talked about this as a way to mark progress. if we reflect back to 2000 and that very difficult time between then and 2007 in south africa, where there was difficulty with even awareness of hiv and aids as the agent, i think that putting road marks down about each of these things, stigma, discrimination, south africa has some of the most progressive and important laws. working with our south african colleague to say that in the next 24 months let's work with other countries on the african continent to move towards your vision and really accelerate south africa's leadership in this area. to celebrate their leadership and investment. like botswana, they stood up and invested aliens, which it will take to control the pandemic in their country.

they have identified the young women. getting them to have that discussion now so that that leadership exists in the roll up to durban will make it a much more vibrant conference where it is almost a report card. we deal with the issue that we identified in melbourne and it is so exciting. there will be a lot for you. joe, veryhank you to helpful. the leave me, all three of you are going to be a part of this effort. please, please, your engagement really matters. say a couple of things. one, we have not had or won't have had an international aids conference in africa in 16 years. it has been a very long time. of coarse, the south african story and trajectory from 2000

until now is just a seachange. extraordinary transformation that is a huge part of the story. we always try and have the conferences and places where we hope it will make a difference. people don't know this, but steve knows it, when the the hiv traveld ban and we could come back to the united states, you were there in d.c. in 2012. we made the decision to come back to the u.s. and we chose washington because it had the highest numbers in the country. truly ground zero for women and girls, the highest rates in the world. we will truly be in the epicenter of that epidemic. a critical part of all that we need to do in terms of

prevention and treatment with human rights. i think that for those reasons it is the right lace area the head of the human sciences research council and one of the architects of the south african health system is really a leader in how you integrate hiv into a health system. that is one of the reasons why we asked her to do this. she will be the first woman in history from africa to chair an international aids conference. when i brought this up with her and said that to her, forcing her to focus on women and girls -- she said it was important int we focus on human rights the population. i said -- all right, you are on. we are going to do both of those things. that thei would say ais is a member organization.

i hope that you are all members. if you aren't, please join us. we have a lot of input. it is an elected representation. your new regional representative is professor ken meier at harvard and the fenway community health center. website,o on to the join if you are a member. get involved. is probablyt durban going to be the same kind of landmark that it was in 2000, but in a very different way. there we were trying to prove a point, a soup -- simple one, that hiv is the source of aids. this time we will really be, we help, at a real turning point where we can start to say that we have the measures, the deliverables, how are we actually doing?

>> [inaudible] of july.he third week to 272016. >> we're here to help you, for sure. >> wonderful. you.anks to all of please join me in thanking our panelists. [applause] thank you, everybody, for letting us. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014]

>> on the next "washington journal," retired marine colonel be discussingwill the latest developments in the u.s. air campaign in iraq. and then former chief economist, on full-time jobs being replaced with part-time work. thea reporter from associated press talks about processing entrapped -- tracking disability payments. plus your phone calls, facebook comments, and tweets. >> the american institute of certified public accountants holds a conference tomorrow. live coverage begins at 1:15 eastern with a discussion that

includes inspectors general to the homeland security department and pentagon. at 2:50 look at financial management issues. you can watch both panels live, here on c-span. while congress is on break, c-span primetime features oh wide range of political topics. this week, a debate of american greatness, better health care, and detectives at disease control and prevention. we take a history too are looking at the civil war. prime time, monday through friday at 8 p.m. eastern. let us know about the programs you are watching you what you think. , join themail us c-span conversation. like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. >> former secretaries of state madeleine albright, condoleezza rice, and former defense secretary robert gates recently

talked about u.s. foreign relations and other policy issues related to ukraine, a, and the role abroad. this is just under one half hours. -- our -- just under an hour and a half. [applause] >> bob, thank you very much. i want to thank bob steel and walter isaacson for their leadership at the aspen institute. [applause] as bob said, we are extraordinarily fortunate to have two great secretaries of state, madeleine albright and condoleezza rice. the third person will arrive. i spoke to him by phone. his plane was diverted. he had to drive in. i said we would filibuster until

he arrived. one way to do that is to say a word about our aspen strategy group. we are a unique institution, i think, in the american foreign-policy because we are nonpartisan. not just bipartisan. we are republicans, democrats, and independents come together once a year. we are in our 30th year. we were founded by two great americans. the general who is not here right now but will be here in a couple of hours and professor joe nye. i would ask you to salute joe. maybe you can stand. [applause] we are going to be discussing russia over the next 3.5 days. there is nothing to talk about, u.s.-russian relationships these days but everything to talk about. as we await bob's arrival, we might talk about the issue that united condoleezza rice and madeleine albright.

