from former education secretary. he will cover a wide variety of issues and topics. we will also talk about the role of unions following the recall of governor scott walker in wisconsin. then, we look at watergate for one hour. the 40th anniversary. that is it for today's show. tamara's show starts at 7:00 a.m. we hope you have a good day -- tomorrow's show starts at 7:00 a.m.. we hope you have a good day. goodbye. "q &

>> next, hillary clinton talks about equipment supplies in syria. and richard lugar discusses the disbursement of u.s. foreign aid and money. and what it is like to lead developing countries. secretary of state hillary clinton said the attack helicopters sent to syria may escalate the conflict in that country. the secretary made the comments at her joint appearance with shimon peres on tuesday. the helicopters were not new, but were repaired by a company in russia.

this is just under an hour. >> 10 years of support for the saban institute. we are especially appreciative that so many of you who have been involved in the work of the center are here to join us here today. we especially want to welcome senator feinstein, a justice prior and the ambassadors of israel and the united arab emirates for honoring us with their presence. when i asked haim how he would

like to be honored, he at first refused. then he said it should be in the saban center tradition with an exchange of ideas about the middle east. when i asked who he wanted to speak, he asked -- he answered shimon and hilary. it is a great testament to their reputation. thank you for joining us today for this conversation.

we should go straight to the conversation. i am not sure what the protocol is. since shimon is such a shiver as gentleman, the deal so sure he would agree that we should start with the lady. [laughter] so, madam secretary, i wanted to start by asking you about syria. you have done an incredible job dealing with the world's problems.

tell us what is your approach, what is your strategy for trying to deal with this tremendous brutality we seem to be witnessing going on from day to day. >> first let me thank you and brookings and haim and cheryl for being here. i am delighted and honored to be with a longtime friend. i am not alone in say i admire him greatly. i appreciate being able to talk about some of the issues we are addressing together. what happens to syria matters greatly to the united states and it matters to israel.

how we work through the many devotees that are posed by this unrelenting, brutal crackdown carried out by the president assad regime and the military will have far reaching consequences. let me make three quick points. we continue to support kofi annan's efforts because he represents the united nations and the arab bleak. it is unprecedented to have a joint special envoy speaking for two organizations that have common interests in trying to bring an end to the violence and helped to precipitate an shepherd through a political

transition. the six point plan that former secretary-general annan has laid out is a good plan. of course, it is not being implemented. the attempt and rejection of the first principle of that plant has been a grave fault on the lives of the syrian people and on the international effort intended to bring an end to this ongoing conflict. kofi annan is trying to put together a group of countries that includes russia to work on a road map for political transition.

russia has increasingly said it was not be sent to president assad and it would work on political transition. there are always a lot of caveats that they want to impose. i met with kofi annan on friday and we talked through what his strategy would be. he said it would be hard to try to implement it. the red line included iran and we thought that would be a grave error. we know that iran was actively been soaring, a leading, encouraging the regular army and the militias that are engaging in sectarian conflict.

we have a timeline in mind to canif this effort of kofi's be successful. the altar limit is in mid-july to c a b -- the outer limits of that is mid-july. if there is no discernible movement by them, it would be difficult to continue the mission. secondly, the challenge faced by so many of the neighbors in the area is what one can realistically do to try to bring an end to the violence without seeing an increase in the

activities of certain elements of the opposition. this could lead to even greater violence and the likelihood of the civil war we are all trying to avoid. we hear from time to time that the turks are meeting with certain elements, the saudis and others are trying to figure out how to support those under the assaults of the syrian regime. it is quite challenging to deliver on that. there are lots of weapons on the black market. there is money available. there seems to be increasing capacity in the opposition to defend themselves and take the fight to the syrian military in a regular way. there is no doubt that the onslaught continues and the use

of heavy artillery and the like. we have confronted the russians about stopping their continued arms shipments to syria. from time to time, they have said we should not worry. everything they are shipping is unrelated to their actions internally. that is patently untrue. we are concerned about the latest information we have that there are attack helicopters on the way from russia to syria, which will escalate the conflict dramatically. there seems to be a massing of syrian forces that we have gotten information about in the last 48 hours. that could be a red line for the turks in terms of their strategic and national interests.

so we are watching carefully. finally, i would say that parts of the reason this is part of the -- reason this is complicated in the face of the rejection of what the president assad regime is doing is that there is fear in the region about what will come next. you have not had a wholesale departure or support of major players in the syrian society. we are approached on a regular basis by representatives of different groups in syria who are terrified of what comes next. i do not know how else to say it. how we manage the political transition, assuming we could manage a political transition,

how we provide reassurance and some level of protection to christians, kurds, sunni business leaders and the like, how we prevent a massive inflow of refugees across the turkish border, how we protect lebanon from getting caught up in the sectarian divide that afflicts them as well as syria -- if these questions had so apparent and actualizing answers, i would certainly -- self apparent and actualizing answers, i would certainly share them with you. there has been a painful analysis of how we can push the president assad regime out and create a transition that gives at least some possible reassurance to those who fear what comes next.

with that, i will stop. >> the israeli army is 40 kilometers from damascus. you are a deputy chief of staff is in the papers warning about the danger that syria's chemical weapons could do getting into the wrong hands. what do you think can be done about it? >> i want to thank cheryl and haim. with them, i feel at home in matters of peace and matters of social justice. i want to say a word or two about hillary clinton, not just my personal admiration, which is tremendous, but the uniqueness of our role. never before did anybody in

history, man or woman, travel thousands and thousands of miles from place to place, not because traveling is such a great pleasure, but because she has an unprecedented response ability. we are dealing with international relations. hillary is dealing with global responsibility, which is a different thing. when you have international relations, she has to face people all around the world with individual differences. occasionally, people are leading the government or the government is leading the people. in a world where governance is

weak and their main instruments have been taken away from them -- the control of the economy and control of security. since the economy became global, no country can really affect it. the same with terror. it is global and it is wild. it does not have an address. hillary clinton is trying to fill the gap by creating alliances, by finding a common basis. the administration was not built to handle its bank -- built to handle it. in the middle east, you have to think about many things, not

one. the future is permanent. i do not doubt that we do not have a choice. we have a transitional situation that is not the same for all countries, but different for every country. a doctor came into the hospital and told the nurses -- there is no temperature in the middle east. you have to have every occasion to deal separately with syria. the bravery of the syrian

people is admirable and unbelievable. people are facing fire every day. a dictator that kills children. the most shocking photograph is to see a small coffin and a child in it. our people are reluctant to see where press -- to say where president assad will go. there is no alternative. at this time, i want to express my admiration for an arab to fight for their own freedom and for their success.

the arab league took responsibility against an arab country. it is a joint venture between the united nations and the arab league. now you know this occasion. what is your proposal? you do not want anyone else to come in because this would be foreign intervention. the united nations will support you. syria is a complex case. let their representatives do it.

let them take responsibility. them -- let'sort support them in any way we can. we would like to help. right now, this should be the decision. what can the russians do? the russians are accused of intervening. no single country can do it bank without being accused. the arab league should -- no single country can do it without being accused. the arab league can and should do it. >> just following on from that,

i wonder if we can shift to the palestinian issue. the status quo between israel and the palestinians is unsustainable. it looks from day to day like israel and the palestinian authority seems to be satisfied with the status quo. in your view, is the status quo sustainable? >> there is a movement. it was said that in israel, foreign affairs are an extension of the domestic situation. the domestic situation is a result of the outside world. we cannot separate ourselves from the global world.

it is moving. between us and the palestinians, there are positive examples. in order to make peace, we have to build a nation. the palestinians started to build a nation with american help. secondly, the palestinians have never had a course of their own. in the middle eastern towns, you do not have forces. now palestine as a force, 16,000 trained by you.

i think abbas is a serious man. he and i signed an agreement here on the white lawn. it was presided over by bill clinton. 19 years have passed. but you cannot make a baby become a boy in a short while and the boy become a grown-up person. it is growing. now is the time to make peace with the palestinians. the palestinians understand that

not everything happening in the arab spring is necessarily in time. the important thing about the arab spring is that the arab youngsters understand that the situation is not a result of the conflict between israel and the palestinians. what is happening in syria has nothing to do with israel. what happened in the tunisian has nothing to do with israel or libya. -- what happened in tunisia has nothing to do with israel or libya. the palestinian-israeli conflict does not excuse the actions. in t middle east, that are doing important things.

-- they are doing important things. being a dictator in the middle east became totally uncomfortable. people voted for the elections. if he does not have a solution for the economic problems, it does not mean much. if they do not have a solution for the security, the elections do not mean much. 60% of the population has the future that is theirs.

they want freedom. many of them have opened their eyes. in tunisia, many of the demonstrators were sick and tired of being discriminated against. if you discriminate against women, you discriminate against your people because you allow only half of the people to participate in building the nation. if the women do not have a chance to be educated, the children are an educated. for that, you do not need money. you have to reform. i wish and i pray that the young people will succeed, not because of us, because of them.

>> it sounded for a moment like shimon was channeling hillary clinton. do you want to pick up on the women's issues in the arab spring? >> i think it is too soon to tell. i think shimon is right. you have a transition we are going through to get to whatever future there will be. it is not going to happen quickly. it is going to have some bumps in the road and difficulties along the way. one of the important indicators as to how the whole process of and politicaln reform is going is the way that

the newly formed governments and their allies in the various countries treat women. to that end, there is mixed news. there is some positive news. there are certain guarantees being put forth about women's rights and opportunities. but there are some worrying actions that do not match those guarantees. that raises a larger issue. shimon is right. democracy has to deliver. a lot of what was behind the revolution in the middle east and north africa was economic aspirations that were not being

met, outbreak at corruption, the difficulty of doing business -- outrage at corruption, the difficulty of doing business, the absence of jobs even if you were at an educated person. there has to be a level of economic returns for people, a leap of faith and investment in a democratic future. that is going to be extremely hard. everyone in a country that is making these changes has a lot of work to do to open up their economy to go after corruption and the like. at the same time, the political reforms that are occurring and the commitment to democracy, albeit it unformed and not yet clear in the minds of leaders

and citizens, is raising a lot of issues. for us, democracy is not one election, one time. we are not sure how others see this democratic enterprise that they have signed onto. democracy is about building institutions. it is about extending rights to everyone, protecting rights of minorities, ensuring that people are equal under the law, establishing judiciary's and all the rest. -- judiciaries and all the rest. it is not just what is happening to women although we will keep an eye on what is happening to all women. it is the democratic development. we are trying to encourage the countries pursuing this to keep

reaching out, learning from the experiences of others. most recently, the post-soviet nations and latin america. we come with 236 years of experiments and people in the region may not think we are a relevant example. we have encouraged a lot of outreach to countries under dictatorships and totalitarian regimes to find common cause with their experience. we all still have to have a certain love all of humility and patience. we have to call out at any turn developments we think endanger the democratic enterprise, the consolidation of power, a fornication -- authoritarian tendencies, and the like. we also have to realize we did

not have a straight line. there were changes we had to do as we move toward a more perfect union. we did not include everybody in the first run. we excluded women among others. we had to fight a civil war to extend citizenship to former slaves. we have to be honest enough to recognize that time has sped up and to some extent the work that has to be done to build the new democracy is much harder today than it was after the berlin wall fell. every single move is scrutinized, spread around the world through social media. it is really hard. even if the people involved are coming at us with the best of intentions, they are going to face a lot of setbacks and challenges to their decision

making and other problems that will make what they are attempting to do in the economic and political realms difficult. women are the canaries in the mine, as people have said before. how they are treed, whether they are included, will tell us a lot about what we can expect from the democratic movements that are ongoing. i think we have to do all we can to support the right tendencies and decisions in order to get the right outcomes. >> thank you. mr. president, less shift to iran. >> there are a gentleman who are more optimistic about women than hillary clinton. when asked who is against

equality in the middle east, i will say the husbands. [laughter] they do not want to share an equal rights. [no audio] -- converts from being a muslim to a democrat. it is not the case. it is a spiritual position, not

an economic footprint. i am more optimistic than you are. i think one should watch a combination of the women and the youngsters. others may find themselves all of the sudden impressed. they want to give a boost to the future. that is mine optimism. >> i will ask you a question about iran. [laughter] >> i am not just a gentle man. >> in 1981, you were opposed to the use of preventive force

against iran's nuclear program. when you look back on that, what were you thinking about that at that time? >> in history, we have friendly elections. i am asking myself, is it just because of the nuclear bomb? what revolts the world against iran in the 21st century? iranian leaders are the only

ones who want nuclear terrorism accepted in the name of religion. iranians do not say the hegemony should be arabic. they want to say muslim because they are muslims. we see the way they want to construct by sending money, hanging. we cannot support it. the world cannot support it. putin and let met say, we cannot support a nuclear -- and med vedev say we cannot support a nuclear iran.

