all the people like some of in th rm that are getting care and how much better the economy is because we addressed this problem? i think it's going to be the latter. so i think this is a happy birthday. thank you. >> thank you. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> earlier today "washington journal" look at the presidential primaries. here is a look of a process in the state of washington. top. host: katie blinn is the co-

director for elections in washington state. thank you for joining us. where is your state in all of this? when will voters go to a primary or caucus and what is the timing of washington participation? guest: washington has a presidential primary. we have had one since 1989. the secretary of state has been a very strong proponent of the presidential primary because it brings out a broader spectrum of voters than a caucus. the caucus in our state probably bring out about 100,000 voters. the primary broadcom 1.3 million voters. there is no comparison in terms of which system allows for greater participation. our state, like many others, is facing such a financial budget

problem. $5 billion is the estimated deficit for washington state for the next two years. we budget two years at a time. every office, every elected official every agency and state government has been asked to find cuts. state government is no longer in the situation where it can afford the desirable programs. we are cutting down to the core of what must be provided. unfortunately, secretary of state and the governor are proposing to cancel the 2012 presidential primary and allow the process to proceed under caucus. i say unfortunately because we do this with a heavy heart because we are a proponent of that system.

historically the process has been handled for the caucuses in washington state. this is a relatively recent process for washington. the other factor is that it is still up to the two major parties in washington whether or not to use the results of the primary to allocate their delegates to the national conventions. the state democratic party has never used the results of the primary to allocate delegates. they have always used the caucus. the state republican party has usually used the results to allocate about half of their delegates to the national convention. that was, of course, another factor we had to consider. we have a proposed the governor and the secretary of state, hasve jointly proposed a bill to cancel the primary and we are expecting that legislation to pass.

host: is there a concern that this would reduce washington state party role in selecting a republican nominee for president? guest: i do not think so. the candidates who are interested in getting the washington vote are going to come here and they will campaign. they will learn the issues that are serious to the northwest. i think that this will also -- this may end up occurring in other states as well. host: the state is facing a $5 billion shortfall. by moving this into one single primary or caucus, how much will it say? guest: $10 million. host: that money is spent on the handling? guest: balltosots. printing,

voting by mail. 3.6 million >> i do not want to develop a strategy to win the primary and not when the general. i want to do well everywhere. >> today, bricks and forrick santorum sits down to discuss his candidacy. >> this week, prime minister david cameron talks about the safety of nuclear power in the u.k.. the labor leader asks for an update on libya. there were also questions on accountability of the national

health service, economic reform, and the pending statement on the economy from the chancellor of the exchequer. that is tonight at 9:00 on c- span. >> of the united nations representative for afghanistan said the u.s.-led surge in the country is working. he spoke and the middle east institute in washington as the u.s. voted to extend its mission by one year. this is 55 minutes. >> he has come from new york

where he was talking about afghanistan. i believe the security council is voting today. is that correct? on thursday, he was talking about the u.s. role in afghanistan and its camilla -- commitment to the development of the country. the u.n. plays an important role. there are 34 representatives in afghan provinces. they spent over $1 billion on the country last year. food programs, health services, and infrastructure and development. the afghans are asking to take a greater lead in all aspects of government and development and the efforts to achieve peace. staffan de mistura made it clear that the u.n. takes these calls for sovereignty. seriously.

what are the challenges of handing over greater responsibility to the afghan government? how can the u.n. support the process and maintain its commitment to the development of afghanistan? these questions will be part of what mr. de mistura will discuss with us today. i will keep his biography brief. he is one of the u.n.'s most accomplished and experienced officials, having served in the organization for over 30 years -- 40 years. that is even more reason to take everything he says very seriously. he has promoted political dialogue reconstruction, and development of humanitarian assistance efforts. he has overseen elections all over the world. his work has taken him from somalia, to the middle east, to afghanistan, and many places in between. before taking his current position in kabul, he served as

executive deputy director at the world food program in rome. prior to that, he served as the special representative to iraq. he helped oversee successful elections in iraq as well as the reconstruction development, and humanitarian assistance. those are a few of his many accomplishments. it is a great honor to have you here. i would like to invite you to the podium. [applause] >> is good to see many friends and colleagues here. i will keep it short for questions later. i will focus on three events. there is so much we could be talking about in afghanistan.

security is the first priority for everyone in afghanistan. the second priority is security as well. the second issue is what do we mean, what can we do, and with this transition mean? the key word there is reintegration. the next word is reconciliation. the words mean a lot and should be meaning even more during this year. in terms of the events, we have the announcement by the president which took place yesterday. then we have the istanbul conference. prior to that, there will be an announcement from president obama sometime in july.

then there will be a conference in bonn. these are the stepping stones that can be foreseen. we're in a very fluid environment. we are not the only ones having steppingstones or creating them. others may have others. we hope not. that is the plan. let's go back to security. there is always a lot of debate about whether it is more or less secure than before. the surge by general petraeus is working. we can see is working in that there is clearly a change in the perception in afghanistan.

you may ask if it is working why are there so many casualties in so much violence? this is a reality also in iraq. there was a moment when the peak of the pressure did attract a counter-peak by insurgents. there were more occasions because there were many more boots on the ground. the issue is to see if after six months is producing what it should be producing. here is the main point. every country is different. in iraq after a peak of bad news linked to the surge use of mr. the scene the first beginnings of another surge. in afghanistan, we will have to see what is happening in july.

the outcome of a military intensified operation cannot be how many people on the other side you are killing more than last year or month but whether that has produced -- secretary clinton gave the speech of the asian society. from a military surge there is a need for a diplomatic and political surge. that needs to be seen taking place during this year. otherwise, the military aspect alone cannot be an indicator of any success because we have all agreed -- even the taliban have

agreed with themselves -- that there is no military victory in afghanistan. let's move to the next point. we can elaborate on many others. transition is a key word. it is also a reality. it coincides with the win-win situation, paradoxically. we have to be optimists. let me give you some elements. president karzai is in fact about their own national sovereignty. afghans have been in charge of the country for 4000 years. the russians, alexander the great, the brits.

but at the end of the day we're profoundly nationalistic. in that case, it is time for them to stop feeling that this is moving in the direction of them owning more of their future. when-win. that comes with accountability. it also comes with responsibility. therefore, it is a challenge. on the other side of the front in lisbon there was a decision with 2014 as the end date for a certain type of engagement. that gives everyone the feeling and going the extra mile if needed. 2011 can be used as an opportunity instead of waiting for them to get tired and move on.

there was a message to parliament and perhaps the u.s. congress. there is a plant there. from that point of view, transition is also a message in the direction of those contributing. it is a message to the taliban. we're starting gradually passing on that. it is not going to happen overnight. if you are thinking about weeding everybody out, the waiting may not take place that quickly. for you willing to wait in a cave for every night raid? it may be the time to look at different scenarios. this is gradually taking place. it is moving in that direction. no one intends to be there forever. at the same time, we are not

going to do what happened twice for the afghans. they are traumatized by that. they do not want to be abandoned for a third time after having intense attention and then. by and look. then killing takes place. the transition makes a lot of sense for everyone to read through it. let's go back to what the military surge is hopefully bringing. secretary clinton said hopefully a political surge. that means reconciliation. that means talking about a future afghanistan but with an endgame that needs to be sufficiently reassuring to all

afghans and neighbors about why we entered afghanistan. that type of processing is already taking place. there is a high level council nominated by the afghans. it is led by a person who is in theory potentially hostile to the taliban. president talabani was opposite to the taliban. you do not want to have someone as hostile to them in its own personal history. one argument is that is exactly the person you need. you need to have someone who has sufficient credentials to be able to make some confessions in a discussion and not be accused

of betraying any community. a high-level peace council and the leadership is a good bet on our side in terms of moving forward on reconciliation. it is not perfect. nothing is perfect in afghanistan or elsewhere. they want to be in charge of their own discussions. we should not be appearing to pay lip service to the concept of afghan-led future. the next point is reintegration. there are two schools of thought. either bottom up or top down. people must be offered jobs and reassurances. hopefully, you will peel off the

insurgency. unless there is some reconciliation and agreement they will be afraid or not trustworthy in terms of moving. in practice, 700 people who are part of the insurgency have already moved into that. we need to reach 30,000 at least if not more. if and when we get into moving on reconciliation having the package ready and waiting six months -- and not waiting six months until they returned to the countryside -- the bottom line is the reconciliation and reintegration support each other.

we will see that during the process. the next point. two other elements were saying about timing. timing is crucial. the secret is to have steppingstones so that you have a feeling you have to deliver. you have a rendezvous where you can do something like in 2011. 2014 is crucial. 2011 is essential. we all know this is where the music and the tone of the music will be laid down. the opportunities will be in july when there will be the first beginning of some type of redeployment. that will be sending a message. then you will have an opportunity at the conference in

istanbul on the regional aspects. any deal or reconciliation taking place in afghanistan without having a comfort zone -- that is crucial for the stability of whatever agreement is reached. the conference in istanbul will be followed by the conference in bonn after december. that could be the opportunity of taking stock of what has been done this year politically and elsewhere. who knows, perhaps even more than that. i will stop there. i would rather expose myself to the brutal questions so that i can be even more explicit while keeping in mind i happen to be a

u.n. official stationed in front of the media. you will have to understand that some questions i may not be able to answer, but i will try to be very frank. >> thank you for the analysis and introduction of what we should be looking ahead at in afghanistan. there are a lot of afghan experts in this room. i am going to open up the floor. please keep your questions to one question only. for those of you in the overflow room, we have cards they you can fill out. please hand goes to an intern. >> barbarous leightona slayton. i understand that you were in a meeting that had not taken place for five or six years. can you talk about whether you are going to have more meetings

like that? is it constructive? should the u.n. set up another process like the 6 +2. can you also comment about what iran has been up to? >> could i have a glass of water? good. we had to find a nice name for about. it is very difficult to decide what you consider a neighbor. a neighbor can beat geographic -- can be geographic a historic neighbor or other kind of neighbor. meetings are taking place in cobble among the ambassadors. includes countries that nobody

would consider exactly neighbors but have a lot of interest. it goes from india all the way to turkey through russia. they are immediate neighbors that i do not need to remind you about. they all have the stateke. they have a genuine interest in stability in afghanistan. many of them have also communities close to them or can be influenced by them or are influencing them. the shiia community of iran. the passihtuns and others. the secret is to be able to make sure that this type of dialogue is maintained so that it does not become only a bilateral discussion.

how to make sure the arguments are not just political? in the meeting, they would say that they agree on afghanistan. you then need to fine tune your concerns about the future of the afghanistan. they may tell you for example drugs. they may tell you that they are concerned about the long-term american permanent basis. it gives them a feeling of threat. it helps to fine tune the messaging we give to everyone. perhaps the way you present the future strategic agreement taking place between the united states and afghanistan that takes into account the sensitivities of neighboring countrieswill ever be permanent.

for example,will ever be used against a neighbor. for instance, they will be active on call from the government and renewable by the government and so on. this type of discussion helps everyone to start feeling more comfortable about the future scenario of a stable afghanistan and making them feel comfortable with it. other areas are economic. think about the roads water electricity, bridges minerals access to ports. there was a very good agreement with richard holbrooke between pakistan and afghanistan. it took years to get that. it made a big difference in terms of the interaction that is not just words.

iran is a big country with a long border with afghanistan. it also has strategic concerns about what happens in afghanistan. they have a shiia community. they have a big problem about drugs. they do not like the taliban because the taliban affected them badly when they were in charge in afghanistan and even killed nine or 10 of their own diplomats. ignoring iran would be a big mistake. in gauging it is the only way. it is not only iran. -- in beijing it constructively is the only way. it is not only iran. -- engaging iran constructively is the only way. it is not only iran.

there are other countries. they are all worried about an afghanistan to go back into the hands of the taliban. pakistan these are suffering enormously. they're suffering more than afghanistan from the taliban. it is a long answer to a very good and short question. i am sorry. >> i wanted to follow up on what you said about the surge strategy and how you assess it as working. you look at the violence? do you look of the large-scale military operations? it is hard to see results from the outside. you may be talking more about the diplomatic track in the

military track. >> one can look at it from many points of view. except the fact that i am looking at it from one angle. it is the following. when you have a substantial surge taking place in the town, you detect and understand that often the taliban has attempted to destabilize other areas to send a signal that this is not enough in order to make the so- called momentum reversed. when you look carefully, you will see that they are doing spectacular attacks were attempting to do them in places where you do not expect it. we have been monitoring the casualties in areas. by doing so, they are also making substantial mistakes.

when mr. mccauleyzarkowi started doing abductions in the fruit market and killed 80 people -- we have seen the surges since they started for this to become more active. 24 people were killed in a bank. 32 were wounded by a person shooting in front of a video camera in the bank. you had this in the national game of afghans. it is respected as much as the game of football in america. most of them killed were civilians. these are mistakes produced by the feeling that there is a need to produce a counter narrative to the reversal of the momentum.

if you are looking at it from an incident point of view, it looks very bad. if you look at it beyond the operational point of view, these are explosions trying to change the near to. not changing the holding. you can see from the afghans that the hold of the taliban on territories is not there anymore. they may return. that is why spring will be crucial. they may not find the weapons they were hiding. the end result of judgment will be later. spring would show whether the taliban have been able to do a counter offensive or not in there for the security would have been changing particularly

about perception. >> we have a question from doyle mcmanus. asking about bilateral talks between afghanistan and the taliban. he is in the overflow room. >> i think the speech by secretary of state hillary clinton was indicating do not talk to friends in confidence. but to produce peace, you need to talk to someone else as well. therefore one day, it will be essential that they talk takes place with the people who have given up the concept of wanting to end up with a scenario that

is unacceptable. it is best not to put that up front but at the end of the discussion. those who need to talk together are the afghans. they need to be in the lead. if we do not allow them, they will do it anywhere inay. need to do it. because of america, everyone else is there. 46 countries need to be involved. they are important and part of what should be the beginning of the political surge the sooner the better. >> michael lemmon. you noted the potential of the high peace council and the president in moving along the

strategy in the process of reintegration and reconciliation. it has a limited capacity of the moment -- at the moment. i was wondering about your thinking and that of your colleagues of what we could do to support the work of the high peace council in what specific support they might need or be interested in from new and perhaps an official group. >> let's start from the assumption that it needs to be serious. it will not work to lead the afghans alone. i have been there 22 years. in afghanistan if there's one thing that unifies afghans we

are very proud people. our future is ours. it needs to be afghan-lead. you have internal and external negotiators. at the end of the day, it needs to be the afghans. they need to be assisted in supported by others or else it would not be credible in the future. the should be assisted by anyone that can do so. they have established the sal aam support group. the first thing is logistics. logistics is 80% of negotiations. you have to be able to be at the

right place at the right time and in a way where you do not appear to be contaminated. that means not being flown in by a marine helicopter or a way that may give you a certain profile or identity. we are importing our own helicopters. we have eight of them. that is at the disposal of the salaam support group and peace council. they have used them. they needed to go all over the country to start talking to the local communities to find out their concerns. they have been to turkey, pakistan. they just announced plans to go to iran.

next is another type of support. a group of 18 experts very qualified, many are very young. they have a remarkable capacity having stood the taliban -- studied the taliban and other side. they have prepared options and analysis. the process may be complicated requiring different languages. they have a roster of other experts available for the actual discussions. for example how do you fit the concept of maintaining an islamic identity of afghanistan while maintaining what has been

acquired in terms of human rights and women's rights? we have not 69 women in the parliament. that is another area where we are involved. if one day there will be a need for the u.n. office to facilitate meetings between people who do not like to meet that office can be easily opened by the u.n. without providing any effective legitimacy to anyone. we are officiating open meetings anyway. we are pretty good at that. that would be another option we're keeping in mind. that is how to support confidence-building measures. we are poised to support the formal and official negotiating

team. >> these are questions from ngo ' s in the other room. what should the political surge look like? is there spaceport personnel to pull back to allow ngo actors to operate more independently? what happens to the rights of women and girls in the future afghanistan? is this a future priority? >> let's start with the last one. the u.n. had to be very firm on the elections. the elections were not perfect. in a country like afghanistan in the middle of a warm and after difficult elections it would have been probably better not to have them. once you have them, you try to

capitalize on the fact that you have institutions to start building up. they got 1.3 million votes. we got 23 mp's excluded. it was a difficult process. for institutions to work in afghanistan, we need to help them. on the same concept we need to maintain and are working on building up what has been achieved regarding women and human rights. you could argue a concern of many afghan women. that is if there is discussion with the taliban, does this mean that we're going to pay the price of compromise for the sake

of making peace? i hope and believe that would not be the case. if the taliban decide to discuss, they may be tempted to do so. the only way they could feel like they have access to the discussion is knowing that the afghan constitution is there. you can change it if you want. you can change it like you can change it in the u.s. you have to try. you have to start by winning the elections in a democratic way. in italy and france during the cold war, they were dreaming of taking over the constitution and making it a communist country. they did not achieve it. there are ways where you can accommodate the fact that they're dreaming to do that but

will not be able to do it especially if we have strong women in the parliament in supporting that. we should keep an eye on it. it is dangerous. the argument of women is a fundamental point for afghans right now. i am predicting areas where the taliban have been taking over that they have been very sensitive and careful this time not to overplay. we have heard of a few incidents. here is the optimist -- they must have learned a lesson that the afghans are not any more for that. but we have to cross that bridge. regarding the role of the ngo ' s, you are right.

