rights for employees in ohio. >> that is right. >> can you just tell us a little bit about that struggle and how you guys have struggled to >> when john kasich was running for governor, he made it clear that he was born to break the backs of the teacher unions in a while, and he said it authorized his campaigns. people did not believe he was going to do it. well, he did. they managed through summit d.d.s. methods to get senate bill 5 passed through the house and the senate -- they managed through some devious methods. they had testimony. it locked the doors of the state us and did not allow us to come in, and now, wisconsin has done a lot of work and has really thought and has shown what the people are speaking about. he is now getting scared,

recognizing that the referendum we have on the ballot in september is probably going to go down. no on issued two is going to win in ohio because 1.3 million people signed a petition to get it on the ballot, and these were not just union folks. these are all people in ohio who are outraged at this draconian methods of speeding up workers in ohio. >> i tell you, i was out in columbus and just happened to be there on the day that those petitions were delivered. that was some scene. it seemed like a holiday in columbus, ohio. people were pumped up. >> we had 8000 people. we even at one of our teachers run the miles from cincinnati up there with petitions on his back and then met up with the crew as a whole parade came into the state house. it was really awesome to see the ohio is up and fighting,

coming together, a grass-roots, coordinated effort, and behind that, we have this on the ballot in november. they passed a voter suppression bill. by september 30, we have got to get over 230,000 signatures to get that on the ballot, or that voter suppression goes into effect for 2012. we cannot have that for the 2012 elections. we have to of people allowed to vote. we got challenge, but you know what? -- we got challenged. this is nothing, if we come together and fight. [applause] >> we just heard from john lewis, and reverend jackson is in the front row, and it is 2011, and we're talking about

voter suppression. please, please. one more question about your experience out there. in addition to what is happening with collective bargaining rights, there have been substantial budget cuts in ohio. can you give us a real sense of how extensive they have been and how they have really affected the school system and other aspects of community life in ohio? >> we are really scrambling in ohio. in cleveland, 700 teachers were let go in the spring. just last week, three days before school, 200 teachers were let go. cleveland is looking at class sizes of 50 and above. that does not help our children. with the economic downturn in ohio and a lack of jobs, we have more and more children who are homeless, and that affects what they are able to do in school. day-by-day struggles are very tremendous for small children,

and it is just amazing that we have had to create community learning centers for kids to go after school, because their parents are doing whatever they can to put food on the table for their children, and all across ohio, the child care workers, the health care workers, everybody is being affected by what is going on. cleveland is a mayoral control district, so he is kind of relishing all of this. putting it together already. the most people you should have by the end of april before you lose your job, but he just let 200 more teachers go. i do not how we are going to survive. >> wow. sarita, you seem to be doing the exact kind of work that dr. king urged us to do, so tell us about jobs for justice. >> sure, jobs for justice is a national network. we have about 46 collisions in

26 states that bring together labor unions, community based organizations, faith based groups, and student organizations, and our main mission is to support, expand, protect the right to organize and collectively bargain, and work on a range of issues that we know are important for workers in communities, whether it be health care, trade issues, the whole gamut. >> can you give us a sense of what you are seeing out there? describe the employment landscape that you and your colleagues are seeing when you are fanning out and talking to workers and their families, in many cases vehement lloyd. >> i think davon and kathleen are giving a good example. people are struggling. when we are out there talking to workers, like our coalition in chicago has been organizing in unemployment council that meets every single week, and people,

these are folks who have gone to school. they have educational background, and they cannot find a job. let alone people who have grown up and continue to be pushed further into poverty. so the way in which people are struggling is profound, and it certainly inspired us at jobs for justice to say that this is a moment, and i really was so pleased to hear congressman lewis talk about the need to build unity right now. we are really clear that people are struggling, and we have to bring public sector workers, a private sector workers, unemployment people, excluding worker's together more than ever, and we need to be defending and protecting what we have, but more importantly, we need to be creating what we need. we need a really transformative and bold agenda right now, and that is what we aim to do. >> one of the things i am often

asked as i travel around the country is what can ordinary people do to help put to a great extent, people feel like they are separate and apart from the government, that they are not represented by their elected officials, and they feel that their voices are not hurt, so they have the tendency to give up. other things that ordinary people can do, and if so, what would you recommend? >> people are the engine behind our movement. frankly, it is people's vision for what they want. it is the hope that they carry. it is the love that they carry for humanity, for one another that, frankly, will make a difference in the kind of movement that we build and the kind of long-lasting change that we make. it is ordinary workers, whether it is one of the 45,000 verizon workers who decided to go on strike last week to say "enough

is enough," or if it is one in hershey said, "we are going to do a sit-down strike in our factory and say "enough is enough." those are ordinary people saying it is time to actually take action. we have to understand each other's struggles and understand that there is a collective struggle here. i am inspired every single day by people like davon and kathleen and by people who have taken risks. people are taking risks. those verizon workers took risks at a time when the economy is so bad. major companies, it is easy for them to say, "well, forget it. there are plenty of other people who want jobs here." it is important for ordinary people to see that it is not just about fighting for what we have, but it is about pushing

the envelope. we are not trying to hold the line here. we are trying to move the line. we can be a better society, and i think ordinary people know that and can help us define what that society is. at jobs for justice, we are doing a lot of campaigns, and hopefully, we will be able to share some of that, but one of the most profound ones, looking at the demographic shift in this country, everyone knows in years to come, we will become a majority people of color nation, but there is also a huge shift in the age. we have a growing aging population. there is an opportunity for us to step in front of those demographics right now and really sink together about what kind of society are we building. we are launching an across generations campaign that looks at how to transform the long- term care industry in this country and put front and center

the question and the value of care, so what does that mean for the people who need care, and what does that mean for the care workers who are actually without good quality jobs, do not have bargaining rights? and for the many immigrants, frankly, who are doing these jobs, who do not have a pathway to citizenship and do not have the protections that they need. >> bruce western, these very serious problems that workers are facing began long before the so-called great recession and, in fact, did all of the way back to the 1970's. is there a way to summarize in this setting what happened to american workers during the period? >> yes, yes. >> thank god, he said yes. [laughter] >> i thought that is what you're going to ask.

