it is much more from the other side. i completely agree with that 100 percent. it's simple enough. there are no more questions. i would like everyone to give a hand to our representatives. what a great session.

i just finished the new brad thor thriller. great work on thrillers. we have gotten into time travel right now. i depends on how much time i get to read. generally it's just on the airplane. i have always been a reader.

followed by the political thriller genre. it helps me unwind. there is a lot of reading to be done but it's all bills and reports and nonfiction i'm breaking on a novel for fun. it's hard time to find time to read. in my they don't seem to be advancing in america. but some the americans have today it also deals with the federal reserve the policies

over the last six years i have heard the average guy. it's why we have the stock market boom. looks like that do they help you with your work here. more confidence in dismantling some of the welfare state a more confidence in the idea that we have do something for to do something for the federal reserve. i always like to read books that are set in foreign countries where i am traveling. with the partnership. i read in tunisia a psychological thriller.

i read out of africa again and a new one called the boulders which is a story of a london lady on the high society living a rather scandalous life in kenya. >> they want to know what you are reading this summer. tweet as your answer. tonight on c-span two book tv in prime time with authors from several book festivals and fairs. we will hear about book tv starting at eight eastern.

book tv on c-span two focuses on the latest nonfiction book release through author interview and book a discussion. the life three-hour look at one authors work with questions from viewers. in-depth there is a one on one conversation. and often with an opposing viewpoint. it airs every saturday at 10:00 p.m. eastern. it's the only national one. cap next here on c-span two.

on responding to the active shooter situation. they spoke at a conference. we will get started. we have to worry about an active shooter if they have yourself in such a situation. thank you chief. our presentation today is about a very unpleasant topic. but as unpleasant at it will be your life may depend upon

it. the theme of our presentation today is that when you are confronted with an active shooter your objective is going to be survival. some of the things we will talk about may be unpleasant but your life could depend upon it. particularly with the level of violence. there is no security issue that is more important to you but to your staff and your family then developing and periodically practicing an active shooter strategy. even the schools in chilled churches today are high visibility symbolic targets there are a lot of people that think simply because they haven't received any threats where they haven't done anything controversial that they don't have to worry while that kind of mindset can lead to major problems because

active shooters sometimes pick institutions strictly for the symbolism and the message it gets. so it's not related to any type of threat you should not be deluded by that. what is an active shooter. we define s and unstable or ideologically motivated individual and sometimes a disgruntled employee. who she people with the intent to kill them and kill themselves. the message they want to convey by death and destruction. if you are building it for your office there is no warning whatsoever. they ordinarily do had signs or symptoms that allow you to prepare. so if you don't have an emergency response plan in place chaos will ensue.

we had found and when it in sue's your employees and staff are going to be picked off by the active shooter. we had found that the chance of survival in the chance of your staff having an orderly response is directly dependent upon your initiative and your leadership for the active shooter response. let me give you a graphic example of how important an active shooter plan can be. on august the fifth of 1993 at about 9:00 in the morning an individual by the name of jack gary stepped off the elevator. he was coming in that day to be sentenced for a large scale marijuana cultivation

operation that he and his wife operated. as he walked out of that elevator the elevator in a process approached the cso the cso had no idea they blew every window out of the building as well as the glass. they walked up to the shooter. he shot and killed they pushed their way in and began walking in the hallway. along the hallway they exploded the sound was deafening to everybody in the building. opened the door and jumped over the counter and for the next several hours mcknight

began firing shots about 50 to 75 rounds detonated 12 pipe bombs the 13th pipe bomb went off in his hand and killed him. it took 100 police officers three hours to secure the building totally before the cast began to subside. i got there the next morning in my capacity as a director into me and the marshall and a couple of reporters telling me we went up and talked to the clerk first. frankly i wanted to let them know how sorry i was for the people that were injured. it looked like a war zone. walls were loan out. i didn't had one person with a scratch on them. we practice every year. everybody has a designated location of where they conceal themselves or where they go to

barricade themselves to make sure that the active shooter had no contact with him and he did not. it was nothing short of a miracle. the judicial conference of the united states recommends that every federal courthouse in america had an annual active shooter drill and i commend it to you. i've spoken to a lot of the judges out here who already have a plan in place but it is very important that you do so. in the inspector from the marshall service is going to walk you through how you can develop an active shooter plan. when you put together your active shooter plan there is one other facet to it to keep in mind. that is making sure that your staff has the resources in case a disaster occurs. in addition to learning to shelter and put those wedges in the door you also need to make sure you have someone in

your courthouse who knows how to operate a defibrillator. to be sure that there is someone has a heart attack you are able to stabilize until rescue arrives. people tell me the defibrillator has the instructions written right on it. but the average person who has not been trained to use that as is good to be reluctant to use that and every second counts when a person has a cardiac arrest. secondly, you want to make sure that you had people trained in cpr. and thirdly you want to have people trained in basic and advanced first aid. and have the resources to put a tourniquet on someone to stop the building -- bleeding if they are shot. ..

>> >> and your staff looks to you for the leadership to putting together a response strategy. i know many of you here have served in the military or law enforcement positions where unfortunately people have been severely injured or killed in the line of duty. i still have scars from that but when something like that occurs there is at great deal of sympathy. but the question that will rise as a few weeks later