am i happy? no. am i making progress? yes. one of these days no one would have ever dreamed, you know, that before the berlin wall fell that the u.s. and former soviet union would be collaborating in space. as a matter of fact as a direct result of the berlin wall union, in the soviet that falling apart, it was a geopolitical decision. foreed to find somewhere them to go so that they wouldn't do bad things. what better place to send them than to collaborate with nasa and our international partners on an international space station? a lot of people think that started with russia and the u.s. russia was one of the last partners to be brought in. nasa was directed to integrate the russian space station's -- space agency into the station.

oury they are one of partners. virtue. is a it will happen in times. go with the president. when the president leaves, i leave. it will happen, be patient. mr. allen: we can find a lot of common ground on the areas of space and technology. marine,en: as a 34 year we deal with a lot of bad people. my son would tell you this. if you want that people to become good people, -- if you want bad people to become good people, you got to engage them. if you choose not to, i guarantee you they are going to stay bad people. a lot of people don't hear that.

time at peopleof who want to be like us, won't what we have, but don't know how to do it. we try to teach them. general is wishing -- allen's wife is wishing that he quit. [laughter] mr. allen: every time i asked for questions we have a forest of hands still. that indicates how rich our panel has 10. ask each of our two guests if they would like to make a couple of minutes of summary comments and then we will go from there. mr. bolden: i think i've said enough. i want you to remember that your space agency is on a journey to mars. we have lots of things that we do that are not just in spaceflight. we have an incredible science program. we look at planets. we look at our own planet earth. we look at the sun and we look at what we call astrophysics. how did we get here? is there life elsewhere?

is the number one product. we spend $19.3 billion on it every single year. mr. kamen: we have to engage our enemies, otherwise they will just become a bigger enemy. two of the phrases used all the time throughout the first community are gracious professionalism. you heard charlie point out that these robots are fiercely competing in their two-minute rounds. and then in the pits the teams help each other if they have a broken axle. gracious professionalism, along with what we call cooperati tion. cooperate as they compete so we wind up with the best of the best. i started with this and i will end by saying this. there is culture, and no culture for your than america, it's either your biggest strength or wait this. kids are free even.

they have a bill of rights, not a bill of responsibilities. in a free culture when you get to do whatever you want, it's incumbent to inspire kids in this country to do it because they have a passion for it. recognizegoing to that in this country of ours, we get the best of what we celebrate. of science, technology, global competitiveness, security , you've got to give kids some vehicle, particularly women or minorities, competing in the hearts and minds with what used to be the national pastime of distractions, which are great in the right proportion. if you are policy people, all i can tell you is that we have created a scalable model. every major tech company in this country, everybody loves it. what you heard charlie point out the government moves slowly and the great irony is that nothing is moving faster these days than technology. government, getting teachers good at technology is not a

likely solution. you cannot scale the old model of kids. you need hands-on, real learning that develops passion. we have the model. you need to figure out how to get government to be a catalyst to make it available to every kid quickly. if you don't, we will all be sorry. mr. allen: ladies and gentlemen, not long ago tom brokaw used the ." he"greatest generation used it in invocation of the outcome of world war ii. the americans and their partners who had stood on the ramparts and defeated an existential enemy. i would contend that there is a new greatest generation. we have seen them in action. when we saw the right faces on that video this morning, that's greatest generation. the greatest generation that will propel this country, our friends, and sometimes our

opponents who will become our friends to another level of human existence. this kind of conversation today is what brings that to fruition. let's thank our panel today and thank you all for coming. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016]

>> coming up live today here on c-span, in about an hour or so the discussion about terrorism in europe with a group, new america, scheduled to start at 12:30 eastern. and then look at social where social welfare programs. we will head to the woodrow wilson center for that discussion at 4:00 this afternoon. and how much has the federal reserve changed since it was created in 1913?

