services they depend on. we know potential homebuyers have gotten fewer mortgages and small business loans have been put on hold. we know that consumers have cut back on half of all ceos say the shutdown and the threat of shutdown set back their plan to higher over the next six months. just the threat of the fault of america had not paying all the bills we owe on time increased our borrowing costs which adds to our deficit. of course, we know the american people lost frustration with what goes on in this town has that's not agher. surprise. the american people are completely fed up with washington. when our economic recovery demands more jobs, more

, we have yet another self-inflicted crisis that set our economy back. and for what? there was no economic rationale for all of this. past four years, our economy has been growing. our businesses have been creating jobs, and our deficits have been cut in half. we hear some members who pushed for the shutdown say they were doing it to save the american economy. but nothing has done more to undermine our economy these past three years than the kind of tactics that create these manufactured crises. you don't have to take my word for it. the agency that put america's credit rating on watch the other day explicitly cited all of remainsying our economy

more dynamic and resilient than other advanced economies and the only thing putting us at risk -- and i am quoting here -- repeated relationship. that is what the credit rating agency says. that was not a political statement. that was an analysis of what is hurting our economy by people whose job it is to analyze these things. that also happens to be the view of our diplomats who have been hearing from their counterparts internationally. some of the same folks who pushed for the shutdown and threatened default claim their actions were needed to get america back on the right track, to make sure we are strong. but probably nothing has done more damage to america's credibility in the world, our standing with other countries, then the spectacle we have seen

these past several weeks. it has encouraged our enemies, and has emboldened our competitors, and it has depressed our friends who look to us for steady leadership. the good news is we will bounce back from this. we always do. is the indispensable nation the rest of the world looks to as the safest and most reliable place to invest, something that has made it easier for generations of americans to invest in their own futures. we have earned that responsibility over more than two centuries because of the dynamism of our country and our entrepreneurs, the productivity of our workers, but also because we keep our word and meet our obligations. that is what full faith and credit means.

you can count on us. today, i want our people and our businesses and the rest the world to know the full faith and credit of the united states remains unquestioned. but all my friends in congress understand that how business is done in this town has to change. have all got a lot of work to do on behalf of the american people, and that includes the hard work of regaining their trust. our system of self-government doesn't function without it. now that the government is reopened and this threat to our economy is removed, all of us need to stop focusing on the lobbyist, loggers and talking heads on radio and professional activists to profit from conflict and focus on what the majority of americans sent us here to do, and that is growth this economy.

create good jobs, strengthen the ,iddle class, educate our kids lay the foundation for broad- based russ parity and get our fiscal house in order for the long haul. here.s why we are that should be our focus. that won't be easy. we all know we have a divided government right now. there is a lot of noise out there and the pressure from the extremes it affects how a lot of members of congress see the day to day work that is supposed to be done here. and let's face it. the american people don't see every issue the same way. but that doesn't mean we can't make progress. when we disagree, we don't have to suggest the other side doesn't love this country or believe in free enterprise or all the other renegade

nationally of the rhetoric that seems to get worse every single year. if we disagree on something, we can move on and focus on things we agree on and get some stuff done. let me be specific about three places where i believe we can make rugrats right now. first, in the coming days and weeks, we should sit down and pursue a allen's approach to a balanced budget. a budget that our economy and shrink our long-term deficits further. both democrats and republicans committed to doing. the senate passed a budget, the house passed the budget, they are supposed to come together and negotiate. side not decided to

pursue a strategy of rink's midship, each side could have gotten together and you're out how do we shape a budget that provide certainty to businesses and people who rely on government. we would be growing faster right now. the good news is the legislation i signed yesterday now requires congress to do exactly that. what could have been doing all along. rsshould not approach this of creating a budget as an ideological exercise. just cutting for the sake of cutting. versusue is not growth fiscal responsibility, we need both. we need a budget that deals with the issues most americans are focused on, creating more good jobs that pay better wages. ethicist is, the getting smaller, not bigger.

it's going down faster than it has in the last two years. the challenge we have right now is not short-term deficits, it is the long-term obligations that we have around things like medicare and social security. we want to make sure those are there for future generations. the key now is a budget that cuts out things we don't need, closes corporate tax loopholes that don't help create jobs, and freeze up resources for things that do help us grow like education, infrastructure and research. these things historically have not been partisan. this should not be as difficult as it has been in pastures because we already spend less than we did a few years ago. our deficits are half of what they were a few years ago. debt problem as we had now

are long-term and we can address without shortchanging our kids or shortchanging our grandkids or weakening the that we have worked for. that's number one. --ber two, we should finish let me say that again -- number two, we should finish the job of exiting our broken immigration system. there is an effort for comprehensive immigration reform from business leaders to law enforcement. in fact, the senate has already passed a bill with strong bipartisan support that would make the biggest commitment to border security in our history,

would modernize our legal immigration system, make sure everyone plays by the same rules lives here everyone pays taxes and meets the responsibilities. that bill has already passed the senate. if that bill becomes law, our economy would be 5% larger two decades from now, that's $1.4 trillion in new economic growth. the majority of americans think this is the right thing to do. and it's sitting there waiting for the house to pass it. if the house has ideas on how to improve the senate bill, let's hear them. let's start the negotiations very but let's not leave this problem to keep festering for another year or two. done by or should get the end of this year.

number three, we should passed a farm bill. farmers andrican ranchers can depend on and protect vulnerable children and adults in time of need and gives rural communities an opportunity to grow and the long-term certainty they deserve. again, the senate has already passed a solid bipartisan bill that has support from democrats and republicans. it is sitting in the house, waiting for passage. if house republicans have ideas they think would improve the farm bill, let's see them. what are weate. waiting for? passingt this done area a budget, immigration reform, farm bill. these are three specific things that would make a huge difference in our economy right

now. and we could get them done by the end of the year. goodr focus is on what is that's american people just the big stuff. they're all kinds of other things that don't give us attention. everything agree on now that the cloud of crisis has passed. democrats and republicans are far apart on a couple of issues. i recognize there are folks on the other side who think my policies are misguided. that is putting it mildly. that's democracy. that's how it works. we can debate those differences vigorously, passionately, in good faith cometh through the normal democratic process.

we will be just too far apart to forge an agreement. that should not hold back our efforts in areas where we do agree. we shouldn't fail to act on areas we do agree or could agree just because we don't think it's good i'll at six. just because the extremes in our party don't like the word compromise. partnersok for willing wherever i can to get important work done. there is no good reason why we can't govern responsibly. despite our differences. without lurching from manufactured crisis to manufactured crisis. things ione of the

hope all of us have learned these past he weeks is that it turns out smart, effective government is important. it matters. the american people during this shutdown had a chance to get some idea of all the things, large and small government does that make the difference in peoples lives. we hear all the time about how government is the problem. turns out we rely on it in a whole lotta ways. not only does it keep us strong to our military and law enforcement, it plays a vital role in caring for our seniors and veterans. kids, being sure our workers are trained for the , arming ourted businesses with the best science and technology so they can compete with companies from other countries.