we cannot allow it to happen. the second thing is the machiavellian formula. the goals justify the means. you can kill. you can lie. you can murder. it is a human problem. the world is already so complicated. this is a terrible alternative.

wherever there is a chance of gaining the enemy, we cannot agree with that-. - gaming the -- gaming the enemy, we cannot agree with thiit. a single man nominated himself as the deputy. prediction stops. it is a situation where i am not aware of anybody who threatens iran who wants to govern iran.

iran could have flourished without it. who is against iran? we are against a policy that endangers our age. i can understand the united states of america. one can take away the united states -- take away from the united states one thing. the character of your history is not traced in terror. the only army that does not fight to conquer, but fights for freedom and peace. not only for america, but for

the rest of the world. historically speaking, americans are fighting for values. he cannot be caring for the rest of the world and in different to iran. they are taking the american process of democracy and making use of it. the president of hamas represents the deepest assumptions and conflicts of american history. this is a profound, serious, and urgent point of no return. i want to try with non-military means.

america understands that this is the only option. the sanction should be free. the americans are saying there are other options on the table. we are aware of the time element. this is the way i look at it. i do not take it personally as a personal ambition. when nobody threatens iran, iran threatens us. we are one country that is threatened to be destroyed right now. it does not reduce the great danger we are facing. >> madam secretary, maybe you

can tell us about the negotiations. both tracks have put forth a sense that not much progress has been made. is that a fair assumption? >> the point of the negotiations is to do exactly what shimon says. we have been consistent in pursuing a credible pressure track that united the entire world. that was not the case when president obama took office. it now is. it is quite remarkable that not only does the international community in general, but the p- 5 plus 1 have remained as

committed and forceful in the diplomatic negotiations with iran over the nuclear program. as you know, there will be meetings in moscow starting next week, over the weekend. there is a unified position being presented by the p-5 plus 1 that against iran, if it is interested in taking a diplomatic way out, a clear path that would be verifiable and linked to action for action. that has been the approach we have advocated and that has been agreed upon. i cannot sit here today and tell you what the iranians will or

will not do. i am quite certain that they are under tremendous pressure from the russians and the chinese to come to moscow prepared to respond. whether that the response is adequate or not, we will not judge. in the last 10 days, they have been pushing to get an experts' meeting, cushion to postpone moscow in the absence of such a meeting. there has not been a single blinkfrom any of the- -- from any of the negotiators. as you saw in the news, it was said that the iranians would show up. my counterpart was on his way

there. the russians have made it clear that they expect the iranians to advance the discussion in come., not to just we will know when it happens. the unity and the resolve that has been shown thus far is of real significance because, clearly, the threat that shimon outline is real. the the continuing effort by the iranians to extend their influence and to use terror as a tool to do so extends to our hemisphere and all the way to east asia. the threat is real for dealing with the regime that has

hegemonic ambitions. those who live in the near an era of good are well aware of that. trying to manage it and avoid -- those who live in the near area are well aware of that. trying to manage its is one of the -- tried to manage its bank is one of the great challenges we are -- trying to manage it is one of the great challenges we are dealing with. i will end with a story. i was in an area that was turned into a mini las vegas on the black sea. i was talking to one of the municipal officials and ask what kind of tourist season they were expecting.

i said, who are most of your tourists and where did they come from the? he said we have a lot of turks and russians and iranians. he said, if you go to be disco's late at night, there are two kinds of people left. the iranians and the israelis. [laughter] surely, after hearing that story, i walked into a public building, which was a created an impressive advancement. it was one-stop shopping. you go into a public building you get a marriage license, a work license, a passport. i was wandering around being shown this modern technological wonder. i walked into the visa section

and three men came running up to me. they said, we love you, we love you. we are from iran. they said, the people like you. who knows? the larger point in shimon's eloquent and compelling description is that there continues to be this disconnect between the people of iran, which is a much more diverse society than most of us understand or know how to deal with, and its leadership, which is becoming more and more rigid, more of a military dictatorship. there is a lot happening inside iran. keeping the pressure on and keeping the sanctions on and

keeping the world united against this nuclear threat and what it represents to this regime remains our highest priority. we are pushing forward on it and we will see what comes out of it. >> unfortunately, the time has come when we have to conclude. you have both been generous with your ideas and analysis and your time. before the concluding ceremony, shimon asked me if he could say a few words about haim and cheryl. >> it is a privilege to be act the -- be at the saban center. the late king hussein's admired late king hussein admired

haim tremendously. he brought to people to speak together. maybe it was the opening -- he brought two people to speak together. maybe it was the opening of the peace process. what is wealth and what is poverty? i am suspicious that he is not a poor person. he did not become poor in his feeling and this scale. the person who is rich with

feelings and concern is the real rich person. haim has his own imagination, his own charm. and he can charm everybody all over the world. be careful. he has not only charm, he has a wife and children. if that is being charming, he is successful. he cares about peace between us and the palestinians. he cares about peace between america and israel. without any publicity, he can publicize his charity and

giving. that is what makes him a real person and me a confused one. he has money and if he has money and is rich in his feeling, it is good to have money. for 10 years, this institute collected outstanding people and they really are thinking the thinkable and the unthinkable. but you are free to think the

unthinkable as well in america. i want to thank the wonderful couple, cheryl and haim. my weakness for cheryl is greater than my weakness for haim. and outstanding job. trying to bring peace and trying to bring your charmed to those who need your help. thank you. [applause] >> russia's foreign minister has denied allegations that russia is sending attack helicopters to the syrian military. secretary clinton made some additional remarks on the matter thursday during a joint news

conference with the indian minister of external affairs following the third annual session of the u.s.-india strategic dialogue. this is 40 minutes.

the strategic fundamentals of our relationship -- shared democratic values, economic imperatives and diplomatic priorities -- are moving us closer to an understanding and a trust that reflects the convergence of values and interests. to grow and prosper, we both need open, free, fair, and transparent global economic systems. >> we both seek security and stability in south asia and the asia pacific. and we understand the critical importance of a coordinated international response to violent extremism and other shared global challenges. as a result, under president obama's and prime minister singh's leadership, we are forging a new and more mature

phase in our critical bilateral relationship, one defined by near-constant consultation aimed at advancing the interests and values we share, and working through the inevitable differences. there is less need today for the dramatic breakthroughs that marked earlier phases, but more need for steady, focused cooperation. this kind of weekly, sometimes daily, collaboration is not always glamorous, but it is strategically significant. and it is exemplified by this dialogue. reflected around this table are a wide range of participants representing the many topics we are working on together. and we are committed to not only expanding our bilateral relationship, but to furthering the work we do regionally and globally.

in fact, later this week we will co-host an important global health conference on child mortality. the quantity of meetings ultimately matters less than the quality of the results produced. and the effectiveness of our partnership hinges on our ability together to convert common interests into common actions. it's not enough just to talk about cooperation on issues ranging from civilian nuclear energy or attracting more u.s. investments to india or defending human rights or promoting women's empowerment, we have to follow through so that our people -- citizens of two great pluralistic democracies -- can see and feel

the benefits.

finally, we work through some of the issues that we have fielded in common because of concerns about iran's continuing search for a nuclearindia has mt iran must live up to their international obligations and as i reported to congress this week, india has taken steps to diversify its forces of imported crude by reducing purchases of iranian oil. we recognize the important energy needs that and yet has and we are working with india, not only to ensure stable oil markets, but to do more to open up other sources of energy for india. on all of these and other issues come up we are working to

convert common interests into common action. we have to follow through. i was very encouraged by what we heard today. things that do not make the headlines but are so critical, such as yesterday's first ever higher education dialogue making it easier for u.s. and indian researchers, students, and faculty to take advantage of the educational resources and opportunities in both countries and we announced the first grant recipients of the 21st century knowledge initiative. our science and technology joint commission are working on improving our linkages in science and engineering and data sharing. we have a new agreement in the health area to boost research on diabetes and for the first time, we agreed to share u.s. in the open government software combat

promote transparency and accountability with a third country partner, rwanda. the list is long. the minister and i will be making a comprehensive report. he to the prime minister and me to the president, of everything that has been happening and all of the various aspects of this incredibly important dialogue. i want to thank my partner and colleagues in this work for his leadership and his attention that has translated this idea into a very important reality for both our countries. >> thank you, secretary clinton. it is always a pleasure for me to come back to washington, d.c. it is in this city that i have

spent a couple of years of my party interesting interaction with america. i had the pleasure of meeting some of the great americans who have let this country in subsequent years. it is always an added pleasure for me to meet with secretary clinton. i always derive comfort and support from secretary clinton. three years back, we started on this journey of this relationship.

we are representing two great countries. let me convey that we had a very productive dialogue. i want to thank you everyone for their participation. this speaks to the depth and diversity of the engagement, which is ever-increasing. the relationship between our two countries and our two democracies, won the oldest and the other the largest. we expressed confidence about realizing the enormous

potential of our economic ties and addressing the concerns on both sides, which i had outlined yesterday. we welcome the progress, as was mentioned by secretary clinton. i think this should put an arrest some of the interpretations and some of the confusions prevailing. i am glad things are -- expand. we hope more indian and american

companies will get involved in the course of the coming months. the secretary and i support different technology transfers and full development and production and our expanding relationship. i have informed secretary clinton and our willingness to receive a team of officials to visit india to get the mia's from wwii. cooperation in counter- terrorism, home and security, cyber security, and intelligence in recent years

have helped our partnership. india's access in accordance with our procedures for the investigation into the mumbai terrorist attack of 2008 was raised. we recommend a broad portfolio of corporations in clean energy. i also saw a liberal guests and exportation. we agreed to strengthen our programs in higher education, technology, innovation. we have made tangible progress

in these areas. as secretary clinton has mentioned, our discussions demonstrated our shared interest on a range of regional and global issues. we are committed to build the capacity for government and security and to the mock the economic potential through regional integration. we stressed the importance of safe havens in pakistan for afghanistan's security. we discussed the gulf area, including our concern about the growing violence in syria.

secretary clinton updated me on the p5 +1 talked with iran. india is interested in the irani in nuclear issues acetylene through dialogue. there are 6 million indians who live in this area. that is also entered -- important to our economy. we share perspectives on the of the changes taking place in myanmar. since we continue to attend via our dialogue on the area, this is associated --

we affirm our mutual interest in maritime security. secretary clinton welcomed them our growing engagement in the asia-pacific. i welcome the u.s. interest in becoming a dialogue partner. i am told that we will take it forward with other members. our meeting today yet again highlights the global dimensions of our relationship and add new momentum to our partnership. thank you. [unintelligible] >> you and the minister of

russia seem to be calling each other liars. in essence, you are saying that russia is providing helicopters. the word was used on route to syria. the minister denies that. he says that providing air defense systems does not violate international laws. then, he said the u.s. is providing arms and weapons. so, you cannot both be right. who is? [laughter] >> welcome i was very clear yesterday about our concerns regarding the continuing military relationship between moscow and the saudi regime. -- the bashar al-assad regime. we have urged the government to cut these military ties completely. and to suspend support and delivery.

