european union but there shouldn't be a right to claim in different countries. i think we need to do more in the future and the lesson is the mistake labor made to give unfetterred access to the liberal market when others join the european union that led to 1.35 million coming to the country was a profound mistake. >> is the prime minister concerned about this and what has he to say to my constituents who are struggling with the cost of living caused my his process ? -- caused by his policies? >> we are raising to 10,000 pounds the amount of people can earn before they pay income tax. that the is worth 705 pounds. because of progress disposable income this year is higher than any year between 1997 and 2010. the members opposite may not

like these facts but they are true. it worth remembering why we are in this situation in the first place. >> you don't have to shout to make himself heard. the point i was make being is -- the point i was making is the reason we are in this was laid out by the institute of physical studies when they pointed out we have the biggest recession for 100 years under the last government which cost the typical family 3,000 pounds. they should be apologizing for that before moving on to the next question. >> mr. rory stewart. >> christmas in syria will be defined by grief and horror in subzero temps. i encourage the prime minister to keep focus on the humanitarian relief in syria and encourage the rest of the international community to meet the demands for four billion of assistance and ensure that assistance is more imaginative and generous. >> i'm grateful for the honorable gentleman raising this

issue before christmas. i think that there is a huge is where our thoughts should be. humanitarian crisis affecting up to half of the syrian population. the first thing i would say is that britain can be proud of the fact back at 500 million we are the seconds largest bilateral donor in terms of aid to syria and neighboring countries. what we should be doing is encouraging others to step up to the plate in the way we've done and make sure we fulfill our moral obligations to people who will suffer at christmastime. >> orders. >> you have been watching "prime time minister's questions." they will be in recess. it returns wednesday january 8, 2014. watch any time at c-span.org where you can find video of past "prime minister's questions" and other programs. we will discuss the federal reserve's decision last week to adjust the bond buying program. our guest is the economist magazine's u.s. economics editor. then advice for preparing your 2013 federal taxes.

we are joined by kevin mccormally. we are joined by kiplinger's editorial director. washington journal live, 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. then at 9:40 five eastern, art

history professor deborah hansen looks at the work trail of annual boone and minerals and other arts and the u.s. capitol. american history tv in prime time, starting at eight a.m. eastern on c-span three. >> as 2013 wraps up, we are on the front steps of the capital to tell you about our new review series. here's the lineup.

opening remarks are provided by anthony harrington, former u.s. ambassador to brazil during the clinton administration. >> good morning. good morning to many good friends in the audience. i am jane harman, president and ceo of the wilson center. i am delighted to welcome you to this just before the christmas holiday important event. the wilson center knows a lot about brazil.

and so does our keynote speaker and good friend ambassador tom shannon. our brazil institute led by paulos otero is this from your place in washington for dialogue on u.s./brazil policy. we were the first to honor dilma rousseff when she became president of brazil. we regularly host brazilian governors and legislators and are trusted platform to air the good, the bad and ugly in our relationship. tom shannon qualifies as part of the good. i hope he's relieved to hear that. as thelose to four years highly regarded u.s. career foreign service ambassador to brazil he is back in washington as senior advisor to secretary kerry. there are lots of rumors about ... brazil is the be

brics. to introduce him is former brazil ambassador, u.s. ambassador to brazil, tony harrington, a longtime friend and chair of our brazil institute. before asking tony to introduce tom, let me applaud the efforts towashington and brasilia move past the snowden issues and to reschedule president rousseff visit for early next year. little bit about surveillance issues and i strongly disagree with what edward snowden did. nonetheless, i welcome the public debate about how we should restart, reset what we do on surveillance. the two largest economies and two largest democracies of the americas, the interest of the u.s. and brazil are more convergent and divergent in the realms of business, defense, science, education and culture. as tom shannon likes to say, the

challenge for the u.s. and brazilian governments is to catch up and align their policies to this reality. that is why tom shannon is here today, to help us understand the hopefully hostis snowden era. i want to turn this over to brazil institute chair tony harrington. tony served as u.s. ambassador to brazil in the clinton administration and is chair of the managing board of the albright stonebridge group third welcome, tony. thank you, jane. thank you for the final leadership that you bring to this important institution here in washington. of thergy and reach programs under your leadership. 1999st met tom shannon in when i was unexpectedly

preparing to go to brasilia as u.s. ambassador. not something i had envisioned, but with a mandate from president clinton to upgrade an important and as most of you know under attended bilateral relationship. happily i also met this other fellow on the stage, paulos otero, about the same time. to folks who accelerated my appreciation and understanding of brazil. an s c staffed rector for brazil in the southern cone at the time. it was readily apparent to me that tom was not only highly butledgeable about brazil had developed an unusual awareness and affection for the country while serving as to atant in a younger age prior u.s. ambassador.

with tom's advice and help in particular and that of many others, we were able to conclude a lot of significant agreements and open new space in u.s. brazil cooperation. since then, tom has been a rising star in our foreign , serving white house senior director and assistant secretary of state for western .emisphere with probably unneeded interest on my part and seeing him go to brazil, frightened with informal indications from the brazilian government that they would be delighted to see tom come back to brazil. he was then nominated and served as a distinctly accomplished ambassador to brazil. , he returned briefly

, but long enough to serve some gray hairs -- to receive some gray hairs. year, tom was nominated and confirmed by the senate to the withof career ambassador rare recognition of extraordinarily distinguished members of the u.s. foreign 53vice given to only diplomats over the last 50 years . as jane noted, secretary kerry has brought tom to the inner circle as senior advisor and history continues to unfold. as ambassador, tom was the architect of rapprochement

aftern u.s. and brazil some malaise in the relationship less thann march 2011 three months after president rousseff as the first woman president of the brazil, president obama made an unprecedented early visit to brasilia. in his address to a very large congregation in brasilia, president obama observed that it was high time that brazil and the u.s. enjoyed a level of engagement on a par with that the u.s. maintains the china and india for example. reset thehelped relationship. president rousseff's openness and engagement with president obama was clearly an important constructive step that was followed by president rousseff's

visit here in april last year. interestingly, she set the theme for visit as brazil/u.s. strategic part to ships for the 21st-century. agendas reset at the presidential level, but we need to get on with it. outreach would not happen without the skilled diplomacy of our ambassador at work austin brazil and back home with the state white house and the interconnections. as we know, for the elevation in the brazil-u.s. relationship was represented by the white house invitation to present rousseff for state visit land for a couple of months ago. the last such visit by a tozilian president washington was more than 18 years ago. on that all of

you are aware of the unfortunate element that led the president to announce a postponement of the visit and it is my hope, i'm sure it is all of our hope, but the review by the national security agency intelligence programs ordered by president questions resolve that are recognized as legitimate race in brazil or otherwise, despite the unfortunate way that they emerged. in so doing, that this will permit rescheduling of the visit and moving forward with the relationship. having attended and paid attention to the relationship since i was ambassador, i believe the reasons that led president obama to make the invitation and president rousseff to accept remain entirely valid and current.