we can look at the history of the last 30 or 40 years as a steady erosion of the power of the american worker. earlyback to the 1960's, 1970's, levels of economic equality were much lower. rates of unionization were much higher. union decline extended through the 1970's, 19 80's, the 1990's, and the 2000's. inequality increased during the period as workers lost power. now, we find ourselves in an historically enormous recession, the largest since the great depression, and it coincides with an erosion in the

bargaining power of the american worker, and i think it is tempting to view the recession as a natural event that has just overwhelmed the labor market. a catastrophe in the financial sector and in the home mortgage sector, and that precipitated this enormous recession, but i think we have to see the depth of the recession and the recovery is also related to this weakening bargaining power. management is shedding jobs. more than it did in the past, partly because the institutions,

on the shop floor and also in washington, they have become so much more adverse, and there are simply very few strong organized voices now speaking up for the poor and working people, and this is the context in which we are having the political conversation we're having now a washington which seems utterly detached and the social and economic reality, out in the labour market. >> you mentioned inequality, which is and it warned issue, but it does not get much traction in our society. infrastructure. it is one of those words were people's eyes glaze over, but can you explain a little bit about why ordinary americans should care about inequality in this extreme inequality that we are seeing now, why that is bad

for society as a whole? >> yes, yes. there are two things i would emphasize. one is as inequality has grown, and over the last 15 years, a lot of the growth in inequality has been driven by the very, very rapid rise of incomes at the very top of the distribution, so there is an extraordinarily wealthy class of people now whose experience is completely separate from the rest of american society, and it is this top of the distribution that is having an outside influence on the political process, so i think that is one reason why we should really care about inequality.

it is distorting and undermining quality of american democracy. >> they have more clout, more say, and more access. >> exactly, exactly. and the other part, as inequality has increased, economic and security has also increased, and so things like the risk of job loss, if you think of the house told us an economic unit, the risks of divorce and separation, underinsurance and other insurance is increasing. people are more exposed to the risk of catastrophic health events, so in security has also increased as inequality has increased. literally all of this increase in security is concentrated in the bottom one-third of the population, and that is the other piece of the rise in

inequality. people's lives and become much more insecure. because their lives are more insecure, it is harder for them to imagine a life for their -- themselves and their children and to plan ahead. >> thank you. sarita, if i can get back to you for a moment. you're a big believer in what i think are two important prongs of what i think is any real solution to this problem we are facing, and one is organization, and the other is massive job creation, so talk about job creation a little bit. i mean, we have many millions of people out of work, and that is before we ever get to the underemployed. forget forum of the sort of stalemated political process, but if we really had an opportunity to do something substantial, what would you like

to see done in terms of job creation? >> well, if we can set aside the political climate we are in, we should all be pushing for a massive federal jobs bill. that is the mission. that is what we need right now. we need to make sure that we're not only pushing for jobs but that we're pushing, what we like to say is jobs for justice, which is organizing a collective bargaining rights which have to be central to any type of massive jobs bill we push. we need to make sure that right now we are again paying attention to where we think in the economy and real job growth is possible. i know in our organization, we have been digging deep and saying we know retail continues to be growing, for example. as you see major retailers like wal-mart expanding into city

centers and campuses, with the promise of creations of jobs, we need to be whipping a segments of our economies like retail, like direct care, like others and be pushing for the actual creation of jobs in those segments of our economy where we know there is that kind of growth potential. i feel that we are at a moment now in history where we just cannot be general about it. we need to get specific. what kinds of jobs. which jobs. and how to reassure the wheel of a robust public sector in this country. but in addition to a robust public sector, we cannot forget the other sector, so we need to balance job creation looking through both of those lenses. >> and, davon, just continuing along those lines, it seems to me -- not seems to me, but it is

a fact. the estimates are anywhere from $2 trillion to $4 trillion worth of infrastructure improvements that we need. this is at a time when the construction industry has really taken it on the chin, and we have all kinds of manufacturing workers unemployed. it seems to me that somebody ought to be able to put two plus two together. you take all of these together, $2.40 trillion worth of work waiting for them. from your perspective, is that feasible? can you imagine a situation where there is tremendous work being done on infrastructure, and then your folks begin to go to work? how would that work? obviously, you would like to see that happen, but do you think it is feasible? do you guys talk about it? >> we talk about it. bloomberg signed $5 billion

worth of work, so that helps a lot, but there is still -- >> he paid for that out of his private checking account. [laughter] >> but even with that, there is still unemployment, and for painters, that is even higher, and i do not know if anyone here can imagine being out of work for a year. no more and in point. your health care coverage is gone, and guys just want to go to work. we just want to work. >> what do you paint? i can imagine folks painting houses, bridges. where i live, you are way up in the sky. some of this stuff, 100 miles, so we get carried away here, but tell me about the men and women in your union, what do they paid good >> my union specifically, we are not just pagers.

we are painters, bridge painters, and glaciers, drywall finishers, and we even have hotel and employees. our apprentice program would be a good start for someone who has been unemployed. a program trains younger kids and even adults, older adults to join the building trades and to have a future, because it propels you directly into the center of the middle class, and the attacks on the union's is open. >> and the attacks on unions bring me back to k'd, with what has been going on in ohio but also in many other places, as well -- brings me back to key -- katy. with these budget cuts you have been talking about and that sort of thing. if you could wave a magic wand and begin to turn some of these things around, what are some

specific things that you would like to see happen? is there or are there alternatives to the budget cuts, and we already know how you are fighting back, but talk about alternatives to these budget cuts. >> well, collective bargaining. recently, i was a collective bargaining chair for a contract. six months into the negotiations, they did not think we were going to borrow enough, and we found out that this was our contract basically in senate bill 5, and then realized the attorney who did this was actually the writer of senate bill 5, but we fought through that. in cincinnati, we were not going to give up, and we were able to negotiate, and so, it now workers are paying double what they paid for in health care.

this year, we have a pay freeze. plus, we have been able to negotiate 50% growth and achievement in our system, so we were able to do some things at the table, talking, through collective bargaining, to make a difference. we are the ones who understand the work that we are doing, but we're also willing to do what needs to be done to keep things going, so collective bargaining is a key to keeping things going. >> all right, and do you think that would have an effect on the budget cutting? in other words, what is your response to folksy say, "wow, we are just out of money"? "this is where we are going to be." i am a believer in shared sacrifice, but when you have 1%

at the top, they decide the page should be shared by the 99% at the bottom. >> if you could take all of the public workers and the state of ohio and say, "go away," it is not going to solve the budget crisis in ohio, so breaking the backs of people is not going to solve it. putting people to work is going to say it. >> paying taxes. >> everybody paying taxes. everybody paying their fair share. [applause] >> will you be entering the presidential primaries? [laughter] bruce, if i may call you bruce. i am calling everybody else by the first name, but the professor i am calling a professor. old habits die hard. i would love to hear your thoughts.

