you removed the credit limit set your spending a lot of your credit limit. if you go near the maximum and taken away so you're using a high percentage, otherwise, causing a credit card does not have a significant effect on your score. host: tucson, ariz., on a republican line. caller: this has to do with credit utilization i got roped into a credit card as a college student in my early 20's and ran up $10,000 in debt. that is a lot of money for a 20- year-old. i paid off over many years. last year, i got that paid off. i closed the account. i have no credit cards now. i have now play harder time getting any kind of credit because i have no credit. in the past, i would of had an option of $10,000 and i would of

had a better chance of getting another credit card. now that i have no opportunities to run up debts, i cannot get credit. hostguest: in order to have a ct score, you need to have one open account and it has to have been open for six months. that is the minimum for fico to calculate credits corporate. you can also have a car loan, a mortgage, or some kind of personal loan that has also been opened for six months and which there is a payment record. if you have none of those days, you will have trouble when you go to apply for credit. you have closed all of your couch and you do not have a mortgage and you don't have a car loan and you suddenly decide that you need credit, you will

be in trouble. if you know that will happen, it is probably worthwhile to try to get a credit card and establish a payment record so that you have a credit score and you can prove that you were creditworthy. host: joan goldwasser >> sunday a look at the 48 states facing a short fall with scott pattison. the political outlook and the 2010 midterm elections with peter hart and bim mcinturff. following that. the latest book, notes from the cracked creal live at 7:00 a.m.

on c-span. this is c-span's america and the courts. next supreme court justice, ruth bader againstburg and melanne vs verveer.

hometown, and this is my favorite lecture series, too. among our president's innovations, he created a new post at the state department, ambassador at large for global women's issues. and for that important post, he chose melanne verveer, an altogether fitting appointment, freeing women worldwide from fear and want and enabling them to develop their talents without artificial restraint is the mission of the new ambassadorship. with melanne at the helm, i anticipate women's rights will become central to human rights agenda. she has an extraordinary capacity for, and in her new

job, she has become a globetrotter. functioning fully on not more than four hours of sleep a night, and i know how that is, she prolongs her workday and i'm told she's able to adjust to time changes instantly. indicative of her awesome efficiency, she turned out thanksgiving dinner for her family just 48 hours after she returned from an arduous journey in asia. for decades, melanne has been a strong advocate for women's full citizenship stature. prior to her current appointment, she was probably best known for her service as deputy chief of staff to first lady hillary clinton.

melanne met bill clinton -- i think i have it right -- even before hillary did. she and the then future president were students at georgetown in the mid 1960's, where she gained fluency in russian and earned bachelor and masters degrees in languages. melanne also met her partner in life at georgetown, philip verveer, but theology class brought them together. philip too has ambassador status in the obama administration. the asked who ranks higher in the two-ambassador family, husband phil, their two children and two grandchildren, i am reliably informed, would give the same answer. she's the boss.

their widely shared appraisal of melanne's white house role is this. no first lady staff ever had a political operative of the caliber and experience of melanne verveer. critics could point to no flaws except possibly one that would hardly disturb bill and hillary clinton. melanne has a tendency to be just a little late, just as i do . among posts that equipped her fer home run white house work and now her current mission, she coordinated civil rights and urban affairs for the u.s. catholic conference's national office, served as field manager for common cause, was legislative director for senator george mcgovern.

before joining bill clinton's 1992 presidential campaign and later the clintons' white house staff, she was executive vice president of people for the american way. she is a co-founder and was the c.e.o. of the non-profit vital voices global partnership, a flourishing organization that encourages and trains women in the developing world, including iraq and afghanistan, to gain leadership posts in government and in commerce. it is rumored that in her white house years, melanne used her computer screen to post thickets. today she never leaves home without her two blackberries. friends report that she is a marvelous host, and also a world

class shopper. called back to asia days after exhausting travel, she remarked with a smile, "it's a great opportunity to take care of the christmas shopping." summing up what melanne believes and strives mightly for all to understand, she said, investments in women have the greatest positive correlation to enhancing a country's general prosperity and poverty alleviation. would you all please join me now in a warm welcome, a very warm welcome, to ambassador at large melanne verveer. [applause] melanne

>> well, justice ginsburg, thank you so much for that introduction. even though there were some exaggerations, i must admit. but i am indeed so privileged and honored to be here tonight to deliver the annual justice ruth bader ginsburg distinguished lecture on women and the law. and i thank the new york city bar for inviting me. you heard some references to globetrotting. but i did recently did return from a trip to asia to four countries, and in seoul, south korea, i was invited to give a talk in observance of international human rights day. and when i met the south korean

human rights commissioners, the first comment i got was about the significance of president obama's signing the lily led better fair pay act. and as all of you know, it overturned the supreme court decision that would have applied very strict limits to acts of pay discrimination. now it is noteworthy that in his first bill signing as president of the united states, president obama was upholding justice ginsburg's interpretation of the law in the dissent she filed in the 2007 decision. [applause] she once noted that dissents speak to a future age, the

greatest dissents do become the dominant view. so that's the dissenter's hope, she said. they are writing not for today, but for tomorrow. and that is exactly what happened in this case. i was serving as the chief of staff to the first lady in the clinton administration when president clinton announced the nomination of justice ginsburg as only the second woman to the highest court. he said at the time that she was brilliant, had a compelling life story whose record was interesting. she was independent, progressive, but we were cheering because she was a champion for women's rights. the justice and i share a very, very dear friend. national public radio's legal correspondent for the supreme

court, nina totenberg. nina reminded me that justice ginsburg began her crusade for gender equality in partnership with her husband marty, with whom she shares a very deep bond, perhaps in all things but cooking. marty is a great cook, and i know that from firsthand experience. years ago, marty spotted a report on a court ruling in a case involving a man named charles morris, who had claimed a dependent care deduction on his taxes for the money he spent caring for his elderly mother when he was on the road for his job. the i.r.s. had disallowed the deduction, noting that congress allowed it only for women and divorced or widowed men. now, mr. morris represented himself in the tax court,

arguing that if he were a dutyful daughter instead of a son, he'd be allowed the deduction. the court concluded that the internal revenue code was immune from constitutional challenge. a claim that marty ginsburg thought was preposterous. he showed his wife the decision, and she agreed they had to take the case. and went on to conclude that the solution was not to invalidate the statute, but to apply it equally to both sexes. the ginsburgs won in the lower courts and the government appealed to the supreme court. the government said the lower court's decision cast a cloud of unconstitutionality over literally hundreds of federal statutes. to prove its point, the

government appended to its briefs a list of hundreds of federal statutes. now, as nina notes, these were the very laws that ruth bader ginsburg would litigate and challenge over the next decade. by the@@@@@@@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @, >> on the court, she tibs to be that voice for justice and women under the law. it is gratitude i stand here as the ambassador at large for global issues. because of the position i now hold speaks volumes about the i

am important abc of global issues in u.s. global policies. of women. women in the united states have the opportunity and responsibility, not only to raise our own voices against inequality and injustice, as justice ginsburg has done again and again. but we also have the responsibility, i believe, to empower others to raise theirs. contributing to the advancement of women's rights and the rule of law frees those voices. next year, we will mark the 15th anniversary of the u.n. fourth world conference on women that took place in beijing. some of you may remember it. some of you may have been active in preparing for it and