further and deeper engagement is in the interest of both governments. the civil societies in both countries and the business sectors, whose interests are policy objectives of u.s.-brazil business communities are remarkably the same. i have herpes -- this confluence of influence reiterated when i was brazil last week for the clinton global initiative in real and the largest annual conference held by the national infederation of industry brasilia. both occasions addressed by president rousseff. not only clinton

opened a very successful clinton meetings, hetive was also asked by the national confederation of industry to address the body, but he was unfortunately presented because of his travel in connection with the memorial for president mandela. the leadership of c and i told us it was the largest gathering they had had an several people called up saying they just wanted to hear bill clinton. do his thing. the awkwardness around the nsa diminished they extraordinary achievements of of our just returned ambassador tom shannon. we are fortunate to have him serving with secretary kerry. , and where we trust

this adept steward of u.s.- brazil relations, we will have room for continued attention to realize the potential for engagement, both bilaterally and the things we can do together cooperatively on the world stage multilaterally. is that a personal privilege to work with some -- with tom shannon for more than a dozen years. i notice a pleasure for all of us to have him with us here this morning to share perspectives that are really unique on the state of relations and the between u.s.ons and brazil. we will have some time for discussion moderated by brazil oteroute director paolo as well. please help me in welcoming ambassador tom shannon. [applause]

well, good morning. is a great pleasure to be here. your warmane, for welcome and thank you woodrow wilson center. tony harrington, thank you for your kind words. my mother appreciates them. to mr.'s otero, thank you for the work you have done. as many of you know, this is a busy town in a town with divergent interests in a variety of immediate interests and keeping our elected leaders and on ahought leaders focused larger neighborhood, our own hemisphere, is sometimes a challenge. i think the woodrow wilson center and the brazil institute have done spectacular work.

the fact that you have institutes like they council and the german marshall fund expensing interest in the region and try to establish own focus i think is tribute to the richness of this field and importance of it. i personally am very grateful for the tremendous work that is done here. so thank you and thank you paolo and tony. this was billed as a conversation with me, sartre like to make it the conversation as quickly as possible. i want to open this up to address your interest and your concerns. before do that, i want to say a few things him a share a few slots. -- share a few slots. thoughts. i have the good fortune of being asked by secretary kerry are being worked on broader issues. i am being globalized. my interest in brazil has not waned. quite the contrary.

as brazil asserts itself deeper into the world, it will not let me go. i will continue to have a profound interest in u.s.-brazil relationships. but especially on the strategic side of the relationship as both brazil and the united states look for ways to share understanding of the world and to chart cooperative path that i believe will benefit all of our countries. nearly four years ago in february of 2010, actually in january of that year, i was kindly invited by the paolo to speak you before i went to brazil as ambassador. in that instance i made a few assertions. the first was that although brazil had been described as an emerging power by many analysts, i said that i didn't agree with that. that was not emerging, that in fact it had already emerged and as already exercising a role an important global player that needed to be recognized and understood.

said that brazil's emergence was really the product of its own domestic transformation as it addressed long-standing social inequities like poverty, inequality and social exclusion, built a functioning democracy and created one of the largest economies in the world. it is an economy which was building a large consumer base middle class that was globalizing as it developed. brazil's emergence into the world and its assertion of global ambition was putting brazil in contact with united of the worldts were historically brazil had not been present before and that this new engagement with brazil, whether in the middle east or broadlyr asia or more in the americas such as in caribbean and central america, meant that the united states had to understand brazil in a different light and that brazil also had to rethink its

relationship with united states as we look for a way to accommodate this new global interest. that whilenoted brazil and the united states have been friendly historically, there's a certain distance that both of us have got about a business but that increasingly conductivityore between our societies and peoples that was going to affect ultimately our diplomacy and our foreign policy towards each other and that with time our societies and peoples work going to become the principal drivers of our relationship and that our governments. i would argue that i was right in all of those assertions and that if anything else, i nearly four years in brazil have convinced me that they are still valid and actually still very much alive in shaping the u.s. brazil relationship. although brazil has seen its own

internal political effervescence last june with the many demonstrations that we saw across brazil, from our point of view this as evidence of the health of brazilian democracy and the fact that there is broad tolic space for citizens demonstrate and protest and make their views heard. brazilian institutions have the capacity to respond to them and -- in a meaningful way and as we look ahead, i think we understand that brazil's domestic transformation, because it was done within a democratic context and because it was done in the market, as shown in democracy and markets can deliver development and that brazil has also shown that democracy and markets are not about status quo. they're not about protecting privileges but about crating space with the right kind of social policy and the right kind of approach to development that

the people themselves can have a central role in determining the developmental direction of the country. this is a powerful message. it is a powerful message from the point of view of the united states and from the point of view of countries around the world who are facing challenges that brazil has faced, whether it is moving from an authoritarian government to a democratic government. weather is moving from close economy to open economy. weather is moving from target development models to ones of regional integration and whether it is moving from isolation to globalization. brazil has laid out a pathway or an example of sorts should be encouraging, not just to the united states as we look for ways to influence the world in ways that are meaningful to us and concurrent with our values, but also as countries themselves try to determine how they can harness the peace and stability that democracies and markets can offer.

to address significant social challenges and historic social challenges. from our point of view, our ability to work with brazil, our ability to engage with it not just bilaterally but globally, and to try to shape areas and methods of cooperation, whether it is in foreign assistance and either in agricultural development areas of public health areas. whether it is in promoting nonproliferation, whether it is addressing peaceful resolution of disputes or fashioning broad trade agreements, how we relate with brazil and how brazil relates to the us is going to be increasingly important. as i noted before, one of the striking things that has happened over the past several years has been the growing conductivity between our societies and our peoples. the most evident and germanic evidence of that obviously is in theism and especially enormous demand for visas that .e have seen coming from brazil

and the flow brazilian tourists over the past 10 years, our visa demand has increased by over 600%. it increased by 32% last year and continues on an upward swing, even with the brazilian economy has slowed considerably. the exchange rate has declined, as far as brazilian consumers in taurus are concerned. this indicates brazilian society is globalizing at a fast pace. brazilians are connecting broadly in the united states, whether it be as tourists or investors. in this regard, what we are seeing increasingly as a response from the united states for growing interest in brazil and increase in tourism, although not at the same level

we are seeing on the brazilian side. it is a dramatic increase in business and investment areas. the travel to the u.s. of governors, mayors, state economic development leaders, businesses, it has been remarkable. we have seen a significant increase in our bilateral trade. well over $100 billion in goods and services. this is a trade potential that is only being barely exploited. there is a lot more that can and should be done. the focus of our relationship on building out has been one of the priorities of this administration. certainly, one of the priorities of secretary clinton. it remains a priority of secretary kerry. what is striking about the emergence of this new connectivity is that i believe, increasingly, our societies will determine the direction of our relationship. both of our governments, by anchorage and this, will build a

balance in the relationship -- by encouraging this, will build a balance in the relationship. we are creating a constituency that will will demand our governments to solve problems that we might not be willing or prepared to address in the immediate moment. that will bring me to the disclosure portion eventually. before i get there, the larger point i want to make is that as we look at this relationship over the past several years, our purpose was to build what we call a 21st century partnership. i told the press when i arrived in brazil in february that, and it has become a mantra of the relationship.

it was used as the slogan of our relationship when president rousseff visited the united states the first time. as we built out this 21st- century partnership and realize we needed to build a more solid and robust dialogue structure, we realized we needed to focus on the quality of dialogue. we needed to connect our governments at leader levels to ensure that our bureaucracies had clear direction and impetus to move forward on important issues. we discovered that our points of view converged. this does not mean they were always the same. there are still some stark differences. what is important, we found important areas of cooperation and concern.

