at the same time we can push all developing countries. this is what i hear from african leaders. they don't want to be on the side of questions just saying no, no, no. it's not our responsibility. i feel a very different attitude. i think leadership from the u.s. and china has had a big impact. they know that even though we respect their need for energy, we have to, if we start saying you have to wait for energy because of climate change then i think we will have a real problem. if we say, of course have you access, renewable, and let's make sure develop like the other countries have and let's talk about your contribution to the climate change, that's the conversation that started and i this i that's the conversation that has to grow in intensity between now and paris. >> yes, ma'am? >> thank you, president kim.

very much for your remarks. center for naf val analysis. instead of the marvelous mark sitting next to you, say you had the koch brothers and u.s. climate skeptic, what would you say to those people to envoc their self interest and commitment to climate change? >> i try on this particular issue to say the same thing to everybody. what i start with is that you really got look at the science. and the science is pretty astounding. and the science is one that you really have tomorrow brace it. and then after the science, i would invite them to travel with me. to places that have been

impacted. so i would invite them to visit for example, where i visited just a while ago. then i put it in the same way that david cameron has put it. what he said is, is look, the science is pretty convincing to me. but even if you don't think that this is real, and you think that chances of the terrible events that we predict are not real, even if you think this is 10% chance that this is real, wouldn't you buy insurance against it? isn't that what we do with insurance policies? even if we don't know for sure it's going to happen, isn't it the smart thing do to protect ourselves in case he does? that's how he put it. >> i've been very clear about where we want to go. for me, the science is absolutely compelling. but i know there are people that don't share that view. i would make those arguments and

then we would see where it goes. >> georgetown law school. president kim, the safeguard policies, environment and culture and other things have been done. as you know, 300 ngos walked out of the consultation with the world bank and there is a stinging critique o on the blog of the brookings institution today. could you comment on how you see the new development in light of the impact of potentially very poor neglected communities and people for infrastructure development and the other climate projects that you've identified? >> that's a great question. first of all let me make clear, the safe guards are not yet done. we just put out a draft and we're in the middle of a very intensive negotiation. and i've extended the consultation process into march.

so we take this very, very seriously. and let me just say, we have a role, the management, has a role in putting information together. but the decision as to what they look like are part after negotiation with our board. the member countries of the world bank group. so i made a commitment to not dilute the safeguard. we want them to be better an stronger. so communities from latin america are absolutely convinced that even stronger langth with on indigenous communities is important. countries in africa are saying, are you kidding me, when we begin to ask questions of indigenous people we have problems like the ones in rwanda. where indigenousness, if you will, is complicated and

difficult. i don't know how we will resolve that issue, frankly. i don't know how we will bring extremely strong opinions that come from different parts of the world with different frames together. but that's the job, not just of me, but of the board. so this is why multilateralism is so extremely difficult. you have powerful forces on the board that are arguing about these things all the time. i will do my best to come to an agreement that protects. because we have 188 member countries and group of governors, we have to do it in the context with them. hope that you will continue and others will continue to discuss this as we go forward. >> yes ma'am? >> carmen -- [ indiscernible ].

i would like to ask in the standard why the bank has not included in the draft document that was discussed recently, mandatory gender standards. i think without the women of the world, the world is not going to move forward and the bank has been such a sustainer of advancement. why is that not included in the draft? >> which draft? >> sustainable and environmental framework. >> i don't know the answer other than we have been extremely committed to gender equality. we have cost-cutting solutions that span the entire

organization. we have been trying to lead as much as possible. i don't know the toons that question. rachel, do you know the answer to that question?atoons that question. rachel, do you know the answer to that question?ntoons that question. rachel, do you know the answer to that question?stoons that question. rachel, do you know the answer to that question?wetoons that question. rachel, do you know the answer to that question?rtoons that question. rachel, do you know the answer to that question? toons that question. rachel, do you know the answer to that question?toons that question. rachel, do you know the answer to that question?oons that question. rachel, do you know the answer to that question?ns that question. rachel, do you know the answer to that question?ns that question. rachel, do you know the answer to that question?s that question. rachel, do you >> we have a mic for you rachel. >> my name is rachel kind. i work for jim. one of the -- as jim says, we are in consultation. so this is all part of the consultation. i think the question indicates and there is a lot of discussion around this, how do you put a gender on all of the safe guards? so that would start from the way this which you work with women in the presence of an environmental inspection and you walk into a forest community and ask men what they think about development in the forested area. and you ask women what they think about the forested area. you may get two very different