participating in it. others have you may have been very young. it was there that hillary clinton as first lady in an historic keynote address said i believe that it is time to break the silence, it is time for us to say here and for the world to hear that it is no longer acceptable to discuss women's rights as separate from human rights. she detailed a litany of abuses against women and girls, from dowry burning, to domestic violence, to rape as a tool of war, and she punctuated all of these statements with the phrase that each of them was a violation of human rights. as the violation of human rights when babies are denied food or

drowned or suffocated simply because they are born girls. it is a violation of human rights when women and girls are sold into slavery. and so on. and then she issued the statement that has echoed around the world. if there is one message that goes forth from this conference, it is that human rights are women's rights, and women's rights are human rights. the polite audience, typical of the united nations gathering, was very silent at first. i frankly worried that the speech wasn't catching on. but then there were waves of applause as each statement came forth about the violations of human rights. there was a crashen doe that

grew until the pounding sounded like an explosion as the first lady called these crimes with which her audience was all too familiar. when she called them what they were, violations of human rights. i remember not long after that speech, she was participating in an international radio call-in program, and a male caller asked her, mrs. clinton, just what did you mean when you said women's rights are human rights? and she said, well, sir, close your eyes. and think of all the rights you enjoy as a man. well, women should have the same. it can be difficult after nearly 15 years to appreciate how simple and yet how revolutionary characterizing women's rights

this way, has not something separate from human rights, but part of it. beijing sparked a movement that made a call to action out of women's access to education, health care, jobs, credit, freedom from violence, and the opportunity to enjoy equal rights and participate fully in the political and economic lives of their societies. 189 countries adopted a platform for action, which was a very ambitious blueprint for women's equality. as governments and civil society now prepare worldwide for events that will mark the 15th anniversary of beijing, we need to recommit ourselves to action and we need to assess our

progress and do develop strategies and new ways to address the persistent obstacles that still hold back the advancement of girls and women all around the world. the beijing agenda is an unfinished agenda. all around the world, women are blazing new trails and triumphing over long-entrenched obstacles as they work to create a better world for all of us. in evaluating our progress, i would like to begin by focusing on an element of concern for international law. one that is a prerequisite for so many of the other agenda items. security, inclusive security. because unless we include women in our discussions about security, and in our discussions about achieving security, there

can neither be lasting peace nor stability. during the last few months, the united nations has taken an important step to strengthening the existing u.n. tools that we have had to address sexual violence as a tactic of war, and to reassert the place and role of women in conflict resolution. two months ago, the security council unanimously adopted a united states sponsored resolution, 1888, the second secretary clinton spoke on behalf of, because it is clear the united nations needed to improve its response to these sexual violations committed during armed conflicts. the resolution recognized that

presenting and responding to this violence that deliberately targeted civilians would significantly contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security. yesterday, she delivered an address on the human rights agenda of the 21st century, and she expanded on this. she said, we have to remain focused on women, women's rights, women's roles, women's responsibilities. as i said in beijing in 1995, human rights are women's rights, and women's rights are human rights. but, oh, how i wish it could be so easily translated into action and changes. that ideal is far from being realized in many places around the world. but there is no place that so

epitomizes the very difficult, tragic circumstances confronting women than in eastern congo. i joined her on her trip to go last august, which is the epicenter of the most violent and chaotic regions on ert. she said yesterday about that, when i was there, i met with victims of horrific gender and sexual violence. and i met with refugees driven from their homes by many military forces operating there. i heard from those working to end the conflict and to protect the victims in such dire circumstances. i saw the best and the worst of humanity in a single day. the unspeakable acts of violence that have left women physically

and emotionally brutalized and the heroism of men and women themselves, of the doctors, the nurses, the volunteers, working to repair bodies and spirits, they are on the front lines of the struggle for human rights. seeing firsthand their courage and tenacity, their internal fortitude that keeps them going, is humbling, but it inspires me every day to keep working. the resolution on whose behalf she spoke two months ago at the u.n. was all about that and what continues to this day. the resolution calls for the appointment of a special representative to lead, coordinate, and advocate for efforts to end sexual violence, and for u.n.'s rapid deployment of the team of experts to

conflict areas, to work to strengthen the rule of law, enhance accountability, and address impunity before the terrible kinds of situations that exist today in the eastern d.r.c. happen again. sexual violence as a tool of conflict doesn't happen as an isolated phenomenon. the perpetrators deliberately target women because doing so is an efficient means of destroying entire communities. when women are attacked as part of a deliberate and coordinated strategy, large populations become not only displaced, but destabilized. a common thread that runs throughout the unfinished beijing agenda is that in each

area, still awaiting progress and improvement, it is fundamentally a manifestation of the low status of women and girls around the world. whether we're working towards inclusive security, ending the violence in the d.r.c., or elsewhere in the world, including women in peace negotiations, or ending dowry burnings, domestic violence, or exclusion from the political process, change in their communities.

there are five interconnects areas particularly that we need to address in order to raise the status of women and work toward real security. first, investing in education. girls' education is the most effective development investment that a country can make. the benefits to girls and their families are well documented, from better health and nutrition, to delayed marriage and enhanced employment opportunities. studies show that an extra year of education increases girls' income by 10% to 20%. and is an important step in breaking the cycle of poverty, which is manifested in too much of the world. of the approximately 13 million illiterate young people in the world, 63% are female.

so we have our work cut out for us. to be sure, we have made great strides. take, for example, the number of girls that are in school today in afghanistan from almost none to 2.6 million. yet at the same time, the lingering global economic crisis has increased the number of girls dropping out of school and the number of families feeling the strains of keeping them in school, foreshadowing potential problems down the road. every girl should be able to go to school. otherwise, we not only shortchange them, we shortchange our world. second, investing in women's health. health care is a bedrock issue.

it is inconceivable that in this 21st century, a woman would die every minute in childbirth somewhere in the world. and so many more are disabled for life. these deaths are not occurring because the world lacks the medical knowledge or the skills to prevent them. many are occurring because it is not a global political priority. too many women lack access to modern forms of family planning, services, and information. in addition, the infection rate of hiv/aids grows at an alarming rate, particularly among adolescent girls. so while we're spending so much rightly on retroviral drugs to keep people alive, the growth is still occurring in the infection itself among so many more. the aids pandemic has a woman's

face. women who lack basic health care ar who face the prospect of death from common life experiences like pregnancy and childbirth are not women who can participate fully, freely, and equally in the political and economic life of their countries. president obama has announced a global health initiative that we are very much focused on implementing at the state department. it provides for the first time significant new resources to combat the high rate of maternal and child mortality around the world, and to prevent millions of new h.i.v. infections. third, investing in women's economic participation. multiple studies have shown that women are the key drivers of

economic growth. from the world economic forum, to the united nations, to major corporations, they all say the same thing. or as the economist magazine summed it up in an article, forget china, forget india, forget the internet. it's women who drive g.d.p. women invest up to 90% of their incomes in their families and communities, and they are the best and most efficient investment in raising the standard of living around the world. over the last 15 years since beijing, when microcredit really rose to the fore , it has lifted up tens of millions of women and their families out of poverty. today upwards of 80% of microborrowers are women.