whether it is around climate change, food security, transnational crime, the proliferation of weapons, just to name a few. as we did this, we recognized that we needed to build a 21st- century platform for this relationship. those of you who are real brazilianists and can remember when we had consulates in many cities, along with our embassy in rio de janeiro and our consulates, over time, that has shrunk down to an embassy in brazil and consulate general's in são paulo. that structure, having consulates on the coast and an embassy in brasilia is like having a consulate in cleveland. it doesn't work. the president's decision to authorize us to open or reopen consulates in two cities was an important step in expanding our presence on the ground and tapping into a very large,

passive population of potential visitors to the united states who had not been able to travel because they were unwilling to travel to the coast or to brasilia to look for the says. it also expands our commercial investment our reach. it is my hope over time that we will be able to expand our presence even further and build back the kind of geographic presence that we need to address a country of continental proportions. another important component of our 21st-century platform is rebuilding our brazil experts. brazil was a centerpiece of our

hemispheric diplomacy for a long time. because of the consulates we had in the region and the u.s. presence, we had a large number of portuguese speakers who knew the country, knew it well, and served there for several iterations, and who we could call upon to help understand what was happening in brazil. through the 1980's and 1990's, and through attrition, that changed. much of our hemispheric policy became spanish-speaking focus. because of the decline in usaid

presence, the exit of the peace corps and the decline in our geographic presence, we began to lose our portuguese language expertise and brazilian language expertise. that has all changed. it has changed because of the enormous demand for visas. we have hundreds of young officers who have done their first and second tours there. we are replicating what we had several decades ago and i think this is going to be important for our diplomacy because it will create familiarity with brazil and an understanding of

how we need to deal with brazil over time. we remain convinced that the united states and brazil continued to build a strategic harness ship. by strategic partner -- partners -- partnerships. what can either country get from each other? how things change with a strategic partnership is the transactional nature remains to a certain extent, but why it is strategic, both countries work together to shape, and understandings of the world. this can only be done through the kind of dialogue that we keep building over time. unfortunately, the decision by both presidents to postpone the october state visit was the product of the snowdon disclosures.

it has created a challenge to build this type of strategic partnership because it has interrupted a dialogue that was nascent, but of growing importance. i believe we can recover that moment and that we have to recover that moment. it would be for the benefit of both countries, not just our governments and state positions, but more important for our own citizens. we need to understand how brasilia investing in the united states and brazil investing in the u.s. and how we can enrich the lives of our citizens and how it has relevancy to the daily lives of our citizens. that will make it unique in our larger diplomatic efforts in the hemisphere. it will underscore the importance of our diplomacy.

we have engaged with brazil in several levels. we engaged technically, with our intelligence community, led by james clapper. meeting to address their concerns about the disclosures. it was also a political engagement in which the minister of justice traveled to the united states to meet with u.s. officials, including the vice president of the united states. there have been several conversations and meetings between president rousseff and president obama as they try to sketch out a pathway forward out of this challenged in the larger relationship. the white house released the results of the presidential review group that was investigating the impact of

technology on information intelligence gathering. that is the first step towards a larger review of how the united states does use intelligence and will form the basis to reengage with the brazilians and make our own suggestions on the best way forward in that relationship. the brazilians have waited with a certain expectation to what we are going to be able to offer them and how we are going to be able to move forward in the aftermath of the disclosures. we do not have a clear pathway yet, but we will. we will look at the recommendations that have been issued by the review group at this point. i don't have a whole lot more to say in that regard because this

is a work in progress. united states and brazil have worked in international forums. resolutions related to disclosures have been presented. the united states and brazil, along with other partners interested in things like internet governance, riotous he is a human rights, and the role of espionage, we have been able to fashion texts that the united states has joined consensus on. this is an important step. it realizes that both of our governments have the capability of understanding the concerns of the other and addressing them with a larger environment. just yesterday, the un's general assembly voted on a resolution

out of the third committee in which we were able to join consensus. that is a positive sign. we are also appreciative of the way the brazilian government has handled the recent communication of edward snowden to the brazilian people and his effort to solicit asylum from brazil. their response is noted and welcomed by the united states. it is evident that what the snowdon disclosures have done, aside from creating a level of pause at one part of our relationship, we have

found, both among usm brazilian business and businesses, is a hunger to continue our engagement and to continue to look for ways to fashion a more fluid and productive business and investment relationship between the two countries. in this regard, i think we have a lot to work from. we continue to see a huge flow of brazilian students to the united states, which will continue to have a big impact on american universities, especially american graduate programs. the influx of students will be the largest influx of students from the western hemisphere that we have seen so far in the 21st century. in that sense, i think the

impact of resilient students on american universities and graduate programs is going to continue to be large. as i indicated earlier, the visa demand has not slacked off. it grows at an important rate. it creates an urgency for both governments to find a way to address the problems and the questions raised by the snowdon disclosures. this is what we are committed to. we are committed to a larger relationship with brazil that understands we occupy different laces in the world and we have different sets of interests, but ultimately we are committed to interests that are similar and compatible. as we think about the u.s.- brazil relationship, it is worthwhile to take a step back and understand how it fits in a larger international environment. many of you are familiar with the phrase "the long war" where was said that while we might

walk away from our enemies, our enemies will not walk away from us. i would argue that although the united states still faces significant security challenges around the world, while we still have enemies that will pursue us wherever we are, we are in a different kind of environment, and given what we have seen with the rise of china and india, the insertion of these giant societies into international economies, the emergence of countries such as brazil, turkey, south africa, mexico, and in asia -- mexico, indonesia

, and the emergence of these societies have drivers -- societies as drivers of foreign policy and diplomacy, we are at a point where we need to understand our future well-being is about building partnerships and alliances. this will require a new focus and new energy in our diplomacy. while the long war might be present for us, we have the immediacy of a long diplomacy. that will require us to rethink how we engage in the world and the kind of partnerships we want to build. in this regard, i think you can be a bellwether. for many reasons that i have described here, it is also important to understand that brazil has emerged into a world and is a part of a larger network of countries that are calling on reform and renewal of international institutions at a time in which there has been no cataclysmic events that forces us into reforming or renewing these institutions.

the institutions are increasingly less capable of the dressing the larger problems that the world faces, so our ability to reestablish momentum in the u.s.-brazil relationship and to ensure a gets back on a meaningful track that both of our governments and societies want, that will have a big impact on our ability to conduct this kind of diplomacy. ultimately, many years from now, much of what we consider to be important will not be seen as important. much of what occupies our every day will fall away and become history. what will be remembered and judged by historians is our ability to accommodate these rising powers, to transform and

renew the institutions that we have created over time, to be responsive to the larger challenges that the world faces, and to do so in ways that promote international peace and security, would also promote prosperity and the ability for individuals to determine their individual destiny. this means not only opportunities and resources, but an environment in which each of us is respected. i believe the united states and brazil, because of our broad commitment to democratic values to human rights, to open society, we are in a unique lace to do this. -- place to do this. there is an urgency for us to recapture the direction and purpose of our relationship and i hope you all share this.