there is not a humanitarian crisis or drama now but there is a potential conflict if things go in the wrong direction. there is poverty. there are some areas where civilians are suffering casualties. the space for ngo's to be allowed to do that is important. >> i have seen in various organizations the multiple displacements of afghan citizens. can you comment on the assimilation so that these people have a chance? >> i know your heart is still

there. you should be proud of iom. doing a fantastic job on the border with libya. we are seeing similar things to what we saw in kuwait when thousands of people who were workers were the first ones to pay the price. on the issue of refugees the bigger problem we're facing at the moment -- you probably know there was a very famous goodwill ambassador visiting recently in afghanistan. he talked about the issue of when the refugee returns he or she should feel sufficient comfort and not feeling that they're not just being welcomed back and abandoned. that is a big problem at the moment with the security

situation and focus on many other issues. they are often in the middle. they need to be better assisted. that is why we are promoting joint operations between the u.n. agencies to make sure they have the type of village family arrangement. it is still a challenge. in other countries when they detected this kind of thing they started returning back. we have had more coming back from pakistan. less from iran. many of them have found jobs also. you are right in raising it. >> in 1947, george tenet set up the policy planning at the state department with the secret memo

that is now the classified. it has become a companion piece to the marshall plan. he explained the way to get the psychological effects that can underpined stability. i am wondering if in the case of afghanistan on the question of economic policy -- unemployment seems to be a top complete of the population. when we hear of u.s. policy leaders and european counterparts speak about afghanistan, they focus on security and the political but not the economic. is now the right time to begin to articulate the economic dimension? is that something that comes later down the road? >> thank you. it is lovely to see you, really. all the best. i am delighted.

she was going through a reproductive lee wonderful -- reproductively wonderful period. [laughter] god bless you. the answer is yes, you are right. the time is now. yesterday, the transition was announced. transition to what? simply to security? the afghans will be sufficiently comfortable in protecting the local environment or to affect unemployment and the local environment making in people finding a job and not being tempted by guys who come from kandahar and tell them to join the taliban. second there is the need for a

master plan. there is going to be a moment where there will be a need for a marshall plan -- marial plan for areas that have been particularly affected. on the border, most of the fighting and bombing has been taking place there. that would be a major contributor to the stabilizing the future of the environment. the second area you do not need to be a troublesome area to deserve special attention. the temptation could be to become troublesome to get special attention. now is the time to focus on economic support to the very

places that have already transitioned. if you look of the areas announced, they coincide a lot. yes, you need to come back soon whenever you can. that is exactly the type of challenge we're going to face. it cannot just be security. >> we have a couple of questions specifically about the u.n. do you and the u.n. staff in afghanistan feel safe? afghan forces are taking over security in seven areas. how will that impact the work the u.n. is doing in those areas? what are your concerns and thoughts? >> if i have to choose between the three points, i would focus

on whether we in the u.n. feel secure. the reality is that afghanistan is still a dangerous place. the reality is that the u.n. has been targeted. i have had five of my colleagues killed and several wounded. we had an attack relatively recently. four suicide bombers tried to enter our operational center. they did not succeed. we were protected by the afghan soldiers. the afghan soldiers were the one who shot them and got wounded. our own internal security was given enough time to respond. our own colleagues were able to go to a safe place. i am trying to reply to all three questions, except the one about our relation with the u.s. military. i will answer that separately.

the writing on the wall is definitely that the afghans want to take over their own security. we need to expect and count on them to do so. there have been complications but not massive ones. our job is dangerous. if we were completely passive we would be in much worse danger. that is the danger of the u.n. has had in its history to become irrelevant. if we have to be active the risk increases. that is why all of us are volunteers, including myself. then we move forward. regarding our relations with the u.s. military i am biased

because i am a friend. you become a friend when you go through difficult times like iraq. i have tried to separate that but it is not easy because friends are friends. that makes a big difference. there is a lot of fair play, attention, and respect by the u.s. military at the highest military -- highest levels for the u.n. that was proven also in iraq. the more active and effective we are, the easier it is for the military not to have to do things they should all be doing. they can be able to favor the transition. when the civilian casualties take place we move fast. we did and we continue doing it. the issue of civilian casualties is a painful one.

75% of those were produced by the taliban. there was a major effort through our influence and meetings to minimize to the maximum their own civilian casualties. to us, one civilian casualties is too many. we continue pushing in that direction. >> can i tempt you to talk about the relationship between al qaeda and the taliban? >> the shortest questions are the most dangerous ones. [laughter] have you read the report of the nyu? you probably did. i would suggest anyone interested in afghanistan to read it.

there was a recent report by nyu on the issue about the relationship between the taliban and al qaeda. it is as it used to be might be, and could be. it is an important point. if one day there will be a reconciliation movement and a political and diplomatic surge that needs to take place by facilitating a tacit and public connection between al qaeda and the taliban. if the taliban claim in saying they are afghans, but they should not be in forfavor of any foreign presence.

al qaeda is totally foreign. i think that is the key for future discussions. i will not elaborate much on it. read the report. you will see that much of it makes sense, at least to me. >> you have a question? >> there is no mention so far about justice and accountability. probably behind security, this is a top priority for afghans. someone was accused of war crimes in the government by the high council. when is the right time to deal with them? what will be the role of the international community in the transition process? >> it is a constant reminder in our minds and hearts that so

many bad things of happened in the past. they cannot be put under a carpet. certainly many afghans still remember what happened in the civil war and what happened with the warlords. when you look at the current composition of the parliament -- these elections are not too bad comparing many things. many young people were babies at the time of the words. they are 26 or 28 years old. when you look at the composition of parliament and the people in the government, you will see that the current afghan society is very much linked to tribal and power brokers. if you decide to go for this type of transitional justice

immediately, we may produce a major conflict that will then be taking advantage only by one group. but giving up on it, forgetting it -- also to your point, i think it came up last year. that is to maintain the flag of that injustice and time and the need for a moment of transition of justice. at the right time, revived it. meanwhile, not allowing the flame to go under. otherwise, there will be no chance for later. the timing now could be taking advantage only by one group. >> you talked about the importance of regional players like iran and pakistan in helping to assure future

stability. someone in the back once you to allow every more on a regional settlement. what specifically to regional settlement consist of? billiard to achieve a real regional settlement -- the failure to achieve a real regional settlement could cause civil war to break out. >> it is exactly what the lady or gentleman said. that is why it is crucial. at this stage, we need an internal sentiment of the taliban disconnected from al qaeda. they are capable of talking afghan to afghan. without the regional blueglue that could happen again. we need each of the regional players to be approached separately and been told the

vision or pull a road picture -- polaroid picture that would make them to a comfortable. it is not metaphysics science. it is simple areas. they are not too complicated. in a public meeting, they will not talk about that. then have a conference where there will be a stability pact. that could be putting down some groups -- rules of the game in which everything -- everyone will respect afghanistan in a way where there will not be a temptation to get too in evolved. -- too involved.

>> the u.n. has many challenges ahead of it as it seeks to fulfil the steps you have just laid out. we wish you all of the best. it is a treat to have someone for it -- someone from the u.n. here in washington. thank you for coming out. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> on "newsmakers," the president of planned parenthood talks about the role of planned

parenthood in the debates going on in congress. today at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c- span. >> i am a numbers guy. >> charles blow expresses his opinion using charts and graphs. >> i really do search for data first. somebody says something interesting and agrees with an opinion that i have and surprises me and my readers -- >> "q & a," tonight on c-span. >> a report was released examining an expanded role in iran. next, you will hear a discussion on these issues and how the u.s. should engaged iran concerning

its nuclear program and human rights. the task force is cochaired by former senator chuck hagel and stuart eizenstat. it is about one hour and 20 minutes. >> thank you very much. i am executive vice president here at the atlantic council. thank you for been at this public event of the atlantic council's task force. we will discuss a work written by our senior fellow. the brief look at iran vis a vi e its neighbors. given the recent events, it

considers the impact of unsettled politics in iran and the impact on u.s./iran relations. this task force was launched one year ago under the chairmanship of senator chuck hagel and ambassador stuart eizenstat. it was launched with the goal of building a confidence of understanding of iran and its internal political and economic dynamics within the country. since its launch last spring, the task force has hosted four working sessions and issued a brief on the need for strategic patients. when the council undertook this project, we had no idea of the event that were about to ensue across the region. the upheaval in the middle east makes the work all that more important in understanding iran. the questions the task force will be facing, this similar

uprisings have a chance to succeed? what are the implications on u.s./iran relations? these are critical questions that need to be addressed by u.s. and global policymakers as they determine what their next strategic steps are in the region. before passing the microphone to our cochairs, i would like to thank the fund that has funded this project. i want to turn it over to our chairman former senator chuck hagel. he is the chairman of the atlantic council. he oversaw a foreign policy in the middle east at an historic and critical moment. >> thank you and welcome. we are pleased you are here. we appreciate you spending some time with us. we recognize this is a friday afternoon. we know the supreme sacrifice

you have made. over the next hour and a half, we will have an opportunity for some substance ofntive exchange based on what the task force has learned over the last few months. that has already been noted. we have been fortunate to have the wise and experienced counsel of many individuals who have had years of experience with the iranian/american issue as well as the entire region. damon noted that when we started this effort as probably the only one clear constant about the world today the great uncertainty about the world -- that plays into much of the

theme in this relationship between iran and the united states, the great uncertainty. when you put a spoke on this and you look at the significant arc beginning in north africa, what happened there beginning in north africa 60 days ago --what is currently under way -- and you take that are over what is currently the middle east over into central and east asia, it covers a tremendous amount of interest for the world. when you look at the deal political dynamics of this, the energy interests you can extrapolate out from that region from that large arc and everything that it comprises that arc and you quickly come to at least a realization if

not the conclusion, that this is a vital part of the world certainly for united states' interests. iran plays a significant part in this. their role, their size, their culture and history they are a significant part of this scenario that has yet to play out. we are seeing a new order being built in this part of the world as we are across the globe a new world order is under way. this general region is a great manifestation, a clear manifestation of what is happening around the world. i do not think there is any question among all who know about this area and may have varying opinions about how we deal with this part of the world -- with no question about

whether we are ever want to see a world again like we had seen the last few years especially within this large arc. we will not. what is under way is going to transform how we do business, relationships, geopolitical relationships and the common interests that anchor those relationships. barbara slavin will get into some detail on this. it is much of the centerpiece of what this task force has tried to grapple with and work along those lines. students have a lot to say about this. -- stu has a lot to say about this. it has been my opinion over the years that if nations forsake the possibility to anchor relationships and their own sovereign, national interests --

if you before the common interests that must anchor relationships, those parallel, common interests there is little likelihood that anything positive will come from that. you will never get to the differences. you will never be able to close in on the boundaries of trying to resolve differences or living with each other or those differences. the common interests become a central core fact of what we are about. with that, thank you. i now turn to my esteemed colleague and good friend. he and i worked together on many projects over the years. i cannot think of anyone more qualified to be part of this. for your leadership, thank you. >> we embarked on this iran project through the atlantic council because we felt the

relationship between the united states and iran was going to be, jeff -- the informative. there were specific papers that reflected the best use of experts inside and outside the -- views of experts inside and outside the government. there are ways to potentially look at the internal political forces. we are trying to look at the regional role that we want to play and that we think iran wants to play. we saw three goals for the united states. barbara slavin has done an excellent job and has -- and will be our main presenter. one is to stabilize the region in a sustainable way. the second is to prepare for a

2014 with a drawl withdrawal of combat troops. third is to encourage iran to be less confrontational toward the united states and our allies in the region. how to keep maximum pressure and the need for enhanced pressure as iran finds ways to avoid a fourth round of u.n. sanctions and the unilateral sanctions that follow it. how to keep pressure on the iranian nuclear program so that it does not develop into a weapon is program. on the other hand, to try to find areas regionally in which there may be a coincidence of interests in which we can cooperate.

one of the tensions we have struggled with is, as we try to find those areas whether iran is interested in engaging or not there is the risk that you send a signal with respect to the nuclear program that you are letting up the pressure. that is not our intention. as we mentioned in the paper there is certainly present for that. for decades we have a strong confrontational relationship with the soviet union with its expansionist role throughout the globe. at the same time, we tried to find areas of cooperation in areas where there happened to be a coincidence of interest without sending a signal to our allies that we were letting up on the confrontation. we think this comes at an

opportune time because of the upheavals in the middle east which iran felt were to its liking. some of the pro-western regimes were toppled. as we have seen democratic forces assert themselves in tunisia and egypt and elsewhere, the iranian autocratic model may itself be a victim. they recognize that they are not necessarily playing from a position of strength. cooperation in these regional areas, particularly afghanistan may be opportune at this time and hit the entrance of the night -- fit the address -- the interests of the united states and iran. mark has pulled this whole

effort together for one year. he has found the experts around the world. he has been the glue that has held this entire project together. i speak for the senator when i say we are much in your debt. we appreciate the intellectual efforts you put into this. it shows in some of the papers. let me turn it to you and you can try to speak on it. >> we should also note that he has just arrived from mongolia, china, the yellow sea and wherever else he has been. we appreciate you coming right from the airport to do this. >> thank you and let me join the cochairs in welcoming you to this rollout of iran -- of the

iran task force. there are a number of uncertainties that will influence how things turn out. as stated, the upheavals across the middle east. the protests are spreading to syria, an iranian ally. the israeli/palestinian situation, the future of iraq and developed as we did not yet know of. these are going to influence direction when it comes to america's relationship with iran. i have just come back from china and korea. there is a strong perspective there, correct or not that with the upheaval in the middle east, iran is gaining influence in the region. i picked up the sense that the populaist regime will be less accommodating to the united states. they will not be pro-iranian.