it plays a key role in keeping our food, toys and workplaces safe. it helps folks rebuild after a storm. it conserves our natural resources and finances startups. it helps to sell our products overseas. it provides security to our diplomats abroad. so let's work together to make government work better. instead of treating it like an enemy for purposefully making it work worse. not what the founders of this nation envisioned when they gave us the gift of self government. you don't like a particular policy or a particular president? then argue for your position. go out there and win an election. push to change it, but don't

break it. don't break what our predecessors spent over two centuries building. that's not been faithful to what this country is about. that brings me to one last point. i have a simple message for all the educated and who havegirl workers either worked without pay or have been forced off the job without haiti's past few weeks, including most of my own staff. thank you. service.r your welcome back. what you do is important. it matters. you defend our country overseas, you deliver benefits to our troops who have earned them when they come home, you guard our

borders, protect our civil , gain, help is mrs. grow footholds in overseas markets and protect the air we breathe and the water our children drink and push the boundaries of science and space. we have hundreds of thousands of people with the glories of this country. thank you. don'tou do is important. let anyone else tell you different. especially the young people who come to this city to serve. and they believe that it matters. you are right. it does. privilege toe the serve this country have an obligation to do our job as best we can. we come from different parties, but we are americans first, and that is why disagreement cannot mean dysfunction.

it cannot degenerate into hatred. the american people's hopes and dreams are what matters, not hours. our obligations are to them. our regard for them compels us all, democrats and republicans to cooperate and compromise. and act in the best interest of our nation. god,ation under indivisible with liberty and justice for all. thank you very much. >> the president earlier this beenng, and we have following tweets by members of congress related to the government shutdown, now resolved. texas republican lloyd doggett

says the impasses avoided now but extremist have not renounced brinksmanship schemes. this from marsha blackburn -- looking forward to conducting oversight on why 93% of epa workers are deemed nonessential. and new hampshire senator kelly ayotte says my office is in d.c. and new hampshire are open and have resumed normal operations. that's something we are seeing from a number of congress numbers. >> a 200-year-old clock stops ticking. time stand still. ohio clock, an easy metaphor for the government shutdown. >> we are standing just a few feet away from the united states senate chamber and the north the stench of the capital. the clock is behind me here, is the oldest clock in the united states capital. it was commissioned for the united states senate in 1815,

ordered from a philadelphia clockmaker named thomas lloyd. >> one of the many reasons why these c-span video archives are so amazing. >> the video library is amazing. you can view and share c-span programming any time. go to c-span.org and go to the video library. to watch the newest audio, go to the most recent tab and press play. search the video library for a specific topic or keyword or find a person. just type in the name, hit search and go to people. scroll down to their appearances on the bio page and share what you are watching. use the set buttons or handle tools. add a title and description and hit share and send it by e-mail, facebook or google plus. the c-span video library -- searchable, easy and free. created by the cable tv industry and funded by your local cable or satellite provider.

>> the deputy united states sector terry general gave an update on the current the gentle -- her an agenda and the upcoming work here in washington dc. the current issues include the concept in syria and global development issues beyond 2015. >> that afternoon, everyone. i am the acting vice president director of the foreign-policy program here at brookings.

thank you for coming. we have a very privileged discussion this afternoon. what we call the states and form. i can think of no other better today, theur guest current deputy secretary-general of the united nations. on behalf of our president and all of us at brookings, i want to give a big welcome to the deputy secretary-general and also to ambassador tom pickering , a distinguished fellow here at the brookings institution and well-known to many of you. ambassador secretary-general took up this post on the appointment of secretary general keep moon in july of 2012 grade he has a long and established career in diplomacy around the world, and the u.n. system and

for sweden. toserved as the ambassador sweden for the united states and spent time as sweden's word minister. in the early 90s, he was the first u.n. under-secretary general for humanitarian affairs and was the special envoy of the u.n. secretary-general in darfur. on and on.es many years of experience in africa, sudan, mozambique, the balkans. known particularly well- for his work and you monetary affairs, including prevention of landmines, prevention of conflicts, getting people most in need on human rights and increasingly speaking quite a bit about water quality and how important that is to the future of health care around the world. will take some time to hear

from the deputy secretary- general and i will turn to ambassador pickering who served in his last post as the under secretary of state for political affairs at the state department. ambassador, which is the highest-ranking the foreign service and has served as ambassador on every continent in the world. russia, india, el salvador, just to name a few. he also served as the u.s. representative to the united nations in new york during a particularly critical time during the first gulf war. he has held a number of other positions and we are honored to have him here and he will be able to stay for part of the time and provide some comments on the deputy secretary- general's remarks and we will be a will to have some conversation and open it up for questions and answers. so, with no further ado, the

deputy secretary-general. [applause] >> thank you very much. it's great to be here. when i was ambassador in washington in 2002 and 2005 come in to be close to the ink tank circuit here was quite a consolation and inspiration and i congratulate you who live in washington that you have this environment in which you can what isand debate sometimes called the washington consensus. it is interesting to be here at this dramatic time for the united states. i hope it turns out ok and i can return to new york. want to tell you i'm extremely honored to have one of my best friends at the podium, tom pickering.

think it is more fitting to be at the statesman formed and for me. you certainly are a legendary figure in american and international diplomacy. i'm very glad you could come. i will start with a story. a precious few minutes away from my remarks and then i will be available for informal discussion. i was noting i had no title. there is no title given for my speech except giving a few ideas about what i would cover. this reminds me of the time i was an exchange student in america a long time ago. i will not say how long ago in front of the ladies. i gave the standard speech there. the swedish student coming to the united states, you could come to me at 2:00 in the morning and i would make that speech. i gave 44 speeches in the state of indiana.

then i was faced with a completely new situation where i had no inkling what is going to speak about because the following thing happened. i was followed to a rotary president to a presbyterian women's yearly convention on indianapolis. ladies, white hair, blue hair, shiny, glasses, enormous expectations. khaki pants, sports shirt, 18 years old, prepared with his speech. men the lady who introduced with a big smile and great expectations as of now, let's welcome our swedish exchange student. he will speak to us about the following subject. remember, this is a presbyterian church. how well have we shared our

christian joys? [laughter] i delivered the same speech. long story about you not having a title. thank you very much. i have some prepared remarks. i want to be a bit precise. i have been in washington two days now to think about syria and afghanistan. a number of crisis situations in the world. iran is a diplomatic challenge of course. also the post 2015 development agenda. i think i want to cover these subjects and then i'm ready to speak about these subjects or any other subjects you want to raise. i would take as a starting point this year's session of the general assembly, which was unusually productive, with

implications not only on specific issues, but more broadly on the state of the u.n.. membermain speech to the states, secretary ban keep moon appealed to our leaders to embrace what he called the global logic of our time. another way of framing this that i sometimes used to say is the challenges today in today's mobilized world, the task of the united nations is to show good international solutions are in the national interest of the member states. take an issue like migration or ismate, and the solution basically a national interest. if we can come to that conclusion, we are home. then we take away the

distinction. what --ive in an age of think g 20, regional arrangements, but this year's u.n. general debate was another reminder of the strength of universality and the strength of global norms. let me go into a bit of detail. i need not explain to this audience the significance of the security council's breakthrough resolution on chemical weapons in syria. this was the first sign of unity after a painful time of division that has prolonged the conflict and led to syria's criticism of the u.n.. andll welcome this step recognize the difficult task that is now before the u.n., the

prohibition of chemical weapons and the international community to safeguard and destroy syria's arsenal of chemical weapons by the middle of next year. quite a mission, but doable. people tend to think of you as your product, and i don't completely deny that, but the joint operation had the ground within four days of the council's decision and i'm happy to note it was such a fast and affect the work. the chemical weapons teams have also been brave. confirmed that the use of chemical weapons moved through battlefield conditions through their job and at one point was targeted by shots from a sniper. they went back to their base and went back again. fortunately, they didn't ask for permission to go.