you've all heard of muhammud eunice and what he has been able to do and so many others like him in the developing world. microcredit, as important as it is, and it needs to continue to grow, but it is not enough. women need education and training and the ability to grow their businesses beyond microbusinesses into small and medium size enterprises. trade and economic policies that affect them rarely consider their needs. this has to change if their potential for economic growth is to be unleashed, and if our world is to benefit. and that is an issue that we are also focusing on. fourth, promoting women's political participation. women are still underrepresented in the town councils, the parliaments, and on the courts

of nearly every country on earth. their voices need to be heard, not only because women have the right to participate in processes and decisions that affect their lives, but also because the world needs to hear women's perspective and experiences. fifth, investing in programs to combat violence against women. it is a global pandemic. the scope of violence against women and the scale make it simultaneously one of the largest and most entrenched human rights violations and development issues before us. violence affects girls and women at every stage of their lives and much of the world. this violence cannot be explained away as cultural or private. it is criminal. these kinds of abuse not only

destroy the lives of individual girls and women, but rob our world of the talent that it urgently needs. it must be a policy imperative for all of us. and i'm happy to say that in recent weeks, both the united states congress in the senate foreign relations committee and the house foreign relations committee have held ground breaking hearings on violence against women, certainly as a human rights issue, but also as an economic issue, and as a security issue. since beijing, more and more countries have passed laws criminalizing violence against women. yet it continues to exact a toll on all societies. these laws are too often not implemented or enforced. and there is too often too large

a gap between the legal status of women, de jure, and de facto. no country can prosper without half its women. solving the problems the world faces requires the full participation of women as peacemakers and peace builders, as policy experts, as decision makers, as leaders, ensuring that women can reach these roles requires that they have safe access to education and safety is still e louisive in much of -- elusive in much of the world, that they are healthy, that they have economic opportunities, that they can parties pailt in their country's political processes, and that they can do all of this free from intimidation, harassment, and

the ever present threat of violence. as i said at the outset, we have seen progress around the world. in many countries, the legal age for marriage has been raised. more girls are going to school. domestic violence has been criminalized. quotas and other allocation systems have been adopted to ensure women's political representation and equitable divorce laws have been enacted. often it is the dedication and commitment of very ordinary women who do the most extraordinary of things. in morocco, family law reform has been achieved after years of struggle. women were even imprisoned for their advocacy. today they have new rights with regard to divorce and child custody.

adjudication of such matters is no longer the jurisdiction of religious courts, but rather civil courts. there were powerful voices who tried to keep women from their rights by misapplying religion to justify their opposition. the women in morocco fought back, in effect reclaiming their religion, and when the king announced the new reform, he cited koranic verses to support the new law. today that law is being taught to lawyer and judges so it can be implemented and enforced, and to all moroccan women, particularly those in the rural areas, so that they can know about the remedies to which they are now entitled. in yemen, a very young girl was married off at the age of 9 to a man her grandfather's age. he was violent and abused her

physically. she found her way to the courthouse. everyone towered over the child. she was ignored for several hours. and finally a female lawyer noticed her and said why are you here? and the child said i want a divorce. the lawyer took her case as well as those of several other girls in similar circumstances. she won and the girls are back in school where they belong. in yemen, in part due to the international attention that these cases attracted, is having a national conversation about raising its legal age for marriage. in pakistan, a woman was gang raped by four men in a

neighboring tribe in her village. in the ordinary curious of things in situations like this, the victim of an attack would be expected to kill herself because the violence perpetrated on her brought dishonor to her and her family. but she was not an ordinary victim. instead, this illiterate, brutalized, and shunned woman found the strength to take her case to court. and ultimately she won. and with a very small settlement, she created a center for victims of abuse, and i saw her recently and that center has now expanded to other villages and she has built two schools, one for boys and one for girls, and she enrolled herself in the school for girls. she told me she wasn't doing as well as she had hoped, but she was in the equivalent of fifth grade.

when asked why she did this, she said, nothing in her village would ever change without education. this past year in kuwait, women finally won seats in the parliament. cue weighty women, after a long struggle, only learned the right to vote and stand office in 2005. it took them four more years to prevail in an election. but prevail they did finally, winning four seats in the parliament. and i might add all four women have their ph.d.'s from the united states. in these and so many related ways, i'm proud that the united states has played a leading role, either through our government's foreign assistance programs, or through the programs and examples of civil

society like many of you represent. attorneys and businesswomen have partnered with women around the world as mentors, trainers, co-collaborators, to share their practices, exchange experiences, and provide support. in addressing women's access to justice, we realize that raising our voice for equal rights and equal treatment under the law is necessary. but it is not sufficient. passing laws is important, but it is not nearly enough because laws must be backed and enforced by effective and responsible governments. judges and legal practitioners are in critical positions, not only to influence how laws are made, but to help ensure that they are indeed enforced. there is so much we can do to

support women who are changing the world for the better through the legal profession. the beijing agenda can still be our road map, but we have our work more than cut out for us. i often think about the first women's rights convention that took place in the united states. it was over 160 years ago, and a group of women and some very supportive men -- every good cause needs the support of men -- adopted a declaration of sentiments. it was a very early kind of beijing agenda, if you will. it called for equal rights in america and was dwopted at the first women's rights convention in seneca falls, new york. one of the brave women who

participated wrote about her experience in her mem waters. she was 19 years old. she was a glove maker. and her life was pretty miserable. she worked long hours, with no hope of keeping her meager wages. she could not own property. she could not vote. she could not get a divorce. if she found herself in a bat marriage. so she decided to go to this women's rights convention in hopes of securing a better life. and she wrote that she was terrified that nobody else would be going. but as the sun came up, at first, the road was empty. but then at a cross road, she saw women and men in carriages,

wagons, and on foot. gradually they formed a long procession to equality. thanks to people like justice ginsburg, thanks to so many others ordinary and not@@@@@@@@d >> we are still on that road. women from every continent continue on that road together. i thank all of you for walking the extra mile, for all you do to promote equal justice, international law, women's progress and human rights. i thank you jussfiss

beginningsberg. we hoe you a great debt of gratitude. we need all of us to with the effort. to do otherwise, would be to hold back one of the most powerful positive forces for shape l the globe. for anything less. thank you very much. [applause] >> i think we are all grateful that we are so well represented around the world. and we are also fortunate that the ambassador will take a few questions from the audience. so if you would like to raise your hand -- we don't have any microphones, but i think most of you in the audience are capable

of being heard. any questions? >> the conversation has so wonderfully gone to international human rights, this seems to be the conception in this country that all is well here and that we don't need more than we already have, which i really disagree with. so i'd like your thoughts on cdaar. it's the convention to end discrimination against women. it's a u.n. treaty. which we have not ratified. >> and we hope we can get it ratified this year, next year. it is a top priority for the obama administration. it requires a super majority in the senate, and that has been the problem. the closest we've come in the

past is to get it out of the senate judiciary committee. we are one of a tiny group of other mostly -- states who have not ratified cdar. it doesn't matter where i travel, one of the first questions i get is when will the united states ratify cdar? it is frankly very, very embarrassing. there are those who say, but look at the countries who have ratified it? they are among the worst offenders of women's rights. but i know firsthand in those countries that that is the tool women are using to promote change in their countries, because they are holding their governments responsible for what they did. so we are hoping to get this done. we are working to get this done.