what is driving the people is a sense of emancipation. this is the process of ending colonialism. that is how the people i met with in china and korea read the situation. what kind of regional role is the iranian leadership seeking? how does that fit the aspirations of the emerging arab states in the gulf and how are american interests affected? we have the principal author of the brief, barbara slavin. she has been to iran seven times. she is a journalist and author. she is also the author of the u.s. institute of peace's report on the iranian regional influence. the process we will follow today is we will hear from barbara for

the next 20 minutes and we will take questions from the audience. without further ado , atlantic council. >> thank you, everybody. i wanted that alex, who did the excellent that and chart. it will give you a better idea of how iran fits in the middle of this region. it is a pivotal country. we are quibbling it here at the atlantic council. we decided to do this brief but it is much more timely now given the events. this is a snapshot of where we are now. we cannot give you the whole

movie. the narrative that one hears most prominently from tehran is that iran is the victor in these uprisings is too simplistic. what we are really seeing is a continuation of a pattern that goes back to the beginning of the islamic republic in which iran takes advantage of opportunities prevented -- presented by external events. what remains is a strategically lonely nation. let me explain what i mean by strategically lonely. before the 1979 revolution, iran was being -- iran had to relationships with the united states and major powers like egypt and saudi arabia and ties with israel. since 1979, iran has had its

most successful relationships with a non-state actor, hezbollah. its closest relations with a neighbor were with armenia. it is not a strategically important country. over the past three decades iran has not become a member of any major defense line. it has observer status in the council. this is a relatively recent development. last year, when iran tried to become a member of the council its membership application was rejected because the rules forbid any country that has been sanctioned by the u.n. security council from becoming a member. iran has been sanctioned repeatedly since 2006 because of its nuclear program. in the brief, there are details

about the ties with the soviet union. these relationships are far from trouble-free. there is also a section on iraq and lebanon and iran across the persian gulf and the ball back on the iranian democracy movement -- democracy movement. i do not like to give advice. but since i am a semi-pundit we have recommendations that about afghanistan. the united states and iran have overlapping interests. i will give a brief overview. i would not go into the top the in depth. looking first at afghanistan iran has clearly benefited from the u.s. regime change. exports to afghanistan have gone

up twentyfold. the western part of the country is the most peaceful and prosperous in afghanistan because of the actions of iranian businessmen who have set up shops there. iran is benefiting from central corridors in afghanistan that go through iran. iran could do much better if not for sanctions. sanctions are an impediment to energy trade. at the same time, there are irritants in this relationship. they stem from history. the two people were both part of the same person empire. afghans and iranians see themselves as the origins of height person culture. afghans resent being treated as second-class citizens. it fled to iran as refugees and have not met with good treatment

there. there have been more recent irritants. when iran goes into a country it tries to push vests onto too many different horses. this is translated into aid and cash payments. there are reports that some taliban have been brought into iran for training. this winter, iran held up 2500 fuel trucks that were bound to afghanistan with fuel from iraq. the motivation still remains somewhat mysterious. some say iran bought the fuel was bound for nato forces, which is not true. some say it was a mercenary decision to jack up the price. some say it was a message to hamid karzai not to ignore iran.

demonstrations against iran in front of iran's embassy. iraq was the biggest threat to the islamic republic. that threat is not going to be there for the foreseeable future. iran is the most powerful foreign active in iraq and it will become more powerful as the remaining u.s. troops leave the country. iran has shot itself in the foot repeatedly. it supported a variety of factions. the supreme council for the islamic revolution in iraq was born in iran from iraqi exiles in the 1980's. it has changed its name to the islamic supreme council in iraq. iranians started supported shiite cleric and splinter

groups formed the army, which attacked sunni's, other shiites and troops. he returned briefly to iraq in january, but left after 15 days after he was the object of assassination threats from the leak of the righteous another one of these iranian-backed factions. he came back and appeared alongside a secular shiite. the removal of his support was threatened. maybe iran is renting him. we also have to ask some

questions about this relationship. if iran has ties that are so close, why is there still a peace treaty? why hasn't iraq pay reparations to iran for the war that iraq started. why is iran holding on to some aging fighter jets that were flown into iran during the 1991 gulf war? why is iran dumping consumer goods on iraq and hurting iraqi production? one of the print -- one of the complaint i heard from iraq these is that a butcher will ask you if you want a sunni chicken or eight shiite chicken? [laughter] this is quite a racket for the iranians. despite these obvious irritants in the relationship, we have seen a panic spread through the

sunni arab world about the rising profile of iran. this has only gotten worse with the events in bahrain and eastern saudi arabia in the weeks and months recently. if we look at iran's relations with these arab shia, it is incorrect to say iran is the instigator of these conflicts. there are longstanding grievances particularly on the part of bahrain. the shia make up 70% of the population. it is also interesting given the hysteria of some of the saudi arabian propaganda we see that until last week, iranian state media, person media, was barely devoting any attention to bahrain.

an iranian scholar brought this to my attention recently. it was only the iran -- the iranian arabic language media that was reporting this. this changed after the saudi arabians sent troops into bahrain recently. then iraq in state media picked up because. the way that they have done it is not terribly helpful to the people in bahrain. the head of the guardian council that supervises iranian elections gave a sermon the other week in which he said that bahrain should resist the enemy until you die or win. this is the iranian pattern. they are perfectly happy to fight to the last arab. they will not put their own lives on the line unless iran is directly attacked. this is a cheap propaganda victory for them.

i am not sure it is anything more. if we look to iran in relationships with the gulf, we see -- iranian relations across the persian gulf -- when we look at these relations, we see that there is a fair amount of variation. iran has had tense relations with saudi arabia and with bahrain. it has good ties with oman which has mediated between iran and the united states on several occasions. most recently, they help to get one of the american hikers that was jailed in iran freed from jail in iran. iran has also had good ties with dubai. the uae is still the largest source of iranian imports.

it is $9 billion. that figure is coming down a bit. it is still substandard. i think it is about $6 billion just this last year. is iran the winner from all of these conflicts? iran is benefiting from the increase in oil prices. this is a tremendous boom that allows it to appear all -- to pay off its supporters. it is still too soon to say that iran is the great victor. in the brief i compare iran to a porcupine that tries to project an image of bristling strength to hide the internal vulnerabilities. the protests have boomeranged back to iran. we do not see this in the media because there are so few foreign

correspondents in iran and there are tremendous restrictions. there have been demonstrated the- --demonstrations in iran for the past two weeks. the green movement never died. it was dormant for a year. iranians are extremely aware of what is happening in the rest of the region. the government is so terrified of this movement that they have been executing people at a record rate. they recently called off the leaders of the -- hauled off the leaders of the green movement with their wives. and they have now removed the former president from an

important post inside the assembly of exports which is a body that is supposed to choose the next supreme leader. these actions narrow the base of support for the government. the scholars of iran know that the more one faction appears to consolidate power, the more it splinters and the more opposition it faces. we can look forward to a lot of in-biting as we face the present a elections-- in-fighting as we look forward to the presidential elections. the former president could have been a mediator between the president and the opposition. now i do not think that is going to happen. in terms of winners and losers, i thought i would mention this

because we are seeing new developments in the region. israel is a bit of a loser. it is now going to have to be more careful in terms of its behavior because these new governments that are coming into power in egypt and tunisia will not be as accommodating to israel as it tries to mount attacks on palestinians or the lebanese. this puts israel into a quandary as it tries to deal with terrorist attacks. in the longer term, we should be optimistic. a longer -- a more democratic egypt can be a good bthing. it will be a more self company egypt. it may be in a better position to mediate arab/israeli peace or

to mediate between palestinian factions. in talking about winners and losers i think syria was mentioned. we are seen growing disturbances. the regime is destabilized. that is not a win for iran. the only real winners that i see right now is turkey. it is the indispensable nation. it has good ties with everyone in the region. just recently, it got four "new york times" the analyst -- journalists released. the uncertainty is likely to make iran more risk-averse. this is the past and we have seen over the last few months.

iran was unable to complete a confidence-building nuclear deal with the united states in 2009 because of the domestic opposition against mahmoud ahmadinejad. there are some overlapping interests. i think the united states can be more pro-active than it has been. obama has pivoted from engagement to containment and sanctions. the u.s. can be more creative in this area. iran has four goals in afghanistan. to prevent the taliban from taking over. it does not want the taliban in control of the country again. second is to stem the flow of drugs, which has a way around one of the most addictive countries in the west. a third is to do something about sunni militancy which feeds

conflicts. finally, iran once the united states to withdraw its troops from afghanistan. -- wants the united states to withdraw its troops from afghanistan. some of these issues are already being explored. there was a recent meeting in sweden that had american and iranian representatives. they said they wanted to see an increased role for the united nations and the establishment of a core group to discuss afghanistan. similar to the group that helped set up the first government in afghanistan after the overthrow of the taliban and the meetings held in the 1990's among iran's

neighbors and the united states. these types of discussions provided cover for bilateral u.s./iraq talks. the top u.n. representative in afghanistan has convened a ambassadors from the united states iran and other regional players in what he calls the silk road and is a tilt. these are the first such meetings of ambassadors since 2005 and the first time american representatives in kabul have sat in the same room with iranian diplomats in kabul. the representative says he wants to have a meeting in turkey later this year. they also want to mark the 10th anniversary of the bond conference.

if iran is going to be playing a more constructive role in afghanistan, it is going to expect something in return. can the united states continue to put pressure on iran over its nuclear program and offer iran something to be laid in a more constructive manner in afghanistan? -- to be slave -- to behave in a more constructive manner in

afghanistan? there is also the matter of energy pipelines in iran. in washington, this is something that has been discouraged. we want to help afghanistan. it would seem that the more routes from central asia to the sea, the more ways trait can go to india thailand and other countries, the better. this is a dilemma the united states is quick to have to deal with and reconcile. pakistan is far more unstable than iran. if you want a benefit for central asia, you should keep that in mind. as the ambassador manchin this is similar to the situation we had with the old -- as the ambassador mentioned this is similar to the situation we had with the old soviet union. iran will change. if there is anything we have

learned from the middle east, it is that governments can change. it is important to lay the groundwork for a better relationship with iran. iran will change. if we can make some progress on this issue of afghanistan it may be easier to talk to iran about the nuclear issue about human rights and other issues we care about in the region. i will stop there and we will be happy to take your questions. >> thank you. that was excellent. let's open up the audience -- let's open up for questions with the audience. what are the implications for what is happening in libya or iran? i would think that the u.s.- backed nato operations would give iran pause. is that a fair assumption? >> iran had a relationship with gaddafi. when libya brought down pan am

103, there was a theory that this was a hit against the united states for bringing down the iranian airliner during the iran/iraq war with the loss of many iranian lives. a palestinian faction was thought to be asked to do it. they were discovered by the germans. it was up crop -- it was subprimecontracted to gaddafi. they are not happy to see a nato-led intervention in the middle east. this is a frightening prospect for them. at the same time, it may make them redouble their efforts to get nuclear weapons. there has been a lot of commentary.

the north koreans have said that gaddafi was able to give up his nuclear weapons in 2003. that made him vulnerable. i do not think gaddafi could ever have put together a bomb. when the nuclear materials were turned over, they were still in their crates. they had not figured out how to take them out of the box. there is a point. it is part of an unsubtle picture that has to make the iranians were reaping. if it comes -- that has to make the iranians worry. it works to the u.s. and western advantage. it may help those in iran who would like to see a negotiated resolution with the united states and the international community. >> yes, sir? >> thank you for the task force. thank you also for an update on this the evolving situation. it is perfect to have a journalist doing it.

you have deadlines week by week in the region. my question relates to a conclusion the task force drew in the first paper, which was in november. it was that iran might have the best chance in the region to be a durable democracy. i am wondering if you could provide a little color on that and what led to that conclusion. >> i just came from an event at the carnegie endowment. the iranian ambassador -- the italian ambassador in iran spoke and an iranian ambassador pointed this out. i think iran will be much better positioned to become a stable democracy that a lot of the arab countries where we are seeing regime change right now.

why do i say that? it is because of the educational level of the country. 80% literacy. that far exceeds that in egypt. it has a history of seeking representative democracy that goes back more than 100 years. iran had a constitutional revolution in 1906 that brought about the first parliament in the middle east. the revolution in 1979 had a lot of democratic elements. it was hijacked by the religious extremists. many iranians would like to see a change in that. we also have the fact that we have had these democratic evolutions. the abolition of civil society in that country began after ayatollah khamenei died in 1989. all of these different

philosophers. who were putting forward interesting documents on reconciling islam and democracy. we had the ups that election in 1997. he eased the hand of the state on the iranian people. there has been an emergent do a more authoritarian system. i do not thinking it is sustainable in iran. the lot as it could work in iran better than anywhere else in the region. -- democracy could work in iran better than anywhere else in the region. >> the to see you. my question is i just came from the state department white house. there are a lot of things going on in the white house and the state department. the political tsunami and unrest

going on in the middle east. where is it going to stop? is it going to go toward china? the chinese people are waiting for the ways of the tsunami to reach their homeland for a better life and human rights and rule of law and democracy and religious freedom. also nato is not going to play a role in libya. they are fighting in afghanistan. they do this without him and on the ground or forces on the ground in libya. >> i will begin and hand it off quickly. your last question about boots on the grounds. that is an area that secretary gates covered four weeks ago in

testimony -- two weeks ago in testimony on capitol hill. what is the objective? what is the purpose? with gaddafi in power there seems to be some confusion. "the washington post" had a headline about clarity. clarity is a critical dimension for any democracy when you commit troops. as secretary gates said in his testimony, we are engaged in an act of war. not just the united states, but the nations who have participated in nato with us. they are engaged in war. what is the essential objective of that? is it a pleasing change? is it to live with gaddafi and divide -- is it a regime change?

is it to live with gaddafi and divide libya. ? you asked about china. i. lead i will let mark brzezinski handled that since he just came from china. >> i suggest we not the birds into china. -- not diverge into china. we have a clearer focus. let's stay there. >> it relates to china thinking and the thoughts that have on this. your question is relevant. >> i will be quick and debris. china is worried about two things. first of all, any kind of contagion in the form of popular upheaval transforming -- transferring from the middle

east to china. you can see newspapers and the steps china is taken to control popular dissent. there is a real worry about an explosion in the middle east. not so much because there is a deep care in china and korea about the democratic movement in the middle east. it is because it is where they get their energy resources. iran is the third largest supplier of oil to china. that is the concern. they want the continuity in terms of their own economy and they want stability in the global economy. >> i think i will pass on that. >> one quick question. >> secretary gates is saying something different. secretary clinton and president obama clearly said today and

yesterday and ever since that mr. gaddafi must leave. >> as the ambassador noted, we are here to talk about iran and not gaddafi. how he fits into the larger scope is ok. i think we should go on to some other questions. >> my name is walter. chuck hagel. you mentioned understanding the difference. today friends. tomorrow enemies. we must understand the difference. in the diplomatic corridor, there are diplomacy'sies that are able to turn in is into friends. i had an interesting book.

if anybody can read and give you an idea of what the problem is in the world -- it is a fascinating book to read. it talks about a free market economy. >> is there a question? >> the question is, what can be done so we can understand the differences between culture religion, and politics between iran and the united states? >> i think i can do an entire issue brief on its own. we have a lot of affinities with iran. that is one of the reasons i wrote a book about it. americans are more popular there than they are anywhere else in the middle east or south asia because of those affinities.

iran is a deeply religious country, a spiritual country. it is not a theocratic one. religious role has made iranians sake of the. -- sick of theocratic government. women have been at the forefront of a lot of the demonstrations. it is absolutely time to go in a different direction. the two government have been fighting each other for 32 years. the car and government appears to see enmity with the united states as a pillar. it has to have an enemy. it has to have a scapegoat. that is a big problem that will be difficult to overcome. >> thank you. >> thank you very much.

i came from poland. i am glad to be here and to listen to this wonderful presentation. i have two brief questions regarding iran. you mentioned the possible spreading of the revolutions in the middle east. when i think about what i call the facebook revolutions and the other revolutions they started in iran with the last election. do you think we should find the beginning of those revelations during the last presidential election in iran? the second question is concerned with the change in the balance of power in the arab league. do you think the revolution is taking place now in the region will affect the balance of power

in the arab league and their attitude toward iran in the future? thank you. >> good questions both of them. i have written about the demonstrations that happened after the disputed elections in iran. the iranian government tries to see these conflicts were in 1979. in 2009 it was facebook and cell phone cameras catching the demonstrators and people being beaten and killed on the streets of tehran. some of the organizers of the demonstrations in tunisia and egypt have said that they communicated through facebook with the iranians and learned some techniques from them in terms of how to organize facebook pages to get some of these demonstrations started. i had not thought about the realignment of the arab league. it will be interesting to see. this has not been a strong

organization for years. it has been kind of a joke. if you have a more democratic or stronger government, that could mean a more vigorous arab league. i was surprised that they agreed to the intervention in libya. that was really something. you might not have seen that in the past. in terms of relationships with iran some people are worried about egypt. egypt might restore diplomatic relationships with -- relations with iran. that is possible. a lot of concern on the radio -- concern on the israeli side that there will be weapons smuggled into plaza. -- into gaza. there is no way they're going to let iran spread its influence.

there are various military installations. the u.s. is not retreating east of suez like the british did. the arab countries are going to remain with the west for the foreseeable future. we should not assume iran will have great friends in the west. we have the arab-person divide. that is and -- arab-persian divide. that is an exaggerated concern. >> i believe iran will be the loser in this turmoil primarily because of each. egypt has not existed on the international scene -- iran will be the loser in this turmoil primarily because of egypt. egypt has not existed on the international scene for 30

years. we do not want to go like the iranians did. that is the comment. the question is, we just completed a study of the opposition in iran. what emerges is that it is an indelible part of the society. it is part of the social structure and goes back to the resolution -- the revolution. that is not going to go away. they are not going to be strong enough to overthrow the government. any real change that takes place has got to come from some insider who reaches out to them. i would be interested in your comment. >> i certainly agree with the fact that the opposition has been a permanent feature of iran if not to say the islamic republic, for a long time.