well, first, on a couple of things, but first, on job creation, what would you like to see done? and what do you think is feasible if those two things do not coincide? maybe they do. >> i mean, what i would love to the need is so pressing and it would reap large economic rewards down the road. that is what i would love to see done, and i actually think that among economists, among the

economics staff, in the congress and the treasury and the white house, the real obstacle is political. what can visibly be done, i think at the moment, it seems there are enormous obstacles to any new spending, despite the fact that the need for it is so profound at the moment. so the kinds of things that are on the table can make a difference, things like tax credits for job creation,

federal tax holiday, perhaps even unemployment benefit extension beyond 99 weeks, although i think that politically, that may be a bridge too far. i feel quite pessimistic, unfortunately, because the things we really need to do are a long way from what seems politically feasible. i think what really needs to be done, i think this whole panel has been talking about it, is the politicization of unemployment as a problem. right now, the problem of unemployment -- it is not politicized within the congress or it seems within the administration. it seems at the moment it is

only important to the extent that it is significant for 2012, for the election, which is completely disspiriting. >> i sadly agree with you that i am pessimistic as well, given what is going on both in washington and in state legislatures around the country. it just seems to me that a couple of things seem so obvious. i agree with you about direct job creation. when people are talking about we have no money, it is just not true. it is a fabulously wealthy country. those tax cuts expire. [applause] and then, bring the troops home. stop spending all this money. [applause]

on more fair, and begin to invest in rebuilding this country. this would be a good place to start in terms of nation building. i will ask a question similar to what asked sarita. you guys have had some experience in ohio, just plunging right into the fight. tell us what ordinary people today can do it a pretty specific sense. what are some things that might be helpful, given the problems we are facing? >> i think we have to communicate with each other, number one. there are still people in this believe across ohio that this is actually taking place. let them know what little things they can do, just on this voter suppression. take a petition around your neighborhood, whatever hours that you have. get it signed so that everyone has the right to vote. just simple things that people

can do. i have seen teachers stepping up every single day, buying lunches for kids. i saw a teacher from my school who saw a child with lymphoma. she took him into her home so that he could continue going to school. everyday people can do what ever it takes to help us get through. we are one nation together, and we have to fight for each and every person. [applause] >> are you surprised at the extent and the virulence of the attack against teachers in this country? are you surprised, or did you see that coming? >> i am honestly shocked about that. there are some challenges we have had in education. we have been testing the kids to death instead of teaching the kids. [applause]

we have got to make sure that what we are testing on is really what is appropriate. i am very pleased that we now have a national campaign calling for standards that we are going to be held to high and rigorous standards for all children. if you build those foundations really strong, i think we will be able to do very well. but attacking teachers and people that you give your children to day by day, and that think the solution is getting rid of that teachers are bringing in teach for america people who only want to teach four year or two and then leave, that is not the way. we want kids to be ready for the future, be ready for the 21st century. we have to give them the tools. >> thank you, these guys have been amazing. [applause]

myon't know whether to keep moderator hat on or go to my journalist tad and pull out my notebook. we are going to go to a question and answer period, but i think we are going to start its -- algernon austin is with the economic policy institute, and we are going to start this segment by having him speak to an area where he is one of the great experts in this country. it is the effect of these economic problems, the downturn, the recession, unemployment, on the communities of color in the united states. >> it is a great panel, and i am really grateful to be here. one thing that certainly everyone -- everyone is

suffering tremendously by the great recession. that goes without saying. we should also remember that there continues to be significant racial disparity. this year, the unemployment rate for whites is quite high. it is averaging 8.2%, but in 2007, before the recession started, the black unemployment rate averaged 8.3%. so even in a good economic time, black america was in a recession in 2007 and it has only gotten significantly worse, now 16%. we certainly need everything that the panelists recommended. we need direct public sector job creation. we need serious infrastructure investment. we need aid for the state and local governments so that our teachers are not being laid off.

we need to shore up our safety net because people need it now more than ever. we need massive programs to put 11 million american workers back to work. it will get us back room were in 2007, but even then, the black unemployment rate was twice the white unemployment rate. the unemployment rate for native americans was pretty close to wear the black unemployment rate was. even after we do that national job creation, we need targeted programs that are going to reach these communities that face persistently high unemployment, and we need another probably 3 million jobs that reach deep within the african-american communities, that latino community, the american indian community, to make sure that every american who wants to work

can work. so the call from the 1963 march is still completely relevant today. i found a flier, the call for the 1963 march. it says america faces a crisis. millions of citizens, black and white, are unemployed. thus, we call on all americans to join us in washington to demand a federal massive work and training program that puts all unemployed workers, black and white, back to work. so this applies to day 100%. the only thing you would change is that you would include latinos, asian-americans, native americans. but it is 100% relative today. >> thank you so much, we really appreciate that. [applause]

and now, if we have any questions from the floor. [unintelligible] [unintelligible]

my concern would simply be this. [unintelligible]

[unintelligible] [unintelligible]

[unintelligible] laying off teachers, police, firemen [unintelligible] we have never received what we needed. [unintelligible] thank you very much.

[applause] >> we also solicited some questions on-line. we will not be able to get to many of them, but here is one from a fellow named frank who said, how can we keep export boarding are skilled and educated jobs and only create low-paying jobs and expect to survive as a nation? i thought it was a pretty good question. bruce, how would you like to take a crack at that? what happens if in fact most of the jobs being created now are low-wage jobs? what happens if that trend to grab hold and becomes what we see for the foreseeable future. >> behind the question is the right and compelling observation that we have seen a polarization of the american the

job market, a real hollowing out of the middle. there has been a lot of employment growth in very low- skilled, low-paid jobs. there has been growth at the very top as well. normally, i think, when we talk about that sort of challenge, the answer to its is more education, more skills, more training, and that is fundamentally important, and we need to expand investments there. i would worry if that is our only focus, for workers who are already out in the labor market, particularly older workers who are being laid off as they were

in the past and are not able to look forward to long term employment with one employer anymore. i worry that those sorts of workers are just being left out of the policy discussion. we are talking about education and training. i think we need a broader policy discussion that includes those people. organized labor has to be part of that discussion, how to reinvigorate the institutional climate for organizing in the face of organizing campaigns. that is just commonplace now. regretting that has to be part of protecting our skilled work force, in addition to all the

things that we need to do for education and training. >> thank you. i am going to keep things on schedule here, which means that it is time to wrap it up. it has been really great. one of the things i tell everyone -- i hope everyone will take away from our proceedings is the need, as you have heard from so many people including the initial speakers and especially john lewis, is the need for all of us to fight back on behalf of america's working men and women. we need to organize concerned americans to turn up the heat on such crucial issues as job creation, it improved wages and benefits, and the strong safety net, which we will talk about at another time. this is the great and noble struggle of our time, but to win this fight on behalf of working people will take a tremendous effort, which i was asking that question about what can ordinary people do, because it is are new