we know because they confirmed that they continue to deliver and we believe that the situation is spiraling toward civil war and is now time for everyone in the international community and, including russia and oil and all security council members to speak to bashar al- assad with a unified voice and insist that the violence stops and come together with kofi annan to plan a political transition going forward. it is something that we believe is in every one's interest, most particularly the syrian people. russia says it wants peace and stability restored. it says it has no particular love lost for bashar al-assad. it also claims to have vital interest in the area and

relationships that it wants to continue to keep. they put all of that at risk if they do not move more constructively right now. i would emphasize that the u.s. has provided no military support to the syrian opposition. none. all of our support has been medical and humanitarian. to help relieve the suffering of the syrian people. a total of $52 million so far. we have also provided non-legal support to the opposition including things like communications gear. the rather than having a long distance debate with my colleague, with whom i work on

so many issues on a regular basis, i would urge that we follow the lead and request kofi annan and try to come together to implement the pillars of his plan including a framework for a political transition. that is what we have been advocating for and that is what i stand ready to do. >> thank you. we're is the relationship between the two countries? what are the messages you art sending and madam secretary coming three years ago you addressed that this is the beginning of india-u.s. -- what will this look like?

do you agree with the remarks that india needs to do more in afghanistan? [laughter] india has a red line in afghanistan. [laughter] india has made a request for giving access. is the u.s. ready to do that? [laughter] >> where to start. [laughter] >> i will try. it is one of those multi-

questions -- multi questions. let me try. first of all, as to the strategic dialogue, we go from strength to strength. we believe strongly and we have evidence to prove that our relationship is deepening and broadening. the extraordinary work that has been done between the last dialogue and today's got so many issues demonstrate the depth of cooperation between our two countries. it is not only government to government. we are bringing in civil society. we are bringing in the idiom -- academia. i believe that we may be surpassing 3.0. we may be onto something that is quite unique and very important.

i appreciate your asking. secondly, on afghanistan, i was briefed on the work that india is doing with afghanistan. we very much appreciate in the's commitment to help build a better future for the afghan people. helping them with more than $2 billion for development and hosting the investment conference at the end of the month. providing security training and support, i am. , very pleased that afghanistan is getting this kind of encouragement and tangible support because it is in every one's interest that afghanistan be as secure and stable as possible. with respect to information

sharing, it is our policy and practice to share information. we do that. m not going to go into details because we think that -- our cooperation on intelligence sharing and homeland security issues, a counter-terrorism has gotten to a new level. it is very important to both of our countries. it is also important that, you know, we support the work that is done by our professionals and our experts in protecting both our countries and i think we are satisfied that that is occurring. >> the statistics dialogue that has taken place between the u.s. in the last three years has been extremely beneficial to

india. the tangible outcome of the broadbased discussions -- we have a lot of officials listed in a statement that has been issued. we have moved ahead in very important areas. i will single out higher education, science and technology, innovation and clean energy. i was very impressed with the way the dialogue on higher education was presented.

not only the comments about the academy -- i think this is an important moment in the most positive direction that not only the two government's are involved in strategic dialogue, but a civil society is also involved. academia is also involved. the people are also involved. i think this strategic dialogue rings that basic strengths and we will certainly continue to take this forward. there have been some useful outcomes that i mentioned about the argument between the two

groups. a shared interest on a range of a regional and global issues added new momentum for the global strategic partnership. let me turn to afghanistan. been a role has always constructive approach. afghanistan falls in the neighborhood of india. we have trade connections and cultural ties with that country and with the people of that country. president karzai, when he came last october to delhi, we signed a strategic partnership with

afghanistan. the whole process behind that is to convey to the people of afghanistan that the afghan problem has to be solved and that afghan leadership -- they need excellent support. to the extent that -- that support will not be available to afghanistan indefinitely. that is the reason why we have done what we have done. we need to equip afghanistan with a security force that is trained by others. i think we will continue to do

that. i'm sure that afghanistan will be able to find a solution within this. >> thank you. madam secretary, if we could go back to syria. i am wondering how bad of relations between the u.s. and russia have gotten. there are some who might argue that it has become as much about the u.s. and russia poking each other than it is about the real issue here. how has this taken away from the real goal? you always say diplomacy is key. if syria is spiraling toward civil war, what does that say about the u.n. observer mission? are you concerned about their safety? will they remain in their same capacity if you are ready to say it is a full-blown civil war? >> i think that everyone knows

we have a very comprehensive relationship with russia. we have worked well together on a range of important issues. the so-called recess that president obama and mendez them dndevev lead hasbet been positive for the u.s. and russia and the larger world. we disagree on syria. that is not the only issue we disagree on. it is one where people are being killed every single day, where violence is escalating, where the government has engaged in these brutal assaults against unarmed civilians, including children, we disagree.

we were encouraged when russia, along with the other members of the security council, supported the kofi annan plan and we have been working very hard with many nations to translate that plan into tangible steps that can be taken. it is clear that the voices of the entire international community need to be clear in the message to bashar al-assad and that it is time for him to participate in saving his own country from a downward spiral into even greater violence. as part of special on by kofi annan's plan, that involves a political transition. we have had numerous discussions and we are

remaining hopeful that kofi annan will be able to bring irrelevant group of nations and multi a national organizations together to find a way forward. we will state our position very clearly and support kofi annan and we do so in part because we are worried about the u.n. mission. we think that the events of the last week where un observers have been put at risk, even in positions where they were attacked intentionally or unintentionally in the midst of the conflict are worrisome. i have talked about this with kofi annan. he does not want to put these brave men and women who are

trying to help protect civilians into situations that are absolutely untenable and dangerous to them. so, all of these concerns have to be addressed and i think it is time for the international community, including russia, to come to the table and be constructive in trying to find a way forward. >> thank you. i have one question. mr. minister, my question is on economic linkages between india in the u.s.. there seems to be pressure on india to open up access to some of its markets more rapidly. also, some disappointments with the decisions in the nuclear sector and defense sectors. how would you explain the

india's views on these matters and on the flip side, did you carry the u.s. side on concerns that india might have regarding u.s. policies that affected economic interests? madam secretary, do you when you stood at the same podium in 2010, you describe your relationship as an affair of the heart. there have been various ups and downs. until recently, there was slow progress on certain issues in india's concerns might be about protectionism and the wrong questions. given the strong stance that both of these countries have on issues of mutual interest, do you see any changes that you might propose to the models that the u.s. has for this relationship? they usually have ups and downs.

that does not make them any less heartfelt. or any less of a commitment. i feel as strongly today as i did two years ago. i think that it is always a temptation to zero in on what the differences are. that is understandable. it certainly is to be expected by the press. that is part of your job. whether it is one country or another or in particular, india, i always look at the totality of the relationship. i would be never in a position to say we do not have differences. how can two great nations with our history and our political systems, incredibly chloral is

democracy's not have differences? that would be strange. there is no doubt that our values and our interests are converging. we have a view of this relationship that is in keeping with the perspectives and history is that bring us together in the 21st century where we are finding so much more common ground that we are working on together. i am very positive about our relationship and we will continue to work through the differences. >> i am conscious of the fact that there is a degree of skepticism regarding the

remaining sentiment of business and economic content of our relationship. i have listed some of our pressing concerns in my speech yesterday. the i have also been sensitized to the concerns articulated by u.s. business. in times of uncertainty for the global economy, expression of such views are not unusual. however, as i said yesterday, the indian economy will restore investor confidence and regain

momentum. i have great confidence in the future of our economic partnership. our trade investment and innovation are growing in both directions. our defense and high-technology is ever expanding. indian plans to invest more than one trillion dollars on infrastructure development in the coming five years will provide enormous business opportunities, which the u.s. companies can consider exploiting. openness and growth in the u.s.

economy will also support other economic ties. we have -- everyone who makes investment in india -- there will be a level playing field and there will be total transparency. with these two elements, i am sure that a number of companies from outside india will be willing to participate in this great government will journey that india is setting on. i am sure that the u.s. and india's strategic relationship will be helpful in this journey. >> thank you.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> this morning from the u.n. -- u.n. observers in syria have suspended their activities and controls today because of escalating violence in the country. the head of the mission said this is the strongest sign yet that an international peace plan for syria is disintegrating. increasing bloodshed poses significant risks to the lives of 300 unarmed observers in the country and wasn't he their ability to carry out their mandate. the observers were sent to the country after international on boy -- on foia talk about a

cease-fire. both sides have staged attacks. the observers have been caught up in the silence on several occasions. >> something from the white house staffer, that was an exceptionally expiring "once you realize the magnitude difference you can make in public life, everything else will pale in comparison. >> someone from the white house said "those who think they're crazy enough to change the world are the ones that actually do. said choose carefully and execute relentlessly. too many times we find ourselves taking too many things on and not focusing on the one thing that should be a top priority. >> every year, the u.s. senate youth program bring students to washington for a week of government education. kamoie made anan des moine

impact. what is it -- >> what is it like to be them? what could i share with them that i wish i had known all along the way or that they will remember when they leave washington week? that is an intense experience. if you leave a few key encouraging messages, at a time where it is very easy to be cynical about politics, it is a good thing to encourage young people to pursue public service. >> more with him sunday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> outgoing republican senate he -- senator richard lugar is concerned aid money will go to a climate change programs rather than education or food assistance programs. the foreign relations committee ranking member was speaking at a conference this week posted by usaid. this is just over 25 minutes.

[applause] >> good morning. thank you for the overly kind introduction and for not just hosting us for these next few days but for the deep and meaningful partnership that georgetown has displayed in partnering to produce frontiers and development. it has been a team effort with the georgetown staff, the team, the fall leaders, and the incredible experience that has been part of the georgetown family. i wanted to recognize that this really is an example of a wonderful public-private partnership with partners like the bill and linda gates foundation and others. they're all coming together to

recognize the development is changing and we had a unique opportunity to craft a new approach. we come together and listen carefully. >> we did not try to open the panel with five -- we are thrilled to be in the presence of president of malawi and liberia, go solo -- kosovo, former president of ireland, and prime minister helen clark, ahead of the u.n. development program. those are just in the guests on

the next panel. this will be an amazing few days. if we all take the approach that we are here to listen and learn from experts in that so many different walks of life and we are here to celebrate the ideas they have to share with us -- we know we will hear from talented leaders. i want to take a moment to thank our usaid first chief economist. he has helped us in still a culture of discipline out around a more quantitative and economic growth oriented approach to development. he is responsible for pulling this together. when he came to me about one year ago, the concept was that never before have we have -- have we achieved so much together in global development.

in order to live up to the promise we have come articulated by secretary clinton and obama when they take action to elevate development as part of our foreign policy. we have to have a new partnership model where we recognize that those abroad, whether they are wealthy or less wealthy than our nation, are our partners with ideas that must and will lead the way to the future. a partnership requires a broader slice of american society. and it is a recognition we need