i am not sure how the change will come. there is a tremendous power in the green movement and the fact that it does not have a leader. you cannot decapitate it. every person in iran is a part of the green movement. they remain loyal to the regime. there are going to be a transition point. there will be a new president and a supreme leader. a lot of people had tremendous hopes invested in the former president. it was the supreme leader who prevented him from becoming and i told gorbachev. -- presentvented him from becoming an ayatollah gorbachev. this is just going to have to evolves.

for the iranian sake, i hope it will be peaceful. it probably will be. this frizzing when not remain in power for another 20 years. -- this regime will not remain in power for another 20 years. you will see a change. >> i see the man in front of you and then it will go to you. >> barbara slavin i enjoyed your comments but i have to take issue. i was misquoted by an iranian who set the united states government wanted pipelines to go through iran. i take issue with the idea that we should encourage multiple pipe line routes through iran.

the need to reduce dependence on russia is the key to the pipelines going through turkey, for example. i would be interested in your reaction. >> if you want the country to not be enough liar in the international system, you need to give them assets. -- not to be and out liarlier in the international system, you need to give them as is. if the u.s. would have allowed iran to have pipelines back in the 1990's, i do not think we would have the hostile relationship we have with iran

today. should we continue this pattern because of the nuclear issue? if we want to end leros a monopoly? -- if we want to end the russian monopoly? we need to stop blocking a run having the pipelines, try to discourage trade -- the late richard holbrooke was proud the had gotten a trade agreement from pakistan to india. it is in everybody's interest. i would refer it to fred starr at john hopkins who has written extensively. arabic and benefit. turkey can benefit all the countries along there. -- everyone can benefit. turkey can benefit and all the

countries along their. >> i think this would be absolutely the wrong time to send that signal. iran is doing everything it can to find ways around the increasingly effective sanctions that are starting to buy. there is a need to engage other and then find areas of cooperation and still keep up a very strong front. if we were to send a signal now that we want to encourage poplins to iran, it would send exactly -- encouraged pipelines to iran, it would send exactly the wrong message. >> i'm not talking about encouraging. i am talking about along blocking others, india, for a simple. obviously, we have laws that forbid it now, very very strict laws. but we should stop encouraging others.

>> we cannot have it both ways in the nuclear issue. we are at a real crossroads whether or not the sanctions will send a real signaturesignal and will hurt enough to change iran. and there is accepting a nuclear motor or having a confrontation with the israelis. we have to have the strongest for a possible for our allies with other countries for india and others were finding ways in which to engage on a loyal andoil and get around some of those other

things. >> i would just offer one additional point on this. i am not sure that we should be stuck in an either/or situation. i speak only for myself, obviously. i do not know when we have had real strategic thinking and our united states government foreign-policy. that may sound a little harsh for some, but why are we broadening -- why are we not broadening options and creativity and take advantage of reality as the way it is. one of the possibilities that could fallout of this new dynamic in north africa/millies central asia --

which is a very clear 21st century example, a manifestation of great power limitations. if it is not happening now, do not know when it is happening in history. great powers in history, this is a pretty good example. something will happen here and it is happening now. there will be a fallout and there will be start -- there will start to be stabilizing some were year. we should be creative in thinking and in our strategic interests and connecting different ways in different thinking that maybe we have not thought about. i think we do a great disservice to our country, our people, who we are. i think we're better than this. when we lock ourselves down to either this or either this. i do not think the world is that simple. i don't think it ever has been. nothing to adjustments will be required like never before in history. >> yes. >> yes, sir.

>> i am jewel rayburn -- joel raburn. your thought about overlapping interests with iran and the afghanistan -- there were people in this city who talked about are perceived overlapping interests in iraq. we found out that iranian goals were to extract as from iraq at all costs. -- extract us from iraq at all costs. i am looking at your list of four iranian interests in afghanistan. it seems to me that it has come easily from being on the ground in afghanistan that their interest in expelling is from afghanistan to of these other three dramatically.

-- trump these other three dramatically. it seems to me that they are on the track and willing to back a militant faction to expels. >> thank you for that question. the u.s. wants to get out of afghanistan. in july, if president obama is to be believed, we will be bringing back combat troops from the surge. this is a year for diplomatic surge as well. secretary of state clinton has said so. there will be a political settlement among afghans and there will be a wide regional and international framework for that settlement. so yes the iranians will do -- will always remind us that they can do a great deal of harm. but, in a sense, they're pushing on an open door. the u.s. does not want to keep 100,000 troops in afghanistan for any more than wanted to keep

them in iraq. i think it is possible to work with them on this. some of these other bowls are important. i would know that the u.s. has not been doing much on the counter-narcotics front lately. the iranians are very resentful that because that is where a lot of the drugs are winding up. i also -- i would say that there are some quid pro quos there. we never look at our own actions. we are now surrounding iran. we have doubled to governments. we have the u.s. government on either -- we have toppled two governments. we have the u.s. government on either side of them. i think we need to look at it through their eyes as well. if we want a relatively stable

afghanistan, if we want to be able to get out of there, then we need to address iranian interests as well. >> yes, we back. -- way back. >> i also have a question about the recommendation regarding in gauging the iranians in a discussion about afghanistan for you, barbara. with the green movement, just hoping to benefit from these uprisings, what you have to say about the timing of trying to engage iranians in some kind of diplomatic initiative? with that run the rest of and running the movement -- of undermining the movement? >> said nothing said. but with the soviet union, president reagan met with them and we negotiated with the russians over gun control.

-- arms control. what obama and clinton are doing is address human rights constantly with iranians. that is more potent than the nuclear issue right now because iran is not going to give up their nuclear program probably. but the un has now addressed a special loquitur on human rights coaches great. -- on human rights, which is great. >> let me also add another dimension to this. it is a dimension of reality. you saw the latest gallup poll or the american people are on afghanistan. i do not think that will be reversed. i think those numbers will continue to go in the direction of get out. for a lot of reasons budget, so on. it seems to me we will have to continue to play all these factors into the reality of what

we want focusing on our strengths, focusing on where we have something to use the diplomatic leverage, focusing all their power into some common purpose, allies, relationships the political reality budgets what we have done to our force structure in the pentagon over 10 years of war. regardless of what your position is, whether it was directing to go into that iraq or not that is the pass. the reality is we are where we are. the question is where do i go from here, just like libya or anywhere else. within the context of all of this, there are some real polybus cities -- real possibilities and real reality is that will force us into different ways of thinking. this is a raging debate always, and it should be debated, but i believe that the engagement does

not appeasement. engagement is not weakness. how else we get to -- again what is the objective? do you want to go to war with iran? certainly not. i'm not so sure how much stomach the american people have for that or whether our allies have for that. you have to think down the road what happens next? what happens next? where are we going? what is the point of this? can we be smarter about how we're doing some of these things? we have to question every pass from a reference every pass reference point in dealing with the iranians are any of these issues. again, i do not see that as a weakness, where a lot of people do. the political reality will dictate a certain amount of this. anyone really believing that the republican nomination for president -- those debates are starting ourright now -- this will

not be a central piece of the republican presidential primary. it will be budgets. what republican presidential candidate is a raise about the budget? where the differences are foreign-policy. we will get a thorough airing of this. we have not had that in this country for a long time. we have to get out in front of us and we have the capacity to do that. >> yes. >> arms control association. gaining nuclear capabilities has been central aspiration for the reins for a long time before they -- for the iranians for a long time, before the 1979 revolution.

>> a lot of my iranian friends have been a friend about a share reactor opening up. this is even before what happened in japan. i have one friend tell me that there's such a hodgepodge of technology. the germans started it in the 1970's. then the japanese took it. they are afraid that if people give in, it will blow up. -- they're afraid that, if you plug it in, it will blow up. some people have suggested there is seven times at the pumps. i think there will be a while because that reactor dissolves if it ever does. if they do not have a power plant, what they need this and richard uranium for? the other things that have gone the assassinations of nuclear scientists as so on, it

definitely could be a factor in suggesting that they might slowdown. i do not think that they will give up their determination to have a program meant to say that they have a right to the program. that is a nationalistic issue. that will let go away. >> that is a lesson not just for the iran, but for the entire middle east. >> it could really be a counter- proliferation -- if it is a horrible cause for the japanese, but it is important for all of the the country to want nuclear power. >> with afghanistan being a majority pest in population -- a majority pashtun population and

with iran being more sympathetic to the palestinian cause would they have more cause in those areas? >> yes definitely, pakistan has more of an interest in the taliban. as we know they have given safe haven to them. but iran has influence as well. 20% of afghans speech of dari. the list goes all the way through pakistan and india that one thinks of native somehow. i think that they do have an important influence. of course, there is the spoiler

role. iran has historically been a spoiler. it gets back to the rest of the world for isolating it after the revolution. in terms of the palestinian issue, the gulf states also give lip service to the palestinian cause, sometimes more than that. this is a rahm's way been exerting its symmetric -- this is iran's way of exerting its symmetric our. it is a way -- symmetric power. it is a way to get back to viewat you. if the other arab states become more sympathetic to the posting

is then -- to the palestinians, then iran will become less important. they do not have a lover and but they take its money. -- they do not have a love for iran but they take its money. >> can you tell us what is happening and are rated hallett intersects with the iranians. you have a movement on bahrain being repressed by the bahraini ruling family. >> in the 1980's, the or definite iranian efforts to subvert the situation in bahrain and kuwait and eastern saudi arabia. iran was still very much in a revolutionary mode. it was a way to get back at these countries because of the iran-iraq war.

in more recent years, that has not been the case. i think that the briny she is -- that the bahraini shias do not want iran on their side. they want democracy. they want the parliament that represents their views. it is absolutely cynical for the bahrainis and the saudis to call this an iranian plot. will durant invented to of a gnat? of course, there will. -- will iran take advantage of it? of course, they will. you will not see a single iranian soldier. you'll see iranian intelligence agents. there is a big divide between the arab shia and the persian shia who understand that this is an ethnic clash that goes back

centuries. if you ever met arabs in iran and ask them about their treatment, you know there are no sunni mosques in iran. they're not allowed. if you talk to the shia in iran , they are treated very poorly. so this is not a relationship that is made in heaven by any chance even though there may be some shia who follow the ayatollah. >> we will take one more question. let me close with this final question. the administration is wrestling with how to channel the popular will that is being expressed in the middle east in the democratic direction. in certain ways, despite the

reference to models elsewhere in the world it really is a case of first impressions. what advice would you offer the administration as it wrestles with that question? how should it develop policies that is consistent with that goal and our goals in terms of changing iran? >> wow. in terms of iran, of course, i mentioned human rights very strongly. but also continue to reach out to the iranian government over the nuclear issue, over afghanistan. put the onus on iran for negotiations. i think the u.s. should also be constantly looking for possible avenues for dialogue with iran especially as we see all these developments in the region.

there will be people in the iranian government who will be looking for, if not a resolution with the differences with the united states, at least lay the groundwork for that day of the game changed. >> thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> tomorrow, the united nations need to discuss libya. after that, the security council will meet behind closed doors for more consultations and to discuss other matters. after the final meeting an on- camera briefing is possible. you can see continuing coverage of the united nations here on the c-span network. >> this week the president of the american university in cairo predicted that muammar gaddafi would die as a mortar before giving up power in libya. lisa -- as a martyr before giving up power in libya. there was an event at the

carnegie endowment for national peace. this is one hour and 25 minutes. >> the last week was eventful but beyond, we are, of course, witnessing what is happening in libya and what has happened in tunisia and indeed, this way that seems to be moving across the arab world that promises to be quite a transformation. i am very delighted to have with us today someone who has --

someone who is known to all of you. i am sure. liz anderson was appointed president to the american university in cairo this year. i was supposed to attend her inauguration but, of course, other events stood in the way. but even before dr. anderson went to cairo, of course, she had been a specialist in the middle east for a very very long time. she served, of course, as the university's provost from 2008 to 2010. but prior to that, she was the dean of international public affairs at columbia for 10 years. she is the author of many books and articles.

dr. anderson will talk with us today about the events not just in egypt but also in tunisia and libya. as you all know, we are getting very unique perspective on events in that country as well as in the region. please help me in welcoming [applause] dr. anderson] -- please help me in welcoming dr. anderson. [applause] >> thank you very much credit is a delight to be here. this is the first have been out of egypt since the beginning of january. so it is an interesting opportunity for me to get a different perspective than lie down from tahrir square from what has been happening in the

region. i want to talk a little bit about this sort of larger picture of how we think about the authoritarian legacies of the regimes against which these rebellions were made. i think, in fact, the tendency to see all of this as a pieces, all the one hand, this damnable but also potentially significant -- but also apotentially a cigna big mistake. -- on the one hand, understandable but also potentially a significant mistake. i want to sort of set the stage if you will, in a little bit more of an abstract and broadway. i think it is clear that,

certainly, in the early days of the uprising, the beginning of this calendar year, people tended to see these "arab uprisings" as all of a peace. it is certainly true that they were largely unexpected, spontaneous protests against aging authoritarian rulers in tunisia and in egypt and in libya and now, as we are seeing increasingly elsewhere as well. many of us have, for a long time, wondered how the next generation would take power in these countries. at least, in a few places, we seem to have the answer. it is through these popular uprisings. the contempt for their own citizens that had been conveyed by a lot of these governments for decades they had seemed indifferent to the well-being of their own citizens. they seemed to have lost touch with the populations that they

were putatively responsible for. in all that respects, this is, as people often say is set of protests about dignity, about citizens who as they themselves put it, lost their fear and wanted to demand the respect that they thought they deserved from their own government. and i think it is important to understand that that is, in many important ways, the framing of this. this is not particularly ideological. it is not particularly about socialism or nationalism or ideologies of any kind. it is simply wanting government that are respectful of people they're supposed to serve and accountable to them. one of the things that i think was most of all of last decade or so in a number of countries and this is a sort of word picture, if you will, about the

decay of the relationship between governments and their citizens in many of these countries was the accumulation of garbage in the streets. i was astonished when i was last in libya, which was in 2007, by the extent to which this oil- rich country was filthy, absolutely filthy. it was not about party and it was not about how one could -- it was not about poverty and it was not about how one could manage public services, but it was a country where the people themselves were expressing content for other government and dissatisfaction with their own government and throwing garbage in the streets. you can hardly resist inquiring how that came to be. and people say, "we do not care. we just threw it in the

streets." and the government did not pick it up. it was a mutual contempt. it was a demoralization that ultimately animated these sorts of protests. you can see the other side of that when you see what has happened in the aftermath of the protests in egypt, where the place is spotless. every single young person has been cleaning and painting the ridges and painting sidewalks and so forth. i do not know whether you have seen these pictures, but across the country there is a clean-up campaign. it is, what's the and emblematic of being tired of living -- it is, once again emblematic of being tired of living -- there was a sense that part of what this is about is

citizens wanting to live in a circumstance in which they are respected by their governments where they are -- for their rights are a knowledge as citizens and where they have responsibilities that are also acknowledged, including things like keeping things clean simple simple points that most points in other societies including the one we are in right now sort of take for granted. but i wanted to paint that would picture at the outset because i think it is important for those of us who are analysts here to keep in mind that, when we say these are not particularly illogical, they are in the logical in this -- particularly ideological, they are in the ideological sense that their government is there to serve them, who think that there should be respected by those governments, that those governments should be accountable, but are not swept up in ideological movements of some kind. i think there is a generational change in the region in that

respect as well as in how they organize themselves and the importance of facebook and social media and that kind of thing. their parents were ideologues in ways that they are not. i think we will see that bear fruit over the course of the coming years. that said, the patterns of how these protests and develop, the kinds of things that were the specific targets of protests are actually quite different in the three countries that i want to talk about tunisia egypt, and libya. it is important to note that, as i said because i think some of the policy prescriptions that we will see developing in the countries themselves, as well as outside, will reflect these sorts of differences. indonesia, one of the things that i think is worth remarking is that the protests started in the hinterlands. they started in rural areas, in areas that were particularly

neglected by government that was extraordinarily good at painting a picture of a successful middle income country that had welcomed tourism and so forth and so on, a picture that really was a contented millage behind which had quite a bit of misery and resentment against the government whose center and ruler was unconscionably corrupt. that's unjust there is a way to be conscious of the corrupt and perhaps there is not -- that suggest there is a way to be conscionable y correct. but the started in the hinterlands, a park that was not enjoying it prosperity at all. there was a sense that the government had taken dishonesty to an art form. there was very, very little

discussion or debate. we tend to think of all of these regimes as having been repressive of free expression. indonesia, despite their image of a modern country and one that could host -- in tunisia, despite their image of a modern country and one that could host the un and modern technology, it was far more controlled than the case in egypt. and admit that there was a facade that everyone understood to be no more than a facades of this sort of modern western- facing as i say, middle-income developing country. the corruption in tunisia was very much organized at the top. president ben ali and his family were routinely described as tunisia's politics as "the family." anyone who was in "the family"

got a cut including any for an adjustment. -- any foreign adjustment. and it was a quality of corruption and equality of predatory knows that, as i said, was not only inhibiting the kind of development that the tunisian regime claimed they were promoted, but it was also deeply humiliating. as a result, there was a family of the top. keep in mind, when you talk about that family, ben ali himself had seven brothers and sisters and his wife had 10 brothers and sisters. it was a very large family and sat very heavily on this kind of economy. so there was very little genuine sense of economic development, a

genuine sense that this was a set of policies that were designed to foster the prosperity of the country as a whole. it felt like it was designed to foster prosperity of a particular family. as i say, partly as a result of that, the revolt started in the hinterland the furthest away from the family and the furthest away from the beneficiaries of the system and spiraled toward the center. ultimately it joined and was supported by the long-repressed, but fairly well repressed labor unions. so you saw it start in the periphery and moving to the senate both -- to the center. the interesting thing about the quality of corruption in tunisia, and for some of us making distinctions of different types of corruption may be a fine point that is unpleasant, but i think it is not

insignificant. the quality of the middle-to- low-level administration intonation was actually read it -- in tunisia actually retained a fair amount of autonomy. the prospects for tunisia to build and retain a relatively strong bureaucratic state administration throughout the country are quite good. today, there are obviously debates about a successor regime that continue a pace there was a fair amount of uncertainty and stability and the transition that the two nations having gone first in this is the most surprised.