i would like to end there, reminding ourselves that this is the 100 anniversary of a scientific expedition to brazil. it was captured in the book "the river of doubt." i have a picture on the floor deck of a vessel as a debarked and began their land track to the river of doubt. it is a remarkable photograph. he is dressed in navy whites with white shoes and his hair is slicked back. he is proud. roosevelt was dressed in camping clothes, with his hat off, here messed up, glasses slightly awry and slightly scrunched and looking at the camera as if he was wondering what was happening. it was a remarkable moment in the sense that it captured a proud and successful man with a

roosevelt who had seen and done much and had much more to do in his life. what was striking about the trip was to have two men of large egos and purpose in such close quarters for so long and to have them travel down the river with no hope of coming out alive at the end, just in anticipation or expectation that they were on a historic journey that would identify a source of the amazon and accomplish something that was going to be important to brazil in the world, it was remarkable. in many ways, this is an image

for a larger u.s.-brazil relationship. friendship, courage, and purpose can accomplish a lot in this world. thank you very much. [applause] >> now for the conversational part of this. i would like to tell those who are following this on the webcast or on c-span, you can send us questions if you wish. it is through our twitter account. just before i open for questions, to complete the story that ambassador sharon just mentioned about roosevelt, that river, the river of doubt during the trip was renamed the roosevelt river. the locals refer to it as the

theodora. we call people by their first names. i would like you to identify yourselves, wait for the microphone, so he knows who is asking the question. >> my name is bill. it is a pleasure to see you again. you mentioned, and i agree, the future and past has been determined by the society. in order for that to continue, don't we have to convince our society, in relationship to the security issues, that we are willing and will modify surveillance so that can be transmitted to brazil?

in brazil, politicians represent the society. we have to convince them. do we have to convince the society of brazil first, and of course there is a good section members of that -- how do you envision us going about that? that is my question. >> one of the challenges of democratic societies is to create space for the kind of dialogue that we have to have now. that is one of the reasons the president decided to name a presidential review group, to look at intelligence gathering and the impact of information technology on the 21st century. we had to have a space where people could talk about this

publicly. on of the challenges with issues of intelligence gathering is much of it cannot be talked about publicly. i think the presidential review group has done a good service in laying out a universe of options for the united states that will serve as a basis for a larger conversation. as far as brazil is concerned, we have a lot of work to do. as to the brazilians themselves. that is going to have to take place at a variety of levels at the same time. some will be done between leaders, diplomats, intelligence officers, but some will be done more broadly and in the public sphere.

one of the opportunities that has been presented to us is an ability to engage with our public about intelligence work in the 21st century. and understand what information technology means for us. if you look at the disclosures issue closely, what you have is a mapping of 21st century technology and a mapping of the internet. you have a recognition that the way we communicate is changing fundamental understandings that we have about things like privacy and individual agency

and our own behavior. much of this is not related to intelligence agencies at all. it is related to large companies and how they use bulk data and metadata and how they predict and try to influence how consumers behave. in many ways, we have been offered a window into this century and it will allow us to make some fundamental decisions about how intelligence is gathered, and how we want to structure information in our communities and societies. >> can i add a couple of observations from my visit last week, meeting with the business leaders and several congressmen, including an influential senator of the president's party. this is not a representative sampling, but the basic theme was, we would like to get on with it, get past this. i think within thought leaders and influential parts of brazil, there is a desire to move on with the relationship in a constructive manner.

this particular senator had been a part of the delegation that came and met with the vice president biden and he was pretty warm about it, including biden, where he said i grew up with two precepts, never trust anyone over 70, and don't trust washington politicians. i would like to ask you to trust me and violate both of those. there is also an interest in, a great challenge and opportunity for collaboration in the involving scheme of governance of the internet that brazil and the u.s. could be, should be,

and probably are prepared to cooperate on. >> thank you. >> hi. the u.s. government has said that it is ready to discuss a new date for the brazilian president to visit the u.s. have you received any sign from the brazilian side that they are ready to discuss and how likely is it that the visit will happen at the beginning of next year? considering your engagement and involvement with brazil, have you personally experienced the problems question mark how -- problems? how frustrated were you with what happened? yesterday we had a concrete

example of the consequences with the decision of the brazilian government. how did you see that? >> i had the pleasure of beginning my tenure with wikileaks and ending it with snowden. [laughter] what i tell people is we have seen the enemy and he is us. diplomacy and representing a country like the united states is not about personal experience. it is about a responsibility and a duty, not only in this regard to president obama and the government, but more broadly to the people of the united states of america. it is an honor and privilege and we try to do the best we can. i have a section for brazil, for brazilians -- i have respect for brazil and for brazilians. i am deeply committed to the u.s.-brazil relationship and building the kind of partnership i talked about.

finding myself in a situation in which we were going to have to slow down what we were doing diplomatically, or look for other ways to express this partnership, what is frustrating -- it was frustrating at one level, but at the same time, these are challenges we relish because it allows us to show what we are capable of and it tests our conceptual understanding of relationships. it allows us to expand the context of our diplomatic activity. in terms of the decision yesterday, related to the fx2. congratulations to the brazilian air force. this is something they have wanted for a long time. even now, it is coming too late,

but it is an important step for the brazilian air force. we are disappointed. boeing did tremendous work in brazil, and it will continue to do tremendous work. this will not affect the kind of cooperation that we have developed over time with the brazilian air force. as i noted, we have seen clear signs from the brazilian government that it is prepared to engage with us in a meaningful way on issues related to disclosures. whether it be in international settings, such as unesco, the u.n.'s general assembly, but also

its response to snowden's request for asylum. i feel good about where we are right now. this is an ongoing discussion we are having. we have made it very clear that we are prepared to reschedule. i think our conversation with the brazilians have to write them a little bit before we get a response from them. -- have to right them a little bit before we get a response from them. >> hello, ambassador shannon. i think your opening address and comments have made an effort to answer the question that i'm going to ask you again. i think if we go back, i would like to ask you, how do you address the skeptics in this town question mark some of them

-- in this town? some of them are here, some of them are floating about. who would point to the going back, before your tenure, then to the reaction to the msa disclosures, -- the nsa disclosures, germans reaction was greeted with greater understanding and perhaps brazil. i think we still have a tendency to understand brazil's reaction jerk, anti-knee- american reaction. that is pointing to brazil's actions on trade issues and

patents. a long list of issues that are pointed to. the u.s. cannot have the strategic ownership with brazil that you have advocated for so adeptly. i would like you to adjust that skepticism head on and maybe use a couple of examples, such as latin america. u.s. a place where the can't have brazil as a partner for reasons of how brazil advances its interests that are different from ours. thank you. >> thank you very much. listen, relationships are between at least two and sometimes more, there are skeptics on both sides. there are skeptics beyond brazil

and the united states for all of the reasons that you have described. on the u.s. side, there has always been people who have tended to view brazil within a south american context and tend that hast as a country behaved differently in many of our partners that different kinds of ambitions. that is sometimes viewed as it can take -- our influence and presence, especially in south america. on the brazilian side, there are skeptics who wonder sometimes quite loudly about the value of brazil attaching itself to closely to a country like the united states because of what they perceive as the asymmetry in the power of interest, especially the global reach of the united states and the extent to which brazil finds itself sucked into our wake and is forced to participate in things

