shouldn't your president have the highest morale and ethical standards and be an example to our children and our young people in the country. shouldn't his life make a role model for your future children. shouldn't anyone that you elect to this office, always keep his promises. >> we look back to 14 men that ran for office and lost. go to our website to see video of the contenders who had a lasting impact on our process. >> do they not have a right to stand up against a government they do not feel is serving them. who are we to send our young men

to -- no support from the other 85%. >> cspan.org/the contenders. >> i started the book and thought it was an american story, this is a country that worships the idea of living alone. but it more common in japan. >> on after words. in going solo, eric kleinenburg looks at the choice of americans to live alone. former secretary of state condaleeza rice, relative,

connie rice. -- book tv every weekend on cspan2. there is c-span3. get our schedules and see past programs at our websites and you can join in the conversation on social media sites. a live picture this morning from the center for strategic and international studies, turkey's foreign minister is here to talk about the up uprisings in syria, russia and china a vetoed a resolution seeking to stop the violence in that nation. there's a resolution that is sought to the tensions in syria.

we expect it to shortly and we will have live coverage on it when it does. president obama signed a nuclear arms reduction treaty after radification was signed, and we will hear from officials from the state department and secretary of state forearms control, that will begin at 1: 00 eastern and you can see it live on our companion station, c-span2. we expect this meeting to start any moment. obama is expected to speak on the religious institutions

having to cover birth control for women free of charge, the administration announced last month that religious affiliated employers had to include birth control as part of their employment. the president will make an announcement this afternoon, and we are hoping to bring that to you live on the cpsan networks.

>>. okay, ladies and gentlemen, thank you all for coming. my name is john henry. i'm the president here at csis, and i said to the foreign minister the last time we had a crowd like this was when bill gates of here, before he gave his money away. so it was quite a crowd. of course, this is probably the most important, well certainly the most important thing i'm going to do this week and grateful that the foreign minister has come to csis and

made us part of his visit to washington. we have had a chance to develop a very fine working relationship with the foreign minister. i first met him back in 2008, and at the time, felt this is an intelligent person in a remarkable position. what most impressed me was something that sounds so simple, but when he started talking about zero problems with neighbors, it was not a nice idea. wouldn't that be good if every country thought about that as their strategy. unfortunately not all his neighbors have zero problems. he lived in a complicated neighborhood and he keeps being drawn into that neighborhood partly because of the depth of his intellect and energy to make a real difference in the world and he is making an enormous difference in the world. you all know that, that is why

there's so many people here. i don't want to take any time away. i have a lovely long speech i was going to give. anding, that would only irritate you at this stage. so could i ask you to warm receive the foreign minister of turkey, minister davutogtu. applause >> thank you, very much. dr. hamme, for this wonderful destruction, and for this opportunity to meet with these distinguished audience. since you made reference to our previous meeting, i would make reference to some of my previous statements here before. because i think that maybe, maybe because of being a student

of international relations and teaching for many years, i prefer always process analysis rather than picture analysis, maybe some of you want to listen more, my assessment about the existing picture focused on syria, but i will still insist on process analysis from where we are coming, where we are now and where we are going. in one of my conferences this year, i made the reference to modern history, and i said after all big wars, there was some sort of new adjustment of world order through a conference or a new international organization or a new convention, like after turkey was wanting order. after the wars, we had congress

of vienna, after first world war, we had league of nations, after second world war we had umig united nations and a system that was more complicated than the previous experiences. economic, political, new institutionalization. at that time i came here, i said cold war was a long big war. great war. covered almost half a century. after the cold war, still, there's no new set of norms reflecting the needs of the post cold war situation, there's no congress like congress of vienna vienna, there's not a new international organization, and also, there's no reform of the existing international organizations, there has been many discussions on the reforming united nations system, but still united nations is

functioning like before, the last indication was veto, in the -- as if cold war was continuing. so, we have to make first, we have to see big picture. we are facing a huge global economy crisis and a policy crisis around turkey but you have to understand where we are coming from. since there was no adjustment of international system and no new set of norms and no set of reformation of the international organizations, i can tell you that there were three big earthquakes in the last 20 years. earthquake is a good analogy for turks, and maybe for americans who came from los angeles, maybe, i don't know, it was not good for others in washington,

last year, so you can at least understand the psychology of earthquake. earthquake means the existing system is shifting. when i say political earthquake or international earthquake, it means the international system is changing and the main attitudes of the actors are changing. during cold war, we could predict all the assumptions, actions or attitudes of the main actors but after cold war, during these transformation, it was difficult to predict and today it difficult to predict the actions. first, in 1991, the indications of the earthquake came with the fall of the berlin wall.