the army did not support the government but neither did it agree to rule. i think part of what is interesting about the role of different armies, and we can talk about this later if you like, is that the army that we're talking about in these three situations that action is so common expense was the egyptian army. as a result of that, they are very reluctant in sustaining their role in the political realm. but i get ahead of myself a little. i think the prospect of a loyal opposition in tunisia is fairly high. i think the labor movement can begin to represent a loyal opposition. one of the things that has been characteristic of these authoritarian regimes is that there was never any space for the idea much less the appearance, of a loyal opposition. either you support the government or your betrayal in the country.

and -- or you were betraying the country. you can see the rise of low opposition or you can debate policy without being seen as a traitor to the country as a whole. in some respects, i think to news has some assets the strength of its budget i think to newsom has some assets, the strength -- in some respects, i think to nietzsche hastunisia has some assets. we can return to those propositions later, if you want. egypt, then, the next of the really significant uprisings as you well know, these were very urban in contrast to the tunisian case.

the uprisings the protests were not only in cairo and not only in downtown cairo. there were significant uprisings in alexandria and in suez. this was an urban phenomenon. one of the things that is a consequence of that is, of course among many others, the outcome of the referendum on the constitutional amendments. the only people that voted know where the people who had been, for all intents and purposes, in tajror square -- in tahrir square. the people who were prepared to be politically active and prepared to challenge the army were entirely the intelligentsia in the urban areas. but in addition to the fact that it was irvin wurban, it was an

organized movement. there was a reluctance for people in them to rise as the movement's rulers. they're part of the people. they're not leaders. they do not want to surface at this juncture. but what is really important about this is that that serves them well as protest organizers. it does not necessarily serve them well after the protest has succeeded. i think it is fair to say that the people who organized the protest, as they get going in the beginning of january, and as the organized the january 25 police day protests, they did not expect to prevail. they have organized protests in the past that fizzled out. they learned lessons in that. they learned a lot about civil disobedience non-violent

protests, and so forth. but they did not expect that there would be confronted with success in the way they had. so they were very extremely good at the protesting and now are finding themselves ill-equipped and ill prepared for actually managing their political position in the new egypt. that said, they were prepared for the opportunity when it presented themselves, and very well-network and sophisticated in getting -- we debate this and we sit in egypt and said, was a 800,000 people or 1 million people. that was quite a lot of people in the square for quite a long time. in a context where they were sufficiently well organized where they were not provoked by the saboteurs were trying to make it violent. we can talk about more about what happened in tahrir square but it was a very

sophisticated rally of the troops and keep them there and it was almost a festival atmosphere that developed over time. some of that was a deliberate effort to make sure that it was peaceful and possible to sustain it for what turned out to be several weeks. the authoritarianism, i think that this protest actually revealed was not a predatory regime that we saw in tunisia but an authoritarian soism board of neglect. the regime got out of touch and stop thinking about a lot of the kinds of things that ordinary people care about so that, over the course of time, things in egypt, whether it is education

for basic social services or salaries or anything are formally very, very cheap. their formal wages are very low for the police. teachers get paid a pittance. but everybody supplements their salary with something that could be described as corrupt. so these small-scale bribes to the police, the private lessons that all the teachers give an order for students to be prepared for exams -- everybody has a second job. and a second source of income. in fact, things of egypt are kind of expensive. it is hard to get the social services that are a matter of right. there is no such thing as free education, even though education is free, because you have to pay for the private lessons.

so there is a kind of pervasive small-scale corruption that is born of a failure to keep pace with inflation in wage rates for teachers, to keep pace with inflation in wage rates for police or the huge 6 million civil servants that there are in egypt. they're all underpaid and they all have other sources of income. so it is not so much removing a predatory family in egypt, although there are accusations that are unfounded against the mubarak family, but reforming a 6 million person bureaucracy so that people are paid enough so they do not need to supplement that and then they stop supplementing it. that will be very complicated. it is probably not impossible to do but it is a very different challenge than the tunisian reformers will be facing. i do think the effects of

neglect in egypt will be harder to reverse than removing the predatory family. the effects of neglect in egypt -- the debate in the future and the extent to which this is organized in a very, very simple, what would be similar to any suburban american, safe and clean their relevance campaign is, in many respects, very appealing and there is an enormous amount of sort of enthusiasm and mobilization and about taking responsibility. as i say people are cleaning up their neighborhoods, neighborhoods that had not been cleaned by anyone because the government was not doing a thing and the local residents were not doing it. suddenly people are cleaning up their neighborhoods. these neighborhood watches appeared with local citizens taking responsibility for their

own security and so forth and so on. that impulse of say yes we are a citizen of this neighborhood, not only this country, and we want to be a citizen and held responsible and courted thataccorded that responsibility i think is quite remarkable and does bode well over the long run for a transition that does capture a sense and reinforces a sense of responsibility on behalf of many of the citizens. i think it is very clear that the military that stepped in and managed the transition in egypt does not want to stay. i think it bodes well that the votes yes for the constitutional amendments were not votes for the constitutional amendment but for the military to get out quickly.

when all of the left voted for fox in mexico, there is a very strategic -- i think that a lot of people did not know what the constitutional amendments were but they voted, one, because it wanted to vote and they did not know what the outcome would be -- that was very exciting -- and come if they voted yes, this was a way of not consulting the military and ensuring that they did leave promptly as they promised to do. we can talk more about the prospects for the characters of the transition if you want. but i think there is ample reason -- sitting in cairo and very optimistic about the prospects of the choppy, complicated, not easy, but nonetheless, ultimately successful transition in egypt. libya, by contrast, i can that be more pessimistic about. the ragtag band of rebels that

appeared in the eastern province, animated by the enthusiasm and lack of fear demonstrated by young people in both tunisia and egypt were completely uncoordinated until now, even internally much less what other rebels in other parts of the country. there is and has been for decades virtually no free information available in libya about what is going on in libya much less in the rest of the world. so most of what libyans know about each other is unreliable and incomplete. and there is very little capacity to coronate. so the discipline in organization you saw among the egyptians is not something you see among the libyans because for the last 30 years, the regime in libya has deliberately and relatively successfully prevented

the growth of bureaucracy a nationwide network of economic ties, political institutions, anything. so what you see now and you hear these reports all the time about tribes and tribalism and libya -- this is the sort of renewed or induced tribalism because one of the few reliable sources of solace and support in a context like libby is was family. -- like libya's was family. it became less important as people became more professional identified. the only way you could get access to the kinds of social services you needed or education or other kinds of permission's to do things in libya was actually through those kinds of connections. what is interesting about what

you would consider corruption in libya is that it has to be something public that has turned to private sources for private purposes. that is the definition of corruption in some sense. in this instance, there is no public. it is, at this point, gaddafi and his revolution and his ideological supporters and his family and that is all. it is hard to argue that the way people have behaved and the extent to which they have relied on their own families for access to the kinds of daily needs that we all have constitutes corruption when there was not any alternative to that at all. all of this means, in my estimation that the post- gaddafi reconstruction will be more best information than democratic transition. i think we're starting behind zero in terms of the construction of a nationwide

state administration that would be recognized by all libyans as having any legitimacy. i think that will be a real challenge. there are regional tensions that are long standing and have grown over the course of time. the east was always relatively solon under gaddafi and it is no surprise that that is where the protests started. but it is also true you have seen fairly opportunistic "tribes" moving toward the rebels and when the rebels fortunes look bad and they moved to the government. there is a lot of opportunism because there is no ideological commitment of any kind at this point except opposition to gaddafi among those people who think they can get away with it. i think that is really the? now -- really the question mark now. one of the things that gaddafi

had said and i think he is, in most respects, a man of his word is that he will die a morartyr to the revolution. i like ballyhoo was exiled from tunisia but -- unlike ban all lay who was exiled from tunisia, but survived and hosni mubarak who was sent out gaddafi will be dragged through the streets so people know he is really dead. there is that quality of tension. no one will give up this fight because they know that, if they surrender, they will be killed, so the miners will die in battle. nobody on either side -- so they might as well die in battle. nobody on either side has merit our value in surrender. so it will be a bloodbath in

many respects. that is and remains the challenge for people who look in from the outside saying this is, of course, in part at least a case of the new united nations doctrine on the responsibility to protect civilians and so forth. but at the same time, it is also like these other protests against authoritarian rulers not simply an issue of civilians. this is simply what could be described as a civil war. if you put your thumb on the scale in trying to protect civilians, you are actually taking sides in a war. that may be fine. it certainly was part of the campus of the arab league. they knew what they were doing. gaddafi is one of the most unpopular people in the arab world in the view of the arab league. there was no love lost there. but the international community

will have to leave with these calculations. so there are very different kinds of non-democratic settings and, therefore there different types of protests against those non-democratic regimes. and it behooves us to disaggregate them one from the other and look at the prospects for various kinds of policy regimes in the aftermath of the fall of the authoritarian regimes. we have two cases where we have reasonable cause for optimism. i am particularly optimistic about egypt, but that is because i live there, i think. if i were living in tunis i would probably be optimistic about two in asia, too. -- about to nietzschtunisia, too. one of the things, however, that

i think we do need to be concerned about is the cost that libya misrepresent to tunisia and egypt. it would be very much too bad if those countries, preoccupied as they should be with sorting out their internal issues, end up being asked to be much less doing anything in libya. you can see the temptation from the rest of the world. they are neighbors and they care. on the other hand, they are very, very busy. if they succeed in any way to develop something that approximates democracy it would be so hugely valuable to the region as a whole that it is worth being abstemious about asking them to do anything in or for libya. on that note, perhaps i can stop and we can top about tahrir

square if you want. >> thank you, dr. anderson. [applause] i will use my privileges as a moderator and ask the first question, if i can. is there any emerging trend that we can see in egypt on a new system or are egyptians thinking about the parliamentary system, a presidential system, or is it too premature to talk about such trends? maybe a couple of words on the role of the muslim brotherhood in egypt. >> as i said, one of the interesting aspects of that egypt right now is that people did not expect to be in this position. if you had asked any egyptian on the 25th of january whether, two months later, they would have to be thinking whether a presidential system was better than a parliamentary system, they would have just said, "was just after the protests."

in that respect, this is where egyptians across the country are starved for information. they love thinking about this. these are not debates that had taken place in the country. we are at a point where people want all of this is all new. the answer is no, nobody really has much of a conviction about what kind of system would serve them best. that are trying to figure out what systems there are, and then given what systems there are what interests that have, and whether those interests would be better served by system they are

system b or some hybrid system something like that. the two parties or the two groups that are believed to be at the moment the best organized are the remnants of the ruling party, and nobody really knows what is going to happen to that, whether its remnants will be reconstituted in something like but non- communist communist party. will it be alive or will it be taken apart, and that tunisian decision to try and just completely in the life of the ruling party does not seem to be on the horizon in egypt at this point. nobody knows what is going to happen to that. it does clearly have the strongest grass-roots support in the rural area among the people who voted for the constitutional amendment but that is on the

docket for all the people who were protesters -- they don't have party organizations. they are not great enthusiasts for the political parties who had been the formal opposition parties. they are trying to figure out whether they formed a party, and what is it about? can they formed a lot of little parties? what cost is there of being a lot of little parties? that may be why they want a parliamentary system. all of that is completely open and completely up for grabs. all i can say is that people are staying up all night trying to figure it out. i remind my egyptian colleagues all the time of oscar will while saying that the trouble is it takes too many evenings. that is the situation people are in. the interesting thing about the brotherhood is that it is also the group that is said to be the

best organized and so forth. i think it is pretty obvious -- i would not say that there are ideological cleavages within the brotherhood has much as significant generational cleavages within the brotherhood. it is not just about the older brothers having past their prime. it is about what the role of the brotherhood should be. this becomes an intra brotherhood debate about politics, the aspirations of the brotherhood and so on. it is easy from the outside to say they are a coherent, well- organized and so forth. if you begin to look inside, they are not so coherent and well organized. if you were doing competing patronage networks that have no

real purpose in life, that i think you have these two groups and they are still fairly strong, but the ndp has been decapitated and the muslim brotherhood does not really know who should be the head of it, if you will. there is a lot of debate in there. even what we think of as the best organized are not particularly well organized. they were not prepared for this, either. the brotherhood was accustomed to being sort of cranky and claiming to be -- presented with these opportunities they are not toys, either. nobody was ready for this. -- they are not a ploy usedpoised either. >> let's take a group of questions at a time, in the

interest of time. >> with respect to egypt and your comment that they are searching for alternatives and cannot quite figure out what kind of system they want, the minister and the constitution seem to me to be somewhat premature. -- amendments to the constitution seem to be somewhat premature. is there any kind of movement toward discussion of a constituent assembly where they would then form constitution based on what system they want? >> i would be interested in your opinion on what the perceptions

of the u.s. in egypt currently are and how the u.s. could help in these transitional phases with regard to the choice of political systems. >> thank you joining us. the youth movements and egypt have been described by the power of the youth. is there something about this that challenges cultural norms of respect for the elderly and the community the experience in egypt? have these events inspired scholarship on the region? >> i will go backwards on this. those are very interesting

questions. on scholarship, i think most of the scholars were not prepared for this either so everybody is trying to get their other book finished before they start thinking about this. we might have to forget about it all together. it is interesting nobody was prepared. the cultural norms and the youths, this is a very interesting question -- dynamic. one of the things i think people do not quite appreciate here is the extent to which the parents of egypt are proud of their children. it is astonishing. this is not seen in this country as something that was a revolution against the parents. this was a revolution on behalf of the family, if you will. everybody i know went down to

tahrir square to see their kids, everybody. it really is a sense that the only thing the parents will say is we are a little guilt ridden because we did not do its and we had to ask them to do it. we had to put it on our children to accomplish this. but they are usually brought. the funny thing about education in egypt is, there is no free education. the porous, the richest everybody pays for it. in a sense, this is the redemption of that. that investment has paid off. it has not paid off in the sense that these kids have the jobs for which they were educated. the mismatch for jobs and skills is the same as it was on the 24th of january, but the sense that the kids did lose their fear, did represent taking

control of their destiny, is something that all of egypt is proud of. in that sense it does not seem like you should be respectful in the hierarchy and what about the older -- it is quite a significant dynamic. that may resurface but one thing that is interesting, and i have remarked on this facetiously even in the united states hallis that this is the generation that taught the kids how to program the vcr. this is the generation that has taught their parents things for decades, and the parents are used to it. the kids and parents are used to it. so that sense that i as a parent know things and you are supposed to listen to me, that dynamic has changed everywhere in the world.