people who will have to come in and make this fight. as dr. king said, human progress is neither automatic or inevitable. every step tower records goal of justice requires sacrifice, suffering, and struggle. the termless exertions and passionate concern of dedicated individuals. i urge each and every one of you to step up and take that fight. thank you so much for coming today. it is a wonderful panel. and thank you, panelists. [applause] >> give them another hand, please. as you know, we will be moving to the second panel. we will have about a 15 minute break so you can get some water or coffee in the lobby. we will see you in about 15

minutes. >> in a few moments, a council hosted discussion on the implications of the libyan rebellion and the country's future. in a little more than an hour, our coverage of the forthcoming iowa republican fund raiser, including remarks by gop presidential candidate texas governor rick perry and representative ron paul of texas and thaddeus mccotter of michigan. on "washington journal" tomorrow morning, the damage caused by hurricane irene. our guest is robert hartwig. our series on the weather begins with a look at disaster relief

and preparedness with michael greenberger, head of the university of maryland's homeland security center. washington journal" live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> what more video of the candidates. see what political reporters are saying and track the latest campaign contributions would c- span's website for campaign 2012. easy to use, it helps you navigate the political landscape with candidate bios and the latest polling data, plus links to c-span media partners in the early primary and caucus states. all at c-span.org/campaign2012. >> not a forum on implications of the libyan rebellion brought -- hosted by the atlantic council. this is a little more than an hour.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> midmorning, welcome everyone. i am the executive vice president here at the atlantic council. thank you for joining us for this timely events entitled "to the shores of tripoli." >> gaddafi has not been captured and fighting will continue in the weeks to come. his regime is crumbling. it is by no means too early to assess the implications of the toppling of yet another arab dictator. the name of the event today boroughs in a play on words. however, the revolution, libya is no game in his demise comes at the hands of libyans rather than u.s. marines. the collapse of their regime after six months of conflict is a historic event and a pivotal

and in the arab awakening. it seems that east -- that each august, when policy makers take a break from the grind, the world events just will not cooperate. earthquakes and hurricanes notwithstanding, this august is no different as well seen until recently as a stalemate in north africa is rapidly turning into the reality of the post- gadhafi libya. some of the council believes what is unfolding in the middle east and north africa is the fourth greatest challenge to the trans-atlantic community since world war two. does the world or to itself, the cold war, the cold war aftermath, the collapse of the soviet union leading to the enlargement of nato and european union, and a transformation in the middle east and north africa. now more than ever, the atlantic community's response cannot be the united states alone. europe, despite facing its own economic crisis, has more at stake and more proximity and must be engaged.

today's discussion hits at the nexus of the work of the atlantic council and three of our flagship programs -- a center for the middle east, the international security program, and the africa center. at a time of dramatic change across the region, the atlantic cod -- atlantic council launched its program for the middle east focusing on the links between political and economic change and developing concrete policy for this transformational change in the region. named for the slain prime minister, it reflects rising above sectarianism, promoting innovative policies for political liberalization, sustainable conflict resolution and promoting regional and international integration. the aim of the center, through its analysis and projects is to more closely bind together the middle east, europe, russia and north america. furthermore, the council's

international security program has long been the leading center for analysis on nato and transatlantic security. this program will involve into brent scowcroft center next spring as we deepen our expertise into working with europe to address global security challenges, including in the middle east. finally, the africa center aims to transform u.s. and european policy approaches to africa by emphasizing the building of strong geopolitical partnerships with african states and strengthening economic growth and prosperity on the continent. the distinguished leaders of each of these programs are participating in our discussion today. today's discussion is in two parts -- first, we will consider the implications for libya itself and the arab awakening more broadly. them will turn to our second panel for the discussions on the implications for nato and the transatlantic community. we have assembled a remarkably

talented group of individuals with varying perspectives. the director of the center for the middle east will moderate this conversation. she is a former white house and state department official who brings to the counseling rich understanding of the washington policy-making process, but also the forces driving the arab awakening. during her time at the carnegie endowment, she was co-chair of the working group on egypt, she is recognized the change and their implications in the region of long before mubarak fell in egypt. the arnold kanter chair at counsel and director of its international victory program will moderate the second program on nato. he has played a leadership roles in the development of a broad range of national security strategies across the past three administrations, including serving at the white house as special assistant to the president and senior director for defense policy and

strategy on the national security staff and having many senior pentagon positions. i am delighted to welcome to our discussion to atlantic council board directors. one is american, franklin miller, one european, we are delighted to have you join us. let me turn this over to michele to kick off the conversation. >> thank you to all of you for being with us this morning. in the first panel, we're going to try to cover what's going on in libya and some scenarios for how things might move forward in libya. we are going to look at the regional implications in the arab and african regions of what is unfolding in libya and we will start to also address some issues in terms of the international community and what its rolls might be in inside libya going forward. we are at a really interesting moment right now in libya where the rebels made this very

surprising breakthrough in tripoli over the last week. it is not so surprising if you have been watching carefully because the military advantage turned to the rebels weeks ago. i did just not make the international media. -- i think it did not make the international media. the transitional council and rebel leadership is largely in control of tripoli, although as you have seen over the last 24 hours and today, there is still fighting in tripoli and are troubling reports emerging in terms of the casualties there and the nature of violence there. also, attention is turning to the south, particularly to the home town of at libyan leader gadhafi and there may well be more fighting there because the rebels are not in control of the city. one of the questions i think

will be interesting to discuss this morning is gadhafi himself and how important his capture is to this situation in libya as we move ahead and as the rebels spread control throughout the country. the issues of the release of assets on the part of the united states and others to the transitional council and whether the plans the transitional council had in place before they entered libya to secure tripoli and establish security throughout the country and move into a political transition, how well those kinds of plans will survive contact with reality. we will also talk about the implications in the region. i think there will be a significant impact on syria. what is happening in libya is

creating a different model for change. a more difficult models for change, but a very different from what happened in tunisia and egypt where there were peaceful uprisings and frankly, the military decided with the uprisings rather than with the leader and therefore the leader was forced to step down with a minimum of violence. there certainly were casualties in both of those countries but not very large scale. in libya, we have seen a completely different model, where what started as a peaceful rebellion met with a lot of resistance on the part of the gadhafi, his military fractured. much of it stuck with him but some of that broke away and went to the rebels. we saw an armed rebellion with international support. that has ultimately won out. for other countries like syria

and yemen and perhaps others, this creates a different way. there is more than one way that these authoritarian leaders may go in arab countries. we will also be discussing the africa dimension because we saw a real range of positions that the various countries with him libya had close relations in the arab world and africa took toward the struggle in libya. those will have implications for libya's foreign relations going forward. i am joined by this panel by three distinguished speakers. first, we are going to hear from a professor at johns hopkins here in washington and also in bologna, italy. he's a senior fellow at a middle east policy council.

also, a professor and scholar at the middle east institute and my colleague, the director of the africa center here at the atlantic council. i want to hear about your evaluation. how important or not important is what happened to moammar gadhafi himself and what are your thoughts on scenarios? where might libya be going from here?