-- recognition we need to innovate more. in an age where technology transforms the possibilities, we have to be on the cutting edge. even if that means taking risks in trying things to different. each is about to live bring results. the results today are profound. -- delivering results. the results today are profound. the spread of democracy and freedom and human rights is embodied in the leaders that we have here this morning. what the economists call the largest success story and development recently, the rapid decline in unnecessary child deaths around the world and with an aspiration across our country of people who want to commit themselves to this mission,

including students at georgetown and around this country. our mission is not necessarily to have all the answers over the next few days. it is to start asking questions. we get usaid on behalf of a community of development experts are eager to listen and learn and to change based on what we hear. that leaves me with the introduction of this morning to attacking the speaker. everyone here knows senator lugar and what he has accomplished through his career. he has long been a champion of what is possible when we project america's leadership around the world in the right way. when we tackle the tough problems, whether it is nuclear threats, food and security take food insecurity, stressed to welfare, or dealing with national security challenges. in his 36 years of service in the senate, he has focused the

attention on these incredibly challenging problems. and many people thought that they were not solvable it. he goes out and creates the political bases in the operational model to solve them. he has never been afraid of the world's bravest -- greatest threats and has led the charge on many of them. he has always realize that our nation's strength lies not just in this ability to wage war, but in our capacity to create peace. for that reason, we are deeply honored to have senator lugar here. there is another reason, as well. as many people would recognize, when you aspire to be in the field of contributing on the international stage into international affairs, senator lugar has been one of the most powerful role models of success. i know that this campus and i know that our administration is

packed with people who have come to this place of service looking to senator lugar as a role model. a role model whose efforts will be deeply felt for decades and decades to come. senator, we are very personally grateful that you are here this morning and we welcome you to address us. senator richard lugar. [applause] >> thank you very much. thank you. it is certainly a great pleasure and a great honor to join you here today in the

frontiers and development conference. i appreciate being honest and innocent campus this morning i want to thank everyone for that kind introduction -- kind invitation and doctrines. we must recognize economic challenges that cast a shadow over development opportunities. let me get my glasses. these economic challenges cast a shadow over development opportunities, investments, practices about liberation.

the u.s. continues to struggle with unemployment rate of more than 8%, our national debt today is approaching 16 trillion dollars. the efforts to contain our budget spiral are complicated by financial pressures from an aging population, lanky military engagements, and sometimes partisan politics. many other countries, including -- many other partners face even more stringent economic circumstances. amid these financial threats and budgetary realities is annette -- is inevitable that some will question the role of the u.s. and global development. a few members of congress argue that all foreign system should be eliminated.

a larger number would preserve the systems to israel and some other politically popular elements but would downsize most of the development aid. almost everyone expects that the u.s. foreign assistance funding will be constrained for the foreseeable future. this may be true. certainly planner said usaid may be engaged in efforts to squeeze the maximum value out of every dollar available. i would assert this morning that development assistance when properly administered remains a bargain for u.s. national security. and for our own economics and moral standing in the world. even in the worst of times, the u.s. remains a wealthy nation with interests in every corner of the world.

foreign assistance is a key component of the u.s. national security strategy. especially since the tragedy events of september 11, 2001, it is evident that poorly governed states with impoverished populations can pose grave threats to our national security. nations that struggle with severe poverty and corrupt government are at greater risk at terrelle -- of terrorism and instability. wars and extended military operations are enormously expensive in lives and dollars. we have spent hundreds of billions of dollars in recent years fighting wars and preparing for military scenarios. if properly targeted, foreign assistance programs can mitigate national security risks. and improve u.s. connections to

peoples and governments. they may wellave the huge military expenditures down the road. this is a reason why the defense department has been a strong advocate of a robust foreign budget in the u.s. beyond the national security inheritance, i strongly agree that no global superpower reclaims to possess the moral high ground can address global disease, hunger, and ignorance. more than any other nation, the u.s. possesses a prediction no moral identity. that identity is associated with religious tolerance. democratic governance. freedom of the individual. promotion of economic opportunity. and resistance to oppression. this set of ideals is in our

founding dr. and spent reaffirms the sacrifice of our civil war. it was exemplified during two world wars in which the u.s. opposed conquest. it was invigorated through the struggle of our own civil rights movements. our moral identity has been eliminated by a rhetorical tradition that flows from thomas jefferson and abraham lincoln through the woodrow wilson and to the present day. rarely do we take a major foreign-policy initiatives without some attempt to justify it on moral ground. wehrli are -- rarely are foreign policies spirit based on moral conditions. i am not claiming the u.s. is the moral leader. i am just saying no nation is

more closely associated with moral precepts. no nation is just more meticulously according to its own articulated values. as an adorable -- as an observer, i believe this is a good king. i believe our moral identity is an essential source of national power. despite missteps, the u.s. has been and still is a force for good in the world. this is indisputable from any objective point of view. in most respects, we have been an incredibly generous nation. -- continue to help the soviet union. we have helped countries such as south korea and taiwan move from extreme poverty to impressive prosperity for our assistance

and our protection. our democratic institutions and political and social freedoms have been models for the world. we have actively helped to nurture democracy in numerous nations. even americans themselves do not fully appreciate the international impact of the sales set by our transparent the degreedebate and p.m of -- our advocacy is one of the prime influences for human rights improvements throughout the world. it is telling that china and other nations often cite their indifference to human rights issues relative to the u.s. when seeking to establish economic or security ties of a problematic nature. the u.s. makes sacrifices every day on behalf of human rights.

our this -- our state department devotes time and energy to producing reports on human rights that are steady around the world. i would assert that as a moral nation, founded on moral principles, we diminish ourselves and our national reputation if we turn our backs on the obvious plight of hundreds of millions of people, or living on less than $1 per day. and facing severe risk from hunger and disease. and this is not to say that every human being or every country in a desperate circumstances is our responsibility. the u.s. must be a leader in forging the global partnership and developing the most impressive practices to achieve development goals. beyond our own programs, the efforts of other nations and

many non-government groups depend on the u.s. for direction, support, and validation. as we move forward, it is critical for each of us to make these arguments. we should not be hesitant, even in this budgetary environment, to make the national security and moral cases for pure development assistance. further, we should be forthright in explaining that diplomacy and developments our two disciplines. although diplomacy and development often can be mutually reinforcing, they may have different priorities. resource requirements, and time horizons. most obviously, diplomacy is far more concerned with solving immediate problems. each is associated with countries who have strategic

interests. we hope that our development efforts will sometimes yield short-term strategic benefits, but this is not their primary purpose. in a developed context, we are willing to take a much larger view of the world and devote resources to countries of less or even minimal strategic significance for the moment. we are willing to allow the diplomatic and national security benefits of developments to accrue over time and we are willing to engage in missions for altruistic reasons. these differences highlight why development must be a goal that is independent of diplomacy, not nearly observant. to maximize our efforts, we will meet robust partnerships. well historically, non- governmental organizations and contractors have been partners,

we must go beyond these traditional relationships. we should be expanding coordination with other governments, foundations, corporations, and small businesses, inventors, and others to contribute value. with partnerships built from the ground up at the earliest stages of program development in sound financial structures for sustaining them, we can leverage scarce resources for maximum results. we also must embrace transparency in foreign assistance programs. we should be forthcoming about where taxpayer dollars are spent. what goals they are meant to accomplish. and what -- whether these goals are achieved. secretary clinton made an important commitment to transparency.

with the development of the foreign assistance-board and the announcement that u.s. could -- the implementation of such efforts should be accelerated to demonstrate our full commitment to transparency. this is vital not only to provide tax payers a clear picture of how the money is being used, but also to reinforce u.s. leadership in transparent economic development. transparency helps level the playing field for u.s. companies, counters the propensity of resources best which the developing countries towards wasteful spending, and, that's the corruption that the world bank is the single biggest obstacle to economic and social development. towards this end, u.s.

government should be moving forward with full implementation of the 2010 garden-lugar amendment which requires all companies listed on the new york stock exchange to publish their payments to foreign governments for oil, natural gas, and mineral development. [applause] to year to fully implement the language would squander an opportunity to transform the development scenarios of resource rich countries that are now admired -- that are now in poverty. while foreign assistance require significant time before demonstrating impacts, funding should flow to programs that demonstrate results. our programs can only produce results when they are developed

with results in mind. i read this because a percentage of foreign assistance funding to some countries is moving away from traditional purposes. including education, food security, and disease prevention, towards climate change. i have expressed concerns about individual usaid komen change spragg koretz -- project. -- climate change projects. i am someone who does not attempt to diminish the potential impact of climate change or the opinions of scientists who have researched the subject. i am concerned that the climate change project is amongst the least likely to offer measurable development results and the most likely to be politically motivated. i do not doubt that some of these projects will produce results and some may be a top

priority. i also understand that some climate change projects are focused heavily on food we except that development dollars should be going to projects that produce the most monstrous or results for impoverished people. -- the most demonstrable results for impoverished people. people suffering from malnutrition and disease. we should demonstrate that those dollars produce a better results relative to agricultural development and disease prevention. i hope that usaid and the state department will be examining climate change product under -- projects under exacting parameters.

the united states should maintain a unique leadership role in global food security. throughout our history, we have developed crop land, improved efficiency and technology, and enormous increases in crop yield. i have seen these on my own farm in indiana. we have developed efficient systems for the distribution of agriculture products for trade and humanitarian purposes. our agricultural universities are the best in the world. they continually improve seed production through genetically modified organisms. they have reduced the impact of pests and diseases. we can perform extremely well in this sector. we continue to lead the world in our shipments of humanitarian food assistance, and have begun to focus on extending our agricultural knowledge to the administration's feed the

future initiative, which strongly support. further, agricultural results are close -- subject to close measurement and can be the basis on which other development sectors are built. i believe that all of these factors translate into an american comparative advantage in global agricultural development. we should be leveraging this to maximum effect. i appreciate very much the necessary -- the deep expertise in this area. i anticipate even greater food security achievements by usaid in the coming years. i applaud the commitment that each of you has made to global development. many of you have been engaged in development work under difficult circumstances. i admire your courage, your compassion, you are still -- and your skill as you continue to find ways to develop results and come together to share that wisdom with each other.

i look forward in every way to supporting your work during my remaining months and the sun at and in the coming years. i say simply, more power to all of you. thank you very much. [applause] >> at the same confident -- conference, the presidents of liberia, malawi, and kosovo describe what is like to lead their countries, and why women are better leaders than men. judy woodruff moderated this panel, which also includes the president -- former president of ireland. the event is an hour and 25 minutes. [applause]

>> good morning, everyone. i am judy woodruff of pbs. i am extraordinarily honored to be here this morning with such a distinguished panel of leaders, and to be participating in this important conference on the future of development as it intersects with democracy and the issues of security in the 21st century. at a time when the world is growing not only more complex but more and more interconnected, we know that it is more critical than ever to pay attention to the needs of every country, for, as we have learned, as one nation and its people are in distress, there are repercussions for the entire region and, ultimately, for the entire world. this morning we are so fortunate to have with us three current and two former heads of state, all women, who play or have

played instrumental roles and leading their own country through historic transitions and key hurdles in the development. of the 197 countries in the world, only eight of them today are led by women. to have three of them together at one time is unusual and a great opportunity for all of us here. each one of them, as you can imagine, has an important and distant vantage point based on her own experiences. it is nice to be able to say that. we expect to learn from each of them. i will briefly introduce them. beginning on up my immediate center -- on my right. the president of malawi, joyce and that. in the center here. -- joyce banda. [applause]

to my immediate right, you recognize her, alan johnson- sirleaf, the president of liberia. -- ellen johnson-sirleaf, the president of liberia. [applause] to my left, the president of kosovo, asif data -- atifete jahjaga. [applause] on the far right, the former president of ireland, mary robinson. she is today the president of the mary robinson foundation for climate justice. [applause] and on my far left, your far right, the administrator of the united nations development program, administrator helen clark, the former prime minister

of new zealand. [applause] so it is an extraordinary group. i want to begin with an unconventional question before we get into the very important topics that we are discussing this morning. i want to ask each one of these leaders to give us a fact or two jiabao your country -- a fact or two about people of your country that may be many of us to not know. president johnson-sirleaf, i will start with you. >> liberia is a country that has experienced two decades of civil conflicts. this resulted in dysfunctional institutions and destroyed infrastructure. young people were bypassed by

education and training. for six years we have tried to fix it. we have got the young people back in schools repairing infrastructure and insuring that institutions function. we solved that problem. a country that has dealt with lack of confidence and lack of hope that now sees a future in which each one has a stake. a future in which they can participate. i might say, one that has ambitions to become a post- conflict success story. >> wonderful. [applause] president jahjaga, what about posso? what you love about your country?