your even seeing it in a context where there was much more deference to the father of the family and is the case in the united states, and you still see the dynamic. i actually think this is something that this generation is going to be different all the way through. it is not just it is the huge bulge and lots of testosterone and that age. this is a different set of responsibilities. you hear the stories of migrants in the united states that the children translated for the parents, and that created a different dynamic. in essence, the entire generation around world has translated for the world. it is a very interesting dynamic. in all of these places, this is part of the reason why it is happening and part of the reason why we -- is going to be

interesting to see how it develops that relationship between the authority and age and so forth is just different. but i have to say, one of the most becoming things about this is the extent to which the parents just think their kids or the cat's whiskers. perceptions of the united states, less adorable. the u.s. has seemed from the perspective of the region to be behind every single time, not having caught on to what was going on in tunisia and egypt and libya. it is partly because what was going on is a little bit different each time. you would not want to extrapolate from one to the next automatically, but there are other reasons why american policy statements just did not seem like they were very agile

or informed or knowledgeable. that may not be fair, but that is what it looks like from the region. in terms of what kinds of things the u.s. can be doing now, as i say, particularly in tunisia and egypt, and i think this is happening this hunger for information about how politics works is quite genuine, and there are ways to address that and to answer that which is send in people who know things like that. get those debates going. one of the things we have been doing that everybody wants to hear is, what happened in latin america? what happened in chile? what happened in eastern europe? how did that work?

not because they think they are like that, but there are best practices or learned lessons are mistakes not to make. the more that kind of discussion and debate, and if i can put it this way, if it is not american political science is coming in and saying you have a political system here, it is the people who are active in writing those constitutions. what works here might not work in libya. that is what is really important right now. there is an enormous appetite for that. in some respects, that is the trouble with the evenings, they are already filled up with talking with each other about what we are going to do, and then you have seminars bringing in people from hungary. it is very busy and very hectic and so forth. there are ways that people have

thought about these kinds of issues that may or may not apply here but it is worthwhile knowing about them. that is proving to be very productive already. in some respects, that sort of democracy promotion work that has been done in the past, by bringing in latterly people who have had that sort of experience, people are hungry and interested and the invigorated by that. obviously that will not be adequate in libya but it would be very helpful and constructive in tunisia and egypt, for example. on the question of constitutional amendments, there was a lot of discussion about whether we should have assembly and all that. everybody i knew was reading the federalist papers for about a week and a half. how do you do this? this is a deeply engaged --

everybody in egypt is a political scientist right now. it is very gratifying, although i think people will fall off after a while. it gets tiresome to do it all the time. part of the way the military adroitly framed all of this was after the president is elected you have the constitutional amendments that permit changes in the presidential term and who can run for office, relatively modest changes but they do open the system for candidates who would not been permitted under the existing constitution. then you have a new parliament because it was universally understood to have been produced by read the elections in the fall. -- then if you want to talk

about the constitution again, go ahead. it was framed that way. nobody has said the constitution with these amendments is necessarily the permanent constitution. it was modest reforms to permit getting to the next six months or so. so there may be revisiting of all of that. there are lively discussions about why the american constitution is only six pages long and the egyptian constitution is dozens of pages long. there are different philosophies of constitutions. i would not be surprised if those things did not come up again, but people want to get through this transition period. >> thank you for wonderful talk.

we have learned so much new. listening to your description of libya, it was hard for me to imagine a happy outcome of the intervention either on the grounds of the fight to the death on both sides, or on the grounds of when can libyans manage themselves and the western forces leave. is that a fair set of conclusions to draw from what you said, or can you see a happier future? >> could you think ahead a year let's say we have had a

political transition relatively smoothly. they have had elections, form a government. what will be the top of the agenda in public debate in egypt at that point? will it be government its issues like corruption, will it be bread-and-butter issues, jobs, high prices, or will it be foreign policy issues? >> i wanted to ask about the military in egypt and its use all of its longer-term interests. some have argued including a lot of the revolutionaries that by handing out power quickly in a way that is democratic, it may

also mean that the remnants of the ndp and the muslim brotherhood will be the ones that the military will end up working with and is most comfortable working with because they have a head start, so to speak. do you think the military's role in egypt is one of hanging onto its economic privileges opposing worker rights, posing serious economic reform and so on? in other words, something that would be not that different from what we have seen up until now despite the revolution. >> one more question. >> i would like to encourage you to go back and think lead. 10 years ago you wrote an article called arab democracy dismal prospects. i ask my graduate students to

look edit and ask the question, what has changed since. i think you have already suggested the social implications of technology. >> the intervention in libya the international community, not just the united states, is in a very difficult position because as the tide turned against the rebels increasingly confronted the possibility that they would actually be defeated. that would of been hugely demoralizing across the region. it was palpable in egypt not that the egyptians particularly care about libya or about the

prospects of the protests in libya, but they did what protests -- they did not want protest to be destroyed like that. there really was a sense that the protest movements in the region and the governments that make up the arab league all wanted to take this opportunity to say no, we don't want gaddafi to prevail. we just don't. and perhaps for different reasons, partly because people work and thought that the protests might succeed in libya and some because they were just sick and tired of gaddafi, as everybody is. that meant that the international community was confronted by choice of saying we are not intervening and the

prospect that gaddafi would have prevailed is quite high, or we are, knowing that it will get us into a difficult set of dilemmas about how we get out and what happens. since gaddafi himself has known for a long time that this was as likely an end to his regime as any other, he is physically going to be hard to find, and people will not finish until they find him. so it could go on for a long time in that kind of stalemate. nobody wants to have anything there they are willing to drop bombs, as we have seen, but beyond that, nobody wants it -- nobody wants to do anything more. i don't think there was any choice. i don't think the prospect that gaddafi would be able to destroy the rebellion and all of its supporters which would of been a massacre was palpable.

people just could not do that. the problem is, we now have a situation which may lead us to also unpalatable prospects. i think that is a significant problem. i had hoped that we would of been able to intervene with something more of what we hoped would happen later than we did. i understand we are all busy and do not have time to do all those things but to talk about who we think will be responsible for assisting in the libyans when they start their reconstruction would have been becoming, even if it turned out we could not implement it. but to say something that there was a sense that we were going to return responsibility to the libyans, whoever they are, and

provide some kind of assistance to them as they gather around a table as people who have literally not talked face-to- face in years. that is what it will be. it will be people who have not talked to each other for years and years, people from inside and outside. somebody is going to have to be a facilitator there. if we had been able to talk a little bit more about how we imagine that happening it would have permitted us to say from the beginning in good faith, we did not intended to be anything but an effort to ensure that gaddafi did not win. right now, it is not clear what it is, so everybody is wondering about why we even bothered when we are not doing it in other places. i think there was a legitimate rationale for what we did when we did it, but that will get

lost because we did not really describe what we anticipated to happen afterwards. egypt in a year, it will be about economic issues. at that point there will be some kind of co lessons of the political landscape. there'll be those parties advocating policies which will mostly be about domestic economic issues. everybody anticipates substantial inflation. the stock exchanges a complete mess at this point. tourism has disappeared entirely. you have a huge sector with millions of employees -- people who are now unemployed. there is a lot to worry about on the domestic, economic front

and there will be a lot of that. that will play into the military. i don't think foreign policy will be the principal issue unless someone decides to make it the issue. this was not about foreign- policy. it is still not about foreign policy. it is about accountable government and fairness and a lot of the labor protest going on across egypt are partly about money but partly but dignity. you, the employer, are not paying me a living wage, which is probably true. it is as much about the right to a living wage as to a certain number of pounds. that will continue and there will be lots of debates about the policies on things like what should be the minimum wage and how to accommodate the fact that what you do with all of your unemployed and so forth.

keep in mind that the current minister of finance is actually a labor economist. that should tell you something already about the kind of priorities that the military has. they are not interested in washington consensus economic reform. one of the problems in egypt is, if you look at the people who have been charged with corruption, some of the former ministers are corrupt but some of them or advocates of economic privatisation, not personally corrupt at all. taking a policy position that is now unpopular. they have gotten caught up that this is all somehow corrupt that big business is corrupt.

it is an early signal of the kind of policies that the military are likely to be advocating in so far as they advocate for a successor regime. it will be about economic policy, but much more statist set of policies. much more about equity and growth. that serves the military purposes. they are big bombers of state enterprises and so forth. why should they be interested in privatization? they are not. going beyond that, the military wants to be behind the curtain.

they want what they were before. that worked very well. and they don't really care as long as there is an implicit deal that they can stay behind the currentcurtain and stay what they were before. i think the vast majority of people are perfectly content with that. even the people in tahrir square realize that an embrace of the military was pretty much all they had. those people were willing to say, get back behind the curtain, let us debate everything else. there is plenty else to debate. sunday in the future the question of military prerogatives may come up, but not for now. that would be perfectly reasonable resolution by the likes of most people. obviously there are a few intellectuals who will push this, but by and large, people will be content with that.

free expression and issues of labor rights and wages there is lots of other stuff to discuss in egypt. i think that is what they want. if they get it, they are pretty liberal. >> the gentleman in the back. >> my question about what has changed. >> i skipped it, did not. a freudian slip if ever there was one. and do think it is partly the maturation of this generation, i have to say. when we rethink and about that these regimes are getting along in the tooth and we are

thinking that about 10 or 15 years ago we were speculating about the next generation and who would be the people who would come up and so forth. one of the things we used to talk about about ben ali not having a son who would serve the same purpose, that seem to be the inevitable transfer of power. there did not seem to be any other way of how you would get to the next generation. nobody thought that was satisfying but there did not seem to be a way to get to what turns out to be the next generation. across all of these countries and i wear argue this is true in the region as a whole there is of a lost generation of the parents. they will have to concede, in a

sense. that generation that is between 82 and 32 is just stuck. they did not figure out how to do it themselves and they are probably going to have to concede to their kids. >> something like prince charles. >> yes like prince charles, exactly. [laughter] >> i live here in washington d.c. i am an egyptian american. my children and grandchildren are just the future. i am so delighted for what they have done. i have a question about possible

hijacking. we are not done. is it possible that we will get hijacked it from true democracy? as an egyptian american, what can we do to help? >> why in the latest referendum -- why was the participation so low? could you elaborate on that? secretary of state clinton was there just last week.

one of the group of the youth movement rejected meeting with her. was a reflection of a deeper sentiment among the egyptian news is there a deep grudge against the u.s. for the last three decades or was it just temporary? you talked about some models in america and other models. there was a topic of entertaining washington in turkey. would you touch on that if it was a reality -- if it was a realistic approach? >> in 2003, the document was discovered in the intelligence

headquarters in baghdad that 13 kurdish women were sent to egypt. the parents of these women appealed to the first lady of egypt, and unfortunately there appeals fell on deaf ears. do you think something could be discovered about these women? >> thank you for sharing with us. with the current change and the fact that most of the people in the current revolution or young people do you see the anti- american sentiment and what you see the role of the american

university and the upcoming years regarding the change in egypt? >> i will start with the last one and give you my inaugural address. first of all i do not think despite the fact that the youth group did not meet with secretary clint and so forth, do not see a lot of anti-american sentiment. this is intra egyptian. it is about relations between governments and citizens. over the course of time, as policy positions began to congeal a little bit, i suppose just as with economic policy, you will see foreign policy positions and so forth and so on, but it really is not about that. in any of these countries at this point, i don't think that is the principal question. i do think that one of the things i will brag about, we

have played an important role in education of citizens, which is what animates these kinds of movements. without saying that other kinds of vegetation are not also important, the idea of a liberal arts education that encourages critical thinking creates better citizens. i think much of that sentiment and impulse and spirit was evident not only in the protests but in their effective management and the relationship between many of the leaders of the movement with the wise men who negotiated with the government and so forth and so on. i think there is enormous opportunity for us to continue playing that kind of role in a

new egypt. it is actually going to be easier to do that than had been in the past. it will be amplified through free expression and so forth in a way that it was not before. from my vantage point the kinds of values that auc represents should be even more deeply appreciated and embedded in the society. i am very optimistic. one small gesture we have made to this end in the short run is auc is governed by a protocol that was signed in the early 1970's between the american and egyptian government. one provision is that auc has a university counselor who is the liaison to the egyptian government. he has watched the university do

a search for new president and seen how an american university routinely operates. he is now on public service leave as the minister of higher education. we hope the experience of seeing from the inside the workings of a genuinely not-for- profit private institution and so forth will have some utility to him as he thinks about the fact that all of the national universities are now in an uproar because the students want all the presidents and deans removed because they were appointed by the president of the republic, that is mubarak. how do you designed a mechanism for the selection of presidents and deans? it will not be having a board of trustees run a search for a president, but something different from simply saying the president names these people is likely to come out of that.

in ways like that, we will prove to be contributing to a capacity to think about different ways of doing things. we can bring experts on to the way we operate the way we run our own affairs. it might be a useful example to consider as we go forward. i think auc represents an opportunity of resource for egypt now even more than it did in the past and i hope we fulfill those expectations. the kurdish women question, i don't know the answer about that particular case, i had not heard about it before. the larger question about transparency is an interesting one. i think there is the intent to be a much more transparent government, even in this transition period then had been

the case before. all of the files of the interior ministry have been burned, for all intents and purposes. there have been fires in the interior ministry and in local state security offices all over the country. the reason we know about the interior ministry is that it is a block away from our downtown campus. we are constantly having to reroute are buses because there is a fire at the interior ministry. the upshot is that there has been a clear effort on the part of a number of parties to destroy evidence. some of the tahrir square protesters did put out some of those fires and tried to get some of that evidence and so forth. it is not even clear altogether who has been lighting the fires because there are disaffected police who were fired and went back in and started some of the fires. there are security people in the

employee of the interior ministry who are starting fires. that is what some of the protesters think. this is part of one of those transition questions. the extent to which you have a capacity for documenting truth and reconciliation and so forth and so on. the point of burning all that evidence is making it harder to do that. it may be that going for you have a much more transparent bureaucratic kind of administrative apparatus, but it is not clear that that kind of administrative apparatus would be able to recruit the past. the question of the past and who should be brought to justice is a very complicated one. as i say, that particular case may have been lost in the fires. other ones like that may have been lost in the fires but we

will never know. there was some recuperation of some of this material, and some of it had been shredded and we were facetiously talking about a lot of unemployed students that can piece together all the shredded material. that may happen in some circumstances but the stuff that is burned is burned, so i don't know what will happen. turkey as a model is something that you hear a lot in the united states. you don't hear it so much in egypt because i don't think they want to have any single model. this is going to be an egyptian project so they want to take a little bit from other places and construct something that is egyptian. it may borrow disproportionately

from one country or another but people are starting to say what happened in indonesia and other places. at this point there is no sense of one country showing us the future. that is quite delivered on the part of those people who are trying to sort out what kinds of policy and procedures they want to advocate. the question of the use and mrs. clinton, i did not put which import in that. it is clear that mrs. clinton's visit was not particularly well organized, so figuring out beforehand who would be willing and able to meet with her and that kind of thing did not happen. some of that, they left themselves open to being disrespected, if you will, but i don't know if there is anything deeper to read into that at this

juncture. on the turnout for the constitutional referendum, the turnout for the parliamentary elections was 5%. 40% is pretty high. people were very, very happy. there were all these people who said they had never voted before, and so forth and so on. in many of the rural areas the get out the vote mechanisms did not actually operate and most of the people who voted actually wanted to vote. they all said one of the things that was fun about voting is they did not know how it was going to come out. i think everybody believes that the turnout was pretty high and it was a satisfying experience for those who enjoyed it. as far as what egyptian

americans can do now i think there is a very important egyptian diaspora particularly in the united states but elsewhere as well. this is a time where it is valuable to people in egypt to see that we connection, to see people making investments. it does not have to be investments of money at this juncture. i think warren buffett is right and there are values in egypt now. if i were an investor, i would be going in egypt and picking up these properties. five or 10 years, i would be a millionaire. i think that is true economically about business but it is also true in general. this is such a good time to make

investments a time of expertise, commitment, moral support whatever kind of resources you have. this is a great moment to say yes this fool community of -- full community, to have that be part of these conversations. people in egypt love to know that people are paying attention and caring and so forth. whatever your particular resources are, they would be welcome back in egypt at this juncture. >> on this upbeat note, i think we will all agree that we have just heard a very engaging and quite insightful presentation. please join me in thanking her for this discussion.

[applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

[crowd murmurs] >> cecile richards, president of planned parenthood federation of america, talks about the role of

planned parenthood in the budget and political debate going on in congress. newsmakers today at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> i am a numbers guy. >> -- >> blow expresses his opinions using charts and graphs. >> i don't decide that i am going to talk about a subject and then go out and look for data. i really do search for data first, something interesting and something that agrees with an opinion that i have, or something that surprises me and i think would surprise my readers. >> "q&a", tonight at 8:00 on c- span. >> outgoing chicago mayor richard daley says americans have begun a nation of whiners in the last few decades. he spoke to students at wheaton college in illinois recently about his legacy as chicago's

longest serving mayor and the transition to incoming mayor rahm emanuel, who will take office in may. his speech and a question and answer session is just over an hour. [applause] >> good afternoon ladies and gentleman. i want to welcome you here this afternoon. i think this should be an extraordinary opportunity for us to listen and to have a discussion with somebody who has been a major player, not only in northern illinois and the midwest, but also on the national and international scene. mayor daley started out his career in pollock ticks literally at -- in politics, literally at his father's knee.

someone was giving statistics the other day, it was the first time in 50 years that there had not been a daly on the ballot in chicago. when i was first cutting my teeth in the legislature the mayor was a state senator and had just gone to be the state's attorney for cook county, and serve as the attorney for cook county for a number of years. he ran for mayor and has served the last 26 years -- 22 years it seems like 26 sometimes as mayor of the city of chicago. in my years in the congress, we had an opportunity to work together. i found that there was no equal of this gentleman in being able to look a what was good for the greater area. mayor daley has constantly reached out to mayors in the suburbs and mayors all over

northern illinois to do what was good for northern illinois. we worked together on things like the western expansion of o'hare. i think you can have a relatively safe experience coming in and out of o'hare that is a good thing. for him the synergy of having an international airport really raised the ability of our city to be able to do business. i had the privilege of working with the mayor and having a good deal of achievement. this is not only an academic exercise, it is an exercise --

some of his insights and some of his feelings, and i would guess there my billable politics added into this discussion as well. i would like to introduce to you my good friend, the mayor of chicago, richard daley. [applause] >> good afternoon. thank you. i want to thank dennis hastert for inviting me out here this afternoon to give a lecture and to thank him for his great commitment of public service. i was fortunate enough to meet him years ago in the general assembly. he served the people as a state representative congressman, and

of course as speaker. issues confronting not only his own decisions but the entire state was only -- was always in the forefront. he felt there were always ways to compromise and move forward. in the sense that we could move our state forward and our country forward, and i deeply appreciate his friendship and commitment and sacrifice over many years in public service. we are public servants. we serve our constituents. once you are elected, you serve the entire constituency. that is what people don't realize. primaries come and go, and once you are elected, you serve the entire district or city or state or nation. that is what we have to become, all of us who work in government, which are public servants and we work for you. you pay our salaries and our

health care and all the other issues confronting government employees. rightfully so that your voice should always be heard on that. that is important in this day and age and in the future. denny talked about the international airport, and how important the engine is in the jobs it produces directly and indirectly. it is enormous. it ties technology and communication to the world. that is the future of the metropolitan area, and that is very important. you bring together economic and political analysis and speakers and lecturers to discuss present problems and have some vision about the future, and look back at the mistakes we all have made and make sure that we do not make the same mistakes in that future which is really

important for the citizens not only of chicago but the country and the world. i think that is the key. and focusing to another generation of young men and women. every aspect of your life is public service, and you are always giving back to the community, and making sure you become good citizens in regard to all the issues in the surrounding community and around the world. that is why another generation of younger people will carry the torch and do a better job than all of us who are assembled here today. they are just as committed and justice challenge and just as smart in regard to with a look at as the issues and how we can solve them together. i firmly believe that.

we see that in an area that many people do not want to talk about. we see the unselfishness of people devoting their commitment into the military. they do not have to do this when they decide to join the military. there is something about that in this day and age, they could just say no. when the president called, the men and women of america have entered overwhelmingly in the last 20 years. when you think of the loss of life and the challenges, the men and women who have come back and the injuries, they still have answered the call. this is a remarkable nation. that is a whole generation, just knock them themselves but their friends and neighbors and all of them making sure they supported them. i firmly believe our country will be in better hands

continually with another generation. we talked about chicago and we talked about the region. it is not to chicago itself not just western or no. our southern suburbs. i went out to springfield in 1972 as a state senator and i did not realize that oak park was downstate illinois. that really woke me up. i had the privilege of being a senator, and my father went to the general assembly in the 1930's as a state representative. he tell me that is where you learn government and you learned politics. i had the fortune of being a young senator and the chairman at that time or all republicans. it was amazing the assistance they gave me. i learned from some of the great

centers at that time of great committees, and others in other positions. i had a great experience, because they helped me. they may be a better public servant and a better senator. many issues are just public policy issues, and about basically working together. i remember the minority chairman that was very important to me. that is how i got to understand not just the suburban area and

downstate but all of the issues. the first committee i wanted to get to was agriculture. everyone wanted to know why i wanted to go to the agriculture committee. i have seen more things than anyone could see it in the stockyards. you got to learn about the agricultural industry through this committee and how important some issues were. you did not think there were important than you realize how important in the state of illinois. then we realize in the long run that will have to exist together that because what is good for wheat and is good for chicago and vice versa. -- what is good for wheaton is good for chicago.

we cannot compete with the china and brazil's of the world. you have seen the city's die and just over the years have a boss everything in the city. everything is always changing. we are not afraid of change. that is what you need to do in life business, family life, but if you do not change your live in the past. that is what it is. if you take the region, all of us are in the top-10 in the world.

think of how we compete as a region. that is what we have to do. how can that be? is a los angeles, new york? as a region, we are competing. last year, "foreign policy" magazine ranked chicago area number six. new york london, tokyo paris hong kong. we are no. 6. that is amazing in the middle part of a country that the region is ranked no. 6. [applause] it is ranked on how much influence a city can have with its ability to manage the global recession. i'm happy to say newsweek published a positive assessment of our city, "chicago steps out." i want to quote some of this. " there is no talk here any

more about being the second the city. it is not only the city that works but also an exciting city in which all of these worlds shine." chicago has began to see itself as something that can embrace all of these conventions and behaviors. success breeds success. they made a special point on why groupon, tehhe tech company happened here. why did groupon not start in silicon valley? for the same reason the facebook started in harvard. they needed a local population

of young people, not cyber nerds or venture-capital lists. chicago had with the nation needed -- people. since i was mayor we help the many partners. they have been a strong part of chicago is history of these great industrialists that have lived all over the metropolitan area. those really traded the culture in chicago with dock kinds of people and ideas who feel welcome. our city was founded by immigrants, our past present and future. i was honored by the error of a professional -- by the arab professional industry group who gathered to say thank you for the big mosaic we have.

immigrants coming in, coming the car -- becoming a part of this fabric. which does not happen by chance. it started by developing and executing the plan. you deal with day-to-day issues within government. then we have to look at the long-range goals of what you want to accomplish as a city that will compete in this century. that is what you have to do. you cannot just build for today's look to the future that is what all the issues you decide to the pad, there is one that government the business and not for profits must come together.

groupon opens in chicago. it's the biggest thing since facebook and twitter and all of a sudden we're a technology center. they stay for one or two years and spin off. you have these little companies all over. groupon started and now an influx of people who have worked now move away to start their own companies. technology is very important for the future.

healthcare is a major reason. think about the university of chicago university of illinois and northwestern. in the largest medical complex in the world. people do realize. you think about all of the research decisions and with have accomplished for many, many years. they're constantly remodeling and rebuilding. from water transportation, and of course to the airport which is a key. 80 percent said of all goods and in vancouver and up in chicago by rail. 90% of goods from halifax and nova scotia come by rail.

about 30 or 40%, up from the mississippi are down from the mississippi. water is important. we are the center of water transportation threat the country. transportation and logistics is very important for us and the region, i'd say. of course, manufacturing. manufacturing is going to be around but it will be different. i will give you an example. pharma tisch right off the river and one of the oldest steel mills -- armitage and have moved to 94thand stoney. they are remodeling and competing with the rest of the world on specialized steel. china is buying it. we cannot give up on manufacturing. we have to rethink with t

echnology and training. that will create jobs. why? excess water. manufacturing needs water. the discharge is always controversial. when you use water and discharge it coming in needs to be the same of. we will not pollute our rivers, streams, or any type of water system. i did the future is bright on the four chicago but for the region. they realize, china realizes that many of the factories cambria's this and they are doing so continually. there's nothing wrong with that because it puts people back to work paying local state and federal taxes. that is part of the economy we seek. when we struggle, we struggle with the local economies.

it does not matter what city you are in, what county, what state. all local governments have to balance their budget. one of the problems has historically been that the federal government does not have to balance their budget. they do not have to come and that is a major concern that we all have. i wish i had the pleasure as mayor. but it would be great to not have to balance their budget. what do they do? they go out and print money. that is what we are all concerned about today. we did not get here overnight. now what we're trying to discipline and bring everyone back. it is very controversial. we are trying to find out for the next generation.

the cost of the government has to go down. it has too slowly level off. i am a democrat progressive whatever you want to describe me. i believe in balancing the budget with priorities and realizing that you have to do this. if you do not, another generation will be burdened with the the debt which is unacceptable. when you talk about a city, what is the vision? think of your family. what do you give your family? very simple. you give them the moral values you receive from your church beliefs and your family. you give them their name and in education. when to give them an education they can gather the money. when to give them a good, quality education, they can succeed in life. people fled the cities for a variety of reasons but usually for a lack of quality education.

it does not matter for -- matter if you are black white, asian. nobody is moving into an urban area rating academic performance -- that is what they do in the metropolitan areas. there's nothing wrong with that in the sense that you realize you want to give your children a good quality education. the failure of major cities has always been the lack of good, quality education. when i got elected in 1989, the basic working reorganizing, outsourcing, privatizing, and trying to structure. education was a separate entity within the city of chicago. i have the responsibility for education. i had the right to submit names to a community board that would look at the names. they would say "that one is from the mayor" and throw it

out. they were running the operation into debt and eventually it came to a crisis in the city of chicago. it was in that and was going to fall apart. no one knew what to do. i said i wanted to take responsibility. by that time you have to understand. very few had the responsibility because in the 1920's and a 1930 proxy it became very corrupt. enough was enough. we protect the political section out of that and do separate governing board. there are collapsing because there were no standards, no compatibility, and lack of real understanding that education is the answer to all of the social abilities that we have. that is what it is.

i knew i had to take responsibility. to be very frank i worked with the republican party and i said that we had fashioned are takeover as a trustee in bankruptcy. we wanted to be able to take over schools and move principals and teachers out. it was very controversial. we established a ceo and they would then hire a ceo for education and operations. they would not cross paths. the ceo for operations as everything non-educational. the educator deals with the education. the first thing i said is that we will be the only city in america was to stop social promotion.

they stopped -- everywhere else promoted people because they could not read, write, and we had people on the street to were uneducated. that is where the prisons are fall especially with many african americans. if you go to the prison system most of them have a finished may be eighth grade. that was the lack of education and a lack of understanding that education is the answer to all of the social ills. the city decided to make a priority. we invested $5 billion of our own money, not state or federal but our own money in repairing the schools, building new schools, and making sure safety and all of the of the things that go into a quality school system over $5 billion. that is amazing coming from local taxpayers. that is a commitment. everyone in the city that if we did not fix the board of

education that nothing would work in the future. we have the haves and the have- nots. you cannot overnight all of a sudden educate so quickly that they will be top students. to see something physically that they knew we were investing in their community they saw about reconstruction remodeling, new building emphasizing in getting back to basic reading math, and science. that is what we have done. we have battled the old theory that one size fits all. you have to look at students differently. to say the specialized schools are only for the best suited to you have to test in, why can we not have students go regardless of grades and have different classrooms, but there is nothing wrong with that. they socialize together and they have mentors. it would be amazing how you could affect other students in dealing with some of the problems you have in school.

a language program which is really important the language program is important and that is why we started teaching mandarin chinese. it is the fastest-growing language program in the country and the largest in a public school system. we are teaching arabic and russian. why would we want to teach rebecca and russian? the cause, we are a global city. you have to know the language, culture, tradition, and the history of those countries. that is very important for business to understand not only here in chicago but drop the world that you are training and educating young people for global jobs. global jobs here and around the world. we are not an isolated country anymore. technology is changing. it was not the cia the

military the secretary of state, but the technology and all the sudden it changed the whole wave of independence and freedom in this country's. that is why it is so important. to me, our schools have to produce graduates who have completed courses and compete with other students around the world. we have many programs and we send students to china, india the middle east continually. we have programs with them on a daily basis with technology. we listen to their concerns about how long they go to school, what they want to be in life, and that is part of being a global cities. our city became a model for reform but reform did not mean it just reform. you stay the course. it is very difficult. the most challenging issue is dealing with the education problem and it still is today to be frank. i am still not satisfied.

i believe we have built a good foundation and people realize that a learning environment has to be in a home, in a community and the school. many people do not have homes which is why any charter schools operating schools for 8:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. said it is like their home. if you do not have costar 8:00 a.m. until 2:00 p.m. that is why charter schools have expanded tremendously. they go six days per week. after-school programs, sports programs, culture, everything else. they are competing against other public schools. there is nothing wrong. i am really pleased but not satisfied. if you're satisfied with government, that is when you should leave. we always can do better and i think that was my philosophy.

as a global city, what do you do? i have travelled many places. to me, the key is china. that is the key with regards to our relationship. how will that grow? this is why we are teaching mandarin chinese and why we are brought together. we have had forums for chinese cities and mayors in chicago. we have had a mayors' conference both in chicago a modicum of jordan morocco, south america central america canada, bringing all of the marriage together and talking about the same issues and how we can work together and best practices. we have 28 sister cities. historical is based on immigration. the wave of eastern europeans and then in turn at the wave of

chinese and mexican, so different ways. historic plea, we are doing business with sister cities and a relationship with not just our city but the metropolitan area of relationship and how important that fits with this global vision for chicago in the region which is very shikar -- very important. i will be visiting very shortly for almost six or seven cities. for the business community of china to make chicago their center of operations, to say that we want to be the gateway of china we want to be the friendliest city to the chinese community and those who arrive whether they are tourists or the business community. we want to make sure that they want to position themselves here. recently when president hu went to washington, he selected one

city to go to and that was the city of chicago. coming down and meeting business leaders in the metropolitan area, a chinese business leaders, for investors in china. thousands of the employees they have struck the metropolitan area. it is amazing. they are satisfied with their work force and they are excited to work here. to me, that is the key of the future of not being afraid of foreign investment. it is business. they are investing to make sure that we're going to make money and that we will be employing people. it is amazing of the people who work for these one, two, four, five investors from china and all american citizens. all of the operating officers, financial teams, and everyone else worked in all of their facilities. we have to get beyond that and realize we are investing there

and we should be able to accept their investments. at the same time, we organized the mayors from canada and we have separate organizations. in order to protect our greatest resource lake michigan and the tributaries, it is very important for us to reorganize all of the mayors for the protection of the great lakes for drinking water recreation, and also for manufacturing. heat you use discharge water in an environmentally friendly where compared to what took place in the past when the discharge affected the quality of water as it had for many years. the other thing i am proud of was in 1997 and understanding that many times chicago, the suburban area, it felt like we were separate. i thought we should form a metropolitan area caucus and the cost -- each county had their

own representative. we would not talk about the most controversial issue in 1997 because if we talked about god we would be there for the next 20 years our view of the. let's all come together, and we did. it has been one of the most effective organizations. most of us get elected and people will say they need help so you have to respond. most of them are non-partisan republican democratic, then we have resources so we could help each other. most of these issues are not partisan issues. all of a sudden, we started to work together and we had great success stories in springfield washington, and we met with the idea that we were going there as elected officials not just a

democrat to republican. the difference is that even today, we work on many issues confronting us whether it is pensions, health care, it affects all of us. that is what the metropolitan male role conference, the only one in the country -- metropolitan mayoral conference that meets every 4 months and i am just a participant. we have a mayor from zero world, peoria milwaukee, some from indiana. we are very proud of that. the success of chicago has always been a public-private partnership. you can go to the hospitals museums, but the business community has been very helpful in all aspects of the city.