>> it's very hard to say when this might be over. i think we are at the end of it. [audio difficulties] what we have seen in tripoli is the defections of important parts of his troops have caused easy access into the city. the troops betrayed them right away. they started shooting, so you see the massacres happen because there was no clear-cut division of rule.

they will be taking care of. it is important day -- it is important that they clean up is conducted and -- [audio difficulties] [audio difficulties] once that has been obtained by the rebels, we have seen a rapid advance from the eastern part. that is true. there is a group of better- disciplined troops that

responds to a hierarchy, but along with them, they're all lot of voluntary, courageous people who go and left their houses to fight, but they are disorganized. the problem of seen in tripoli is exactly that. there are groups who enter the city from the mountains and all over that have been trained and prepared and one of the cases, the capture of the first son of gadhafi, he gave himself up to the rebels and was kept in a place by a group and people went to the house where he was captured, pretending to beat rebels and wanting to free him and bring him to headquarters, so they freedom. they did not know each other. there was no communication, no hierarchy, nothing. this has led to various

problems like the massacre in tripoli. i was watching a report this morning and see the city full of bodies left in the streets. people were blindfolded, handcuffed, executed, signs of torture, this is because of the sudden collapse of the resistance and lack of order on the part of most of the rebels. the problem, another issue is it is a hierarchy and the people are people known and it is confused. they don't talk with one voice. that is what we have. criticizing now is it too easy.

we should not have the standard too high. he has not been seen for a couple of days in two months. the whole draft is different, but that will be solved. the legitimacy will be increased. there is one problem regarding them and that -- everybody is quick to dismiss the islamists. there are no islamists and they

are conservatives at the most. they are very few and very limited. be conservatism of the people has increased in the last two or three or four years at a higher rate -- at a high speed rate. the people, the former minister of defense, there are two factions of islamist groups, so that is an issue we should consider. where are we now? on the ground, there may be three or four scenarios. first, what is going to happen once they announced the formation of the government? the people will say they are not

represented or they say we carry the burden of the fight and we need three minutes more than you, what will happen in that moment. what will happen when they tried to resolve the factions and they refuse it? that's -- that could lead to an enormous quantity of weapons for what somebody called the somalia effect. hopefully that will not happen. another scenario is that someone emerges. we have not seen the military commander yet. there is no soldier that has emerged. nobody has that i lead the army. if the commander of the largest

italian says there is too much fighting and i will take care in this situation, then we are back to a semi dictatorship, different than before but it is a possible scenario. a strong man is very present in libya and someone talked about a figure to take an emergent and leader because of the lack of charisma. the third scenario is nothing has happened and you remain stuck in a transition there is no agreement and we remain -- >> fourth is the author -- the opportunistic situation where

the population will not allow for this to become a failure. people will be ready to give up their arms and start all over again. i want to finish with just one thing. the fact that libya should be left to the libyans, etc. it is important that the countries remain on our side. libyans do not look, despite their effort, do not look at the west as negative as some may be. this war has been one thanks to

the support of european countries. i don't think they will look badly. [unintelligible] >> thank you. let me just ask you a brief, to follow up questions. you talk about the bloodshed occurring in tripoli. to what extent do you see that impeding the transition and in beating a reconciliation and integration of tripoli fully into a post-gadhafi of arrangement? i recall when members of the transitional council were here in washington a few weeks ago and they said we do not want to

fight our way through tripoli because we are worried about what that will mean when we need to reconcile. is that going to be a serious problem or do you feel they will be able to pacify tripoli without having done so much damage that reconciliation becomes difficult? the other question is hypothetical, but it is something we need to bear in mind. where do you think libya would be had there not then international intervention? what would have happened? as difficult as the current situation is, what would the alternative had been like had there not been an international intervention. >> we always pushed for a possibility of a negotiated solution. if the united states would lead a negotiated deal with gadhafi said he could leave tripoli and to some success to deal with

thednc and none of this bloodshed would happen. it is very bad and very tragic, but i think all libyans at the end will simply say okay, the dictator is gone, we are free, finally, after so many years and it has cost as many more deaths than necessary, but that is a war of liberation. i think it will lead -- some will quest for vengeance, but i hope [unintelligible] to your second question, i think it will be -- it would have been crushed in the second or third day without the international community intervening. therefore, i think we are much better off and should be thankful for that intervention and we should -- everything

considered, when a father comes and says i lost my son, you have a difficult time in telling, yes, but we did it for freedom. that causes problems and destruction and devastation, but in the end, i hope the libyans understand it was worth it and it was an act of courage and dignity and was worth it. >> thank you very much. daniel, we're going to turn to you to discuss a little bit more the international role beyond the military intervention. how do you see the international role in libya following the fall of tripoli? if you can include in that not

only the western world, the u.s. and european role, but the arab world, which has been very significant. there has been significant support from gulf states to this rebellion. >> we have to start on the international role inside libya with libyan requirements. that's very difficult to do right now because where are the authoritatively the invoices? let me imagine a bit what libyans will be feeling at the moment they really need, recognizing full well i will defer and the lead to libyans if they say i am wrong. the immediate requirements are to block revenge killings, stabilize tripoli, get water and electricity flowing, dealing with humanitarian requirements and beginning a inclusive political protest. these are the things to be

worrying about at the moment and i would be surprised of libyans were not worrying about them. but when you design the international effort, you need to be looking at longer-term goals as well. what are those longer-term goals? first and foremost is a safe and secure environment. the decision has essentially been made for the moment, at least, that there will be no international peacekeeping force. this is a decision whose wisdom we will know someday. i would have preferred the europeans prepare to put paramilitary police into tripoli to stabilize the situation, but they would have to be landing right now and they are not. they have not organize such an effort and it is a mistake not to have organized it to be ready if it was needed. i would be the first to admit

it would only deploy if the libyans requested it. why do i point that the europeans? i point that the europeans because they have violent trysts at stake in libya and the united states does not. -- they have vital interests at stake in libya and the united states does not. libya is connected by a liberal umbilical gas pipelines to europe. there are european oil and gas supplies at stake. there is the risk of libyan migration if things really go to hell in a handbasket. there is the risk of libyan migration which should concern the europeans, which is not such a concern to the united states. so i do believe in all of what i am going to talk about now. i believe the europeans should

play a leading role and the american role is to get the europeans to stand up to their proper role. we did this somewhat successfully with the military effort. i have not seen the same kind of success yet with the civilian effort. looking at the longer-term, libyans are going to want rule of law, at least in terms, i'm going to keep myself in a relatively benign scenario. this is a long-term project. is not going to happen tomorrow. long-term training of the police and judiciary and corrections. yet to start quickly because it's going to take a long time. you cannot wait three or four years and begin a because then you will have three or four years of very bad experience. on the political front, the

libyans have been great. they've prepared a constitutional charter and they may talk about it differently, each one, but it is great they have done this. it is a road map. it's a road map that includes a time schedule that is too fast, a constitution within six months, even less, and elections within a year. i will be surprised if they have to postpone that. but people have postponed elections before. they have done it in tunisia and egypt. it's not a big issue if you are headed down the right path. i happen to believe they should do municipal alexian's first. i it's a big mistake to do national elections first, but there's only one case i can think of where municipal elections were done first, that was in kosovo, and at was a very stabilizing thing to do. why do i think that?