answers a as you would in the village that i come from and i'm sure if you talked to people in bethesda or on the claim. we are aware of that. how do you deal with the specific issues related to gender and some of the other issues in indigenous people, et cetera. do you put a gender lens across everything or have a stand alone policy on gender? i think that the real feeling that stand alone policy on gender needs to be upstream. safe guards are very much an end of type process to make sure you are doing no harm in your projects. they have to be accompanied by strategic documents and strategy to the bank. and in fact one of the things that jim has do next year is take a huge strategy to the board. but let's talk after the meeting. >> this is just an ongoing argument that is happening between people who are

commenting on the documents, and also our board. there are many, many, you can imagine the number of new stand-alone safe guards that are being requested. and you know, there the discussion with the board which is the 188 countries, is where do you get the greatest impact from stand-alone safe guards or from some way of insuring that at the end of the day we remain accountable for outcomes around je gender equality. this won't be resoxed for at least, you know, we will present a final version to the board sometime in the summer of 2015. tl then the final approval is in about a year. >> how about in the back of the room? and let's try to revert back to the topic of climate change. >> that would be great. >> can you talk about the special problem of and ia and the -- the development needs and

its use of coal and so forth? >> right.nd ia and the -- the development needs and its use of coal and so forth? >> right.ind ia and the -- the development needs and its use of coal and so forth? >> right.nd ia and the -- the development needs and its use of coal and so forth? >> right.dnd ia and the -- the development needs and its use of coal and so forth? >> right.ind ia and the -- the development needs and its use of coal and so forth? >> right.and ia and the -- the development needs and its use of coal and so forth? >> right.the -- the developmentd its use of coal and so forth? >> right. i've had meetinges with prime minister modi and prime minister modi told me he has worked a lot in terms of increasing solar energy. he is a great advocate of solar energy. he has an enormous problem in the sense that he has to find ways to provide energy for still 400 million people in india who live on less than $1.25 a day while at the same time having a positive impact. in my discussions with him, he has been clear that he is very taupe havi open to having the discussions. but the first thing they say is we need the clahance to industrialize. we need energy. i'm hopeful in the sense that the leadership of china and the u.s., i think was unexpected.

even at the g-20 meeting, every single one of the leaders there knew there was a reconing coming. they would have to state what they were going to do. we would continue to work with them closely. do everything we can do to help india down a cleaner path. for example, if we could build more bus transit systems in india, if we could do many more thousands of kilometers of bus route to transit system, that would have a huge impact. they have already gone to natural gas and run buses that are much cleaner. there are lots of things we can do. what prime minister modi is looking for, and this is our responsible to him, he said if you can find cleaner ways of accomplish wlag i have to accomplish, and that is creating jobs for all of the young people, all of the people that are efrmixiting schools and loc for work, if you can find that,

i would clohoose it. i remain hopeful but it is a complicated one. 400 million people living on less than $1.25 a day. >> one or two more questions on the topic of climate change. yes? >> thank you. let me offer critique on your presentation. you have one of the few positions in the world that gives you a pulpit to frame the issues in the way that people take heart. what i'm finding is that when you talk about objectives unless we do something in the next 20 years, there's no prospect of meeting those objectives. they are all politicians who think they can postpone the problem. so what i look for in a presentation is what are you saying that would cause a mainstream politician to develop the political will to take very hard close is within the next 10, 15 years, not 50 years.

what i hear is a summation of what countries can do and what they should do. we have all of these people at the bank that can help you and understand these things. but the urgency and certainty frankly, that the consequences are dire within the next 20 years, not in the timeframe of the 2100 would suggest. so you don't have to agree with me, but i wonder what your reaction is. and we are into $70 oil. and that is not complicated for this issue. it means it postpones tremendously people's incentive to get off of oil. there's a rush to the resource. >> first of all, i think my mother would thank you for calling me wonky. i've been in a political position for so long now that i welcome that. but first of all, i don't think we know what is going to happen.

there are equal numbers of people and i think we don't really know what is going to happen. and if you read our documents, and we have put out a lot of documents, and they are very specific about what will happen in asia and what happens in latin-america. we have been very specific about the approach is that we won't limit our activity just to giving dooms day scenarios because in my view changing his or her mind is an extremely important task. but in the meantime how do we increase financing for renewable

energy. it makes the cross more resilient and feeds more people and it is good for the environment. such a no-brainer and it is not being done at anywhere near the level that it should done. that's very clear. i hope you guys are successful along with us and reading our documents and convincing the politicians to change their minds in the meantime, what about cleaner more livable cities. cities are built in ways that are not cleaner and not more livable. we are aggressively moving toward an saying look, 70% of the missions happens in cities. if you can make them cleaner and more livable, denser with the bus rapid transit, with all of the other things that have been proven to lower the carbon footprint then it is something we should do right now. this something that really changed about the world bank group that we are not straddling the fence any more. we are saying this is a real problem and instead of just

engaging in -- because see people, the thing i worried about is that everyone putets everything on a binding political agreement for cop 21. that might not happen. where we want to be is that by that meeting we will have worked out both mitigation and finance activity for the year forward for the poorest countries that we will have work ietd plan for building cleaner more livable cities. it is agriculture would have taken off and funding for renewable energy and in other words, we cannot wait for the politicians to change their mind to do things we know today will make a difference. that's our approach and i urge you to read our turn down the heat documents. they are pretty frighten frommi fromming yen /* /- frightening. >> let's close on those remarks. thanks for your leadership.