or act in a way that it does not feel is in its best interest overtime. part of our challenge has been to address the skeptics and reshape the understandings. recognizing that, there are is a certain degree of truth to both sides. our interest at times due clash. the ambition sometimes works across purposes. we have to be able to manage those parts of the relationship that are problematic but we have tried to build out and expand those parts of the relationship that function well. in many ways, the reason i talked about the diplomacy is because this is the challenge of diplomacy. this is the largest challenge we

will face with result. we are looking for a country that will follow at all times. if the brazilians are looking from us, a country that is prepared to meet every knee when it comes to market access or some other interest that it is pursuing, both sides of be disappointed and the relationship will be troublesome. understandble to where we can work together in a meaningful fashion, then i think there is a lot that we can do and potential for a productive relationship and growth. i think it needs to be taken advantage of. thank you. weekly0 years of daily engagement with brazil, which i

think this room is a flash in the pan, there is no what i have found who explains brazil better to that united states and the united states better to brazil than our moderated. i do not know if the rules permit this, but given that we have heard tom shannon as a tour de force on the u.s. side of this, can i ask the moderator what it would take from the brazilians side for us to with this disclosure issue behind us? it coming from the business immunity that feel that brazil has in a sense somewhat isolated itself in the trade arena. this is daily news in brazil. a national conversation in brazil, very much so. you have the president, of the national cap -- confederation of industries, addressing this directly.

he is very close to president dilma rousseff. he is very close to the person who is likely to run for the governor of the state, who is now the minister of development and commerce in brazil. you have this and the signals from society, that they won more and more engagement with the united states. so i think that is where, you know, this will appear in a debate in brazil. especially, i think, in a presidential election year in brazil next year. it will be interesting. i personally would love if the candidates all have the capacity to engage in this debate in terms of brazil's presence in the world. one thing that i thought he was going to mention, but he didn't, and i will -- you have an increasing number of brazilian companies, global companies. i personally would love if the

candidates all have the capacity to engage in this debate in terms of brazil's presence in the world. one thing that i thought he was going to mention, but he didn't, and i will -- you have an increasing number of brazilian companies, global companies. there are about 30 of them. some of them are important in the united states. they become real connectors between brazil and the united states. there is one well-known company that has five subsidiaries in the united states. they are here because this is a big market, but this is also a place of innovation. i wanted to just remember something president dilma rousseff said exactly one year ago in her last interview of 2012. she was asked about this business of the fiscal cliff that the united states was going down.

that they could not manage their fiscal affairs and govern themselves. she said, i don't believe that the united states is losing importance in the world. this is almost a quote, as i read this so many times. then she said, the united states is a country with an extraordinarily flexible economy, with a great capacity to reinvent itself. the united states is moving -- is the country of innovation and has something that she says, i value very much, and we have to pay attention to. she repeated four times the word "education." there is a debate in the united states about the quality of education, but those are the topics now. what it requires, what will happen -- it takes leadership.

it takes leadership here. it takes leadership there, too, to make those interests. but this is completely out of order because i am not supposed to be saying any of this. >> thank you. ambassador shannon, it is a pleasure to have you with us. it is always such a pleasure to hear you talk. you give such a coherent presentation, and i know that you choose your words very carefully. so i want to address this phrase of the disclosure problem, which you referred to repeatedly. probably being one of the only people in the room that has sued the u.s. government for warrantless wiretapping, and having suits rejected by the supreme court on the grounds

that we could not prove standing nearly two months before the snowden disclosures, which leads one to continually wonder if we could have proved standing two months later, i think choosing the phrase "the disclosure problem" makes it seem less serious and i think it really is. because, and not just on a human rights level and a right to privacy, on a commercial level, the lyrical level. it fundamentally has to do with trust. there is, and i understand it is corporate as well as domestic. i would like to hear you respond to that. i think it discounts the seriousness of what is happening. the second thing, with respect to education and the number of brazilian students coming here to the united states, which is enormous, how is it going from the u.s. to brazil? i have a sense that it is much less, but i don't know the numbers. could you talk about that, and what you see in the future on that side? >> i will get to the last one first.

i don't have the exact figures. but i think it is going to change over time. to begin with, historically when americans have done overseas university stints it has been focused on europe, the u.k., spain, italy, with some france thrown in. we see more going to mexico, to argentina. it is our hope, especially as we build out our component of education in america, 100,000 strong, that we will be able to begin to build a larger u.s. presence in brazilian universities. in order to do that successfully, we need the help of brazilian universities, because many brazilian universities are not equipped to take international students easily. they don't have dormitories,

they don't have international student programs, so it tends to fall the student to find a place to live, a support network, etc. some young students are able to do that. others are not. others want a more package deal. there are a few brazilian universities that are beginning to understand this and are beginning to try to fashion mechanisms that will allow them to attract foreign students more easily. not just from the united states, but from elsewhere. one of the things we hope to be able to do overtime with the science without borders program is use what is really a student exchange program to build relationships between and solutions, between universities and to use that to facilitate the movement of faculty and the movement of services and to break down the closed shop nature of universities, especially when it comes to

things like credits and degrees so that they can be shared easily. it is our hope over time to take a program, which is about exchanging students, and use it to build relationships between our educational systems and our laboratories and research institutes that are going to provide a much more vigorous and productive relationship for both countries. in terms of disclosure problems, challenges, crises, outrage, i choose my words carefully. we could call it something else. you could call it treason. >> that focuses on snowden. >> i agree. what i want to be able to do here is recognize the seriousness of the issue, recognize the impact it has had

on the relationship and on brazil's understanding of that relationship, but put it into a context in which it does not overwhelm the relationship, because i do not think it should. imagery is different i talk to the foreign ministry and it said he said it cast a dark shadow on the relationship. others have used words like trust and respect. we are going to have to address all of that in some fashion. the brazil end of this has been exaggerated for political purposes, not by brazilians themselves, but by snowden's handlers. much has been taken out of context. ultimately, we are in a position with the brazilians because of this, to rethink our liaison relationships.

that is something brazil does poorly right now. largely because of their own internal history and that -- a recognition that brazil does not have an intelligence relationship that matches its global ambitions. in order to do that, it needs to build liaison relationships with global intelligence services that are capable of helping it do the kinds of things and provide the kinds of services to its own government that ultimately it is going to need. brazil is in a privileged place right now. it largely does not have external enemies. it does have adversaries and people who are interested in what is happening inside brazil. the subject and the object of cyber assaults everyday.

brazilians know this. they are looking for ways to build capacity as they build out their economy. it is our hope that they will recognize that they have a useful partner in us and that they need to see be on their own immediate concerns caused by snowden to build out that partnership, especially as they look to work towards the world cup and the olympics. also, as i noted, and you acknowledge, this is much bigger than intelligence issues. this is how modern society manages the data flowing through our telecommunication systems. it is going to require a response, or at least a thought process that is much larger than the one we have going right now.