they went back and picked up a new car and did their job. of course, they richly deserve the nobel peace prize that was just announced. syria,y for its work in but for more than a decade of determined efforts to rid the world of these horrible weapons. i've seen the effect of them during the iran -- iraq war. it's one of the worst anxiety experienced to see soldiers come back from the field where iraqis had used these horrible chemical weapons. and you all know about the use of saddam hussein and chemical weapons. it was unthinkable. at the same time, action on chemical weapons is just one step on the road to peace in syria. killing -- after all of the killing with conventional

weapons goes on. theontinue to place appalling figures before the member states. the death toll of more than 100 house and, refugees of 200 million, out of which will one million are children. one million syrian children are refugees. there are 4.5 million people displaced in syria and we have seriously underfunded the humanitarian aid. entireyou know, the region is being destabilized. we have great fears for the neighboring countries. the the poetic momentum now created by the world's response to the use of chemical weapons to push for a different solution. we also need to work on the humanitarian access. fortunately, the security council agreed on a presidential

statement. that has to be translated to concrete action on the field. the situation is horrible. there are cities that are completely isolated, where conditions are absolutely horrifying. now with the winter approaching one more time, we have further challenges on the humanitarian front and -- the road ahead will be difficult. there are still those who believe vaguely and military solutions. there are two ways of ending this war. either by negotiating transition as negotiated by kofi annan to create a governing body with full executive powers and to items.ion the agenda belief in possible military solutions.

but i would say the so-called military solutions could lead to situations that are worse than the present stage with a wave of revenge against one sectarian group or the other. we hope now very much that the secretary-general and all of us involved can now focus completely with the help of on convening the geneva to conference in november. top concern during the opening session two weeks ago, but there were other andrtant steps on peace security challenges. i will give you some examples. to resumeted negotiations between israelis and palestinians who were there with chief negotiators. in lebanon, we launched a group

to deal with the syrian crisis not only on the refugee needs but the pressures on schools and infrastructure. absolutely important now to have a relationship between the humanitarian and development , transitions in the arab world, arab states came together to support the national biological in yemen and continued toward libya and egypt. on interfaithocus dialogue. during the assembly session, we stood back from specific crises and took strength on mediation. to focus on chapter seven of the u.n. charter which opens up for the use of horse crucial charter because

it provides the muscular capacity sometimes needed. i am convinced there is a highly underutilized position in chapter six of the disputes. i have it here and my favorite pacific -- article 33 is christmas eve for a diplomat and a lawyer, i hope. what the party should do before a conflict. they should first of all seek a solution. negotiation, inquiry, resort to regional arrangements or other peaceful means. this is what diplomacy is all about.

we also saw last week, two weeks ago, the great value of the u.n. as a meeting place and bilateral contacts that take place in the margins of the assembly sessions. used the u.n.n platform ford diplomatic openings to the world, including on the nuclear issue. tom pickering is a specialist in this and we have talked about many years and only just 15 minutes ago. i know there are several interpretations of this effort. only that the opening is testing seriously. tests and verify. trust and verify. .rust, test and verify

reducing tensions around miranda is of great little significance. this reminds me of a quote by john f. kennedy -- almost exactly 50 years ago he said it is never too early to try and it is never too late to talk area beyond the political crisis of the moment, the assembly. highlighted some of the x essential challenges we face. several streams work to converge and 2015. has made. progress global poverty has been cut in half during these past 13 years great two years are remaining. new -- moreting a girls are learning to read and write than ever before. great progress in education

generally, at the same time progress is uneven and we need to accelerate efforts where development is lagging. there are more people -- more poor people living in middle that says aries -- lot about inequality. intohe also need progress areas -- maternal health, it's a shame so many women are dying in childbirth. we need midwives all over africa. i saw that in darfur and we need to make progress in sanitation. watertion is behind and is still, a glass of tap water is a luxury for 768 million people in the world. ..5 billion people die

have billion people do not sanitation. that's a euphemism for toilets. more than 2000 children die every day out of diet sheet -- have diarrhea, dysentery and cholera. we have to do something about it. we have the ongoing goals we have to work with. 2015 is the year which we plan to adopt a plan development agenda. our goal is a set of goals that will mobilize the world. we believe we can eradicate by 2013.overty 2030 should be our goal. we want to see sustainability take hold. generation first that has to think about the existence and health of this planet.

have planned be in your life that you are no planet b. has to belity combined with public education. a strongert to add focus on institutions, power, the rule of rights and human law. such an agenda would be daunting but inspiring. movee the members will this direction in next two years and present this set of new goals and targets. year in which member states pledged to reach agreements on climate change. the secretary -- the secretary general will convene a climate summit. the centrality of the u.n. today is encouraging, but the secretary and iran recognize the responsibility this confers upon us.

we have to learn from our failing and shortcomings and we have them. syria represents a collective failure to stop the destruction. -- noted ao see systemic failure on the different parts of the u.n.. member states did not meet the tasks they himself had set and .e did not adapt properly a broader u.n. practice had been focused on development. we work hard to draw the right lessons from this experience that we are focusing not only on sri lanka but beyond. internally, one main lesson is to ensure the main system has human rights resources in place whenever they are needed. , i say toportant those people who want to work

with them, prevention. if you look back at crises, that the first vibrations, that the .eginning maybe even ethnic lensing and genocide. a third aspect as we must have the courage to act and speak out about what we see. i continue to lead this process on behalf of the secretary-general. we will be reaching out to members soon because this is a collective responsibility and there is an important task for us all to do. in conclusion, it is not a banality i hope to say that we are at a crucial juncture, at a crossroads. we see big trends with eight implications, migration, urbanization, population growth,

the emergence of the global south. we are making headway against poverty even as inequality grows. the 21st-century progress to finally be the century of women's empowerment despite the of remaining cultural gap, we see the world growing more strong his, but there is inward looking tendencies. technology is making tremendous advances against hunger, disease and the wasteful use of energy and it empowers organized crime and it raises the specter are of cyber attacks. there is an upside and downside to everything trade people in the world are looking to the u.n. for big decisions and big changes, expectations and hopes are high. the united nations provides immense lu, paris -- feeding 90 million people, assisting dozens