certainly many in civil society, in the groups are very engaged. i hope i can stand here one day again and say we finally ratified it, but we have a struggle ahead of us. >> i was wondering about the status of the covenant on social, cultural, and economic rights which we also never ratified and which are also very, very important for women's rights. and the fact that we did things like an old cold war hangover that shouldn't exist anymore. >> you know, there's a long list of treaties that we haven't ratified. it's almost as though we have some kind of phobia. but there are those who headache the arguments that they'll somehow prevail in mustering the

votes against. the rights of child treaty has never been ratified. there's a long list that will probably go forward in the senate that includes a law, disarmament treaties having to do with weaponry, and also certainly in the top priority, cda. but as far as the others, we're going to have to get through the first year first assuming we manage to do that. >> i stand corrected. we do have a microphone. i've been asked please wait for the microphone to come over. >> hi. what are your thoughts on the male population in sri lanka, especially women and children,

the displacement? >> the camels have recently been put down according to the government, and it's a serious situation in terms of the plight of those who are in the camps. we have had personnel go and try to assess what is happening, and we are calling on the government to do all that they can to begin to change the situation. but it is a worrisome one. >> what specifically are you hoping to accomplish in this coming year, and how do you see yourself actually making a difference? >> well, you know, i think

success in this new role will be determined by how well we integrate these issues into the overall work of the state department. as you know, i think, the state department has many responsibilities. there are regional bureaus literally covering the face of the globe. there are economics bureaus, human rights, the office for trafficking of persons and so on. it is our hope that eventually this position won't be needed because women's issues will become part of everything else the state department does and be a consideration. and that's certainly what the administration looked at in making this position a reality, and that is when you think about issues with respect to security,

economics, the environment, governance, you name it, women are -- need to be part of the solutions, need to be part of the decision making, and certainly are impacts in some way. -- impacted in some way. so take for for example, the administration has a food security initiative to end hunger and enhance agriculture productivity. it's hard to understand how that can be achieved, although previous policies have not taken women into consideration, but ponder for a moment the fact that 60% to 80% of the small holder farmers around the world are women. in asia and certainly in africa. unless our policies also provide them with the kinets of training , access to land tenure, credits, participation, opportunities, and the decision

making, the policies will not be as successful as they should be and ought to be. so our hope is that by putting on the lens of gender, we will certainly respond both to the feeds of male farmers and female farmers in ways that are appropriate to both. now obviously, this is an issue that has many other complexities in terms of transportation and markets and so much more, but there is certainly a significant role for women in agriculture, and in this initiative, like so many, we want to ensure that these considerations are there and considered in significant ways to make a difference. just to add to that, my hope is not that this be a siloed office. a women's office on the periphery with a few nice

project. but no real impact on the department. so whether it has to do with apex or trade or what's happening to internally displace people like in sri lanka, all of that really -- all of that, the plight of women, the role of women, the positive role of women needs to be considered. >> when you were speaking about land and farmers in africa, i was reminded of some of the policies at the world bank and how they attempted to do things which paid no attention to who was really the farmer and who is allowed to use large machinery and so on. i'm just curious to know about what your interaction and relationship with the world bank is or will be.

>> it's considerable. actually, there are several programs now that the world bank , with respect to women, is moving in a really positive direction. frex, -- for example, they have a significant program called women's equality equals smart economics. and it is to look at precisely those obstacles like land tenure, like the lack of property rights, regulations, laws that impede women from participating effectively in the economies of their countries. and they are bringing together civil society activists, government actors, as well as people from the business world to really advocate in significant ways with governments to bring about change. so the world bank is doing any number of things right, and to the extent that this is an

issue, i will look at it. i'm not familiar specifically with with a you said, but we do have a close working relationship on many issues affecting women. >> thank you for your inspiring words. could you speak about the preservation of affordable housing as an aspect of women's rights? >> well, it is clearly one of those issues that still eludes so many around the world. i remember being with then first lady hillary clinton twice, and she returned to this site, again as secretary. it was a women's housing project

on the outskirts of cape town. these were the poorest of the poor. they had gotten some resources an access to credit to begin to build all by themselves from the bottom up, small bricks buildings. when we first went, there were perhaps 10, maybe 15 homes that they had created. and they, you know, were so convinced and empowered that they could bring about this change, and they were able to do it because of the kind of support they got. when we returned, they not only had expanded the number of houses, but they had a daycare center, a very primitive daycare center, and a grocery store. you could see sort of where this was going. and it was rather extraordinary. and you never saw a prouder group of people who literally

started with nothing. when she returned as secretary a few months ago, they were completely in a different place. i only use this as an example because we've got to do more of the kind of provision of support that empowers people to bring about change in their own lives. i remember years ago being in india with her at the self-employed women's association. it provides microcredit training, some other resources. after a discussion, the women were asked, how has this program made a difference for you? and one of the women who had been the poorest among the poorest of the poor, they all had been in a different place in their lives thanks to training,

small credit, the kinds of things that they were doing to not only now have a livelihood for their families, but go beyond, and this woman stood up and she said, i am no longer afraid. and i thought that's a powerful statement. i am no longer afraid. and she went on to say i am not afraid of my husband. i am not afraid of the police. i am not even afraid of my mother-in-law. now, in india, that's really being free from fear. and she was in many ways a real symbol of what empowerment can do. and i think when it comes to housing, when it comes to ending poverty and having access to economic opportunity and credit and so on and so forth, this is where we really need to focus.

>> you were speaking a lot about how education is such a factor, and in all the foreign countries how detriment tall it is that women are not exposed toilet. it seems that there's a gang epidemic that seems to be occurring. i interned in the federal courthouse and i thought it was prevalent. it seems that women are getting pregnant at early ages. they're not being educated. to get into gangs, they're having sex with multiple people, spreading h.i.v., increasing it. what is your position on that and how do you see the administration helping that area? >> well, obviously we are not immune from these problems at

home. we are not solved all of our issues that still create great inequities for women. the world economic forum recently released its gender gap report, which compares men and women's progress in a given country on four criteria. economic opportunity, access to education, health and survivability, and political partition pation. we're -- participation. we're not doing as well as we should be doing. in no country are men and women equal. when i travel, i'm asked all kinds of questions about the united states. and there are a lot of times when i have to say we need to be doing better. and thank god for people like justice ginsburg, because the situation for women in so many ways would be even worse. where the laws have really made a difference here. but when it comes to some of the great social challenges, we have

more than our share. you just described some of them. many of our cities in rural areas are coping with these problems, and they are obviously issues that we need to address, the administration is working to address. but we have a way to go. and all of us need to do what we can. >> this is actually the perfect closing question, because many of us in this room stand committed to do a great deal at home and around the world. i think this is inspirational. thank you so much. >> this discussion took place at the new york city bar association in new york city. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] . .

.

helsinki created pressure and then you had statesmen on both sides that were able to take advantage of that pressure and opening. the other case that i personally was a little involved in as a student at berkeley was south africa. there were demonstrations at berkeley about divesting from south africa, getting the university's investments out of south africa and companies that were investing in south africa. just last weekend, i taught my daughter the song that we sang, "free nelson mandela." my 7-year-old knows more about him than i did at that time. but that was what the student movement in the united states was focuseded on, and i think it did -- again, enlightened leadership, a tremendous statesman in mandela, and declare off of connor's side,

but it was the pressure combined with individuals that were in a position to make a change. unfortunately, we don't have -- i don't know who those individuals are in north korea, so it does make member pessimistic, it's too easy to make of burma and tibet and other seemingly hopeless cases. >> thanks. mike? >> this is a hard question, and there may be others in the room that are more versed in it the post-conflict stability and reconstruction operations. but i think there's three things that come to my mind that we know have worked or do work, and one of them is that we know that the rock approach in iraq worked in that situation. their focus was in working with the local community, building infrastructure, adding stability to the situation, and that worked very well. we also know from long experience, i think, that a whole of government approach is

what works, that you have to look at this not from a military standpoint. in fact, that's what doesn't work, when you treat this as a simple military problem. you have to look at the economics of it. you have to look at the basic infrastructure that needs to be built to provide that stability. and third point i think that we are learning and have learned in afghanistan is resources. you have to put the right amount of resources against the problem to be successful. i think korea has understood that, instead of trying to talk about sending a 50-man p.r.t. or something to afghanistan, they're talking about a fairly robust p.r.t. element that would be able to conduct a mission. but we have to understand, in the case of afghanistan, this is one of the things where i think we have to be very cautious, this is not post-conflict reconstruction and stability. this is in the middle of an insurgency.