all politics is local. or the least good politics is local. it is much harder to form a coalition based on the sect, secular is some verses islamists. you get a test of who is emerging, very direct relations between them and the local government. there's a lot of focus on getting libyans the money that they need. for the long term, the critical issue is not the quantity of money. the transparency and accountability of the money. haveseen all progress, i heard a lot of good intentions, but little progress in actually establishing a system by which they would be accountable publicly. this has to be a system inside libya to be accountable and

transparent about how the money is being spent. i have never known a post- conflict situation that would have benefited from having less money sloshing around. the reason is less money means you have to decide what your real priorities are. more corruption, more problems, more focus on priorities. specifically once the oil and gas, that there be accountability, and the citizens feel that it is coming to them. frankly, i don't see iraqis have any idea where their money goes to this point. i hope the libyans are able to do better. the and the it social needs are quite acute.

this does not make headlines in great deal, but there are a large number of people have been displaced and need shelter, food, water. the transitional national council has been good about trends -- about cooperating with the ngos and providing basic needs and i expect them to do that in tripoli, but i expected to be much more difficult in tripoli, not least because of the security situation. in the long term, the social needs are larger than the basic human needs. there will be a real need for a kind of social reconciliation, a political reconciliation, whenever you want to college. this was a regime with which a lot of people collaborated and a lot of as collaborators will collaborate with the new apparatus. i don't know the situation in which collaborators have not

tried to turn quickly to collaborate again. it's the people who resisted the old regime that resist the new one as well and call it out for its misdeeds. it seems to me that libyans will need a process in due course of accountability for some type for the crimes of the previous regime. for that, they need a sought -- they need a strong civil society. civil society has blossomed and i hope it blossoms in tripoli. it is really citizens that will prevent some of the bad scenarios. these are longer-term goals. i believe these should be set out clearly in a security council resolution. 1973 has been overtaken by events.

we need a security council resolution that shows this to be a united, democratic libya under the rule of law that uses its natural resources for the benefit of all its people. that, to me, would be a kind of vindication, not a justification, but a kind of vindication of the nato effort. >> thank you. i wanted to ask you about a couple of questions or concerns i have about what the nature of the involvement of a post- gadhafi libya would be like. one of them is whether we would see any kind of competition for influence between the west and the arab countries. some of the arab countries have played very significant roles in giving support to the rebels.

there was a very significant islamic factor inside of libya. are we going to see international players supporting different actors trying to strengthen their hand in the evolving libya situation? are we going to see international assistance to libya being shaped or motivated by the desire to have a piece of the pie commercially in libya afterwards? are we going to see a scramble -- libya, once it is through all of this, it is going to be wealthy country. >> yes, to all of the above, libya should count itself as lucky. there will be competition for influence in libya and competition for oil and gas. more power to the libyans.

they can manage that competition to their advantage. as far as the arab issue is concerned, i don't really see that to tell you the truth. what i see is a kind of synergy. the west is having trouble moving money quickly to the national transitional council. the arabs were doing that quickly and i think that's fine from the libyan perspective. the western frozen money will come in -- will come in due course. there was a good deal of unanimity between the arab world and the west. if that can be maintained, that would be a marvelous thing. so much as competition among the western powers is concerned, there will be. but that is good thing -- that

is a good thing, basically, but it has to be managed and the libyans have to create eight level playing field. for their oil and gas resources. >> thank you, daniel. i'm going to turn now to peter. expanding this question of the international role and relations with libya and going forward, many of the african forces back gadhafi, almost to the end. we have seen a number of them. i think 16 have recognize the transitional council, but i'm wondering how are libyans going to feel about africa as opposed to the arab world moving forward? gadhafi had become disillusioned and disappointed trying to reorient libya, not

sure to what extent that was shared by the libyan population, but how do you think this is going to look in the new of libya, and i'm wondering if you can explain the role of south africa in the current situation and why south africa has continued to resist the transfer of assets to the transitional leadership? >> thank you. in order to understand libya's relations with africa, a little history we have to take a look at. here and many aspects of his life, money -- moammar gadhafi was a little schizophrenic or had shown little of multiple personality. there is khaddafi the revolutionary who from the beginning of his regime spent a lot of libyan money financing liberation movements across africa.

that has bearing on current events. then there is khaddafi the hegemon who tried to foment armed change of regime in african countries, financing guerrillas to attempt to overthrow and that brought this -- that brought destruction to large parts of africa. then when the sanctions for terrorism tried to hit their regime at home and they felt the arab companies were not given enough, he shifted to many of whom who were his former victims for support. he became a pan-africanist, welcoming africans to movehe wao move to live via -- to libya, and becoming a pan-african --

the african union was begun in sirte and it's beginning documents saying it was inspired by gaddafi. then there was gaddafi the investor, who invested from business it infrastructure throughout africa. 3 these different gaddafis, and which countries dealt with, will reflect what it has been dealing with libya, so they were least affected by the gap and most flexible in reaching out to the transitional national council. that has affected their judgment to the point where souder got's

president -- where south africa 's president called for -- also, from the african side, there's the perception of what has happened in libya. refugees are returning. the violence that has occurred again -- some africans thought they were mercenaries or bore the brunt of resentment from people. that has affected african perception. we are going to see in africa a reset. the arab league has been much more forward on this, both in lending diplomatic cover, the u.n. resolution, and this week recognizing the transitional national council as a legitimate government of libya, where the african union has yet to come up

with a consistent policy. i suspect the new government in libya will pivot more toward the arab world, less to the african world, but they will still need each other. the africans cannot hope to stop the flow of arms from the stockpiles that are beginning to see in markets in africa. you then sanction monitoring group in somalia has reported -- arms are showing up in conflicts in somalia. showing up in the open market in mali and martini. -- and mauriiania. on the other side, the deal will be the cooperation of african governments to retrieve assets that gaddafi invested.