of countries for years with elect shims and keeping peace with these keepers. provide,ces we standard telecommunication provides art of the backbone of and globaleconomy corporations. i hope the american people and taxpayers should feel proud of their contributions to this work, not their shared values, but our shared work every day and again come to the conclusion that international cooperation is basically a national interest. more connected than ever. our future must be one of ever greater cooperation. we need to determine who can continue to work together. look at the united nations not just in terms of where we hope to be but in terms of national interest. engagement at the u.n. is not something you do for someone out

there, but rather for yourselves and your children. a friend of mine, rich gardner am paradoxically, i love my country, that's why i am an internationalist. the secretary and i are determined to make the most of the current moment. from the very beginning of the arab awakening, he spoke out and called the leaders of the old order to listen to those, not just the young seeking change, realizing this is a long and arduous journey. the child, he experienced devastation of war in korea. i know these values guide his work and -- in this time of global turmoil. closing, the secretary- general succeeded in luring me back to the organization and his side after time away on the organization. like my wife and others know, i'm in the did to the united

nations. it is a drug in my veins and i and q for your attention and i look forward to the more informal part starting now. >> thank you, my old friend. you reminded me today that we probably have known each other for a longer time than most of you have lived who are present here in this room. ands a special pleasure honor to be asked to say a few words about this speech. how well you have shared with us your internationalist joys today. i share them with you because each of us having served together at the united nations at a particularly interesting time have come to understand the capabilities, strengths, and

some of the foibles and problems of the only organization we have to bring 193 countries together around the world, to pursue peace and security. thank you for your remarks, particularly for three point -- i would like to begin with one top ofy not be at the everyone's agenda, but in my view ought to be. diplomacy counts, diplomacy is important, and diplomacy can make a difference. i grew up in cold war days, when we were deeply concerned about a catastrophic nuclear conflict and diplomacy was our main deal with the consequences of inadvertent miscalculation, accidents and cussedness in terms of a potential for a nuclear conflict. it was successful. i remain somewhat distraught as

someone whose career has been heavily in diplomacy that for in two majorears, areas, we have attempted to find a way to short-circuit the poet see with rapid military solutions and indeed have found disastrous answers. it is time to come back to diplomacy, but i was also chagrined by the notion that when a year ago i began to speak of the necessity for a political answer in syria, everyone thought i was certifiably local. the fact we have created among ourselves with this reoccupation with military solutions a distrust and disparagement of diplomacy as an effect it means of maintaining international security is a serious one and hang you for bringing us back to that reality which i think is important. we now see in a serious way that reality being used to address two very

difficult problem's, which again you have recalled for us in a very important way. one is syria. the breakthrough in syria opens the door, and i say only opens the door to us abilities because we must be realistic about the difficulties of what must be achieved. hours, fact that within a seemingly throwaway proposal by the american secretary of state was accepted by the , hadans, who, incidentally on hand in moscow the foreign minister of syria, who immediately marched at the drum of future diplomacy rather than the war drum is an interesting indication that this is something people have been thinking about for some time, even if they didn't reveal it at the time or subsequently.

it also brought oceans of about whether this is working or would work and this has been pointed out by the weights you have made by which the degree to which in fact the inspectors arrived on the scene an the process has begun and almost impossible deadline seems less impossible now than it did ring weeks ago, and that is important. it also opens the door to other things. it opens the door to the possibility that the u.s. and russia can cooperate not only in destroying chemical weapons in syria, but in moving back to kofi annanthe principles and to a process that what is clearly in my view impossible on the field of battle. there is no military victory around the corner or

with in the years ahead. those who two years ago thought it would be three months have been proven wrong and my sense is the destruction of 100,000 people should he enough on itself to take us to the conference table, whether we in fact believe that can't happen or not. my own sense is it's extremely important that preconditions to negotiations should no longer vex the problem. it is in my view very important that the parties should agree that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, a perfectly fine diplomatic principle, but one that works against progress in this case should be dropped. but i also think it is imperative we move as i think the deputy secretary-general has suggested toward a cease-fire. necessary toings protect the syrian population

against what are clearly the arbitrary vicissitudes of a civil war. beyond that, the challenge will be a new government for syria. the parties all agree that will have to happen one time or another. my sense is the diplomatic challenge of negotiating a new challenge for syria is a necessary and tough one and will be made easier if a cease-fire can be achieved. there, i see a huge role for the united nations, not just in monitoring a cease-fire, but hopefully finding a way for pre--- for peacekeepers to protect the minorities, à la lights, druze, christians, kurds, who will be under pressure as a result of the conflict which will not go away even if a cease-fire can be achieved. that is a huge and very difficult challenge, but in my view, closer today than it was a

month ago and we have to find a way to move from that. the second thing you mentioned was iran. a meeting took lace yesterday. millennial come to solution meeting, but it was certainly a meeting that in my view has moved things beyond where they had been stuck for many decades. my hope is it will be the beginning of change. iran will be challenged to be specific about what it is putting on the table with respect to the limitations which expect and the inspections and allow the kind of transparency that can assure those who have been skeptical about around's nuclear program, that it is not leading to weapons but is devoted to peaceful purposes. we will be challenged on our side not only to accept the make seriouss they

moves ahead, and i believe they have started, we will have to undertake serious moves on sanctions to create a sense of mutual confidence and restore the trust that has been lacking for 33 years to move that assess ahead. easily, it solved won't be solved in a summer, it won't be solved before the endgame is reached in whatever form that will take, but i think it is clear that iran will have to have a peaceful program, well monitored, and sanctions will have to go away as this particular process proceeds. to dealbe challenged with what has been the remnant of past negotiations, whether in fact there has to be a time of zero enrichment in iran for a full agreement. are well past that

date, but many people are still mesmerized by it. that challenge will continue to come. thise center of all of will be the united nations. almost everything you touched on involves the most serious problem's before today's world. andchallenges of 2015 indeed all of the issues out there that will once again require us to come together with 193 other countries to deal with them wherever that might be. so thank you for coming down either by lane or train, thank you for being with us, and thank you even more for your words and knowration or it i firsthand by working with you over the years, for your dedication and refusal to quit in times of adversity, many of which you have had to face.