and there's many activities happening along that continuum of conflict. it's very different from what korea experienced in iraq. korea was in, let's face, it a fairly quiet corner of the country. so in iraq, it's going to be a little bit different for korea, and i think one of the things that will come out of this will be a division of labor where korea is able to focus on the reconstruction and stability operations in its geographic yarke but allowing the united states and other coalition partners to provide perhaps that more robust countersnudges nl around them. thank you. >> thank you. scott? >> scott harold, rand corporation.

two questions, one for dr. change and dr. fennigan. first, with respect to climate change, environmental stresses, i wonder if you could say something about how those are going to pose a greater challenge, if you believe they are, in the future to the dprk. going forward as the climate changes around the peninsula, are we going see greater famine, greater drought, greater deforest asian than we've already seen, and how might that stress pyongyang? and conversely, if we do see a transition away from authoritarian rule in the north and toward reunification, presumably that will come with tremendous investment by the south in the north, leading to new reindustrialization, potentially leading to greater output of carbon in the north. currently the north is pretty -- certainly less production in an industrial sense than the south. therefore, you might anticipate that actually reunion fakes might lead to a worsening of

carbon emissions. i wonder if you could comment on that. dr. finnegan, you know that the rock is currently undertaking an effort to enhance the technical capabilities of its military while downsizing the number of forces. that has tremendous implications for a post-conflict or a collapse in the north where, quite frankly, airplanes and ships and submarines don't substitute well for boots on the ground. i ok oh your call, but i wonder if 300 people, quite frankly, is going to be enough to really help the rock ground forces deal with the situation that they will encounter when potentially insurgents will continue to exist, tremendous human rights violations that occur in the north will need to be redressed, calls for justice by victims of those human rights abuses will exist. you may be dealing with weapons system that have been useded

that will consequences for the environment. so if you can just comment on the rock's overall military strategy going forward and how it fits with a post-collapse scenario, i'd be very interested in hearing your thoughts. >> two ears here. the first is what's the kind of trend in the climate and what's going to happen in the future as we continue the current development patterns. and i will admit, i'm not a climate change policy scientist. i'm more of a biophysicist scientist, and i am also working with the korean scientist looking at the climate change assessment of water resources that will focus on that aspect. so that brings a lot of family at droughts, and a lot of these projections suggest that korea will become wetter in winter -- i'm sorry, wetter in summer and

dryer in winter and early spring. farmers use more water for crops. and also, there are also people looking at the human ears, the heat wave which occurred more frequently in the past several years. and the korean administration, they released a report last year showing all these increasing changing of their ability of presentation. this is the case for any major series around the world, particularly in korea, but also big cities located in their communities, they might be more vulnerable to these climate change effects.

maybe trees can blossom much earlier. these have been already found in a lot of scientific internships, and they also look at the potential impacts of climate change on water resources. the second issue is what if the north korea got developed in the future as a result of reunification, mable more direct investment from south korean companies, and yes, and as i said, the deforesation impacts climate change. and interestingly, the north korea have cleared a lot of forests, which exacerbate this in the late 199 on's and 2000. this is also considered after the collapse of the soviet union, they did get last oils from the soviet union, they have to rely on more biofuel, they have to cut all these

forests to produce these fields. and on top of that, they have very heavy, torrential rains which worsen the problem. so i think in the future, we don't have to follow the same path. maybe we can move more toward greener development, maybe use clean technology which trap some of these carbons. there are more plans we can implement in the future. so i think it requires this. in the past, traditionally, all these developed country may have transferred all these old technologies to developing countries, which now they are facing with pollution problems, but i think we can change the paradigm and the new developed areas they can have less polluted industries.

>> snake >> i think the rock has, as you for many years been trying to leverage technology and figure out how to downsize. however, that downsize be has been paused, relooked. the wisdom behind it questioned. but we have to recognize that there is a pressure still. there's a societal pressure to figure out a way to downsize the military that has to do with the draft and frankly, if you switch top a volunteer force, trying to maintain one the size of the current military on the population base of the republic of korea would be, as rapped has done very, very studies, would be very, very difficult. but they are looking at ways to mitigate their downsizing.

i think a lot of that driven by the realization that airplanes and ships don't do a lot for stabilization in north korea. but having said that, as i said in the presentation, the rock has taken a different approach to what it would take to stabilize. it's not a simple military approach. they have invested significant republican sources, time, effort, money in training a civilian workforce that is versed, capable, ready to take its part in stability operations in north korea. i think they're also, tip point, looking for how they build a professional reserve system that would allow them to have something they can fall back on. you make the point about 300 people going to afghanistan,

does that provide them the training to be able to take on north korea. obviously no. and what it does do, and not just the 300 that go there, but if you're there for several years, it's the thousands that rotate through. it's the thousands that rotated through iraq. it's the thousands that rotated through. they're building up a tremendously well versed core cadre of people that understand this type of problem set, that have done it for real. and at the soldier level, at the lower level of a military, these problems aren't all that different. it has to do with the mindset that did you into the mission with, but the skill set of providing security, of driving vehicles, of doing the normal things a military does are not that different.

what's different is the framework you're working with. i think that's what u.s. cooperation in places like afghanistan can do is help give us a more robust framework at the alliance level to deal with this issue. so i would hope would come out of cooperation in afghanistan would be this idea of a whole of alliance approach that provides that framework for operations that the military can really fall into. >> thanks. first to profess, in addition to carbon dioxide, and there's a poll, do you even know what

the retribution of his own poll tom global warming, and when you talk global warming, up didn't mention industrial production, yeah, and also what's the status in south korea. green chemistry is a new science and the green production to -- so-called japan trilateral cooperation. peter talk human right. do you think that this issue can add to the cooperation?

you talk of the stability, and i would like to -- everybody can answer these two question. first is this. what's the factor in stability of north korea? and then how to deal from people outside north korea. >> i think that's enough questions. >> ok, this is real important. alivense cooperation on north korea and south korea is very important. and how the u.s. and china can help for this alliance cooperation into a reality. and i have another question too later on. >> several issues here. the first is the ozone hole. the ozone is also a greenhouse

gas. they're talking about when the ozone or the stress of ozone suspect completed, you cruise down the upper atmosphere, so it's an operative butt the problem is we are talking about the warming of the lower atmosphere as a result of long-wave radiation from the earth. so there's nothing to do with the ozone hole, with the climate change. and yes, industrial production is the major source of carbon emissions, and the people have actually tried to tease this out, what's the source of carbon from the industry, but also, we have to concede all other cascading effects. there's also transportation, which we can count as part of the production process while we

can separate these. and what type of industry they are having, for example, in korea, they used to have a lot of heavy industry which use a lot of energy. but by moving toward the more green industry, they could reduce this carbon. there have been several studies as a result of structure. so carbon he manipulation rate has dropped. and the third is chemistry. to be honse, i don't have any update about the status of current industry in korea. but they have a lot of plans, some operations participated in these plans.