>> alec watson. thank you very much for a brilliant exposition earlier on. it was anticipated a little bit, what i would like to ask you about. with brazil's starting to feel a little isolated in international commerce with the formation of the pacific alliance, others, the comments by the cni president in denver reflect some of that. on the other hand, the brazilians seem to be still hogtied by their participation and by certain kinds of barriers within their own still quite protectionist society to be able to make a breakthrough on trade issues. they have been talking to the eu

for many years and have not gotten very far. yet i think that is one of the points that will be most important for strengthening the overall bilateral relationship between us and brazilians. i wonder if you could say a few words about that. >> we want more trade and more investment. that is why brazil is one of the focuses of the president's national export initiative. one of the focuses of the initiative. we are prepared to go to great lengths to achieve that. what is heartening, as tony mentioned, is the very strong push from large industrial confederations like cni on the bilateral trade relationship and trying to find ways to overcome aspects of brazilian trade and commerce that have limited our ability to penetrate certain markets. in this regard, the negotiations that are ongoing between brazil and the european union are an interesting beltway. -- bellwether.

it is increasingly clear to brazilians that they have large opportunities in europe, but they are being held back for a variety of reasons. some of them are domestic and some of them are related to the american relationship. we are not asking anyone to abandon their alliances or trading structures. a relationship between resilient brazil and the european union could put someone in a position where you could imagine triangulation as the united states builds its transatlantic trade partnership, triangulating into south america, or into the free-trade agreements that exist, or the kinds of agreements one might fashion with brazil, would be a very interesting possibility. one that i would think would create a fascinating grouping of

markets as we look across into africa and also into asia. but brazil has come a long way in a fairly short time. when i was there the first time around, from 1989 to 1992, the thought that brazil would be the home of major global companies and it would be a growing investor in the united states and that a company would have numerous subsidiaries operating in the united states and that another company would be a major supplier of regional aircraft did not cross many people's minds. in a short time, they have covered a lot of ground. they have a lot more ground to cover. >> i was recently at the council of foreign relations council in new york where the minister of development was speaking. he said something meaningful to

me and i think i will repeat it here. it helps with the context. he said brazil, over the past 30 years or so, faced and basically built a consensus over three major challenges. the first was democracy, followed by the challenge around economic stabilization. the consensus in brazil, do not try inflation on brazilians because you will lose. and the third is social inclusion. brazil has achieved a lot with the expansion of the middle class. the minister added, now is the time to face the challenge of competitiveness. the other name of it is the challenge of making the

brazilian economy a more open economy. you cannot deal with competitiveness in a closed economy, as you cannot resolve innovation issues and become more innovative in a closed economy. i wanted to add this because it is relevant to the conversation. >> my question is related to what he was talking about. >> how does the recent increase decrease in gdp and increase in economic concern affect the relationship you have come to talk to us about and understand? >> it is indicative of the changes going on in brazil and challenges brazil faces. if you look at what brazil have been able to accomplish, it has done a lot of this on a consumer-driven growth model.

that model has run its course. brazil now needs to build a growth model that is based on productivity and competitiveness. as you look out over the brazilian landscape, what is striking to me is that the challenges the brazilian economy faces are several. the biggest and most pressing is infrastructure. how do you build the ports, the highways, the railways and the telecommunications systems to move goods and services? how do you do it in a timely fashion? brazil is the second-largest food exporter in the world. but it still cannot get all its product and market or to port or

to the foreign destinations that would happily buy brazilian products. it has huge infrastructure needs that have to be addressed. it has significant human resource needs that need to be addressed. as it builds up the managerial corps, there is a worker corps that needs to be fashioned in a 21st century economy. its labor regime, its tax structures or the other regulations that determine how you start businesses and how you close businesses. these are not problems that are hidden or known. -- unknown. brazilians understand this well. they have advanced dialogue and how to address them. the human resources are easiest to involve because they involve investment. the regulatory drag is the hardest because it is political.

it involves taking on significant entrenched interests within brazilian society. in some ways, the president has inherited the toughest part of brazil's economic transformation. the previous brazilian president cleared the space for a long- term positive growth path. the next president was able to inject capital into the system so that brazilians could take advantage of that long-term growth path and profit from it and drive growth rates that were quite high. the current president took over just as it was hitting a wall. it is up to her to find a new way to address the challenges in the brazilian economy.

in many ways, her challenge is probably the toughest of the three. but the good thing is as brazil has worked through these different parts of its economic development, it has globalized and become aware of what is happening elsewhere in the world. so i do think that brazil is up to these challenges. the question is how fast. in this regard, brazil is uniquely positioned. there are very few countries in the world his economic well- being is entirely in their own hands. for the most part, that is true for brazil. the decision it makes on infrastructure, education and regulatory reform will determine how fast it grows. if it makes the right decisions quickly, it grows faster and stronger. if it makes no more slowly, it will not. the thing is, it doesn't stop growing. it continues to attract american

investors and american business leaders. >> this side of the room. >> i am a former representative of uruguay to the organization of american states. ambassador shannon mentioned a couple times of a u.n. resolution. on the right of digital privacy related to human rights. how do you see the implementation of a solution, and is -- it is something brazil has fought a lot for. will it have a direct impact in the actual state of the relationship? >> as i noted, we join consensus on that, which means we are fine with it. the reason we were able to join consensus is that the original

text proposed by the initial conveners or those who authored the text, including brazil, had to change some aspects of the text to broadly address our concerns. we recognize, as the resolution does, the importance of privacy and the importance of an internet, which is seen as a global public good and one that that needs to be protected. like so many u.n. resolutions, these are designed to capture a sense of the members of the u.n. and to help provide direction. but they are not binding. rarely do they have aspects to them that are implemented. but that does not mean they are not important, because they capture a political moment, and a purpose that needs to be understood and respected, and we

just think the fact that we were able to work with our other partners, but also with brazil to fashion a text that we could accept was important, and i think it shows that whatever brazil's intentions might have been starting that process, it recognized early on it was not going to achieve everything it wanted to in that process and it had to make concessions that actually created a better environment for the kind of dialogue we are having. >> thanks. my question has to do with brazil's relationship with other countries in the hemisphere, whether south america or more broadly. we have worked on some of this together. for the broad respect

strength of the brazilian economy, what brazil has accomplished in terms of democracy. i think there is less willingness to cede leadership in the hemisphere to brazil even though brazil aspires to use south america as a base for global projection. you see any number of examples, opposition toch having brazil have a permanent seat on the un security council. you see it in the reaction in the hemisphere to the position that brazil took these of the the human rights system. i was wondering, and your time as ambassador if you could comment on how you perceive brazil's leadership being perceived in other parts of the region. >> that is a great question. brazil tries to be careful in terms of how it deals with its neighbors, largely because he

recognizes that it's bigger ambitions are expressed through salek, but especially uniscor. it has to be managed with respect and understanding for the concerns of other countries. it tries to present itself not as a hegemonic force but as a coalescing force in the region. this is not easy when you're as they cast brazil. that even border on france -- brazilians like to point out even border on france. it is a complicated diplomatic dance and is made more complicated by the relationships and the trade challenges that brazil faces with argentina because they tend to overload some of the circuits in the structures that they have.

but the brazilians work very hard at this. the efforts from our point of view are positive, whether it is in central america or the caribbean community. these are all efforts that facilitate dialogue and exchanges that -- for the broader hemisphere. but the biggest impediment to a brazil that dominates south america is largely its inability to open its markets. if brazil could open its markets, the andean countries never would have done free-trade agreements with the united states, or least not with the speed that they did them. they would have done agreements with brazil.