[applause] >> let me thank tom again for joining us in making those comments. i think he hit on so many of the keep points in bringing it back to the u.n. role in some of the most important crises and challenges facing us right now. i appreciate his comments and i want to be a little provocative and come back to some of the points you made before we open it up to you all. one thing you touched on which was very important, but since we are in washington, we are compelled to ask you about the role of the united states in the world right now. there is an increasing debate about where we are headed in terms of the way the world is changing and the leadership we can offer to the rest of the world. usditionally and for many of

during the cold war and after, would besumed the u.s. up on a pedestal in some ways and sometimes we put ourselves up on that pedestal in some helpful and unhelpful ways area i'm thinking about what's happening in washington and the crisis we are facing in our own governance. president obama has played a mixed role in how he is asserting u.s. leadership great we talk about the importance of diplomacy, but the way it played out in syria, there is an element of coercive diplomacy and i would like to comment about the use of force in getting states to act and did that make a difference in moving the parties along on the syrian front? generally, i would like to say more about what you're reading is of the u.s. role.

we have rising powers that are wanting a bigger voice. thedid not touch about question for the member states, but i would like you to talk about the shifting tempest in the world and the role of the united states. >> thank >> thank you. a president of the u.n. i am notn -- i hope premature in saying that the latest polls there is growing support of the united nations as an organization. it is possible the syria development have played a role in this regard. of course, i wanted to say i spent -- i was not only an exchange student to this nation. i was an ambassador to this nation for five years. i have been working to the

united states for so long. the commitment of the united states to the united nations is absolutely crucial for the health of our organization. therefore, i made the point strongly -- maybe i over did it -- i claim the work we do is in the national interest of every country, also the larger countries. the larger countries do not have to worry so much because they have enough power to create their own solutions, political and economic and in other areas. but i would say that also the by thecountries should, logic of the goal of these corporations, realize it is in the national interest. some of it is impossible to think of, like climate and migration. i would hope this will more and more the realize. the united states, like the

other members of the security council, realize what a tremendous responsibility, and the gift they have been given by the world by having the veto power in the security council. i hope that that veto power would be used at a minimum, and that in fact, the security council more and more will become a body are you negotiate, where it is a duty to come up with a solution. i would hope the security council would take the work more in the direction of prevention. the security council needs to act on threats for international peace and security. what is a threat? it is before anything has happened. usually we are like a fireman who gets in there when the house is on fire, not when the smoke pelops -- develops. it should be accountable prevention that could clearly the security council. it is an unsolved issue. and i was president of the general assembly, it was the

most difficult reform id. to get -- reform item to get that security towns or form, and termination to say this is a reflection on the work of 1945, particularly some of the major emerging powers playing an enormous import role. the use of force -- i am great friend of [indiscernible] i showed you the charter. i'm saying [indiscernible] the best way of using force is the credible threat use of force. the best case is when that comes from a united security council. itis more problematic if comes only from one or two in the security council, but then you would have an action not of the security council. i would certainly say to see sharon -- to show the security

council can be unified on the show of force that would have a positive effect on the willingness of the parties to agree to solutions according to the charter. >> building on the same thing, and we covered a lot of ground on syria, and i'm glad we did because it is such a pressing concern, but there is a concept wrapped up in what we are seeing in serious run out that has been very important sign of progress. as you talked about the marriage of international and international -- and national interests, the responsibility to protect, adopted by all member states, in 2005, used for the intervention in libya, that has been very controversial and it is for her to say the syrian people are the victim of that circumstance. r2p doctrine -- how do you see a role in that playing

forward, and it looks like some government is not protecting its own people, and the international community has called intervene. >> i am very proud to have been president of the general assembly when that formula was gaveled on the 16th of september, 2005. it is a great to forward. in a wider context, i would put of thehe context preeminent part of that declaration, where it says we say -- i paraphrase -- there is no peace without development. there is note element without peace. there's no lasting peace or sustainable development without respect to human rights and the rule of law. in other words, for an international assistance to work and even a nation to work, you have to have least developed with respect to human rights and the law. if you have serious violations

of human rights, you have by definition instability. and lack of prosperity. basis. is a here is a tension in this urbanization. we had a principle of sovereignty, but we have in everything the printable of people-- solidarity with in need. the paradox is sometimes international law puts us in a position where solidarity has to stop at the border and not as human beings in need. when intervention came up as a concept in the early 1990,, people said no, intervention means infringement of sovereignty, you're interfering in our affairs, as will be a political trojan horse by the western powers. when we say to the few first -- to the first minute, we have to --[indiscernible] >> here comes a stroke of g enius.

someone said if sovereignty is so important, wouldn't that imply you have an obligation to make sure your own population does not -- is not subject to ethnic cleansing and genocide and mass killing? course,er is yes, of sovereignty is that important. if you accept that then you have to answer the second question -- what happens if you as a state fails and do not guarantee your population that security? thisit is found in document that the international community is responsible. it is difficult to follow the sequence of the second paragraph. basis, and ine the and it is the security council decision. it comes back to the security council. we have established a principle that states are responsible for

the safety of the population. syria him a constant reminder that we should have replied it better, -- applied it better, and in two years i came to the conclusion that the concept is [indiscernible] there were only one or two nations of skeptical in talking about it. we have to place an emphasis on prevention, the rational elements, and of course read the words among members aides that they have the primary responsibility to prevent atrocities. >> can i come back to the reform of the security council? do you have any thoughts on that issue? >> you're really making this difficult. [laughter] the visa right is -- the veto right is written into the charter. the veto -- i've come to the conclusion that is probably an unrealistic

opposition. the other road is to reduce the use of the veto. and i would say that there have been several proposals, some ,ations, small nations, s5 came up with a proposal that every time the beat of cast it should be reported what the reasons are given to the general assembly as a sign of the very exclusive situation where a veto is cast. as a negotiator i am more using the council as a negotiating body where they have this privilege of having the veto as a last resort. they should initiate. i jokingly said when i was president of the general assembly to the p5 a should work like the catholic church when they select popes. you know, the white smoke comes up of from the sistine chapel?

then there is a resolution, and the papa is elected. we had unfortunately for too long cold war impulses that the vetoes were automatic. they cannot be changed. now i think we have a situation where it is growing between the united states and russia that there is more comfort in finding a negotiating solution. >> if you step back and look at how money is being spent in the u.n. system -- it is one of the three main pillars at the u.n., but it only gets about three percent of the un's budget. i am wondering -- we have had some dramatic reform in getting to the human rights council. the council has proven to be more active than the commission. a number of independent experts who are deployed on the ground, exactly as you said, in the earning whirling -- early

warning facilities -- should we have any hope that the member states should put more money behind the human rights color of the united nations? >> i was mentioning the work from the sri lanka tragedy in 2009, and i think there are three conclusions. we will have to improve and strengthen the human rights teller of the united -- hel pillar of the united states. -- united nations. we need also to be that are at protecting civilians once we fail to listen to the early warning signatures on human rights. then we have human rights violations during a time when the syrians are severely affect. khen we need to have work' -- work more speedily.

in sri lanka, we needed to have more of a development team, and we did not have the flexibility to change our presence. i think we are moving in that duration, and i hope we will see human rights as a universal obligation. the whole declaration of december 1948 is the universal declaration of human rights, and we have to be very, very careful to make sure that the human rights complex is universally excepted. we have to accept more than we do, particularly in western countries, that the economic and social rights are also part of the human rights body. it is important to create that universality around the culture. glad we have so many countries that are behind this in latin america to make sure that human rights become universal. the most interesting new factor that i would like to mention is

there is a -- a concept that is revitalized which is the rule of law. the rule of law is post conflict institutions. it is anticorruption for development. it is women's, children's rights, human rights, and that rule of law is a door that can open up to human rights. when i talked about the post -- 2015 agenda --institution building. the reason why people -- countries fault all is there are no institutions. look at afghanistan, somalia, and now some signs in libya, with the same characters. no institutions are holding up. institutions play an enormously important role. i can talk about my own country. sweden was one of europe's poorest countries eight years ago. build up a strong if structure,

androng education system, strong institutions. these were the three factors that built our country. institution building, rule of law, and by that, a rights perspective is so important, and that qualitative development is very crucial. >> why don't we open the floor five or so minutes, take a couple questions. then we will come back to the city secretary general. gentleman in the middle by the aisle? >> thank you. university of wisconsin. i wonder if the mission statements we have seen in kenya about a possible withdrawal from perhaps anht signal unraveling of some global organizations, or do you think that is just a political statement?