sometimes a u.s. company will invest the money to develop these green chemistry in korea. and the broad issue on how this may be associated with the human rights and the stability, one interesting thing you can conceive of, as climate changes, people might migrate from one place to the other. for example, there's a small island in the indian ocean, the whole country will disappear if the current level of sea level is going to continue. have the same thing might happen in a lot of coastal areas, which are sea level. and for example, even in the states, people living in new orleans after hurricane katrina have been located, them may not go back to their home because

them may hear about getting additional flood damage. and maybe as a result of climate change, for example, if the north korea gets more flaws, which is poor land management, we can think approximate how it may work as a push factor, may migrate, may send people out from their region. so one thing in terms of adaptation or planning, which have not been implemented in a lot of countries. but in some european countries and some taste, they have now considered the land use planning is probably one of the only ways we can reduce the potential damage of climate change. so make space for water, for

example, and we can always quantify the value of these natural areas. there's the ecosystem service. i think that's one area the u.s. can leave to other countries, including korea. how we can quantify these services, and what are the target areas, which area might serve the best value. these are some of the area i can think of. thank you. >> peter? >> i know we're running out of time, and i see there are more questions, so on this issue of stability, i'll be very brief and just say that we've had -- it's always difficult and problematic to assess stability in north korea. but we've had two tests in the last year, year and a half, and that is king jom ill's suspected stroke -- king jong il's suspected stroke a year

ago, and more recent, the currency revaluation. at least in the case of king jong il's health scare, the situation appears to be very stable. he just disappears from view, which isn't too abnormal for him, at least publicly, but things were stable inside the regime and out. in terms of currency reform, we're getting reports of anger and confusion and even some unrest, if you can believe the groups and some servers are concluding even americans, while this is the last gasp of a regime, the beginning of the end, i don't take that view. i think the iron fist can get stronger by weakening demand, so i don't think that in and of itself that it's going to lead to change in north korea. but the real test is king jong

il has a situation he doesn't recover from and whether they can make a new transition to leadership will be the ultimate test for stability in the north. >> mike? >> i think the question about cooperation, i think in the theoretical from a policy perspective, trilateral cooperation, which we in the united states, the republic of korea and japan, on a home host of security issues including reconstruction and stability operations is possible. from a practical measure, i don't think we're going to go down that road anytime soon, and that has mainly to do with japan. the types of operations, particularly with the afghanistan situation, the idea of japan being able to make a political screening to commit japanese forces to such an operation is just unthinkable at this point. so i think from a practical

standpoint, such cooperation remains elusive. on north korea, i would echo what peter has said. wheaning we've seen in north korea range the signs of instability really are signs of remarkable stability. is the way they manage their way through the health scare if you will, it showed that there was a snm place that at least in the short term was table maintain stability. the question is, as peter put it, what happened if we have king jong il go through another health situation where he doesn't recover. perhaps we have short-term stability, but what about the long term? can they make that transition? >> thank you. last question for dr. park in the back. >> thank you. i'm a visiting fellow at brookings.

a all you think we need to accident up and down the cooperation at a multilateral level, as well as the bilateral level. korea will host a g-20 summit. this is an important agenda, such as financial regulations. but we could include some global issues based on korea and u.s.'s strong support. we could consider the climate issue and g-27 so. my question is for professor change. so what do you think about it and will you try? thank you. >> elaborate on the question a

little bit. >> well, korea, they host the g-28 summit in north korea. it already already has some agenda. but the government will try it some important issues in the agenda. so we could consider development and climate change issue in the summit, so what do you think about it? >> i do think there's a way in which climate change issues are coming up in the context of the g-20. i don't know if it's going to necessarily be a center piece because the issue of financial stability is really going to be, i think, the primary focus, exit strategies, all the issues

connected with coming out of the global financial crisis. and so there's a danger, on the one hand, of trying to overload the agenda, and as a result, possibly defusing it. at the same time, korea needs to try to find a distinctive contribution to make as part of its g-20 role. maybe this is something i can use as a segue to say something to kind of conclude. the alliance -- in fact, another area that's very interesting to look at is the economic issues related to the u.s.-korea relationship. i think that the conversation that we've had really underscores that this is just one note in a very complex system. but it is a note that has been effective in fostering cooperation in the past and can be made more able to try to

address some of the current challenges on the global agenda today. >> we've come to the end of our time. i want to thank all of you for coming i want to thank our presenters for stimulating a great discussion, and thanks again to scott snyder for allowing us to be part of this project. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> coming up this morning on c-span -- a discussion on the chemical herbicide agent orange that was used by the u.s. military in vietnam. at 7:00 eastern, it's washington. top thicks morning include budget shortfalls in several states and the political

outlook in the light of the 2010 elections. after "washington journal" this morning, on "news makers," i.r.s. commissioner douglas shulman on how his organization is planning for the tax season and future changes for tax preparers. >> a discussion now on the chemical herbicide agent orange. it was useded in massive quantities by the u.s. military in vietnam, where that government is now demanding compensation for damages. it's also believed to have caused serious medical conditions in thousands of american soldiers who served in vietnam. the new america foundation and washington monthly magazine hosted this event. it's about an hour and a half. >> thanks for coming.

we're here today to discuss a special report just released in the current issue of the washington monthly called the agent orange boomer rang, which you can read at washingtonmonthly.com. i just to want thank new america, thank the staff of the washington monthly, and also charles bailey of the ford foundation for his support. the u.s. military sprayed close to 20 million gallons of the herbicide agent orange across vietnam to defeel ate dense jungle in order to better detect movement of personnel and equipment from north to south and to destroy enemy crops. they have persistent and highly toxic chemical. and over the next two decades, soldiers who served in vietnam were forced to fight another long war, which one to force their own government to

recognize the damage it had done to their body and provide health and air other benefits they deserved. washington did so in 1991 after president george h.w. bush signed the agent orange act into law. and in the year since, justice seemingly done the issue of agent orange has largely disappeared from the news. but in reality, the problem of agent orange never really went away. in fact, it is now morphing into a new set of problems for our nation's leaders t. turns out that the long-acting toxin is continuing to damage lives in vietnam, not only for those exposed to it during the war, but for their children and their grandchildren. the government estimates that as many as 400,000 vietnamese have died early from ailments related to the exposure to dioxin and that half a million children have birth defects because of exposure to the chemicals leaching into the soil and water. until recently, the effects of

agent orange were not something the vietnamese government talked much about after normal sizing relations with the united states in 1995, hanoi's overwhelming goal was to win favorable deals with the united states in addition to bodies like the world trade organization, bringing up unpleasant subjects like agent orange worked against that strategy. but having aattend these goals hanoi is demanding compensation for the suffering of its people. and that is that has put the united states in a tough spot. not wanting to set a precedent, but on the other hand, recognizing that vietnam is an increasingly vital military security ally and trading

partner. it raises the responsibility any military has to clean you want environmental messes it leaves behind after a war. and that's an issue we're likely to face as we pull out of iraq and ultimately from afghanistan. meanwhile, another hidden problem with agent orange is impacting our veterans. with each passing year, medical researchers are discovering more and more illnesses, many of them major,:being diseases like parkinson's for which exposure to agent orange turns out to be a risk factor. yet hundreds of thousands of vietnam veterans have been denied v.a. care for years as they've waited for the science to prove that the suffering they've been having is indeed service-related. so the problem with agent orange, which we thought we had put behind us, is once again stares -- staring us in the face. in the latest issue, we have this special report that looks at these new developments and makes the case that we finally