it was a shared interest in russia. it was one individual who brought them both to that shared interest. if you could start and madeleine will finish. >> absolutely. thank you all for joining us here and thank you, nick for this conversation. i want to echo thanks to bob and walter who pull off a extraordinary conversation. in a wonderful and simple way. well, i was, not to put too fine a point on it, but i was a piano major in college. i was supposed to be a great pianist. i started playing at the age of three. i came here as a 17-year-old rising junior at the university of denver to go to the aspen music festival school. i met here, 12 year olds who laid from site what it took me all your to learn. i thought, find another profession. i went back to denver. fortunately, i wandered into a

course of international politics taught by a soviet expert and a great diplomat. it was joseph korbel that stimulated my interest in things international and things russian and interest and a diplomatic history. and he convinced me that it was ok for a black girl from birmingham, alabama who wanted to be a soviet specialist. that was the start of my career. he also said and i have a daughter that i would like you to meet some time and she is studying at columbia. her name is madeleine and now you can take that story. >> what happened was my father was a czechoslovakian diplomat who did not want to work for the communists and came to the united states and defected. at that stage, i understand the rockefeller foundation found him a job. we had no idea where denver was.

my parents bought a car and started driving across america and my mother said it is the mile high city and we are not going up so maybe we are going the wrong direction. [laughter] my father started teaching at the university of denver and ultimately became dean of the graduate school. he died in 1977. by then, he was a very big deal. there were lots of flowers and tributes at his funeral. among them, there was a ceramic pot in the shape of a piano. i said to my mother, where did it come from? she said from your father's favorite student, condoleezza rice. in 1987, when i was working for my long-string of losing democratic presidential candidates -- [laughter] i thought, why not in fact get in touch with his woman, condoleezza rice, who was i knew

an african-american music major from alabama who wrote her dissertation on the czechoslovakian military with my father. i will ask her to join my group. joe was a part of the group. i said, condi, this is what i am doing. she said, i do not know how to tell you, i am a republican. i said, how could you be? we had the same father. [laughter] so, here we are. >> ok. [laughter] and bob has not arrived yet. let's get started. russia. condi and madeleine, the question i will want to pose is to you the following. at the end of the sochi olympics, maybe the opportunity president putin decided to evade and take over crimea.

we have seen a rather deliberate campaign to support -- here he is. [applause] how was the car ride? >> fortunately the colorado state patrol was nowhere in sight. [laughter] >> we won't tell. we were filibustering until you major very dramatic entrance and i was posing the first question. what unites the panel is madeleine started her life in czechoslovakia. she had to be concerned about russia. condi did her dissertation. bob, a career soviet specialist in the central intelligence agency. they have all lived in this

issue. >> so have you. >> i have as well. we have seen the formal annexation of crimea and have seen a deliberate policy to destabilize eastern ukraine through russian military forces. intelligent support. they are in the throes of a civil war. they have russian troops on the borders of that part of eastern ukraine. the question for the three of you, is this the most serious east-west crisis since the end of the cold war? and here is the easy part -- what should we do? >> yes, i think it is the most serious east-west crisis since the end of the cold war. in large part because it has been a longtime since a country, a big power in europe annexed a part of its neighbor. when great powers start behaving

badly, it is really dangerous. the malaysian airplane that was shot down was shot down because of this sophistication of the equipment. 30,000 feet is a long way to catch a civilian aircraft. when great powers behave badly, it gets really dangerous. vladimir putin never accepted the outcome of the end of the cold war. he said the collapse of the soviet union was the greatest tragedy of the 20th century. that is something when you think that russia lost 30 million people in world war ii and to say that was the greatest tragedy. and he said something that was particularly dangerous and that is the reason it was a great tragedy was because 25 million russians were orphaned outside of the soviet union in other