>> of the front row here? >> thanks very much. garrett mitchell, and i want to ask the deputy secretary- general a question that comes from one of your opening remarks about the global logic of our time. and expand a bit on a question of -- that ted asked you about the security council itself, wondering if we could broaden that out and try this -- in 1945 the global logic of our time led us to create three institutions that have played an arrest role. important role in global relations.

now there is a new global logic of our time, as you are you and moon described it. can you give us a sense of specificity about what the elements of the global logic of our time are. it has already led the imf to make some institutional changes and that afoot at the world bank to do the same, i wonder if it calls on the u.n. to do something along those lines? >> thanks, and i saw one hand in the back. >> thank you very much. migration policy institute, and i was pleased to hear you gration because almost no one else does. i wonder if you could share with us what you think the u.n. and

particular -- in particular has to offer on that subject in the ? in the last two weeks we have seen people die, but is the u.n. an institution that can help with us? >> thank you very much. please. >> well, there is a situation forwhich is causing concern is s.c. and myself, and that several african nations are reacting to the fact that africa and african leaders are the objects of the icc. what we should remember is that four of the eight cases where africans are involved are brought to the icc by african states themselves and two of them by the security council. but the matter has become more

dramatic after-the-fact that the two people who were going to -- became president and vice president of kenya. discussion about whether we could find pragmatic takeaways of hearing them in their own countries or in the neighboring countries. these formulas did not work out, and there was a reaction from the side of kenya, but from other members aced in africa, that sitting heads of state should not be prosecuted or should -- there should be deferral as long as they were sitting heads of state. this was problematic, because 27 of those do not make that decision. adopteds a solution

last week along these lines. we have suggested to our african friends to bring up this issue of partiessembly meeting in november to go through whether they could be -- there could be changes made to their own statute, and be brought through in a more regular way. i do not note what extent that we done. -- a not a mask walk out mass walkout, but we are chiefly concerned that this discussion takes place because fighting impunity or accountability for the kind of crimes that this court has to work with has to be accepted by all member states. it is now a challenge for all of us. they have put up a lot of time and effort on all of us. [indiscernible] think we have reached a stage

now where we have never had closer cooperation between the united nations and the world bank, particularly. san francisco and bretton woods are coming together in a great way, and the model, no peace without a moment, note moment without peace, is translated into an ambitious agenda, and the new president of the world bank is working hand-in-hand with us, and we with them, on a number of issues. kim visited the great lakes region in africa recently. they are on their way to sahel. we're working on issues like rule of law and in a new way which has given us, from the humanitarian side, a link to the development side. there has to be connection between the humanitarian relief and development. you see that in the neighboring countries and syria.

to help them with crowded schools, crowded health facilities, job fairs, and we work now along these lines in a completely new way. the globals that logic of arts time -- i could spend an hour on this -- -- of our time -- i could spend an hour on this -- got to do this together, that when you look at ity of the task, you realize the united nations not do it alone, the world bank cannot do it alone, you need to put the problem at the center, and how about a glass of water or whatever, or migration? this is today's global problem. it turns out you need to have not only peace and security, development of human rights and

human law, you need to reach out , and maybe sometimes the expectations are too high on the u.n. to solve problems. the you and is the league -- the u.n. is the lead on a number of issue, but the u.n. is in some cases could be a catalyst or even be a part of doing the job, because we will not be able to fight -- reached the goal of eradicating poverty if we do not have the help not only a bretton woods, not only ever regional european at the union, the private sector, with training and innovation. we need a civil society, men of youth and a background, and they played an enormously important role on actors of the world scene. and the scientific community. scientific research in general, and each and everyone of you. i have a line that i use that i believe in very strong, nobody can do everything, everybody can

do something. we have to realize that because i sense that in several parts of the world a hopelessness that's a situation is so difficult, the enormity of tasks is so high that you turn off the television and say i want to stop the world and get off. you have to define the problems she departs. -- have to that is my take on the global logic of our time. on migration and then -- >> there are a couple of issues that i have been asking for a long time we should be doing more. i gratian has been one. -- migration has been one. it is a huge issue.

the remittances from migrants is bigger than the whole official moment system in the world. migrants, human rights, huge issue. the political explosive nature of that issue in many countries, where you divide humanity and people between us and them is set at this. the tragedy of the situation of the huge inequalities is demonstrated by those as rrible, people drowning a mile off tehe shore. we went down to the general assembly and i suggested a moment of silence, at the least we can do, but there has to be action taken. if we do not take into the migration to mention in the post -- 2015 development, we do a major mistake. i hope that member states will

note in that issue because we cannot disconnect from that from the 2015 work. same thing goes for other issues that are growing. we need to focus on the more, like the urbanization, which is the potential and a promise. now in theis mostly big cities. 60% of humanity live in big cities. where you have problems of sanitation, no infrastructure, poor people will begin to poor countries'big cities. we had a collar and at break in sierra leone -- we had a cholera outbreak in sierra leone. one issue which i think is completely met -- is regarded is the role of organized crime, related to drugs, illicit arms transfer, prostitution, trafficking -- and harvell and anding -- a horrible

growing problem, added to the security openings for organized crime. >> funny you mention it. yesterday on this platform we have a form on organized crime and political finance. we just published a new book on the subject as it relates to this issue, and its impact on democracy in latin america. i cannot agree more. one of the comments was this his new research that needs to be done and we would like to do here. i want to come up from the bottom of my hat, thank you for your comments because i found them to be not only thoughtful, but also inspiring. when we talk about the global logic of our time, i think we have to think about in terms of leadership am and what we heard today was a global leader for our time. jan. join me in thanking [applause] >> thank you very much. picconeomired

when he said i had proved that diplomacy council, and i was visiting a professor before i was drafted into this job, and i was challenged by my professor, my colleague, who is known to this institution, has a great researcher. he said, can you list the reasons you fail or succeed in the initiation's or mediation -- in negotiation or mediation or diplomacy? we need to be more systematic about how we succeed. he forced me to think over the whole weekend about my failures and my successes. [laughter] i have negotiated in six different crises, lots of humanitarian situations that required negotiation. i came to four conclusions why