it really helps us tremendously to of the business community supporting us. that does not mean the corporate headquarters, federal and local taxes and everything, but no other city has this. he is more democrats than the business community so fighting. this republican for governor, this for president. they should be committed to the city and not worry about partisan politics. you should really reach out to them. they have been a great resource for me to solve many of these issues. i give the example of millennium park. people now talk about millennium parker.

it is internationally acclaimed arts architecture, music landscaping outdoor activities it is something that we are very proud of and we have never had that natch. and benefits the business community and takes responsibility for public schools. they supported me 100% of the efforts that i needed in dealing with hiring a principals and looking at quality teachers. booking and new programs looking for better teachers quality principles, charter schools, and they have been there. another example has been the economic stimulus package. when i said to all of the not for profits in the city, there was a huge homeless group or dealing with neglected children why should government compete for a grant? we all got together, all of these organizations, and said it they should go forward for

the granted we would support them. we should just be a conduit. that helped us tremendously. we saved a lot of money. basically competing against each other, we went under one theory. whenever you did to deal with our budget. we never put money in from the budget to solve. many states try to solve their budget crisis that year and you know what happened. you cannot do that. that is one thing we are able to do. of the not-for-profit organizations and foundations helped tremendously. the money went much further during the recession, one thing i found out was i was meeting many people who had just gotten laid off. they worked so many years for a company but they did not have technology experience. these are co-workers and the the companies to have laid people

off, but those people now have the technology experience. i can up with the idea of doing a chicago career tech and training these people with the commitment of getting a drop. we just completed the one class about 300 people. and was amazing over 60%-7% for college graduates with no technology experience. then we had companies coming but everyone had gained a draw. we have over 50 or 60 companies and they will say they need 45 people at such a range in this technology field. then we would train people for that job. that was the key. but you should see the letters i get from these people. a lot of people said it that you needed to disembowelled the ownership of your home.

you cannot do that. you have to go ports have a training program? these people deserve it and we've of them because they have built this country and have provided many opportunities for their children. this is one of the best programs in the country and we want to adopt it regionwide. i have gotten thousands of calls in the metropolitan area from all over for people who have gotten laid off. we have a list of them because we are showing the federal government. if we have a 500, there must be 2000 in the surrounding communities. we go to the federal government and i hope they take the whole region and rebuild. this is one of the best programs and it is a very small staff of

about eight people. the business community is there with us saying that when they graduate they will have a job. many of them have gone through training programs and there is no drop. we talk about the environment and it is one of the most important aspect of this century. when we look back, we figured the industrial revolution could summon the people to work in a made billionaires, millionaires but we forgot about the environment. everyone should be rightly concerned about the tax brackets and what we are doing to the environment. nature can coexist in a city. i believe that nature can coexist in an urban community. that is why immediately i started an agenda, but i said we were going to do it first. i would not tell the business

community what to do. they can pass all of the laws, exempted themselves, etc.. the city will lead by example. the business community followed me in the first thing we did was the center for technology on the west side. this was in sacramento and franklin. this was just north of the expressway on sacramento. is the first municipal building to be awarded a plaque commemorating by the u.s. green building capital. we brought in engineers contractors, architects to explain about green technology. it deals with the energy, the air quality, the water the

product to using inside, everything going on with the the building, saving energy costs. then replanted over 7 million square feet of green roofs. the first is on city hall. we are the first to establish a beehives in public buildings and public parks. we have the finest beekeepers in illinois. it is interesting because of the lake effect. it is really interesting in what we're doing in the parks and the green roofs. we have the largest in the world and we're very proud of that. we've committed over 1,500 acres in the city of chicago adjacent to parks schools, and we have more major areas and bird sanctuaries in our system. we are bringing major back into

the system. we have a chicago climate action plan which is a commitment to the business community and the economic community to set standards and say that we have to meet these in various areas. the chicago climate plan is separate from us. the delegate of the information. it is a top and are mentally from the construction and it is amazing what we have down there. we want to make this the most environmentally friendly city in the world. to make, that is very important. when people talk about what a city has to be, it is quality education and the quality of life. that is very important. at the same time, the government must understand that it has to have a value to government services. there has to be value. and we have to talk about values. some of the things that we may have to get out of, privatized

are resource, and we're continually fighting that. i did not think the taxpayers can afford the cost of government. i really do not believe they can. the cost of government is going up faster than the costs that you could bear in your own pocketbook. i firmly believe that. canada got significantly so much each year that you cannot afford it the cost of government. that is we have to look at with value. we're causally try to value when it is. we talk about civility in public discourse. it is not just governance but the society in general. there's not a certain respect for things anymore. it is not a breakdown of politicians or of those in government service but a breakdown of society. society has changed. you can disagree, but you do not

have to be disagreeable. you can have a position, but you can have the discourse. i think it is society, it is not just what you may be seen on tv in springfield or other places. i firmly believe we need to understand this as a democracy. there have been great debates and disagreements but they should not separate people to extremes that the refused to shake hands say hello or understand one another's issues. i firmly believe that is what we do and i am firmly proud to be a public servant. after 32 years in the public service prior to the eight years as state senator, two years in the constitutional convention. all of my public life, and i have no regrets. i could change a lot of things, but i'm a public servant. i served the people as a state

senator, the state's attorney, and as mayor. that is what we need to get back to. we come in the government, our public servants. not just the public official, but all of those who work in government which includes the schools, the parks, the city colleges all of the education system which includes all fire and police. we are all public servants. if we can go back to that belief, that i think we will have a better discourse and a better relationship that the taxpayers can have with government. thank you very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [applause]

>> thank you, mr. mayor. i have a list of questions here that some students and faculty have thrown in. we'd like to put some to you. the first question. as someone who has held public office for two decades, what are some of the skills that students interested in public service should cultivate? >> to have to have a passion about what you want to do when you go into public service. you have to keep that passion. is not just "a drop peacoat is not so big that you will work for 9:00 until 5:00. you have to really believe that you will make a difference in the roles that you taken the public service, and the government, but also in anything else you do. there should be no difference between the private and public sector.

if you do not have a passion emission human to accomplish then the job just gets boring, too bureaucratic, and nothing gets done. that is when people have to wonder why. >> the second question. i am not sure where the magic is 3, but what would be three pieces of advice that you would give incoming mayor ron emmanuel? -- rahm emmanuel? klaxon never given anyone advice unless they ask for it. [laughter] [applause] if he asks for it in a personal way, then we will talk about issues. in that aspect, we have already sat down with our transition. our transition will work with his chief of staff and others for two weeks side-by-side. no one can come in just one day.

you need to have a nice transition of about two weeks. that is what you do to make sure that you understand that you have a report from each department going in on some of the other issues and at the same time in have the odd it so you realize what will take place you know? we will have a longer transition that does not and on may 16th, there will not be a surprise of the next mayor coming into office. that is why we make sure the last four months, i refuse to make appointments to boards or commissions because would be unfair for the next mayor. >> what do you hope your legacy will be as mayor of chicago? >> i hope the legacy -- and everyone worries about legacy from it seems like that is a big

word. i hope that education becomes the connors torn -- the cornerstone of the city and the future. that is the greatest cornerstone i could ever give in my legacy. >> this one is a little long. it must be from a faculty member. [laughter] what lessons would you draw from the city of detroit who has lost significant portions of their population and occupied housing, and is clearly uninterested in reducing the government footprint? >> chicago is always changing. the chicago fire, industrial revolution stockyards. we always change and are willing to change. what happens to cities as they get caught in the path of change. look at the city's. first of all, they had reasons why they were established. if you look at the midwest and different cities, once they lost

the manufacturing base of the automobile industry, it never changed. they never solved. why is windsor canada, moving tremendously in the economic development right across from detroit? they missed it and now have to come back and they have acres upon acres and they have to take that off of the city map. they have defense the whole thing in. there is no one there. the have to reduce the cost of government immediately because they have thousands of acres where there is no one there. they have to take that off and change the government and come back with a mission of making that city of innovation leading with the manufacturing base in the midwest or something.

you have to rebuild these cities. that is the other question. you take detroit, toledo, pittsburgh, buffalo. what do you do with that region? that is what america needs to figure out. what do you do? pittsburgh is smaller and they're doing great things with universities. what will happen? that is a question that people constantly ask. >> primary and secondary education remains a very difficult issue for larger cities. whenever progress chicago has made over the last 15 years, it is still the case that many young people do not even finish high school. in what will be the foreseeable future with financial constraints, what can be done? >> there is a school called. what on the 63rd -- it was called englewood.

bureaucrats and educators wanted to keep open. the gangs recruited heavily out of that school because of all of the dropouts. wheat closed down and tim king had the philosophy of that every child, every young man, all of the young black men who came there, that there were going to graduate and go to college. when they came and graduated from eighth grade, they came right over. he basically evaluated them. he does not talk about the tests, but there are very proficient in reading, math, and everything. they worked all summer, every day and saturdays. . then they had mentors. they had wonderful teachers. and was a charter school. the second year these young men coming from dysfunctional homes drugs all the other issues, they're going to college.

they're going to top colleges, but some form of college. it is the first time anyone in their community has ever gone to college. how can that happen right after the public school that cannot do that. why is it that he can do that? why is it that he can run a school from 8:00-6:00. how can the work on saturdays? how can they have young men wearing uniforms with ties and the and proper. how does it happen? we have to change what is taking place in the public-school system and we have to say that if there is no learning environment, the school takes over in the community. [applause] >> this is a lot different question. what is the hardest event you ever had to deal with as mayor? >> education. [laughter] i am very passionate about it.

i just want a commitment of everyone realizing that this -- our teachers work six hours a day. six hours. think about that. 30 hours per week. i asked for 15 minutes more for the students that they would give the students and after 15 minutes. new they unanimously voted against me. unless we pay them, they will not do it. >> that is a sad thing. i am not condemning all of the teachers but there has to be a time and place that we have to give some time to the less fortunate. if we do not educate them, what will happen to a society? what will happen to them darks -- what will happen to them? my sisters are teachers and i know so many good teachers, but you have to understand that you have a responsibility. it is not just a paycheck. you have a responsibility to the students.

you will not solve everything but the time clock does not work when younger people do not have it. tim king made it work. how could he make it work and someone down the street could not? no one is after teachers. no one is blaming are condemning teachers but it needs to be a two-way street in the understanding we are all in this together. everyone has to give a little bit. if you cannot give a little bit on a contract, then it is on a contractual basis and it is all about money and nothing else. >> a student writes, "i would love to hear his thoughts on anything he wishes team would have known when he entered the office as chicago mayor. [laughter] >> my dad worked seven days a week and i sound nothing like my dad, right?

he was very passionate and committed working seven days per week. i am down to six. on sundays i signed pictures and autographs. when i was a kid and baseball player refused to sign an autograph for me and i thought when i was something in life that i would sign autographs. i'm very proud that people ask me for my signature. i think it is important to sign it. in government, you really have to have a passion and sacrifice a lot of things that maybe other people have. my dad says you never get jealous about what someone has in life. in government, that is when you go astray. >> i would love to ask how mr.

daley balances his personal valets with his constituency. >> he think about your values in life and how you get them and how values really come into play in a lot of things and then in turn you make decisions. you can make decisions and i really believe that. some of them may be controversial. gap have enough confidence to make decisions so does that affect you personally. >> was the way forward in integrating the still segregated city of chicago? >> bellard your black population that came to the south -- came from the south. we still have germans swedes bohemians, and they moved to different parts of the city and different parts of the metropolitan area. every ethnic group moves.

every ethnic group moves in different ways. there are our racial groups but also ethnic groups and they move in different parts of the city, suburban and area counties. we are privileged to have a large concentration of african- americans, spandex, and other ethnic groups split of of the city and are now being integrated much faster than in the past. >> what do think it will take to get america back on the right track? >> we have to have confidence. we have become a country of wiener's. -- of whiners. [applause] we wind about the japanese. "the japanese will take us over." what will happen to america? they will on our country. that is it. we are all out of jobs. then we start writing about the mexicans. we are losing manufacturing to mexico. -- then we start whining about

mexicans. now we whine about chinese adn thend the indians. we are a country of whiners. we need to have enough confidence to compete with people. if we do that, we can compete with any nation. we have to allow the best and brightest to come to our universities to stay here. we are not doing that. we are moving them all back out of this country. this is founded the space program? those who came from germany and russia. they got many of them back to establish by immigrants and foreigners. we have to get back into believing that we can compete. the entire technology field is here in the united states. it is right here.

we have to have more confidence. it is not just down in the washington, d.c. but they really have to believe to run our country that all of us can do it on behalf of the country. i think we can. >> this one is a little intrusive. what are your plans after a life as being mayor of chicago? >> occurred 33 years of being on the schedule six or seven days a week after 33 years being on a schedule, it will be a shock. i have to have a schedule. i think i will do some teaching and some other things i may be what to do that i have not done. i have no regrets. i have not missed out on anything, i think. i enjoy a public-service and i have had a wonderful public service life. no regrets about going to the private sector.

>> this one maybe, coal. this comes from a lifelong chicago bears fan. what are your thoughts on it j. cutler? [laughter] >> i get beat up. i understand what he is going through. [laughter] just do not take it personally. >> mr. mayor, thank you so much for being here. [applause] [applause]

>> earlier today "washington drop" looked at how some states are preparing for the 2012 primary. here's a look at the process in california. for the call. we will stay in california and a check in with paul fong, a member of the california state assembly. thank you for being with us live onwashington journal." that me ask you to weigh in on the argument that would move the california primary to june to save the state $100 million. by the savings? guest: the standalone primary cost us $97 million in 2008.

if we consolidate we can save nearly $100 million. host: some would argue that it would decrease your iluence on the republican nominee. guest: both parties have extended the campaign season if you do not know where the candidates will get the delegate votes. if california kept to their original schedule in 2008, we would have been more influential in determining our presidential candidates. host: if you go back to 1976 and 1980, california did have a say in determining the democratic nominee ultimately going to jimmy carter. why the change? why did california deem it necessary to move the pmary as a stand-alone presidential primary? guest: they wanted to have more influence in the process. they call it front loading the primary is hoping to determine

who the candidate will be for both parties. that is the reason they moved it up but it did not determine it atll. host: what is california's current projected budget deficit? guest: $26.60 billion. we have taken care of $10.50 billion so far. host: and this would save about -- $100 million, but just a small part of a larger budget deficit for california. guest: when every penny counts, that $100 million will go a long way. host: we are talking with paul fong a state representative and a democrat. guest: we have a bipartisan support and it passed the committee with bipartisan support and we have a couple of republican co-authors as well as the california state election the state board of counties.

host: what about governor brown? guest: he is tied on monday and will see this as an savings. host: paul fong, state representative joining us from california. thank you for giving us your perspective. we are talking about the 2012 primary calendars. and >> i am not interested in developing a strategy to win the primary and not be in a position to win the general. i want to be able to go out there and say we have done well. >> today, rick santorum said down on "road to the white house" to discuss a possible presidential bid, part of a

series of injuries with potential gop candidates on c- span. >> this week on "newsmakers" we are joined by cecile richards from the planned parenthood federation here to talk about us what could be a debate next week when congress returns, this week coming up, should say, the debate between republicans and democrats over whether there should be federal funding for planned parenthood. walk us through from your perspective what this is about for you guys. >> this began during the budget debate on the house side. the new house leadership the issues of american voters are very concerned about took it as a chance to repeal all access to family planning and to go after planned parenthood, the largest family planning provider in america. i think what we saw is the women's health care is now being