countries. he meant poland and ukraine. i remember sitting with him at the nato in 2008 at his last talk to the nato russia council and he said something that every body said, did we hear that right. he said ukraine is a made-up state. and i can remember going to see vladimir putin in one of my last encounters with him and having say, you know us, condi, and you know russia was only great when ruled by strong men like alexander the great and alexander ii. like peter the great. i remember thinking, is vladimir the great supposed to be in that line? and so, we have for i think a very dangerous, perfect storm between a leader who was unreconciled to the postwar order in europe willing to use a combination of economic pressure, military force, intimidation, and surrogates to get his way to undo the order. and international community and that seems at times uncertain on how to respond.

let me leave it as in the analysis question and then perhaps we can get to ways to think about approaching it after madeleine and bob. >> i do think it is the most serious event since the end of the cold war. and we all have been a diplomat or in the government and many people here with the same background. there are things that happen all over the world all of the time. there are changes, border disputes, various arguments to go on. that is what people like us do for a living. the bottom line is there been two huge game changers. that is the russian annexation of crimea as condi sad. and the other is what is happening in the middle east. in many ways, i think they are related and maybe we will get

into that. i think that -- i have had, i have been further away from when i met putin. i did not like in from the moment i met him and he did not like me, either. the bottom line is i think he has developed his own version of history. that is the troublesome part. anybody who can say the dissolution of the soviet union was the greatest tragedy of the 20th century is delusional. i do think that he has lived in his own version of history as he keeps making it up as it goes along. i see we depend on the fact that there's a rational actor on the other side of the table. i am worried about his own approach to issues and it does lead to the question of how we deal with it. i think what he has done is identify himself with a very -- it sounds like psychobabble, problem that russia has been having. you were there. one of the things we were asked to do, and so were you bob,

basically how to dissolve the power of our major adversary at the end of the cold war without doing it in the field of battle. it is true. i happen to think they lost the cold war rather than we won it. the system did not work. we, in the 1990's, were working to figure out how russia could be brought into the system and be a normal country and operate in a functional international system. i went and i was doing survey work in 1991. i will never forget this. i was in russia with a focus group and this man stood up and said, i am so embarrassed. we used to be a superpower and now we are bangladesh with the missiles. that loss of identity is something that as a motivating factor in russia. what has happened is putin has

identified himself with that. vladimir the great. i think he has what accounts for his popularity at the moment. i think we have to deal with what has been happening in russia since the end of the cold war, what is the relationship with the united states and the identity crisis and a leader who has made up history. >> bob? >> first of all, i agree in terms of the magnitude of the crisis. also agree it has its roots in what happened after the collapse of the soviet union. in the early 1990's, we did not fully appreciate the humiliation that the russians felt. the collapse not just the soviet union but of the centuries-old russian empire. one of the reasons we face it as such a serious crisis and why it is the worst since the end of the cold war is because putin is

trying to upend two aspects of that. two points of international order that people thought was settled. one was, border changes could only be resolved through peaceful negotiations and the consent of the parties and not a satisfaction of revenge or claims by force. the second was the freedom of sovereign states to choose which other countries with whom they wanted to ally, politically, economically, and for security. both of those, putin has essentially thrown aside. and so what the europeans and we for a long time felt was a matter settled at the end of the cold war is now very much back on the table. i think putin has two goals. i do not know that he is

delusional. maybe because we both came from the spy business. he and i had a very interesting relationship. we did not like each other, but there was a certain interesting respect. or suspicion. i am not sure which. [laughter] we would speak very frankly with one another. partly because i was not a diplomat. neither was he. but i think he is after two things. one is what condi alluded to, this sense of historical mission to protect the russians who were left behind. the second is more traditional russian behavior. and that is the re-creation of a band of states on the periphery of russia that lean toward moscow economically, politically, and for security. he does not want to re-create the soviet union and be this