you fail or succeed. the first one is how you use your language, the word. if you look at your own life, your most important pool is your word, your spoken word or your written word. it is your most important tool that you have, and how much do we take care of that tool, how much do we work with the nuances, how much do we find synonyms, how much can we turn around sentences so you can make it meet the problem better? a journalists life, a lawyer's life. the love of words and the care for words. very strong statement and one of thatarkings where he says to misuse a word is poisoning the wells. the second reason to fail or succeed is a simple thing, but

extremely important in and mediation, and that is timing. we most often do things to make. i have been so in situations where you have done things too early. you need to think carefully about timing. the geniuses are children when it comes to timing. have you ever had a child ask for raise or an allowance on monday morning on your way to work? friday night with a glass of wine? [laughter] third reason to fail or succeed .s cultural sensitivity the importance of respecting culture, history, tradition is absolutely crucial to create the right atmosphere. speaking in a manipulative way, but through

curious the an interest and openness in recognizing the quality of people. and the last recent and the most important i would say after a long life is personal relations. is trust. be truthful. exact a new recording of what others say. meet the university class, and you create networks, remember those personal relationships what help you in life and enormously. build on that. my friendships go back years. we have been in contact all over the world. we always try to find our colleagues. [indiscernible] friendstill a group of

that have our addresses in the computer or the inside pocket, and we call each other. member that personal relationships are important. i was inspired by tom to say that. thank you. >> thank you. [applause] >> before becoming first later, lou hoover traveled the world. >> among the things they collected, the chinese porcelains. mingfocused on the

periods. they stared the collecting when they were living in china. what was probably the best collection in the united states of chinese porcelains. they started collecting pewter. here are some pieces of british future -- pewter. we have a number of them here. >> watch our program on lou span.org. c- we continue our series live on monday.

[applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, thank .ou, welcome to chatham house let me be a little boring, make sure you do not have your mobile phones on. it would be a shame to be beeping through this if you interviewed -- if it interfered with microphones. i don't usually say it. lease -- no early stepping out. it is my great honor to welcome hillary rodham clinton. welcome to our institute. it is a pleasure to welcome here

as the winner of the chatham house price of 2013. >> thank you. [applause] that what i say is fromut our prize, it a collection of candidates the a research programs, then our presidents, and our members vote. the members are here. special prize. it was given to you for your great significant contributions to national diplomacy. roleis important to your in promoting the rights of women and girls, and opportunities for them in the world. this evening we are going to celebrate the award in a formal event, with lech -- which lets us have an informal conversation today.

will have this conversation today. we can go anywhere. what i'm going to do is start off by kicking off with a few questions. hopefully will leave a whole bunch. [laughter] hang on for 20 minutes or so. we have time. i probably will not take more than 20 minutes. hopefully i will not take up all of your questions. do filibustering so the cameras will get quieter in a minute. we can go in many directions. clinton, you have played fundamental roles as secretary of state strategically. three balance of the american -- the rebalance of the american foreign-policy to the asia- pacific was one of the calling cards of your tenure as secretary. theinvolved very much in trenches, having to make last-

minute calls, tough calls through the process. things, wended those could talk about grand strategy with you. we can talk about the tough calls you had to make as you go along. i hope we can draw out the insights of your experience for the future, not just for how things went on in our time. let's kick off with a big question. when you took of your position of the u.s. leadership, the phrase you used, there were questions about the future of u.s. world leadership raid you wanted to renew the commitment and the tools of committed see -- you wanted to renew the commitment and the tools of diplomacy. america is easily the most powerful. shale gas, military bases all over the world. at the same time we have , and fears outside of

the u.s. of a new isolationist instinct creeping into the body politic. do you feel america plays by its own rules. i keep hearing and conferences. it comes up in conversations. with that setup, do you think america has the capacity for global leadership today? >> first, let me thank you and the members of chatham house for this very moving award. i am a fan of your work. i appreciate greatly the vote of the membership on my behalf. i think the question is one that has a very simple answer. yes. america's leadership remains not only preeminent, but necessary.

the world in which we live poses new challenges to all of us. , that requireds a level of strategic thinking and execution that starts first and foremost back in the democracies that we represent. i would never criticize my country. let me say that it is distressing at any point to see political system that has so many crises over whatries now caught up in our very unfortunate partisans disputes. underlying them, our questions about america's direction at home and abroad. i am confident that we will work our way through this latest

challenge, as we did back during administration in 1995 and 1996. i think that there is an underlying concern. not only in our country, because we didn't take a vote, but you did, that raises issues about -- what are our responsibilities? how do we reject power in the 21st century, and traditional forms and new smart power? are debates societies have to have, not just inside government offices. i am looking forward to talking in specifics with you. it is fair to say that the concerns that we have to be aware of when we look at the international position of the

united states has to come from a wellspring of effective decision making at home. that is economic, and it is social, growing inequality, the sense that in the united states, an in europe, there is ongoing debate about how we continue to provide the best services at the most affordable costs to our citizens. that is really the core of what we can do around the world. i am confident, but the debate we are having is one that requires very serious analysis and thought. >> doesn't cramp the style of the foreign secretary of state? it is so powerful today. beenpublics who have battered by financial crisis,

not good handling with international crises, and the room for scope for leadership is minimal. president or prime minister is fine they -- the role of the secretary of state must be quite difficult. how do you find that a role as the secretary of state in particular? >> i didn't find it difficult. i found it challenging. i took office when president in the midstrn in, of the economic crisis. it is easy for many to forget how close the world came to a much more serious, long-lasting evenmic recession, depression. i think it was something that required american leadership.

the reasonsme of for it lay in american financial decision-making, and perhaps lack of regulatory oversight. the fact is that when i came into the position, the president and i talked very openly with each other about how important it was for me to get out around the world at that moment, making it clear we had confidence to recover. the president had to deal with the congress, and the media fax effects- the immediate of economic crisis. that is what i did for much of the first year, starting as you which wasng to asia, unusual for an american secretary of state. it was an important message to send, in part because china, which to this day has heavily invested in american debt, was

raising questions. thewondering about decisions that would be made by the new administration. there was a feeling that because iraq, and the aftermath of 9/11, and then afghanistan, the united states had shifted attention away from asia, and that was of concern to our allies. in europe, there was also a were that the contagion of the economic crisis, plus a less than ongoing level of attention from the prior administration. i went to asia and immediately came to europe. consult, and to hear what people had to say i'm a but to convey a message that we are looking at the entire world. we will always be concerned

about the middle east. to trya were or -- a war to wind down and resolve. that was on the forefront of the national security council's agenda. we wanted to get back into a consultative role in our allies, and sent messages to others. >> on this point about that trip to asia, and the role that you played in the pivoting or moreancing of policy to the asia-pacific, you mentioned china and the need to keep china feeling alongside. you push this economic dialogue. i've the same time, you are a forceful advocate for your asian singapore etc.. with the factance

thischina might be seeing suspiciously. did you feel this with the chinese leaders? >> i did. there were concerns on the part of the chinese readership over what this meant. trip, plan to that first and presented the strategy to the white house, i wanted to integrate what were different strands of our involvement. there is a strong argument that a rising china has to be the central focus of american foreign-policy in the asia- pacific, and increasingly globally. the hope being that through that kind of involvement we could toward china becoming a responsible stakeholder.