should do something, do what we should have done years ago, and that is to offer humanitarian aid to the vietnamese for the suffering of those affected by agent orange and to derive by our veterans and offer v.a. care to all who serve, no questions asked. you can agree or disagree with those arguments, but i think there's no doubt, and i think we've documented pretty carefully that this is an issue that is going to be on the radar screen for the obama administration, for congress, and for the v.a. and so to discuss these issues, we brought together a panel that i'm honored to introduce now. dr. michael f. martin is a specialist in asian affairs for the congressional research service of the library of congress. dr. martin's professional career has included work in china, japan, hong kong, and vietnam. he has taught at hong kong baptist university, colby

college and activities university. clay rise suspect managing editor at democracy, journal of ideas. he's formerly on the staff of the new republic and has written on history, politics, and culture for a variety of publications, including the new york observer, the atlantic monthly, the smithsonian, and now the washington monthly. phil longman, frequent contributor to the washington monthly, is a senior research fellow at the new america foundation here and the author of the next progressive era, a blueprint for prosperity. also, a fine book called best care anywhere. so let me begin by asking to the podium dr. michael martin. >> thank you very much for that

kind introduction and bringing up this issue that is proving to be very timely. and perhaps of increasing concern in the days ahead. before i again my short, brief presentation, the views i'm reflecting today are my own, and they do not necessarily reflect the news of congressional research service or the library of congress. what i'd like to do from the time i have is to focus on this issue more from the vietnamese perspective, it or at least my understanding of the vietnamese perspective, and then looking at the u.s. aspects of it. with that in mind, i would first like to talk about three particular elements of the issue, a little bit of a background on each of those issues, and then talk a bit about, from the vietnamese perspective, how this impacts on u.s.-vietnam relations.

i boil this down to remade asian, dealing with the environmental damage that's been caused by the dioxin. second, the healthcare issues that are associated with people who have been exposed to dioxin and agent orange. and third, an area that sometimes doesn't get enough consideration, which is a continuation of scientific research about the effects of dioxin and agent orange on people. let me go through these as quickly as i can, but to try to be concise. in terms of environmental remade asian, hatfield consultant says, a canadian company, has done a number of studies in vietnam to try to determine where indeed dioxin and agent orange remains in the environment. they came up with hot spots, generally due to basically spillage and loss during the

movement of agent orange. by and large, studies have found that the residuals in sprayed areas, even heavily sprayed areas, are not at the international threshold for posing extendeded danger. whether or not those studies are comprehensive is a whole other issue, but as a result, there's a focus on these hot spots. there appears to be somewhere in the 20 to 30 hot spots around the country, but three have become the prominent focus of the efforts to date on this issue, and oddly enough, i've been there, but i'm not very gooded at the vietnamese, and the major one of u.s. interest is at tinet, which was a primary military base for u.s. military operations during the

war. if you look at the vietnamese perspective, they estimate it will cost somewhere around $60 million to clean up the airport. there is a joint effort going on. to date, in terms of resources that have been dedicated by the united states on this effort, roughly four million dollars. just recently, they announced the contracting of 1.7 million, 1.69 to be more prep sight, for the construction of a secure land fill. now i've been to the facility, and what has been done to date is a containment effort. a way of limiting ax success to lakes, ponds, as well as the creating a catch area so it

does not spread further in the ecosystem. but this has created a new situation, which is having contained the problem. they're moving to clean up, and there, at least the last i heard, is the question was, do you just try to clean it up right away or basically move the contaminated soil out of the area and find a way of cleaning it up later? it appears they're trying to find a way to remove the dioxin from the environment. one of the ways of doing that is an experimental bioremediation technology. which is being utilized, which is hopefully of greater use than just this one application but could be used in other situations around the world. there has been some criticism from the vietnamese press and from the vietnamese government about the speed of which this clean-up program has proceeded. however, my impressions have

been, by and large, the relationship between the u.s. entities and the vietnamese entities that are involved in this containment and clean-up activity has been generally fairly good and fairly successful. moving on to healthcare, then things get more problematic. the actual scope or scale of the issue is really unknown. we've already heard the figure of 400,000 deaths attributable to agent orange and dioxin. the vietnamese come up with a figure of 4.8 million people in vietnam that have health or medical problems associated with exposure to the dioxin and agent orange. and one recent media report put the 10-year estimated cost of dealing with the health effects of agent orange dioxin at $30 billion.

to give some perspective on the scope of this, the latest figure i could see from the vietnamese government in terms of their annual outlay is 44 million. so we're a few scales off from each other,ed pods billion from the one side, $40 million on the other. u.s. assistance dealing with the healthcare aspects of agent orange in vietnam to date, two million. which is, again, we're moving as we go from one to the other. part of the problem behind it is issues identifying the victims or people associated with the exposure of agent orange dioxin. as you can probably imagine, at the time of war, it wasn't exactly clear who was where exactly when. particularly again the nature of the warfare that was going on in vietnam. since the war, a number of people have moved and relocated around vietnam, so the actual physical location at this time may not be associated with exposure.

the result is that it isn't clear who was exposed to agent orange and dioxin when they were in vietnam. second, even if they were exposed, it is not 100% clear how much they themselves have been affected by it, and one of the issues associated with that is the cost of trying to do such a study. agent orange is not water soluble. it's fat soluble. i'm not a scientist, but what it means is you have to do a fat tissue test, and the last estimate i saw was $2,000 per test. so given the vietnamese government's resources and the government available to do comprehensive testing on everybody in vietnam would be a prohibitively expensive cost, particularly given with the alternative, utilize it to take care of people who they believe are affected by agent orange. another element is there's victims of agent orange as it's

often put and people with certain medical conditions. there is almost a presumption if you have a certain medical condition, it attributable to agent orange. the v.a. recognizes spina bifida as a birth defect to be associated with agent orange, and in vietnam, if a child has spina bifida, it's often presumed it's related to agent orange exposure, even though it may not be. moving on then quickly, the area of scientific research, if you look back over the time period since the war, there was an effort for joint research between the united states government and the vietnamese government to try to identify the extent of this problem. it did not really go as well as it had hoped. there was sort a period where they pulled away from it. this seemed to be reemergen as an area of willingness to do research. however, as i sort of indicated

earlier, the ability to do such research is difficult. inside vietnam it's very difficult to differentiate those two populations. people weren't exactly aware that they were being sprayed with agent orange and dioxin. second the cost of doing the stuffed i, tissue sampling, to determine whether or not somebody has a high level of dioxin in their system is another problem. third, when you get to the -- f.b.i. you've determined the person has dioxin in their system, it doesn't necessarily mean it's associated with the dioxin in their system. there may be other contributing factors. there are a number of new initiatives going on in vietnam. my understanding is a census is being done under the auspices of the ministry of health to

try to identify within the vietnamese population individuals who may have been adversely affected by dioxin. there was a recent joint study that looked at 47,000 veterans inside vietnam, vietnamese nationals, trying to differentiate between expose and had nonexposed, to see whether or not a higher incident of health problems. that study confirms that, yes, there is a differentiation. let me finish by talking a little bit about the impact on u.s. and vietnamese relations. for a period of time, the vietnamese government seemed to accept that this issue can remain on the back burner t. wasn't that it wasn't raised, but they were willing to let it set aside so that other proorts could move forward, such as the return of diplomatic recognition to vietnam.