>> kosovo is a country which had a war and conflict about 13 years ago. we are just celebrating in my country the 13 years of the end of the conflict and the war and the entry of nato troops who have been supporting peace and stability but also the international community. they're playing a tremendous role in the process of state building for my country. the past 13 years have not been easy, particularly in the beginning. trying to get over the consequences that were left out of the war. hundreds of thousands of houses were destroyed and burned. thousands of people had been killed. over 20,000 women had been

raped. it has been a very difficult time of trying to cope with all of this. but at the same time we are trying to build the country in order to overcome this consequence much quicker. today, 13 years after, being the first woman president, it is something i am so proud of. every time i go out of the country and come in the country, i see the youth of my country. kosovo is not only the youngest country in the world, but has one of the youngest populations , about 60% of the population from 26 to 35. these are well-educated, well- trained. it is an obligation for me and all others in my country to

provide a better future for them. i will find peace and set out the proper foundation so that this young population has a better future. >> thank you. [applause] the president of malawi, but joyce bond that. -- joyce banda. >> i come from malawi, a country of 13.5 million people. 60% live under the poverty line. but one thing about mali -- malawi is that they are very clear about what they want. they are in a country for three years that have lost direction, where leadership was corrupt,

where leadership was abusing human rights. what i love most about my people is that they are clear about what they want for themselves. they had been denied the opportunity. they stood firm and respected their constitution. we had a peaceful transition. here i am. [applause] >> the head of the united nations development program, helen clark. >> i come from a small country that is probably best known for being peaceful, but we to have a history. going back to the 19th century,

when after a treaty signed between the indigenous people of new zealand and the british, when the treaty was not respected and a civil war broke out. indigenous people who fought that war were the losers. it led to land confiscation and a lot of discrimination over many years. but i guess the last 40 years, new zealand has been quite preoccupied with reconciliation, reparation, restoration of dignity in every respect. i think that we offer some experiences of how to overcome a difficult past through very clear policies of inclusion and reconciliation. thank you. [applause] >> finally, the former president of ireland, now the head of her

own foundation addressing climate justice -- mary robinson. >> i was growing up in the west of ireland. we always thought of the next parish. i do have a passion. i put it in terms of the fact that women tend to be more intergenerational. we tend to think of women -- children and grandson -- grandchildren. i have an urgent sense that they will look back at this time and think, how could they have been so neglectful? why do they not understand the urgency of dealing with issues of development, a huge population increases, security -- the kinds of issues will be talking about. there is an urgent need for leadership.

in the 21st century, i think a lot of it will be women leadership. we do have a more of a sense of purpose in leadership. that is what is needed. the issues we're discussing -- we are discussing them, i hope, in an innovative way. there are the issues that need to be dealt with. that is a challenge. >> thank you. [applause] we have heard from each of the three heads of state about some of the stresses and the tensions in their own country, their own region. president sir leaf, i want to start with you. tell me about the main hurdles a country faces in moving from conflict to post-conflict and continuing on a path to democracy. as you know, our focus is

development in the context of democracy and security. >> in managing a post-conflict country, almost everything is a priority. you have to tackle some many things at the same time. perhaps the greatest hurdle is managing the expectations of a young population that has been bypassed by education and skills. giving them hope. enabling them to know that they have a stake. making them productive citizens again. bringing back their confidence and their dignity. if you can manage that, then i think you have the chance of being able to address that and all the other shortcomings. >> some more than budgets --

obviously, money matters. u.s. and that the high expectation -- you say that the high expectations, it is the job of a leader to address that. >> in a post-conflict environment, when -- patience runs out, you need to go beyond that. you need to be able to transform people. to be able to insure that the things you have done to mobilize resources began to effectively apply so that you can improve their lives. that is a challenge. >> what about that, president jahjaga? what would you add to the main challenges facing them? >> i have to agree with president sirleaf. there is not any unified form of how to address these matters, but the community has to be a

part of every process, from day one. they have to feel a level of confidence within the leadership, but they have to also have some of the accountability and responsibility. it is not just the leaders. it is within the community. it is not possible if it isot received and accepted by the community. in my own country, we have a lot of progress. kosovo has been viewed as a success story by the international community. but still, if i go back and see a 13-year -- 13 years ago, how far we have done, we could have

been much further today if we had done -- if we had included the community. the population is part of the process. for example, in our country of the people from high education have not been a part of the process of the developing of the country. they have been employed by international companies. but that is a short-term solution. that is not a long-term solution. the best solution is the continuation between the community, the local leadership, and international partners. if we really wants to get the best of the process. being accepted and being received. >> president banda, what about you? what you feel is the most

challenging piece of this transition from conflict to post-conflict? >> in malawi, i think the problem is that the whole economy was near collapse. the people were living under very difficult conditions, said they hoped, when new leadership's came, that things would change. they expect that change to come immediately. it is what you do in that transition that matters. for what i have done is to be inclusive, to insure that even to calm down the tensions that existed is to choose a country that contain more parties. to be able to talk to the people -- if people are told the

truth they will stand with you. i have worked with people for 30 years. i believe that leadership is a love affair. you must fall in love with the people and the people fall in love with you. >> we will remember that line. [laughter] leadership is a love affair with your people. >> with a group trust you and loves you, they will stand with you. even in difficult times. in malawi, we are trying to become -- i have said to the people, we must move from aid to trade. that is difficult in a country where people have been dependent on aid to the tune of a 40%. we need to tell the people, we must change the way we think.

we must not forget trade. in order for that to happen, these are the steps we should take. to get the people on board is what is critical. >> what about? >> it is important, but at a time like this, we have to get back on track. most people will pay the price. people will feel the pinch. therefore, quelling make that sacrifice, as we move into the future, we know that you can make sacrifices. for me to get to zambia to see my brother, it takes the one hour. if i do not have a plane, it

will take me to 10 days. zambia is the same. tanzania is the same. when you tell them we are going to get a plane, they know what you are talking about. they want to pay the price together and move into the future together with hope. [applause] >> helen clark, as head of the un development program, you are clearly dealing with many leaders in many parts of the world. what would you add to this conversation about moving from conflict to post-conflict, and where the focus should be? >> our leaders bring up very important points. the first one is to build public confidence in the way ahead. as president johnson-sirleaf said, in these situations, everything needs to be done at once. to get traction on everything at once is hard. people need to understand.

the more inclusion, the better. the more engagement with the people, the better, because for democracy to be deepened and institutions to be built -- a democracy does not put food on the table. it takes confidence in the economy. but having a more responsive government through democratic institutions will be the key to everybody staying together in the longer term. i cannot stress enough this engagement with the people. sometimes symbolic decisions, such as that of president banda -- are important. i got an incredibly positive reaction. >> president robinson, you

clearly had experience in this area of post-conflict. what would you add to this? >> i would say that we need that confidence, but we also, in the 21st century, the innovative partnerships for change. it is happening. even this confidence -- conference has engaged partners engagedusaid and universities. helen, you are increasingly working on the civil societies commission. she is setting up groups of women in different parts of the world -- at regional and local levels -- to create partnerships. that is very much part of how you can try to contribute more women ness -- wmanness to these issues. it is very disappointing to see the preparation, given the

urgency of the problems. given that the 6 billion child is about 13 years old. we have never had this before in the same way. this preoccupies me more and more. i know this is a country where there are different views and different levels, but we have to understand that climate is affecting people. it is affecting development. everybody knows this. we have to do something about it urgently. >> that is a reminder -- there are so many issues, so many balls in the air you have to keep moving as the leader of any of these countries. president jahjaga, getting back to the presence shirley johnson said, everything is important. -- president sir leif johnson said, everything is important. you want to maintain security however you define it.

you do not want to be dependent on the rest of the world forever. how you decide what is most important? >> there is not an easy answer to this question. everything, in the beginning of the end of the conflict, everything is emerging. everything is a priority. you have to face everything at the same time. meeting the short-term challenges will lead you up to the more sustainable countries. my country has taken the lead. for example, going back to the community. people love to see that the country is their own country. the best governing is a joint

responsibility for the proper success -- making it as a joining success. together with international aid agencies, the local institution has taken leadership in the effort that has been made 13 years ago to get into the preconditions of proper life of the people. that is to restore the 100,000 houses that have been destroyed. we have not -- we were meeting proper conditions for refugees, about 60% of the population. these are the conditions for the people to return and have the food and supplies necessary for day-to-date living.

our country has become one of the success stories. we're also trying to resolve the security dilemma. we are restructuring and reforming the security element, from the security force and the security -- the police organization. it had been used as a tool of the repression. the community did not have trust. that -- establishing trust between the force and the public security. at the same time, they have started the process of restructuring the public

security system that will be establishing together with non- governmental actors. this will be meeting the needs of the country, will be meeting the circumstances of the country, but at the same time will allow for a legitimate government based on power sharing models. meeting these preconditions will help address immediately to have democracy develop, to have security develop, and allow the process of state building. >> president sirleaf-johnson, i'm turning your comment of a moment ago back to you. you say everything is important and yet you still have to prioritize, focus security, democracy, broadly speaking.

thinking about development and moving away from the need for development -- how you make those decisions? how you organize? how you approach it? >> it is a challenge, trying to find the right balance between the promotion of sustainable development and growth and conventional methods us -- achieving that growth, and the promotion of democracy based upon an open society in which there is transparency and presentation as key elements. if one wants to reinforce these concepts, that is always difficult. putting them to work, changing work ethics in an environment in

which they are used to being refugees, with the dependency that is a part of that. the two must enforce each other. whether democracy supports development or if development supports democracy. there are bound to be contradictions. there are times when must push the basic things of getting the infrastructure and institutions. it is a society that feels that needs should be met and they should have the freedom to choose. it is -- we choose the path of

trying to first of all stabilize the situation. get the fundamentals in place. then we can focus on freedom in society and the power dissipation -- participation. there is a sense of entitlement and, in some cases, a sense of disappointment because their lives have not changed quickly enough. >> that is the second time you mentioned youth and the concern you must have about how they see the future. president banda, is there one right formula as you think about balancing all these priorities? >> yes. i have -- only six weeks.