they were our traditional allies. we have treaty alliances with japan and south korea, thailand, the philippines. there was a feeling on their part that we needed to be much clearer about what american interest would be in the 21st century, that we were a resident we had power that obligations, that we needed to more forcefully present those. then there were the aussie on -- asian countries, looking to how to figure out how to do their own balance of things. i did not think you could pick among those choices. you had to have a more comprehensive approach, partly because we had existing obligations. me as we chart our course forward with china, we wanted china to realize that we were in the pacific to stay. we were there not as an

participantbut as a . we wanted to be more involved in the regional organizations on that first trip to jakarta. i signed a memorandum saying the united states would move toward the treaty of amity and cooperation. something we had never done, but which was important. , began what was a very candid conversation. i think there were certainly some areas that -- areas of disagreement. we know that china's historical interest in taiwan and tibet, which they raise with the united states. their sensitivity of human rights. all of which were on the agenda. we were looking through this new

vehicle of the strategic and economic dialogue to take what hank paulson had done on the economic side, with tim geithner and i working together, to expand the discussion, because the chinese would have been happy to say focused on the economic issues in early 2009. part of that was you guys are going to get your house in order and make sure that our arestment in your debts good ones. we wanted to bring the strategic in. there is a long list. the conflicts that have occurred potential resources with vietnam, the philippines, the back-and-forth arguing with japan. the continuing threats posed by north korea, which is very much of a chinese problem. solution.tential

we wanted to broaden the after church -- we wanted to broaden the aperture. we wanted to have a broader discussion, and make clear that the united states was there to stay. >> there was a moment where you must have wondered if this would be able to hang together. it struck people as the most those few moments, months in the beginning of 2012 gave himself mayor up to the u.s. embassy in beijing, which we had to handle , and thencular way rescued into the embassy. that was only just before you were going to land your strategic economic dialogue. can you give us a feel for how you manage that particular process? >> it is always a challenge with things that are unexpected.

i like to have these virtual inboxes in my head, the immediate screaming crisis, and the long-term crisis. i try to keep the big box of opportunities. it is a great example of the way i think the expanded strategic and economic dialogue helped to resolve very difficult issues. what i tried to do in the dialogue was in bed in the government of both of our countries issues so there was a lot more interchange. i came to believe that the chinese, for their own reasons, and their own way of government was a masterre plan about what we plan to do to control their rise. i see my friend in the front

row. he and i talked about that and leslie. they do. they have plans. processesall kinds of . the have never understood the jazz like quality of american government. [laughter] tot i tried to do was begin strip away some of the misconceptions. we do have views. we have interest. we have values. we are not ok. we want to share with you. we want you to share more thoughts. when the right-hand of the police chief showed up in a asylum,e, asking for because his story was quite dramatic about knowing those [indiscernible]

had killed one of your countrymen, he did not fit any of the categories for the united states giving him asylum. ,e had a record of corruption of thuggish and us, of brutality. he was an enforcer. they may have had a falling out and now he was trying to somehow get his way to a place of safety. on the other hand, the consulate ,as quickly encircled by police who were either subordinate to him, or looking to incur his favor. becoming a very dangerous situation. what we did was to tell them that he could not move into the consulate. there weather -- there were no grounds on which we could offer that to them. he kept saying he wanted to get the truth to beijing, to know

what was happening. we said we could arrange that. that is what we did. we were very discreet about it. we did not try to embarrass anybody involved in it, but tried to handle it in a professional manner am a which i think we accomplished. fast-forward. i get called late one night from chen, who has escaped house arrest, remarkably because he was blind. he had been picked up and was in our embassy in beijing. he was on his way there. we knew of his courageous history of dissidents. we knew he was a safe -- self- taught lawyer who had bravely taken on the one child policy of

china, suing local officials and others for their behavior. it was as you say, we before our annual strategic and economic dialogue meeting, this time in beijing. i was very well aware that this would be an issue in the relationship. i also believe that this was an example of american values and practice. this was a man who deserved american support and attention, and protection. lots of back-and-forth, as you can imagine. i finally made the call. we are going to send people out to pick him up. i was a rendezvous. we got him into the embassy. medical treatment for his injuries. , had to tell the chinese government that we were offering

hospitality to one of their citizens, and would love to talk about it to them. you campbell, who some of know, was my assistant secretary for asia-pacific affairs. he got on the plane. we were fortunate the head of my and a crediblet, international lawyer, with his own history of dissidents. his father was unable to return home from his position at the you win because -- because of a coup in korea. we got our people to the embassy and they began talking with mr. chen. they began negotiating with their chinese counterparts. this a long story. i don't take all of our time. it was a very touching and touch and go situation.

we were able to negotiate with -- safeese safe patches passage for his family. he not seen one of his children in quite some time. we were able to negotiate an agreement that he could attend college. he did not want to leave china. he loved china. he actually very much believed that if he could get his story to the upper echelon of the chinese government they would agree with him. our team did a great job negotiating this. he did have medical problems that needed further treatment. voluntarily.mbassy he called me from the van on the way to the hospital and said if i were there, i would kiss you. i said i'm very happy you are so happy.

[laughter] hospital, ande his family showed up. rightfully, they were saying and you trust the chinese government? are you sure they're going to let you go to college? man had beenhis under stress for several days. he began saying i am not sure. think that, i don't it is a good deal you negotiated. yes. i know. [laughter] i said excuse me? we said, what would you like? tosaid i would like to go america. ok. after saying no, no. we worked out an arrangement that could go to new york university to study, assuming we could get a second agreement with the chinese. this was where i think all the work we put into this, all of and one-dible planning

on-one meetings, and candid conversations i engaged in with my counterpart. this is in your interest and our interest. it has to be a way we can work this out. his first response is we never want to talk about this man again with anybody. we can't go back and negotiations. we have to. we need to get this resolved. that i thinkay they'll a dated the kind of -- validated the arrangement, and the daily work that went into it. the final thing, which was touching to me. this was touch and go. one of the things that i was asked to do, because i still had

meetings, they said please do not mention this to them. we will work this out. i didn't. , predictableormal meetings. ofn we were having an event people to people exchanges. policyfallen -- foreign experts say that is frosting on the cake. going to the meetings. i can only tell you that at the people to people event, there was a young american man who was studying in china, and a young chinese woman who was studying in the united states. we had picked the not to speak to the group. she in english, he him aaron there and -- he in mandarin. i am convinced that helped to convince the chinese government that we would do this deal. i said in my prepared remarks,

this is what the future should be about. young people like this working together am understanding each other better. visiting and finding common ground. that is a we should look for. later that afternoon, we were able to make the deal. mr. chen and his family were able to leave. i think it was part of a broader a one-off.just >> the story is fascinating. an absolute example of that thickening of relationships, what diplomacy is about. to get to them, you have to go through such a process of confidence building. >> and we are such an impatient people these days. this sounds like the comment about politics. the doll, slow, boring. it goes onnd