we are talking more than $15 billion in the last few years from businesses to infrastructure that can be converted back into cash to be used for development issues and other issues that daniel and karim spoke about. >> thank you. i would note as he did about africa that in terms of the arab countries, the position they took toward libya was not at all in uniform. initially, the question of the initial establishment of a no- fly zone and an international intervention, a number of arab countries opposed that strongly, although they were eventually persuaded by saudi arabia to kind of stuff aside and the arab league did speak in favor of

the international intervention. that was a really unusual step for the arab league, and a lot of it goes back to the saudi enmity against gaddafi. >> 3 african members of the u.n. security council, all three voted for the u.n. resolution. it is interesting how they position themselves afterward. nigeria took a middle position and this week recognize the transitional council, and gabon, its president, a few months ago, call for the ouster of gaddafi and last week recognized the council. there is a bit of a variety in the african response. >> the libyan relations with arab countries are going to need resets as well, notably algeria.

we will see what will happen there. we are going to open it up now to questions from the audience. if you have a question, please put your hand up. i will recognize you. we have microphones. i would like you speak your questions and keep your questions brief and director questions to one of the panelists. >> i am a member of the atlantic council. my question would be, do you know what arab leaders are the defectors, and how people can trust? one that libyan citizen

asked, why does the western countries had the answers to all of libyans problems? >> i have a gut feeling that we have not seen the emergence of the real leadership of the viet yet. -- of libya yet. all those young people who fought in the streets, left at their houses, who had seen their friends killed, will accept a political class that has been in bed with gaddafi for 40 years. somebody has been prime minister with gaddafi for so many times

cannot claim to be a leader. military commanders of gaddafi cannot think they would be leading the new battalions. there are new figures that are the second line that will emerge. [unintelligible] there are those who will claim their role and say i have more titles to be such and such. people who lead libya inside will emerge and they will not accept the people who have been abroad for 40 years. government might need the leadership of expatriate's.

-- expatriates. i think there is an assumption of the transitional council that we now see or some form of it will actually lead libya in some kind of a transitional period. are you saying that you do not think that is the case, or are you saying that they will, but then other leaders are going to emerge? >> they have to enlarge. we are going to see other people coming in, and these people will put pressure on, and will open up places for other people, and there will be a new wave of leadership. i do not believe that this is it. i do not believe that the new

media will be led by these people. -- the new libya will be led by these people. there have been people who have done a good job to this moment, but the legitimacy will come from people who will appear in the next month or month and a half. >> can i add a word? there has been a lot of journalistic commentary that the transitional national council is a hodgepodge. it is, and that has become more of a hodgepodge. a hodgepodge, a lot of different perspectives in it, and when you're writing the rules, which is what the constitution is, this should in power, that is what you need, as broad a tent as you can possibly have.

i might be afraid of the islamists influence, too, but i definitely want them there. bmi thank you. -- >> thank you. >> one is year-old mother a one is the role of arab states. i wondered if you could talk about the varying roles of other arab countries in the conflict in libya and what the implications of that, how that plays out. for example, morocco and jordan formally became parkton -- partners of the nato council that was conducting the operations. saudia arabia played a key role in the arab league, but was

dating back a little from this. play that out a little bit. what is the impact of what is happening now in libya on the arab spring, on the arab waking more broadly? how does this play in syria and yemen come off two countries in the midst of revolution and revolt? what are the implications in tunisia and egypt, countries that are going through this already? >> maybe i will take a first cut at that. we are seeing a confused, chaotic picture in the arab world right now as the various arab states try to cope with the amount of change in the arab world. it is more than the system can bear. i mentioned that i thought in some ways libya was a unique case.

gaddafi made a very big mistake about eight years ago, by trying assassinate the king of saudi arabia. because of that, saudi arabia took that position on change in libya, when the uprising started. they were eager to get rid of gaddafi, and that clearly has not in the saudi approached other arab states in general. they were very unhappy to see president mubarak of egypt go and they gave refuge to the president of tunisia. even in syria, the saudis only reluctantly and recently came around to more or less getting on assad and withdrawing the saudi ambassador. it was an important step, and one that paved the way for a more vigorous u.s. and european position on what needs to happen

in syria. and we saw that most of the arab states pulled together in favor of a change in libya, not all of them, though. algeria stuck gaddafi until close to the end. syria is preoccupied with its own problems and cannot play this kind of role. lebanon had a big grudge against gaddafi and cast its vote in the security council against this regime. that does not predict what the positions of arab states are going to be on other changes going forward. libya was a unique case because gaddafi made so many enemies over the years.

syria, i am certain that the opposition forces in syria and yemen are going to be very much encouraged by what has happened in libya, because, as i said at the beginning of this panel, it shows there is more than one way to overturn a regime. i think there had been a discoursed emerging that said, if it does not happen peacefully and quickly the way it did in egypt and tunisia, then it just cannot work, and then you are mired in war forever. the libyans have showed that with outside help they were able to overcome the regime. that does not mean that things are going to be easy going forward and libya will look like a perfect scenario, but it does create another model. already, we are seeing in yemen

devolving a bit into an armed conflict. it is not clear whether things will go that route in syria, but it is a possibility. it is a possibility, indeed, that, for example, the divisions of the syrian army would begin fighting each other. there is this fourth division that is very close -- is headed by the president's brother and is expected to remain loyal to him, but we could see the syrian conflict, which has been going on for a long time, and slowly spreading, becoming more of an armed conflict, and that i think will raise questions about international military assistance of some kind. i am sure that the international community has no interest in fomenting an armed conflict in syria, that if we solve poorly

armed divisions of the army citing with the protesters -- siding with protesters against a well-equipped division, that will raise questions. and the fact that if libya is seen as presenting successful cases of international military intervention, that is going to raise a question about syria and about whether there should be some form of military assistance. and i want to be clear, not at all in the presence scenario, only in this an area where an armed conflict developed inside of syria. i think there are a lot of implications for the other rebellions in the arab world, and there are a number of countries, notably algeria, in which we have not seen much yet, that has a model of

leadership that is somewhat similar to the model of the ship -- of leaderships that are being overturned successfully in other arab countries, and are growing to be questions about whether there is going to be spillover. two other panelists want to comment? >> i think this scenario you pay for series is a possibility and would be a horrible mistakes, the protesters, for the international community, for everybody concerned. why do i say that i say that because the conditions for successful international military intervention simply do not exist with syria. there is not going to be an enabling security council resolution. the russians would block it. and you have the potential in syria for a breakdown -- when