possible for the economic basket cases on the periphery. but he does want to re-create this buffer, if you will, the has been a big part of russian history for a long time. and frankly, i think he sees ukraine as a launchpad of that. kiev is where the russian empire was founded over a thousand years ago. i think he does see it as a made-up state. and i think that he will never rest easy as long as he thinks that ukraine might slide west. and away from russia and not a part of that buffer of states. >> let's get to policy. what should the united states do? we will hear tomorrow from the assistant secretary of state of europe, who is been at the center of this. i appreciate what president

obama has tried to do and he has worked very hard on this, sanctions on russia to drive up the cost. he did not have much help from the europeans until two weeks ago when they finally joined the united states and canada in tough sanctions. second, try to help the ukrainian state which is a basket case of its own, economically high levels of corruption. to raise economic performance and try to pull together. ineffective military. and third, try to reinforce nato. the front-line states, poland, lithuania are protected. they have deterrence there. is that the right strategy? should all of that be reinforced? >> i have no problem with the three pillars.

i think they are the right three pillars. you have to do them in a way that is committed and likely to have a really big effect. when it comes to sanctions, i am up to my eyeballs in sanctions. i think some of the sanctions are going to have an effect. after all, 80% of russian exports are in oil and gas and minerals and they are likely to run out of money before europe runs out of energy. anything that takes what is currently, according even to the russians, an economy that is probably in retreat and puts more pressure on it, that is fine. i do not think we can expect it will have a short term or even medium-term effect on putin. in the long term, there is more we can do to the energy front. go ahead and allow keystone today. go ahead and prepare export terminals today. because you have to show russia the future of energy is not going to be in russia if they continue to behave this way.

yes, sanctions -- let's call it economic pressure. the second element, by all means, the ukrainians have demonstrated they are more capable of fighting than i thought they were. arm them. it is not provocative to help people defend themselves. i would provide lethal assistance to them. not just nonlethal assistance. i would provide further intelligence to them so they can help themselves. third, i would do more with the strengthening of nato. we do not know what is coming out of the september summit. perhaps more will come out of it. let me just, for this purpose, position myself between madeleine and bob on the question of vladimir putin. i am not sure he is delusional. i am sure he is not wholly rational. leaders of great countries do not go around fighting tigers bare-chested. he is a megalomaniac. and you have to deal with the 5% chance he might be delusional and he is making up his own version of history and chance --

and i do not see anybody around him telling -- and he is talking about russia but coming self-sufficient. how long has it been since we heard those words, joseph stalin? you have to prepare for the 5% of him that may not be totally rational and that means when you reinforce nato you do it in a really serious away. we do not need forces in italy. let's put them in the baltic states and poland in large enough numbers to manage. he may indeed be a megalomaniac but he is not going to attack a country in which there are american forces deployed. i would make a much bigger move to make nato a real bulwark in case he has some notions he might do some of the things he did in ukraine in the baltic states of which we have an article five guarantee. you do not want the president of the united states to have to make a choice of refusing to act on our article five guarantee or

fighting russia. deter it now. >> thank you. madeleine? >> i think all of us here in our little humility in terms of our soviet expertise. i want to tell a story. in october 1964, i was a student at columbia at the russian institute where nobody predicted the ouster. nobody predicted the disintegration of the soviet union. and so, trying to predict putin's behavior is pretty difficult. i am not a shrink. maybe he lives in a parallel universe or whatever the right term is. i think one of the problems out of there is it has to be a part of the solution that whether putin can only think in zero-sum terms because these countries are where they are. as bob said, ukraine has a very

complicated history and geographically, it is a buffer. there is no question about it. what could be done is to try and figure out some way where the what they want. the ukrainians want to be poles and they want to have the kind of life they have in a poland. and they could have a rational economic relationship with russia. the question is whether putin only sees things in zero-sum terms? i teach a course. i say foreign policy is just trying to get countries to do what you want. what are the tools? there are not a lot of tools. i think that president obama is using the tools in the best possible way of finding a regime finally in cooperation with the