this is long-term view and short term view, one to harness markets, harness partnerships with the ngos. your leadership is needed and we appreciate it very much. nz are. this week on q & a, on the trail with mitch mcconnell. >> we have been planning for

four years. this started in 2010, right after he saw what happened in the republican primary for rand paul, republican contender. he beat the hand picked guy in the primary. that point mcconnell realized i have to recalibrate everything i know about republican primary politics in my home state and making changes, and hiring key staff and starting to build the very sophisticated infrastructure knowing this is the most difficult race if the campaign. >> they knew they would spend a lot of money on technology. they watched the obama campaign in 2008 and 2012. they watched harry reid's under 2010, where he beat bruce lungs ford and the newest technology. he said would he build the most thorough senate campaign ever. >> in american history.

in american history. and he probably got there. >> to mark ten years of q & a, we are airing one program from each year starting december 22 at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> military officials and researchers discuss strategy for combatting terrorism at a forum in arlington, virginia. some topics include chuck hagel's resignation and campaign against isis and syria. this is just under two hours. >> okay, i think we'll try to get started here today.

welcome again to all of you. and i think this is probably the 250th seminar that he will run this afternoon or some number like that. but we've had a few before on the topic today about the military role of the terrorism and the like and yona will touch on that. on behalf of mike's webinar, ceo, chairman and board of regions, i want to formally welcome all of you here this afternoon. it is great that you would join us and we hope that you enjoy it. we have a very, very distinguished panel as always. but this looked particularly like an extinguished group -- i mean distinguished. i'm sure they will have an interesting set of messages for us. i think that topic is most germane and certainly it's been in the news quite a bit here

recently. and my only comment would be that in my humble p not there is no such thing as only a military anywhere in the world for any reason. it has to be a team effort and it has to be cut across all of the elements of national power influence and capability whether it is diplomatic or technology or society tal or cultural, whatever, whatever. so i would ask you to keep that in mind as we hear about this today. because we make a big mistake in my opinion when we talk only about the military and only about what can be done and so on and so forth. and clearly in this kind of environment, there's more than' ever a distinct need for what many term inner agency type process type work et cetera. with that, i turn it over to our leader, yona. and you got it.

>> thank you, general. i'm not the leader, i'm a solder. thank you very much. i would like first to thank the cosponsors here. as well as the institute. my colleague, professor dunnwallace, and also those that are not here, but they work with us for a long time, center for security law and university of virginia law school. and graduate and come back later. and i would like to first introduce the panel of general gray is going to take over for a while.

and first we have regular general in u.s. army. council to the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. right here to my left. that's brigadier general david brisk u.s. marine corps. currently vice president on strategy and planning division. and going back two weeks later. and next is dr. lawrence carr from center for american progress and center of defense information and also georgetown. next is political counsellor of the embassy of egypt and the u.s.

and in syria for two years. and finally of course i mentioned, professor dunnwall yas. we appreciate very much the c-span effort for communicate actually globally and to bring the pressages around the world so we're very grateful for that. and as usual we try to say one word in terms of education.

that is to say in honor of the men and women who are serving in the armed forces, combatting terrorism, we have to recall the sacrifice and obviously express our sympathy to the families of those who have fallen during the battles. in fact, just a couple days ago there was a joint u.s. and yemen raid conducted in yemen. they rescued about, i think, about eight hostages. but unfortunately, they failed to rescue others, including an american, british, turkish, i think, and south africa. but it shows that international cooperation has failed, is very critical and we will discuss it.