membership in the world trade organization, normal trade relations. those seem to take more of a priority than trying to press this issue. however, on the other side, on the u.s. side, there are issues swoshte the war that also took precedent over the agent orange issue. in the united states, nothing much could go on on other issues until the united states government felt that that was adequately addressed. we have apparently moved into a period where they do so that's been adequately addressed. as these ears fell to the side, diplomatic recognition, w.t.o. membership, all these issues set aside, it basically allowed agent orange and the associated concerns to perk higher up on the priority list in vietnam. and they were willing to bring the issue forward more. that is not to say there aren't other issues that threaten or

could push agent orange off the front burner and into the back burner again. for example, vietnam this past year applied for membership in the generalized system of trade preference policy of the united states government. that application is still pending. no decision has come from the bush or obama administrations. so pushing on agent orange may possibly, in the eyes of the vietnamese, have adverse effects on their g.s.p. application, so they may be willing to step back for a little while now. another issue coming forward is a specific partnership, an initiative to form a free association in asia. the united states just recently announced that they are going to enter into formal negotiations to join what we call the t.p.p. vietnam is also expressed an interest in joining it. so you may have a tradeoff on negotiations betweening on the arrange in the future.

my next point is to, in some ways, correct myself in that i keep talking about the vietnamese government, the vietnamese perspective. one of the things that i came away with in my research in vietnam is that there is no unified vietnamese government perspective on this. different ministries, different agencies have a different take on the issue. there's committee 33 or office 33 that has been given the authority to deal with this issue. they're trying to coordinate this issue and have done, from what i see, a fairly effective job on it. however, different ministries, different agencies have a different -- may have different perspectives on the issue. ministry of health may be primarily concerned about the health effects in trying to adequately address the health effects. the ministry of labor, sometimes war invalids and, let's see, invalids and social

affairs also deals with the agent orange usual, they deal with providing benefits, they're concerned about it. on the other hand, the seethe at the airport is under the minister of defense's authority, they're interested in making that available, so their priority may number getting the cam nabt out of the area, they can extend the runway, and proceed on that project and let somebody else worry about the clean-up later. so you start seeing the tensions on how to deal with it. even other industries that you may not think of, the ministry of industry and trade, for example. some of the things that vietnam is best known around the world for exporting, carp, catfish are bottom feeding fish, dioxin tends to settle to the bottom of the aquatic environment, so

the catfish may be a primary source of it getting into the food chain in vietnam or around the world. so needless to sarke the ministry of industry and trade would like to downplay problems associated with dioxin possibly being in the fish, ducks, geese being types of exports that may have dioxin in it. similarly, the ministry of natural resources in the environment may have mixed feelings about the issue. one, they want to clean up, but on the other hand, they don't to want imply that agricultural problems coming out of vietnam are inharntly contaminated. having pointed out there are tensions between the vietnamese government, there are certain elements that i found consistently reflected in different agencies in vietnam on the issue. first was, time and time again, the vietnamese talked about the

contrast between how the u.s. vietnam war veterans were being treated in u.s. policy, and the u.s. government's attitude toward vietnamese war veterans and the vietnamese population from the war. in the u.s., the policy is a presumption of exposure, and therefore, medical conditions can be treated in&provide benefits due to that exposure. we have not correspondly treated the vietnamese population. second, there's some confusion from the apparent priorities in the u.s. funding. for example, as i mapped out earlier, there's about $6 million provided by the united states government to deal direct with the agent issue. that contrasts a bit sharply with $323 million provided to vietnam under what's called the pep far program so. where's pep far, which deals with h.i.v./aids is $323

million through this fiscal year, agent orange, which perhaps in the vietnamese's eyes is a more serious issue, has received $2 million or $6 million if you want to look at it in the whole. at this time, my sense is the vietnamese government are more concerned about not addressing blame or who's responsible or legal obligations. they really want to work on solving their problems. dealing with the issues at hand. the last point, on several issues, from the vietnamese perspective, i heard statements saying we cannot fully normalize relations with the united states until the agent orange issue has been addressed. so from their perspective, perspective not normalized relations yet. it's a process. we're partway there. going a little bit long, my apologies, a couple of quick things. the u.s. response to date, as i've indicated, there's been $6

million appropriated by congress specifically to deal with this issue, $3 million in fy-09. is there more to come? that's a good question. we shall see. the house foreign affairs committee has held two hearings on the issue. are there more to come? again, time will tell. the obama administration has been actively trying to get the dispersement of funds that have been appropriated. they have personnel in place dedicated to this project, and they continue to work through the joint advisory committee to facilitate government-to-government communications. last, just to reiterate, earlier i mentioned t.p.p. has issues that may impact on how much there's a willingness to work on agent orange issue. i would add two more. one, there's been increasing concern about the human rights situation in vietnam, particularly treatment of the

media. and second, the issue of workers' rights continues and the vietnamese government. so do i provide you any answers? no, but hopefully i provided you some useful information, and i would hand the podium over to the next speakers. i'm ready and willing to answer questions later. thank you. s later. thank you. [applause] okay. i appreciate paul including me in this esteemed panel and new america hosting the focus of the article i wrote for the package was really to -- the purpose was to take a step back and say what is the historical legal international context within which questions about u.s. obligations or the possibilities of u.s. action to immediate

agent orange take place? are there bases for the obligations either legal, moral or political or even just possible leverages, points of leverage with the u.s. could be brought to address these questions and the answer unfortunately is no there are not very many. but in the article i try to explain a little bit about how if you were nevertheless to as a policymaker try to construct a way to push the u.s. toward greater responsibility or recognition of its need to act how would you do that? so the first thing to keep in mind is when you talk about the environmental consequences of the war there are two broad categories. one is -- and they are somewhat artificial the first one is the consequences of the actual war fighting, so you explode a bomb,

you shoot guns, legal a land mine these sorts of things there are very few points of international law we or efforts to control this aspect of military activity and in in very little interest on the part of the global community to do something to. the reason is obvious if you are a country that has a military and you want to assure you that your mother to raise effective you don't want to be creating a corpus of international law we that restricts on necessarily your ability to act, so there has been activity on certain things, sort of on the edges like banning weather modification or restricting the deployment of land mines, -- land mines or a horrible thing for the environment. animals step on them, they'd leach chemicals and they are often not match. chemical weapons control of

chemical weapons and eradication of chemical weapons is a big step in that regard to the core idea we should try to reduce the impact of the conventional warfare on the environment is something that ultimately hinges on a paradox all military activity call war fighting is inherently bad for the environment, so given that most countries i wasn't hesitate to say pretty much every country wants to stay away from any of those kind of limitations. the only place where you do see some action is in a sort of victor's justice, the best example being after the first gulf war in which iraq was required to were actually some of the money that iraq was required to give the u.n. was funneled into funds that paid for the planning of oil spills of the environmental damage caused by iraq's scorched-earth campaign at the end of -- toward

the end of that conflict. the other category of activity is sort of everything else but it is the positioning of the military troops and assistant personnel of basing the movement of goods and troops and material around the world, testing weapons and everything, developing weapons, everything that goes into getting up to the point of the war fighting so this is obviously an enormous category also won every military undertakes even if they never actually go to war. and yet this is also one where the efforts to control its have been surprisingly limited at the international level. again for the same reason. if you are a country with a military, you don't want to agree to one necessary limitations on that activity. it's also a question where very

few countries actually have to deal with it in the international context because most countries don't have bases outside of their own territory. the united states does, britain, france, a few others. the soviet union did, and russia now did and they withdrew from those in the 1990's, but it really becomes a question of -- a question for the larger powers in the world and so inherently you are going to have a already stacked deck against anyone who is trying to create equitable international law we are around basing issues. there is also the issue of the dominance of the bilateral law in this regard. every country that agrees to post military forces has signed some sort of status of forces agreement with the country whose military is coming on to their territory unless of cour