the violence comes, people go for protection to their own community, their own family, and you have the potential for sectarian and ethnic strife in syria that would be catastrophic. if we are smart, we will be insisting over and over again with the protesters in syria that they should not expect international military assistance of any sort. they have to keep on the nonviolent track, it has serious potential for success, but it may take -- >> it is an unhappy scenario, but i wanted to point out, because it might go that way. i am hearing from the syrians that that might be a possibility. >> i want to bring up the role that turkey has played, which has been rather extraordinary given -- and is part of the

overall evolution of turkish foreign policy caucus the role that is played in helping rebels in libya, financing then quietly. it is part of a broader role that is played in africa. i want to keep in mind that the turks will be part of keeping syria from going in that direction. it is one thing to finance and assist a rebel movement across the mediterranean. it is a whole other thing to have it on their doorstep. they will play an important role in helping encourage the syrian opposition maintain discipline and despite provocations to avoid evoking the type of armed conflict. >> i agree they would not want to do that, but they have had difficulty defining their own positions. with libya, they were initially

supportive of gaddafi, and with syria now, we saw the foreign minister make a trip there and make an effort which was utterly rebuffed by the syrians. i think it is a very challenging situation for turkey. other questions? >> i wonder if anybody would like to speculate about why the success stories in the arab spring have all been in north africa, particularly since there is not much evidence of a great deal of interaction between the three. any comments? >> i do believe that there has been contagion in the long

standing hypocrisies in north africa. i'm not puzzled by why it has happened there. [unintelligible] >> they were ripe for that. >> perhaps also, there is the factor that i cannot help but think of bahrain, when you raised the question, an uprising that was put down temporarily. i do not think we have seen the end of the opposition in bahrain. the countries in north africa were not next door to a large arab country like sour -- like saudi arabia that was willing to intervene in all kinds of ways,

including militarily, in order to put down these uprisings. other questions? >> thank you. >> can you speak up a little bit. >> a question concerning the external influence, which was addressed before. i would like if possible for you to expand on the possible role of russia and china when it comes to the influence of economic influence. >> well, you know, you can expect the chinese to what some of the oil action, and that is why it is important to

establish a level playing field for oil and gas for libya. first, russia is a concern. i have not seen the same kind of concern about libya from the russians that you see about syria. syria is something that is very serious about. in a certain very real sense, libya is just a gas competitor to russia. in that sense, maybe a little on welcome in its return to the market, but that is part of the game. i think the russians will adjust to that. for europe and a gentler, been able to diversify by taking libyan gas has been an important factor in the european gas market. >> we also have to think that most of the oil and gas of libya is already a kitten or

established. the real bounty that there is a scramble is the money that comes from the oil. libya cash's it's well and then goes in the conflict. is because of this money coming from oil would be spent here and there and somewhere else. >> construction, infrastructure. >> buying of weapons. that is the real issue. it will be difficult to take it out from where they are located. it might, but i would be surprised if they do not. the rest is under negotiation. it is easy for someone to promised contracts to everybody.

>> china had a very large investment, and it was a major issue for the chinese. they took large losses in libya because of the uprising and they had a big problem evaluating tens of thousands of chinese. >> they took them out -- body was appalled by the show of efficiency by the chinese because they shipped somebody -- everybody out very quickly. they are very very strong in construction. >> to follow up, china has proven itself to be remarkably flexible and pragmatic in this crisis, not only voting for the u.n. resolutions to pass, but china was the first country to buy oil from the rebels.

$120 billion worth, and they are already positioning themselves and had made very clear in recent days, high level statements where they expect to go back and continued their contracts and expand upon it. it is unusual that china supports a rebel movement, but here is the case where national interests, economic growth, and studies -- steady supplies of oil and contracts for chinese businesses trump's and ideological aspect of the libyan conflict. >> any more questions from the audience? i want to -- one issue. this question of the return of the libyan assets. over $100ing at well

billion in libyan assets, many of which are invested, but there are significant liquid assets. we have seen the security council committee approved the transfer of $1.5 billion from the united states to the transitional leadership. italy is not pursuing being able to pursue transfering $500 million to the rebel leadership. what are your thoughts in terms of how this should be handled, how quickly money should be, the money that is liquid, should be returned to libya, how it might be monitored, and so forth, or whether it should be returned? daniel, you made the point that there is a danger of too much money too soon, but we also hear the concern about

getting resources quickly to the transitional leadership. i would like to hear any of the panelists who would like to comment on this issue. >> they have to have money, but they should not have too much money, and what they get should be handled transparently and responsibly. you can rely on them to voluntarily do that. i do not think that is so wise. the security council resolution that lays out requirements is the right way to go. i do not know -- >> are there good models for that? >> there are lousy models for that," oil for food, but they because they were

imposed on an unwilling regimes. you could get the tnc to agree to some measures for accountability and transparency. my reading them is that they are the kind of people who would be amenable to this. >> yes, i agree with him. i it is important that some way is designed that this money is given to the libyans with a clear budget and a lot of transparency. whether it is going to be a commission that decides where the money goes -- it should not simply be given, also because it would put strains on the tnc. many people did not want all that money right now because it would put pressure on them which would be disrupting. >> the important thing, in

addition, is to get the institutional capacity to absorb. libya certainly needs that infrastructure, not just because of the structure of the war, because gaddafi is deprived the country for four decades. there is a technical expertise that has to be put in place. otherwise all the money in the world will only cause a hyper inflation of the cost services without delivering value for the money. that has to be put in place. that is where i think the international community, europeans, the closest there, but also the united states, can help with the technical capacity to put up a framework of where this money might be spent wisely. >> i think the italians are behaving the best, and nobody

has gone to the minister of finance and has asked for that money. they say the money is coming, but it is not. they are promises, an iou, and it is interesting to see how they will deliver its. >> are there any other questions from the floor? one more. >> if the panel could address the question of the libyan diaspora. what role will they play in the post-gaddafi libya? >> i think we're all very good and we see our country go back to democracy and freedom. the role of the gas from -- of the diaspora will be relatively

limited. i do not thinking the political lives ship will come from us. we do not know what it has meant to be under gaddafi for 40 years. our legitimacy is undermined by the fact -- the emotions, and that people have to understand the emotion. that is a major factor for legitimacy. the leadership has yet to come. it cannot be jibril or these other people. it has to come from the ground. if i may have a minute for this. i see the good in this point. having elections will be good because it will allow the beginning of a competition, the

beginning of an emergency of a new leader, a new people. whoever is in that moment will run the country. we have to find a way in the debate in the new assembly to find a way to reconcile this necessity -- with the other big problem of libya that we have to face, which is the problem of national identity. libya needs to be reconstructed and harley. libya is an idea that has been killed in the last 40 years. the libyans have to be told about -- to be allowed what it means to be libyan. it needs to be a centralized effort for unification. effort for unification.