and let me make a footnote before i turn it over to general gray. he mentioned the seminars that we conducted. i would like it mention that we tried to develop academically a project dealing with the role of the military in combatting terrorism. there is part of our effort. also we are living with that particular aspect through other projects, such as weapons of mass destruction and recently we're co-sponsoring also a blue ribbon study group on biodefense. actually we have the meeting yesterday with our cosponsors, and the institute. and it is by senator joe leiberman and tom ridge and we do have other distinguished

people participate in that. now the general mentioned the number of seminars we are going all the way back. and of course generals from the united states and many other countries, egypt, israel, turkey, india, pakistan, et cetera, et cetera, over the years. and we're publishing the materials. the most recent event we have was on security just about a month ago. dealing elowebola and the role the military and combatting terrorism. not only isis but other groups and so forth. so we left some information for

you, i think, to look at this particular time and you're welcome to be in touch with us about cooperation. we take your advice on the various projects we are involved with. now, i would like to introduce general gray, who needs no introduction. we are talking about leadership. number one, i would like to mention the book that really showed, attract attention of people in the united states all over the world. and about the true nature of the leader. so this is a marine corps and for the speakers in a minute, now just a little footnote related to general gray. and it would be historical, historical in the sense that i

checked actually how can we describe general gray? and it's not easy. of course a formal, i think, from the marine corps et cetera, et cetera. but i discover that king phillip of macedonia, the father of alexander the great, and i have to be very careful and cite what he said. and he said that and i quote, an army of deer led by a lion is more to be feared than an army of lions led by a deer. and to describe general gray, i'm goning to talk about the

lion, but i will say a great american. now it is all over.ing to talk lion, but i will say a great american. now it is all over. >> you just gave your last speech at these seminars. can i tell you that. i apologize. but that was not in the script. it was not needed. it wasn't programmed and besides, i'm a follower of gaga khan. you want to dazzle us your foot work in a graduate of west point. he came into the army as an infantry officer. because he majored in computer science. and that's the way they do it in the united states army. and he served year in the airborne organization and the like. around 19 t93 he got drafted in

the business. but we have people like the general with a very, very good background in matters of military infantry and what soldiering is all about and move on into the jag operation as such. and within that construct, he has been just about everywhere with everybody that's anybody in terms of trying to help out with legal ramifications of what we are involved. and he served with both the 82nd and with the 101st airborne. both in afghanistan and central command. and everywhere where the action is the loudest, if you will. so it is a great privilege to introduce you and take over. >> there is a few booby traps here. >> they trained us right. thank you very much. it is a tremendous honor to be here.

this panel is intimidating to be sitting next to such amazing pep. and the audience. i saw the roster and talent that was out there. i was getting more nervous when yonah was introducing general gray. and every time he mentioned lion he looked at general gray. every time he said deer, he looked at me. i'm not sure how to take that. i'm not sure. >> any of the views i say here, are my views. not the army or joint chiefs. i'm afraid my talk will sound a little bit like the role of the military lawyer. i think you will get great perspectives on the role of the military but you invited a lawyer so you will get a lawyer's perspective and focus as much on the law as everything. because that's where i focus pli

efforts. my client, pli boss is the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and by law it is his job to give the best advice to the secretary of defense, the president, national security council and to congress when it comes to taking military actions as one of the instruments of national power. i appreciate what general gray said, it is not just the military that combats terrorism. it is our inner agency, intergovernmental. partners throughout the world that help us in combatting terrorism. so not just the military but obviously today we're focussing on that. so when it comes to combatting terrorism, my boss, the chairman, his role is to present options to the secretary of defense and the president. present military options as part after variety of other national power instruments of national power.

these options mr. president. options mr. secretary, that you can use to take on a particular situation. to solve a o particular problem. to combat terrorism. et cetera. and as part of that, i give him legal advice on the military options. i advise him whether or not i believe those are legal and my staff reviews those and so forth as part of that process. now one of the challenges for the military today, and it is not a legal challenge per se, it is real more of a feasibility challenge. we are seeing a shrinking military in the u.s. as we look at the military instrument of power, we are in a resource constrained environment, facing not only shrinking military and shrinking resources but i would say growing global claels. i don't think we have seen the problems around the world that we face today at any time at least through my 30-year career,

29, 30-year career. as you examine the different options that the military can bring to bear, one of the things that the chairman and vice chairman and others have begun to think about and present to the secretary a enpresident are the so opportunity costs become an important part of the military

advice that my boss provides to the secretary and to the president when it comes to considering how to combat terrorism or take on any of the other number of challenges that we face today. so you know, as i advise the chairman of the joint staff, i'm looking at the legal basis for any of the use of force. particularly when it comes to combatting terrorism. the first thing when it look at is the legal basis for using force. there is primary three. those of you who are lawyers in the room are very familiar with this. but typically to use military force, under international law, you have to have u.n. security council resolution. you have to have the consent of the nation involved. or have a self-defense basis, national self-defense basis. that could also include a national self-defense basis. as i analyze proposed option that the chairman would propose to the president, the first thing we typically look at is, is there an international lowell

basis for the action pro proposed. and i advise him on that. perhaps just as critically or more critically is the domestic legal basis.