[laughter] [applause] >> it does take some gall to ask for these questions when she has been there less than two months. >> we have managed to do so much in six weeks, but it is about the people who are prepared for change. it has been a little bit easier for me. to make some of the decisions that are hard to make. i have found that what is helping -- in my case, four days

after coming to audience -- office, i established a presidential initiative on maternal health and safe motherhood. the second one was the presidential initiative on poverty. i knew that these are the two areas that they are concerned about. in civil wars in africa, 691 women died out of 100,000. every day, i say to the people that is unacceptable. we must not accept women to died giving birth. i also say that you must encourage women and youth to get involved in the production that

helps export potential. in order for people to see that there is something they should look forward to. in six weeks, i have launched the construction of two centers so that women can get to work there so that they do not die waiting -- in the long term, you must begin to show the people that we must change from aid to trade, but also we must change our government institutions. i have deliberately spoken again and again about toughening on corruption and putting into place institutions that would tackle corruption. people did not want to tackle

them. we are centering on economic recovery and institutions, but also we are beginning to bring back the principles that have worked. -- one thing that has really devastated mullions is -- malawians was the breakup of our relationship with the uk. >> we talk about these broad concepts, democracy, government, security, but each of you speak about specific steps you need to take that make those things a reality. is that a big part of what it means to choose? >> absolutely. i spent nine years in my country

at the top of government. you cannot tackle everything at once. you have to be deliberate. what can you do in what timeframe? he cannot do everything at once, but you can put on the building blocks that you then move further on as you have the time and opportunity. looking at the issues which confront countries coming out of crisis, when elections are being held, things are being done -- then the priorities move to how you actually build your government to deliver. that becomes very important as a part of building confidence. you need to build parliament, which is such an important organ of democracy. you need to build institutions which can fight corruption, etc..

the securities sector is extremely important. generally, people have very little faith in the securities sector -- the police, and so on. the judicial has to be built. the work on the basic reconstruction -- it can take a long time to get to the significant interests -- places of shelter have to be built. and then the all-important livelihood. people need to eat, and the need a livelihood. resolving these problems can be quite helpful. schemes that give impact -- income back into the people's pockets and allow the economy to start again. inclusion has been mentioned a great deal. as a priority, public money that is available needs to go into education and skills. we of the huge new generation

which wants to fulfil -- we have a huge new generation that wants to fulfill its potential. if we cannot bring together young people, our societies are in trouble. it is a big and complicated agenda, but you have to act very deliberately. >> president robinson, what advice do you have? as you hear the difficult choices that these leaders are having to make every single day? >> when i was listening, the willingness to be innovative -- i remember in liberia for an international symposium. the president, with the support of the president of finland, brought it together.

it was daring to have an international symposium in a country that was still trying to have a basic infrastructure. that was a big for the pride of the country. it changed some of the dynamics. my sense -- president banda is a new president in a country where she has already made some impact. from time to time, do something bigger in order -- work with partners, outside partners. then you continue in a symbolic way to drive an agenda. it is not business as usual anymore. we have extraordinarily -- people in the informal sector. whether it is the self employed women in association in india,

other very poor people who are working through the numbers that they are. we have to address the unemployment of young people. it has to be done in innovative ways. the capacity to create these new kinds of partnerships -- women are good at partnering and listening to form partnerships, including the business community. it has to take on much more of a role in development. the last thing i would say, judy, because i have to. the commitments of these distinguished women presidents dealing with their countries, each of them have prioritized democracy and the structures of democracy. money is corrupting democracy in this country and is being

followed in the rest of the world. the packs and super pac's are undermining democracy. this is a concept we have to be very vigilant about. [applause] >> bring up democracy at the end is a perfect segue for me. president banda, what is a democracy look like you to the war -- in the world? is democracy still appealing as a form of government? there are criticisms of democracies and the way they work. they are not all perfect, as we know. what does democracy look like to you right now? isn't as appealing as it once was? how you know that it is the right path for your country? >> i have always seen -- each part of the world will have to

develop their own democracy. for example, in other parts of the world, they did not have democracy. they had what looked like autocracy. i do not want to mention the governments. then they forged what they thought was democracy. and what we see now is total chaos. what we want, i do not know, but for us in africa, we are coming up with what we want to do. democracy and a mix of us respecting our traditional and historical models, where we hetchy to respect and have the final say. i am working on this in my program.

the -- that is autocratic, but for me -- yes, democracy is flourishing in malawi. i think each part of the world will have to have their own democracy. >> president johnson-sirleaf, what about liberia? you have a different country from -- you have a different history from every other country. what does democracy look like to you? is it as easy to embrace today as it has been? >> today i think the basic

things we know, the promotion of basic freedom, expression, association. the rights of the people to participate in the decisions that affect their lives. the rights of them to question and ask for accountability and transparency. people have to be very mindful when you talk about democracy being corrupted by money. when i campaigned in liberia, which went to the villages and were hosted by villages. when i campaigned, they had t- shirts and caps --

[laughter] every election you have to take more things. this costs money. but democracy remains the same, we just have to put a check on what is happening, how much to give away. [laughter] >> president jahjaga, what does democracy look like to you? is it the same as what it felt like five or 10 years ago? >> definitely is not the same. democracy at this level today and democracy about four years ago, democracy is quite challenging as a process. democracy by many people can be

understood at the beginning, freedom of expression, freedom of speech. i found it quite often you can look at examples -- in democracy, people expect a quick result. when there is not a quick results they become quite disappointed. democracy is not a process that you start today and finished tomorrow. it is a life-lasting process. it is a process of democracy where you need access to information. the level of interaction between the government and between the people, the governments are there to serve the people. not the people to serve the government.

that logic has to be in focus. the process of democratization in my country has lasted longer than we expected. they have mentioned the issue of the example of democracy. i have the message here that there is no copy pace system. you cannot take a model from kosovo and inserted in burma, or anywhere else. there is -- the international community should come hand in hand with the local government to solve the process of democracy, and not try to impose or force the system. it is not going to work out. everywhere -- the rest of the

world is like this, but albania and bulgaria is like that. the world can see how those changes will reflect differently. in my country, the process of democratization has been done hand in hand with the local institutions and international partners. every process has been planned in advance. the great example -- what worked out in ireland may not work out in the mentality of kosovo. the country has to adopt expertise for their own needs. that has to be translated within the country in order to be more used within the country. >> who should hear that message?

who do want to hear that message to dispassionately shared? >> from the local leaders of the community. >> food you want to hear? >> the international community. we have seen a their mission mandate. there is not a fix emission mandate. it has to be preplanned before reaching the ground and jointly planned with the local institutions within the country. because we cannot function without the cat -- within the country, it will not work. >> administrator clarke, is that realistic about how things work? >> i was going to tackle the question of if democracy is appealing as a form of government. it is the best of all available options.

what is the alternative? to govern without consent? give the people no choice? we see some of our regimes' getting away with that for quite a time -- long time. they typically see economic hardship. then maybe furthering -- further impoverishing themselves with the global recession. another to pinpoint is the role of information and communications technology, which has had an extraordinarily democratizing effect in a number of countries. i think that democracy has safety valves built into it career. --. i think that mary and others are

right to stress the point about being vigilant with democracy. money sloshing around is corrosive to democracy. concentration of media ownership is corrosive to democracy. the challenge is how you provide for the freedom of expression and voice, not becoming overweening because of the concentration of power. >> do you think the international community is prepared to hear the kind of message we this heard from president jahjaga, that democracy needs to work at a ground level? that they need to listen to what the community wants, it cannot be imposed from the outside? >> each country needs a part in design. we go back to the principle that the people have a right to choose who they governed. they can do their own unique ways of doing that. the constitution of kosovo is

not going to fit in with the constitution of new zealand because we do not have one. each government is its own creation. but if it respects the basic power of the people to choose, then that is good. >> president robinson, how about that? how much can a country tailor its own democracy to the needs of its people? how much leeway is their? >> we heard from all of us, that has to be the starting point. to build your community, that is the essential point. the international community should point -- support the way that would develop. a way of assessing a countries are doing in governance -- i'm on the board of the foundation. there index covers countries on

the continent of africa. the countries are being rent for their human development, economic developments, rights and participation, attacking poverty, health. you can see the index, the countries that are making progress. it is interesting to see liberia is coming up in the index. countries like zimbabwe have gone down. this is an index that has the merit of being treated by an african. the creature was born in sudan and is a businessman -- to create toure was born in sudan and is a businessman. he puts his money back into the foundation after investing. we do not measure the

performance of democratic governments very effectively. it is left far too much to rhetorical speeches rather than, what are they actually doing? can you measure services to people? can you measure improvements in health and education? that is what this foundation is doing. i think it is an innovative example. >> we cannot have this extraordinary group of leaders without asking a question about how much difference it makes, or does it make a difference, president johnson-sirleaf, to be a woman in this position. is there a difference in what you are able to do, how you are perceived by the people who chose you -- how you see that? you had a chance over the years to think about this a lot. >> it does make a difference. [laughter] [applause]

liberia has been ruled by men for over 160 years. see the progress we have made in six years. [laughter] [applause] no, but really, i do believe that women leadership brings a certain tension to the management -- a certain dye mention it to the management, that is caring and sharing, that sensitivity to the people that comes from being a woman, being a mother, but at the same time it does not and should not take a way from a woman's competitiveness, a woman's capacity and ability to lead people in a world that requires

a certain amount of qualification and technocratic abilities. once those qualifications are in place, i think a woman -- quite frankly, i think that women are more honest. [applause] >> what about the fact that you are a woman in your position, president banda? you have been their only weeks, but you have had a chance in your previous position to look at this and think about this. >> let me start by saying what happened in washington. the malawi ambassador came to have a meeting with me. he said, what you think that you are going to do differently?

when i was trying to say was that i was trying to communicate my personal conviction about how women look at leadership different. for me, being a leader is about being for the people. i never thought that i would rule, but that i would lead and serve. that is why i talked about it being a love affair. it is a stewardship. that is what i was trying to do in malawi. i worked with people. their agenda was one of empowering women.

i was coming from an abusive marriage and i decided i would do anything i could do to change. i was going to do it. by the time i got into this position, i knew i could do what i had been able to do before. so i believe that being a woman leader is the best country can have. now, in africa, men and women have agreed that they should allow women to participate in leadership. at this point, in my country, the people love a woman leader.

[applause] it is the support in africa that we must give to one another in order to promote and support more women. and it is the ability on the ground that matters. tomowlawi, they don't have make a point or statement. but they do something big for women to build confidence in the people. because when she came, we opened together the clinic -- the maternity clinic. everyone in mowlawi knows i'm not joking about gender

equality. we cannot stand by and watch the people be abused. an allusion was made that only in africa we are going to support george on to to get into leadership. or i'm saying is that in africa it is necessary for us to support one another. we need women in leadership, too. and in the last few years we've had for five women presidential appointments. [applause]

>> next time i'm going to ask you a question about which you feel passionately. [laughter] president, what about you? how is being a woman affecting, changing your ability to lead in kosovo? >> actually, it really does make a change to have a woman in the leadership role. it really does make a change. there is a responsibility of a woman where they have to give more of themselves. they have to show more. and from research it has been found that the woman is vested in the process of the decision

making. why? because they are more inclusive in the process of the decision making and they have more of an ability to listen. which in the process of the decision making you need, particularly in hands of the state. you need that balance of being able to be inclusive, and at the same time being able to listen. you also need to build consensus between the leadership. which is not the case. my country has been lacking for centuries in leadership by the male spirit -- by the males.

also, though women are less corruptible. they know what they're doing and they do it with a fall passion -- a full passion and they have no tolerance toward the negative. i recently started consulting one of the president's about anti- corruption. this is a continuous burning, which is also an obstacle. but having a woman leading the process of fighting organized crime and corruption has been

done well, except by the community. at the same time, the committee has more trust of the woman because the only answer, they say, is they are less corrupt. they are not corrupt. they are doing what they need to do and they do it with full commitment. those are the values that can be found only within the woman. and there are more mobilized within their environment. and the network of the women in dealing with the gender issue, with today's economic problems, it is a problem not only with one state, that has become a global phenomenon.

how we do would is with the proper network, particularly with the woman in a leadership role. >> and you are saying especially with gender issues. it is remarkable to be able to get the perspective of the leaders who are dealing with this every single day. president mary robinson, you have had the chance to think about this a lot, and you have certainly spoken about it a lot. with the benefit of hindsight, how do you see how being a woman changes one's ability to lead? >> it is not that women are better than men. we need balance, obviously. but women lead in a different way. it is less hierarchical. it is more nurturing, you know, all the things that you have been hearing. and what i was elected

president, against the odds, the women of ireland had been rocking the cradle, and were now rocking the system. it was important for me to be a woman president. it was an advantage to be a woman. in 1996, i joined a number of others in establishing something called the council of women world leaders. there are eight of us, and three of them are here right now. the only one i know of that decline to join the club was margaret thatcher. she was not interested in joining this club of women. [laughter] we now have over 40 women that

are either in office, or have been in office as president or prime minister. this means we have a critical mass of women not just at top levels, but as leaders of trade unions and leaders in business. the house to begin to make more of a difference. a number of them -- it has to make more of a difference. a number of them are involved with the way that women naturally network. in my own foundation we have a network called the toregas + network of -- troika plus network of leadership. we have established a top-down troika plus meeting and platform, an innovative thought from of leadership.