there were changes to the structure and the result of the earthquake, emergence of new states and transformation of the states in eastern europe. and the basic idea of the earthquake was freedom and democracy. the new concept, the concept of the new world order. now we can ask do we have a new world order or this order? from that time, we, for almost ten years we had observed democratic transitions in eastern europe. this is important, because whenever we as, in turkey, not as a minister of foreign affairs, but as an intellectual, the main criteria in my

decisions is we want to be on the right side of the history, i would come to that point. today, this is the main difference between the actors, those who are understanding the flow of history and those that are trying to resist the flow of the history. after the first decade in the cold war, until 2001, the earthquake was a geo political earthquake and the value was freedom and democracy. turkey that the time was on the winning side of the cold war. we were supposed to win something because we spent a significant part of our budget to nation of defense as a member of nato. but to be frank, when we look at those years, turkey did not win much, we faced many difficulties and many challenges and had to take new responsibilities in

bosnia and kosovo, and to give up an indication, in 1991, our -- in 2001, it was 2,800. the increase of $200 or was not much. in 2001, the second earthquake was security earthquake. the concept of security has changed because of 9/11 so it was seen as security around the nations. when you refer to secretary of defense, it means you are

defending your country against that of another state or another block. but 9/11 shows that there's a need for security everywhere in the world, even if new york and in washington. that changed the concept and mind set of the international system. from freedom to security oriented approach. the regulations were done, new regulations, domestic regulations and migration regulations coming from all things after 9/11 and more security oriented operations, bosnia was freedom. liberating, or whenever -- later was more security needs against terrorism. in this tenure until 2011.

and this is in our government of turkey. we acted differently. we did not want to have a security oriented policy. we wanted to have freedom and democracy oriented politics and what we did. we tried to implement new policies. which one of them was used by doctor hahmre, we tried to define new priorities of turkey on domestic and foreign policy. this in domestic fields the main field was packages. when there were restrictive regulations being used in different parts of the world. they tried to extend democratic

areas, the democracy process. at that time, we declared five principals. new assumptions of turkish policy. to understand our policy today, vis-a-vis syria and tunisia and egypt, we need to refer to these references. the first principal was, the balance between freedom and security. i used these concepts. security and freedom, just to change the mind set of turkey's mind set. turkey for throughout cold war and after the cold war in 1990s taught that the main need of our society is security. security against soviet expansi expansion, security against greece and turkey, and all security references.

what we said, that now there's a new -- there's a need of a new set of norms based on more freedom but equal security. because, again today we have this position, why? because if you sacrifice security for pfreedom, you'll have a cost, if you sacrifice it for regimes you will have -- for many decades, societies were told, that they need to sacrifice from their freedom because there's a security threat for israel or others. similar what we were told throughout the cold war, this winter radical islam will come,

another day, separation will come, another day, division will come, if you have so many fears you cannot have a logical analysis. in order for us to be a democratic government, there should be a balance between security and freedom. and a government is legitimate if he says to his people, to its people that the government we provide maximum freedom, without risking security and maximum security without limiting freedom. so this is still our foreign policy, now in our region, the regimes are facing this challenge. they all prefer security and they tell their people, wait for freedom. maybe another time. maybe another spring. second principal was as doctor

hahmre mentioned, i was not going to refer to this, but i want to be well understood here. zero tolerance with neighbors, why? because we want to change the mind set of foreign policy. before we felt we were having diplomatic problems with all neighbors. but during the second earthquake, we have proven that turkish maybe relations could be improved and today, if you go to turkish people and ask do you feel any threat from any neighbor or how do you see the future of our relations with neighbors, there will be no such psychological fear like cold war that russians are the enemy, like afterwards greeks are our enemies or iran is our main competitor, or bul fwmgaria is

former republic. no. today, everybody today agrees that we need maximum integration with our neighbors we have a problem with syria and it not our choice, it's because of their domestic problem. we want to have zero problems with the people. therefore we need process analysis, not picture analysis, if you have a picture today, you may think that turkey has a problem with syria, no. syrian people in the future, after a process we will be having a excellent relationship with the new syria established with the people of syria stlaes

cannot sacrifice for our future relationed with syria. it was a risk when there was a major statement from turkish grand national convention making a statement against mubarak, asking him to leave. and we were criticized by main opposition if mubarak continues, what will you be doing? and it was interesting, a letter was sent to me by my former colleague, expressing, praising turkish action and polite disappointment about the statement. i responded next day, saying we

tru trust, egyptian people because egyptian people produced one of the most successful society in the world. egyptian people know this best for their own. and because of our rust in the egyptian people, prime minister made this call, they should be given their chance for their own future and after one week, mubarak left. if we were hesitating and we were not sure about our neighbors and we tried to praise or keep good relations with mubarak of course today, turkish prime minister would not be welcomed by around 20,000 egyptians when he went to cairo september last year, or 10,000 people would not have welcomed

him in libya. here our main reference is zero problems with our neighbors means excellent relations with the maximum integration and with the people of our regions. then, we declared other principals like active foreign policy for regional stability and regional reordering of our surrounding region, central asia and middle east and foreign policy for u.n. etcetera. so we made an adjustment in our domestic politics and i can say in the last nine years, after nine years in power, turkey is one of the country's which effectively used the new post,

after shock of security earthquake in 2001. we were not trapped by security paranoia, we were not trapped by crisis. we tried to provide a new horizon, a new vision to our region and to the world. we became member of u.n. security council and we have today, even in last three years we opened 30 new embassies. in different parts of the world. in would years only, we opened 22 embassies in africa and five embassies in american, and when there's a huge economic crisis, why we want to make turkey a country, center of stability