when the mexicans realize they have been organized of latin america and they were not part of the caribbean community, and they launch their own initiative, that was all about putting themselves back into the region. the most interesting diplomatic move of recent times has been mexico's joined the pacific alliance. that put mexico into south america in a way that i think many never anticipated and created the possibility of a connected series of free markets along the pacific coast, all facing asia, without a u.s. presence or driving purpose that i think ultimately would be challenge is the wrong word because brazil tends to embrace challenges. i do not think this is a

challenge to brazil so much as it is something that it has to understand and address in a way that reflects the concerns of the members of the alliance. >> yes. >> my name is steve and i'm here on behalf of the u.s. travel association and want to thank you for your opening remarks about booming demand in both directions for both business travel and leisure travel. and in that context i think it should be mentioned how commendable it is the enormous effort the and this he -- embassy has done to bring down enormous delays in wait times for brazilian applicants for u.s. visas. those wait times are down over

90% and it makes a big difference. that demand we all hope and expect will continue to rise. i want to bring up the question of the visa waiver program. as you are aware, the first south american country will be admitted to the program this spring. a year and half ago after as press was in her zeal -- in brazil, state departments were established to set up so-called roadmaps pre-discussions knowing that the conditions are not yet in place for an actual agreement but to lay the groundwork. it is not clear to many of us were that all stands, particularly after october. i wonder in the spirit of looking forward and consensus

that you have described here, described what the path forward may be there. >> sure. happy to do that. as we try to understand the demographics in brazil and what has been driving this demand is surging these is -- visa, the growth in the middle class was seen as one of the reasons why we were seeing such a sharp rise. as we look at the issue were closing, we realized that really wasn't true. many of the new middle class and trends when not traveling to the united states. they were still traveling inside brazil. we were seeing increased travel by upper-middle-class. because they had more disposable income and they had developed an interest in travel. even though we had to run really

hard in order to fashion a visa process that reduced wait times down to two days and accommodate the many brazilians traveling to the united states, we recognize that there is a new group of entrants into the middle class that have yet to attempt to travel to the united states but that they are coming. it is kind of like a rogue wave out there. it is in the middle of the ocean and not stopping. through expanding our consular sections and the number of officers we have in building out the interview windows we have, we are building a capacity to produce 1.8 million to 2 million visas a year. i personally do not think that is enough, if this rogue wave keeps coming at us.

if the brazilian economy takes up in terms of growth and people can consolidate themselves and that is where the visa program becomes important. both countries have to keep working at it. there was hesitancy to address the visa waiver program. their experience in spain and portugal has not been a happy one. that people turned around at ports of entry. that they have to turn around the brazilians were looking for assurances that they would not have repeat experiences in lisbon and madrid. is not that we ask for information about travelers.

we do want governments to give us a thumbs up or a thumbs down, whether they are at risk or not. and this is very hard for the brazilians to do legally. it requires them to dig through databases that are not easily connected right now. but secondly, to share risk assessments that they doubt they are legally allowed to do. we think there is a way forward on this and we think we can solve these problems. it is going to take some hard work on both sides. we think there is some urgency to it.

>> i am getting there. >> thanks. i work with many multinationals that operate in brazil and for them the cost of doing business is quite high. a lot of the cheap credit is available and another measure is no in the local tax regime and where to set up local production. which way does the u.s. plan to advocate for these u.s. based multinationals? the return investment is not like a five- or seven-year time frame. >> it is not just people coming in from the outside. one of the striking things is they will land american companies if they are based in brazil. without a doubt, there is an

overhang in the economy that needs to be addressed to promote not just brazilian companies from helping generate increased growth but also the growing presence of global companies and global investors. and some of this has to do with the legal costs and the regulatory costs. we have a very large foreign commercial presence in brazil and a very skilled one that operates out of all of our embassies and is prepared to help all american countries that are interested. many of the multinationals come down with their own resources and can manage their way through a lot of this. but many companies are coming in fresh. we are seeing with companies to come down with state delegations but by governors is a great interest in selling into the market are being present but little understanding about how to do it. that is where we can play an important role.

we can try to look for brazilian partners. ultimately brazil is a country where the extent to which you have brazilian partners working with you will make it a lot easier. the advice we give to american companies when they come down is first and foremost take on the dictum that brazil is not for beginners, that it is a complex and conductivity country and in many ways it is like an archaeological dig. navigating that can be challenging for some businesses. but also, brazil is not for short timers.

it is not for people who are going to come in and come out. it is for people who are prepared to make a long-term commitment, simply because it does take a long time to establish yourself and to find a way forward. we believe given the direction that brazil is going and given the platform that it could be for exports into the region and beyond, it is attracted to american industries. but again, we have clear instructions from the president and from the secretary of state and the secretary of commerce, that our number one is commercial diplomacy. this was my priority. i'm sure it is the priority of the new ambassador to brazil. i recommend that you work for closely with the embassy and our consulates because we'll provide all the help we can. >> paul johnson. thank you so much. always a pleasure to hear you talk.

we have heard over the years about opportunities for trilateral cooperation between e united states and brazil and sub-saharan africa. what are the prospects for some of the meat on the bones in terms of financing and trade investment, industries like agriculture, infrastructure, health. i just wanted to hear if thoughts on that. thank you. >> no, thank you. it is great seeing you. there are lots of possibilities. we began our trilateral cooperation in an effort to eradicate malaria but have extended that to mozambique, where we're doing some important work on the agricultural productivity side. we are working with the brazilians in honduras and haiti

on some other projects. this is brand-new for us and for the brazilians. working through their brazilian cooperation agency has been an interesting and fruitful experience. it is a small agency. it is staffed largely --brazil does not have the hydrant of professionals that one would imagine in that kind of an agency but it is building them over time. we have created an interesting relationship where we have exchange officers. as we try to get a better feel for how both sides work and where there might be synergies and connections. and we are interested and excited about extending that possibility.

we think that brazil has some really interesting things to offer. countries in africa and elsewhere. brazil does have some legal restraint or constraints on how far it goes in this kind of cooperation, especially related to how moneys flow back and forth between the government and abc and how it does its development assistance abroad and in some cases it is aid that is paying for brazilian services in some of these countries. but we think over time as brazil built out its programs, it is going to begin removing these barriers or streamlining them in a way in which abc and the brazilian government can do more.

there have been discussions about joint financing of projects, especially where there is a u.s. and a brazilian partner. it is competent to a certain extent by rules and regulations. we continue to try to find a way forward on that because the potential is huge. >> i might just add that outside the private sector and government, the gates foundation has engaged with the brazilian government and ministry of agriculture, abc in an ambitious program to send retired, distinguished agricultural scientists, economists to help with small farms, the development of small farms and farm practices in africa. very promising effort. >> thank you. margaret. >> thank you very much.

i was one of those brazilianistas that was brought up a long time ago. when i first went to brazil in the 1970's, one of the points of attrition between the united states and brazil was a nuclear question. you mentioned the kerfluffle with iran with the lula administration. have we gotten over that previous, that last irritation and is the treaty for the south american countries possibly a model for the kind of weapons nonproliferation regime that we are looking at in the middle east and other areas? is this an area where we might see more cooperation?