and the nobel is an example. when there were enough of them, 45, they got together. it is -- four or five, they got together. it is now an institution. the men had been together for a long time. it was not part of their thinking. but they actually got together. this is where women can be more creative. >> administrator -- prime minister clark, you have been asked about this a lot. what would you add to this conversation? >> we have all been the first to be elected by the people to the positions that we have held. we are acutely aware of the barriers to getting there. the chief of them being is that the public has to actually envisage -- envisioned a woman

in the world. when there has never been a woman in a row, there is a glass ceiling and one could talk -- in the world, there is a glass ceiling that want to talk about at length. not everyone has been a saint and not everyone has been caring and sharing. >> just the ones here today. [laughter] >> in general, i think there is a material difference, but i suppose many people have seen brilliant performances. not everyone of them have been caring and sharing. [laughter] but as a matter of principle, women should be equally represented in positions of power. the women society should hold us to account to make sure that we deliver for the win that are there and not pull the rug0 out from under us.

if fundamental connection with society which is not shared to the same extent, that is, whatever our society is in and, women and of taking more responsibility for the care of the children, older and frail relatives, and being very connected with the needs of people. how does the health system work? how does social protection work? have my kids got a job? in the end, we see women much more attention to these kinds of issues and services because of that personal connection. >> for the last question, i want to bring it back to the subject of this conference, at least a big part of it, and that of course is, development. i want to ask each one of you what you see, whether it is the west, usaid, both government and non-governmental agencies that think about and work on development, what do you want

them to look at? what do you need and want in terms of development? what do they need to know about your country and your people that would make it much more efficient and effective as a process? let's start with you, president johnson. >> to recognize that our people, particularly in rural areas, are intelligent, if not educated, and they know what their needs are. and they know what best will help them to change their lives. we as governments should listen to them and should construct our

programs to meet their needs as they see it, as they identify it. that brings the best results. >> has that not always been the case? >> that has not always been the case. [laughter] but it is changing. i think that it is today being recognized by all and the evolution of commonization and the establishments of government in consultation with their own people is the order of the day. we have reached a level where we see full compliance with this principle. but i see that we are moving in that direction and we encourage everyone to move at an even faster pace. >> what is it that the west -- is that a message that the

developer been communities, the development organizations -- is that a message for the development organizations here? lot of preoccupation among partners over results. the results that some leaders in some countries are looking for going to be seen not tomorrow, not next year, but in a generation's time. i think that for the development of systems, which is a relatively small amount of the total resources that go into development, it needs to focus on capacities, institutions, build and resilience, beckoning well-founded strategies, and being prepared to explain that to the stakeholders in the

country. the most worthwhile things will take time to achieve. quick results may not be sustainable at all. have faith in these leaders and invest in their capacity to change the country. >> president, from your perspective, being in office for a little over a year, what is it that the west, the development community, what do they need to know about what you want and need and where you want to go? >> now, we are coming to the stage that we need to invest in the frontiers for the future. we are the frontiers for the current date. but we need to identify now the frontiers for the future. we need to invest in the future.

we need to continue building up relations between these countries, particularly into the western, of particularly achieving the long term goals of the individual countries. and that can be done -- the best investment is with individuals, is with the countries. we have to get leaders for tomorrow. if you are really going to save one country, you need to invest in the people, education, training, the capacity building. it is time today that we need to develop the frontier for the future. >> having spent a lot of time thinking about these areas, are these kinds of messages the

international aid community, the international development committee seek are they hearing these messages? >> -- the development community, are they hearing these messages? >> i do not know if they have heard, but they have to be beyond frontiers. they have to be innovators. this is beginning to happen. european countries are cutting their aid budgets, unfortunately, because of the eurozone crisis. i do not think the u.s. budget will increase dramatically in the next few years. it is less money now than real partner in. i happen to be officially designated among a group of elders to tackle discrimination among women. how can 10 elders do something?

traditional practices can sometimes subjugate women and the harmful practices. and we need to move from that to child marriage. 10 million girls i gear are married way before they should become law or are ready for it physically or emotionally. it affects their health. they died giving birth, etc. what we did is we looked to see in every region where people were looking -- working locally on the issue, they have never been able to come together. we have created a global partnership call girls, not bribes. now there is a global partnership. ngo's are extremely important. i remember here in washington meeting with donors a few years

ago the first year and you told them, i welcome you in my country, but what on earth are you doing and you have to meet my priorities. that has been a problem with development, sometimes presidents don't know what ngo's are doing in their country. they come in with something on health or education and it does not have to be government controlled, but there has to be leadership bottom-up from the community that has to be managed by a good democratic government. the money will not come in the same amounts, so we need better partnering. >> as our newest leader, i will be the last word on what you need -- what it is you want the west to know, the united states to know, the international community -- what do they need to know about the needs of your country as you see them? >> first and foremost, to call

upon the international community to recognize those countries on the continent of africa, and in particular at this point in time, mowlawi. that has come out that they are prepared to follow the democratic government, to correct the government's record, the human rights record, to recover the economy. we have taken steps -- i am selling my plane. [laughter] we need the international community to meet us halfway. just last week i went from one end of the country to the other in allawi. -- in mowlawi. [unintelligible]

i said, no, honey, close your eyes and imagine those be in stones thrown at me 12-month down the line. [applause] this is just to say, as we make those bold decisions, the international community has to recognize them and meet us halfway so that we do not disappoint the people that are there and ready for change, that are ready to do something about their situation. the people of my country are not just waiting for handouts. they're looking -- but they are looking for support. and finally, i'm sitting here because of usaid. five years ago i walked into the office of usaid in mowlawi and said, i want to do something for women. i came from abuse.

i know a lot of them are out there and do not have the courage to walk out. the partnership we have forged has lasted this long. it is imperative for mowlawi, as well as africa, to support within, but especially -- to support women, but especially in leadership. women must get into leadership. go to parliament. in parliament, i championed the passage of the domestic violence bill. we were only seven women. we worked throughout the night. i had to go to the women of two villages to show parliament that they were there and working. it is very important to have a woman sitting where the laws are

made. thank you very much for the support i have received thus far. thank you. [applause] >> from my perspective, it has been a remarkable discussion and conversation with these extraordinary -- five extraordinary leaders. as we go to a break, which is what i understand is next in the program, join me in thanking each one of them. the president of mowlawi, the theident of liberia cu,

president of kosovo, a former president of ireland, and the former president of new zealand and now the administrator. let's thank them all. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] supreme allied commander for europe and second assistant to president obama discuss the relief force in afghanistan, hey, somalia, -- haiti, somalia, and yemen. this is about an hour. >> we welcome people going on line to browse the panel to

submit your questions and/or for your favorites. look for these cards in your folders. -- and to vote for your favorites. look for these cards in your folders. it is my pleasure to introduce our next speaker. the first ti i met the admiral at a dinner, the first question he asked me was whether i had read proust or not, which is how i knew he truly embodied the idea of a soldier/scholar /statement. he had deck -- decades of experience leading direct combat missions in theater across the globe -- haiti, bosnia, some of the places we heard about earlier in the panel. and he also guide our military strategy at the highest levels. the nato's supreme allied commander of europe as well as

the leader of our european command. he has been a leading force in the military on a lot of topics that we are wrestling with over the next three days. we could not think of a more fitting candidate to be here with us today to talk about the collectively attacking these issues of security and doing so in a way that really moves us thoughtfully for. please join me in welcoming the admiral. [applause] >> thank you very much. good morning, everybody. the first, i want to thank the administrator for letting me come and take just a couple of minutes to set up. i think it will be a great panel with some extraordinary

views to share. generally people see a military guy from the pentagon with a power point presentation and it has created a fair amount of problems around the world. [laughter] i assure you, this is a very easy presentation to get through and i would like to do it and about 10 minutes. i want to use a couple of images. there is no part of the government in which the images are, frankly, more evocative than in the world of development. what i will do today is just show you some of the challenges of thinking about development in a conflict dual situation. it and then i will try to talk a little bit about some of what i think are the relatively creative ways of thinking about it at the department of defense. if i could have the first image, this is libya, which many people in this for were involved in. i will offer this as an example

and attempting to do humanitarian work trending toward development in a zone of actual open, welton conflict. as many of the practitioners here know, we saw about 1 million refugees in this situation in camps, in tunis, egypt, niger, mali, and going to the north into italy and into spain as well as france and to greece. about one person in seven in libya has become a refugee and in need of international assistance. and yet, we are in the midst of a very active campaign. at this, of course, is afghanistan, which is a place that i am engaged today. we have the nato alliance, 28 nations as well as troops on the

ground in a total of 70 nations who are engaged in one way or another with development. here we see not only the complexity of the desperate need of development, but we also see a very virulent insurgency compounded by this image, which of course, is a copy. this is a our products. -- is poppy. this is narcotics. this is similar to the challenge we saw in colombia. i offer these three images to set the stage for what we all know, which is the extraordinary difficulty of doing the strategic mission of the rubble and that you are executing with the tactical work that we are trying to do to create some level of security so you can do your work. your work is what in the end will determine success or failure in these places. we get that. we want to support you and if

there is a single message i have for you today, it is the importance of defense as trying to support development and diplomacy where we can. next, please. i also think a lot about these two images. in the upper left argon boys and girls were receiving aid. the bottom -- our young boys and girls who are receiving aid. the bottom right is a child soldier. this is a supply chain that we cannot allow to connect, both from a security perspective, i humanitarian perspective, a sociological perspective. our goal is to support your efforts to make sure those two images do not connect. and we heard a lot from heads of state and government about the youth.

what are trying to do about it? we're working on some things in the department of defense. the first one may or may not surprise you of it. it is the idea of studying and learning languages and understanding the culture of these places in which we go to work. we take our example in this regard from a.i.d., from the department of defense. only about 8% of the department of defense speaks a second language, for example. i have chosen your to use the resto. we are working hard to increase our ability to understand and be able to create and -- to communicate both directly and also to understand history and culture and literature, all of the salient aspects of the culture. if we can do that, we can far more effectively support you and your work. we're also doing some fairly

creative things as we work with local security forces. these are afghan soldiers. you should look at this photograph and say, that is an odd photo. because they are all holding books. if you know anything about afghanistan, you know that sadly, the literacy rate in this demographic, 20-30, is very low. it is only about 50 to 20% because the taliban withheld education -- 15% to 20% because the taliban withheld education or the opportunity to learn. so you should say, why are the afghan soldiers all holding books? the answer is because we are teaching them to read. we, the nato training mission afghanistan. we have taught 200,000 afghan soldiers and policemen to read. go write a going to novel like marcel proust.

but they are functionally literate. they are hungry for this knowledge. if your a man or woman in afghanistan and you can read, you put a pen in your pocket, and when the graduates of the reading course, again, 200,000 so far, about 70,000 in class's soul -- right now. when they graduate, we put a pen in their pocket. that is an extraordinary moment to watch a young afghan man or woman to take that and as a symbol of literacy. we are also teaching them to fight. that is our job. but we have to take a broader, more comprehensive approach to try to create security. this is an example of it. another way in which our security sector is trying to be helpful to diplomacy and development is the use of hospital ships. i can talk quite a lot about this.

this is from my three years as commander in the southern command. i was stationed in miami and i was focused on military to military relations throughout latin america and the caribbean. comfort sales throughout the caribbean and the pacific and does patient treatments, about 300,000 every time she goes on a voyage. we work very hard to support the u.s. aid programs and the state department programs. this young boy was photographed in nicaragua. anybody remember that from the 1980's? now it is an american hospital ship there. manuela ortega said the americans come now with ships of peace. that is an extraordinary statement from a latin american leader, particularly in nicaragua. this young boy came with his mother. they walked three days to come

to an eye clinic. he was very near sighted. they put the vision goggles on him and for the first time he looked around and he said come -- and said, mama, i see the world. that is a terrific story about a real human moment. but in the end, has a pragmatic affect, which is to help deliver security by demonstrating compassion and confidence, along with the capability to conduct more traditional military operations. next, please. this is a view of the world according to twitter. if you look closely, you will see purple lines, which are tweets. the density is the darker purple. you will see green lines, which giorgio locations of twitter

users. the white is the synthesis of those two. it is the points of intersection between the social network and the physical world. i show it to you, first of all, because it is an interesting way to look at the world and the regions that are developed in this sense, and the less developed. and i would make the point that from a military perspective in areas that are less developed, we can help. we can support through infrastructure, logistics for my information. we have the ability to reach into those bases. and secondly, all of us as we work together on development and diplomacy and defense, we need to be in social networks. it is terrific to publish articles in the journal of "nobody actually reads it." [laughter] and i have published a few of those. but to exist in the world to date, you have to be in these

social networks in the largest nations in the world -- china, india, facebook, the united states, twitter, indonesia. [laughter] we need to move better and connect in this world as well. we are trying to do that in partnership with all of you. this is a busy slide. i will not dwell on it, but it wraps up this approach that i am discussing, which is if you look on the outside, of course, this slide is geared to afghanistan. and if you look outside, you see the flags of the nations represented there today doing the comment and defense and diplomacy in afghanistan. inside that, you see the logos of international organizations that are engaged. appropriately at the top, the united nations, the european union, using nato over there. you see then the interagency is, the capital level organizations like a id -- like

eight and dissident organizations and others. and then you sit private-sector. i would argue that we've kind of guided on international. we understand interagency. the big thing we have to be working -- and again, we heard a lot of it from heads of state and government here. i see it all the time with the way that raj is moving a.i.d. it is private-public. we are working on ways that we hope will be supportive of what is done by you in the lead in the development community. we call this the comprehensive approach. it simply means international, interagency, private-public -- bringing it together. next, please. this is the image we want to create. we do not always succeed. we fail. we cause civilian casualties.

we are reducing those radically today in afghanistan. and yet, we just had a terrible incident last week. a civilian casualties in the first four months of this year are down almost 50% above those caused by the coalition. 85% of the civilian casualties are caused by the insurgency. one is too many. this is the picture we strive for. we do not always achieve it, but in the end, we can achieve this if we lend our support to the efforts of the development of community. next, please. last image. life is not an on and off switch. i think we all know this. you know this within your own lives. you have to kind of dialogue in a little bit. i would argue that your defense establishment is not an on and off switch. what i mean by that is, we do

not simply go into barracks or go all out -- go off and you are out combat. we have a lot of capability in the middle, and logistics to my information, medical, all of the things that i have talked about -- logistics, information, medical, all of the things i have talked about. it is not just hard power or just soft power. it is finding the dial and setting it right, so we can support the development communities as you do. this is what is in the hands going to cause the strategic success. that is your charge, and our job, to try to support you where we can in these theaters of conflict. i hope we have a chance to talk about that on the panel. with that, it is a pleasure to be with you today. thank you. [applause]

>> i am from the pbs news hour and i am joined by the adderall, we just heard from. to -- by the admiral, who we just heard from. to my left, gail flynt, special assistant to the president, senior director at the nsc.

and the director of partners for democratic change in yemen. and to my right, the admiral, and the senior associate at the center for strategic and international studies. admiral, i loved that picture of the hospital ship in nicaragua. in the 1980's were minding the harbor there and now we are sending hospital ships there. it was a lovely distribution of change that we cast our military to -- ask our military to make. you have to take on skills you were not taught much in the academy. >> i think the force has adapted and fairly well to this.

we're always trying to improve our ability to work across the spectrum from, as we talk about the last slide, from the hospital ship, which is a pure example of soft power, to our significant role in combat. the key is being able to move across the spectrum and take on intelligence information, security, logistics. another thing that we can do is be helpful in communications, in setting up, and providing that early on. yes, we are moving along in the skills and we continue to hone our combat skills, but we find that in today's world, we will not deliver security exclusively

from the barrel of a gun. >> you spent 20 years traveling in africa and elsewhere around the world, and there are more conflicts because the world has become a naughty or and more complicated place in the last 20 years. how does your experience in for what you are doing now inside the white house? how have you seen the state of the art helped to bring change to the most complicated places on earth? >> it has changed a lot, and in a positive way. the big difference between the field and headquarters, in the field, you get a sense of how long these transitions take, or how complex it is to pursue development objectives in a post-conflict setting, but also how rich and diverse it is. but also, when you are in

washington, the pressure is on to find faster solutions. there is always that kind of tension. the changes we have seen are in the understanding that while development is an aspiration, it is also a discipline. i find across the administration we have seen enormous changes in it usaid, for example. working with all agencies, in the case of haiti, i think we found across the board that we were all driven by compassion and a need and an interest in responding to a disaster so close to our shores. but it was also driven by a discipline. in somalia, one word that points to the change, it is even getting to the case of development disciplined to relief. in that case, making sure markets did not completely collapse, even with a situation of famine. it is the kind of expertise

being deployed across the spectrum that i see as the biggest change. that, and it is a much bigger feel that it was when i started. >> yemen is a place still struggling to form a coherent and working civil society. is it tough not only to stand that up, but also to speak to your own people in a way that gets to where you need to go, but also is not weighted down by who is helping you? there is a high degree of suspicion in yemen about the outside world. help is not seen as ambivalent good. health is good and held as bad. horicon tax are in the outside world is also complicated -- who

your contacts are in the outside world is also complicated. >> it is difficult in yemen, particularly in the conflict -- conflict areas. i have been working for the past eight years, and surprisingly, people know to help them. it is incredible in tribal areas in yemen because usaid has done a lot of great work in terms of providing support to my improving health, services and education in these areas. one of the things repeatedly mentioned by the group's that we work with that we have found very helpful is that usaid funded and help to the training of midwives. in that sense, we have been branding usaid in our projects in those areas.

it has not been a major issue for us. >> recently, there was a fascinating frontline special on television here about a network of invisible lines drawn across the map of yemen where when you cross then, suddenly who is in charge, what they want, what they want to have been locally is very different >> absolutely. we work across all lot of trouble sensitivities, political sensitivities, cultural -- tribal sensitivities, political sensitivities, cultural sensitivities. we spend a lot of time understand in the context, mapping, building relationships. after we have built relationships, we also have to continue to maintain these relationships, even after we have finished our project. we work and almost 40 districts in the highest conflict areas in

yemen, the tribal areas. you connect to the people. you create the leadership. i come back to what the president of mowlawi said earlier. you have to create the kind of love relationship with the locals. i have certainly been in a love affair with the tribes for the past eight years. it has been a great experience for me. my lesson learned is that you have to spend time to get the no-get to know the people, to get the answers -- to get to know the people, to get the answers. >> there is a four letter word that maybe does not come up in your training very often that maybe we should be thinking about, love.

there is a widespread perception that billions of dollars it spent in bringing relief to conflict zones with very little to show for it at the end, with very little in return. can you give us examples where the international community has successfully intervened in a way that leaves everybody better off at the end of the process? >> if we have the billions of dollars that we really needed to do this -- i will not comment on that -- but i do think there are many success stories. let me bring up the case of columbia. -- colombia. we learned many lessons in that case. local partnerships, security and development, those are very important. we understood the concept of local partnerships. we built up security forces in a way that made them professional

and responsible, but on the development side, we also listened to what the local needs work. we listened to the people who were the victims of the insurgency, the victims of the coca growers. and we began to understand the nexus of security that was necessary for international vomit. -- international development. and yes, we spend a lot of money. we also had the involvement of the government and recognize that this was a shared need. that combination basically set a template for other places in the world. we talk very highly about this relationship decorated doctors

and partnerships in other areas. -- that created partnerships and other areas. >> in 1991, a book was written about columbia called "the status country -- by a canadian . if you think about the balkans 10 to 15 years ago, they were on fire. 8000 men and boys killed in two days. 100,000 people killed total, 1 million push across borders. chaos spreading across the region. an extraordinarily difficult situation. it is not perfect today, but slovenia, croatia are members of

nato. albion is a member of made up -- allegany @ is a member of nato. montenegro -- albania is a member of nato. montenegro is moving forward. people are now resorting to violence to sort out problems. -- not resorting to violence to stop problems. that is the big change in the balkans. and that is another area of the world where we see the elements successfully moving us forward. >> these kinds of interventions are often accompanied by conflict on the ground. conflict creates the humanitarian disasters rather than the other way around. in contrast in doing this kind of work in countries where, as joanna points out, in colombia that government was on their side try to help her but there

are other areas where people control the water works, the electric grid, and they do not want people coming to help to succeed. >> i think we have a lot of those situations. but back to the point about yemen, and i like your point about love, because i think it factors into that as well. even in the most complex environments, there are ways for skilled people who listen and to talk to people where they are and not where they should be, and it may not even be the warlord or the head of state, but the community leader, the doctor, the midwife through whom he can work. the challenge is the cases were that is a chronic situation. we are dealing with a longstanding humanitarian crisis

in south sudan. and even with independence, we are very far from being out of the woods. the somalia is a case where there is no government and the circumstances there, there is an overwhelming reliance on humanitarian since -- humanitarian assistance. but even there, the international committee was able to assist to bring it from famine to relative security. that is because really smart people, including a lot of local people -- this is not all the experts and relief workers i come from outside to find ways to get through the cracks. >> we talked about building trust and some of those organizations you showed in your slide, admiral, have shown how difficult it is to get it

corporate identification with one side or another in a conflict. all they want to do is help people, but they are perceived by people in the middle of the conflict as having a certain history. the united is -- they can perhaps boiled down that identity. the united states navy, not so easy. you cannot build down the american identity, but you guys are in -- are the guys with the machines and the stuff to make a difference in that situation. how you deal with that? >> we, in the military, need to go into activities like this with a sense of how we can help and how we can support, and we need to listen to our development experts and say, you know, probably not a good idea to have that type of development equipment here. better to come in light and do

this. take the advice of the development experts. as i mentioned in my presentation, we're working very hard to learn about culture and language. in afghanistan, for example, we have created a project called the pakistan-afghanistan organization, which is a group of people that will study the history and culture and work in that area. third, we need to be more sensitive to the dollar and agencies when they do not want to work with us for one reason or another -- more sensitive to the development agencies when they do not want to work with us for one reason or another. some international agencies say, no, we will not get anywhere near a military unit. we have to be perspective -- respective of that and if they get into trouble, provide security. we have to listen, be respectful

and try to be as helpful as we can, recognizing we are not in the lead in this area. we are in support. and in the end, i think we are capable of doing those lessons and working very hard to do so. >> you have people in charge to go to be in charge for a long time. and they are taking a view of their country as it is, and as it may be, that involves getting people help so that maybe they can be associated with it down the road. but a frightening and quite disturbing aspect of the current state of play is that there are people in charge of places that are ready to see widespread civilian deaths. is not in their interest to make sure things have turned around quickly. we see that in the war fine level of civilian deaths in somalia. there is an aspec o