>> we are way over iran. we got over that one pretty quickly, actually. i think that brazil has been a very useful partner. brazil has never been happy with sanctioned regimes but it complies with them faithfully. but more importantly, i think especially under president rousseff, the brazilian made clear that iran had a lot of explaining to do and if it wanted normal relationships it would have to be respectful of un security council resolutions and the desire expressed repeatedly by the security council and elsewhere that iran address the concerns related to its nuclear program. brazil has been supportive

publicly most recently of the agreement that they were able to fashion with iran. i think brazil sees this as a positive development. that is helpful. in that regard i think we are in a very good place right now. the latin american experience around nuclear liberation and especially the agreement between brazil and argentina to create kind of mutual verification capabilities was an innovative and important agreement and one that could be useful as we look at how we manage verification regimes elsewhere. but i think ultimately the challenge we will face whether in iran or north korea is really

will be about verification and in that regard, oddly enough this is where intelligence is going to play an important role, because what we have seen over time is that especially in the nonproliferation side, intelligence is central to how we do our verification mark. much of it can be done publicly and by inspectors, not all that can be. as we think about the issues raised by mr. snowden, we need to understand that not all is about spying in our countries. much of it has to do with supporting larger international agreements. >> right there, yes.

>> i am with georgetown university law center. thank you for your talk but even more so for taking so many questions. i have two questions. if you could shed some light on why president obama apologized to angela merkel but not to rousseff for the spying. and secondly, jesters have worked extremely well for the pope, for example, and president putin is considering reportedly a pardon for the pussy riot girls and the arctic sunrise crew. would you consider recommending to the government a pardon for snowden given that he is such a thorn in our relations with so many countries but particularly brazil? >> thank you for both of those

questions. when these issues first appeared and especially when the allegations of head of government surveillance appeared, we treated the brazilians in the same way we treated the germans, which is quite remarkable given whatever allegations were out there. and the brazilians understood this and i think appreciated in their own way because it was indicative of the importance of the relationship. our intelligence relationships with those countries are quite different. germany has much more equity in our intelligence community then brazil does, especially with troops participating in isaf. much of the protection comes

from u.s. sources. i do not want to get into characterizing the conversation that president obama had with the chancellor. i will leave that to the white house. the germans have characterized that in one fashion and i am not sure the white house would agree with that. but what is important is that there has been communication several times between president obama and president rousseff about this and there will be communication about this in the future that addresses that specific issue. and so i think that given the circumstances, we are probably in as good a position we can be in terms of how we do our engagement in our country to country engagement. in terms of unexpected actions,,

this was race briefly in a "60 minutes" piece on the nsa. i think it is clear what the white house as said, but especially what the department of justice has said, that you should not expect an unexpected gesture. >> let me collect a few questions because we are coming to an end. we have two and then that is it. >> mr. ambassador, hi. i have served twice in brazil with u.s. aid. you talk about bilateral cooperation and talk about trilateral and you mentioned the opportunities in education and we have had major successes from the early 1970's with brazil, linking american and brazilian

universities. they have come back and now they are running those institutions in agriculture and health and other areas. you alluded to agriculture. i'm wondering about energy and environment. what opportunities for bilateral cooperation do you see? >> let's move to the next question. yes, there. >> i am with the house ways and means committee. in bali, we saw a great success led by a brazilian inspector general. right before that success was cinched, it looked as though some of the wto players would be the reason for the failure of the bali discussions.

to what degree coming out of bali do you think that brazil's view of its own specifically trade leadership is changing from one in which it is a leader of the developing world to one in which it is a broker of some sort between the developing world and the developed world? >> let's come here. let's start with this. >> human rights watch. thank you very much for your remarks. you mentioned that you hope to build up constructive relationship with brazil, promoting common values like democracy and human rights. what makes you feel hopeful that that can be effectively

developed in our region, and particularly in south america, where a group of countries that i do not think they share the same views and the same values in terms of promoting democracy and human rights. it is critical that brazil plays a more effective role. how do you see that role developing in terms of working together constructively with the u.s. government in south america? >> thank you. and the last question, please. >> hi. i don't think you have time to answer my question. i will pose a perhaps as a comment. it has been wonderful to hear your remarks on a wide range of subjects. brazil is a continental country. i was wanting to ask if you

could comment on some of the tensions within the country that come along with improvements in social inclusion and growth and improvements in economic well- being across the country instead of treating brazil as a single country that is doing remarkable things. what is happening in the different regions that have different opportunities? >> ok. thank you. all good questions. we have done something remarkable with our aid mission in brazil. it was on the chopping blocks, as it has been several times in our history. we were able to convince our colleagues in washington and elsewhere that now was the time to move from an aid mission to one that was a policy engagement mission. the idea being as brazil's economy expands, that we needed to be there working with them on a daily basis with the hope of helping to influence and shape

how they did assistance work so that it was more compatible with what we were trying to accomplish, recognizing other major economies out there have a different understanding in what foreign assistance is. and so far the dialogue has been really positive. we have been able to fashion a third country assistance programs where we are able to share expertise and funding in order to accomplish common goals, and i think if we are able to do this right, it could create a new kind of development assistance diplomacy that we could deploy in other countries that have emerging or strong economies that are playing an increasing lee important role in subregions. we have pulled back on some of our historical roles in brazil,

and our program today is focused on biodiversity issues and climate change issues. we have a few alternative energy programs, but this does not represent the future of our developed assistance program. however, it does represent the future of our commercial engagement, our investment engagement, which strikes me to degree to which pharmaceutical companies are prepared to come to brazil and do agreements with brazilian companies to build out a capacity for brazilian pharmaceutical companies. this is driven by the emerging middle class and that the demand for high-quality health care in brazil. i think the synergies are there, just moving from the developing world into the commercial and investment world. regarding the wto and bali,

congratulations to the person who managed that event for the wto. it was in everybody's interests that the bali event was successful, because having failed at this time would not have been in anyone's best interests. especially with acevedo at its head, there was a special need to play as much of a role of broker as they could. historically, brazil has had the kind of negotiations with two mentalities. one is trying to get the best deal possible. that is not going to work, trying to assert leadership in some fashion and use the event as a way to assert leadership. but i think in this regard they recognize that they could do both.

they could act as a leader of a particular group of countries while at the same time brokering. i think they found a way to bridge that divide. with any luck they will be able to maintain that over time. in terms of human rights, a great question. it is one of the big struggles that brazil faces as it tries to find a way to express through its foreign policy what it means to be a democracy in the region and the world. historically, brazil has been an adherent to principles of nonintervention and non- interference and self- determination of peoples and has been reluctant to criticize countries. this is because at one level it does not believe it should, but it also recognizes it is quite open to criticism.

it does not want to open the door for reciprocal attacks and wants to build a protection, especially within inside regional and institutional organizations. i do not think that is a stance that it will be able to maintain in the long term because as brazil globalizes, as its society mobilizes, brazilians will wonder what it means to be a democracy in the world and how does brazil express that democracy. and the fact that internally you have got such a strong commitment to an open society, such a strong commitment to individual rights, is a very positive thing to work from. this is going to be an evolutionary process over time and one we cannot give up on. we have to keep focused and pushing on it. with regard to the tensions within the country, brazil is a huge country, that of all the colonial entities that were established in the region, it is the only one that has held together. i am sure there is all kinds of linguistic and cultural reasons for that and demographic reasons for it, but although it is a big

country and a diverse country in terms of its linguistics and its accents and its traditions and the ethnicity of its immigrants, at the same time there's something that makes everyone a brazilian. that in many ways is what is remarkable about brazil and all the -- even today, people in the southern part of brazil will be dismissive of the northern part of brazil and vice versa. one can find the same thing in the united states. i think what is remarkable about brazil is that like the united states it is able through its diversity that it can present an image of itsth