the american enterprise institute will host a discussion on the evolution of the fed, also here on c-span. >> tonight on "the communicators," michael onielly, sec commissioner, issues facing the sec, like net neutrality and set-top boxes. he also talked about the political divide within the sec. he is joined by howard buzz kirk. direction is to take the most aggressive, leftist approach to policymaking. there's little ground when that becomes the first primary goal of the item. and when the policy direction they want to go becomes the first goal rather than any consideration of any collegiality or an attempt to bring or develop consensus, you wind up with the scenario we have today. little interest in bringing my

opinion on board, you will find it less likely that i will be supportive and express my views. >> watch tonight at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span two. >> president obama delivered the commencement address this weekend at howard university, a historically black college in washington, d.c. he said the world is a better place than when he graduated 30 years ago, but that racism and inequality persist. this is 45 minutes. [applause] president obama: thank you. hello, howard. hu. thank you so much, everybody. have a seat. i feel important now. [laughter] got a degree from howard. [laughter] sisley tyson said something nice

about me. [laughter] i love you back. [cheers] to president frederick, the board of trustees, faculty and staff, fellow recipients of honorary degrees, thank you for the honor of spending this day with you, and congratulations to the class of 2016. [applause] pres. obama: four years ago i understand many of you came by my house the night i was reelected. i decided to return the favor and come by yours. to the parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, sisters, family

and friends who stood by this class, cheered them on, helped them get here today, this is your day as well. let's give them a big round of applause as well. [applause] pres. obama: i am not trying to stir up any rivalries. i just want to see who is in the house. we got quad? in a? -- annex? carver? sloan? towers? and meridian? rest in peace, meridian. [laughter] pres. obama: rest in peace. [laughter] i know you are all excited today.

you might be a little tired as well. some will be up all night making sure your credits were in order. some of you stayed up too late, ended up at ho chi at 2:00 a.m., got some mambo sauce on your fingers. [laughter] but you got here. and you have all worked hard to reach this day. you have gone between challenging classes in greek life, played an instrument or sport, volunteered, in turn, held down one, 2, 3 jobs. made lifelong friends and discovered exactly what you are made of. the howard hustle that

strengthens your sense of purpose and ambition. which means you are part of a long line of howard graduates. some are on this stage today. some are in the audience. the spirit of achievement and special responsibility has defined this can't this campus ever since the freedmen's bureau established howard just four years after the emancipation proclamation. two years after the civil war came to an end. they created this university with a vision of uplift, a vision of america where our place would be determined not by our gender, race, or creed, but where we would be free to pursue our individual and collective dreams. it is that spirit that has made howard a centerpiece of african-american life and a centerpiece of a larger american

story. this institution has been the home of many firsts. the first black nobel peace prize winner. the first black supreme court justice. but it's mission has been to ensure those firsts were not the last. countless scholars, professionals, artists, leaders from every field received their training here. the generations of men and women who walk through this yard, helped reform our government, cure disease, grow a black middle class, advance civil rights, shape our culture. the seeds of change for all americans were sold here --sowed here. that is what i want to talk about today.

as i was preparing these remarks, when i realized when i was first elected president most of you, the class of 2016, were just starting high school. today you are graduating college. i used to joke about being old. now, i realize i am old. [laughter] pres. obama: it is not a joke anymore. [laughter] but seeing all of you here gives me some perspective. it makes me reflect on the changes that i have seen over my own lifetime. so let me begin with what may sound like a controversial

statement. a hot take. given the current state of our political rhetoric and debate, let me say something that may be controversial and that is this -- america is a better place today than it was when i graduated from college. [applause] pres. obama: let me repeat -- america is by almost every measure measure than it -- better than it was when i graduated college. it is also better than when i took office. that is a different story. [applause] that is a different discussion for another speech. but think about it, i graduated in 1983. new york city, america's largest city where i lived at the time had endured a decade marked by

crime and deterioration and near bankruptcy. and many cities were in similar shape. our nation had gone three years of economic stagnation. the stranglehold of foreign oil, a recession where unemployment nearly scraped 11%. the auto industry was getting its clock cleaned by foreign competition, and do not even get me started on the clothing and the hairstyles. i tried to eliminate all photos of me from this period. i thought i looked good. i was wrong. [laughter] pres. obama: since that year, since the year i graduated, the

poverty rate is down. americans with college degrees, that rate is up. crime rates are down. america's cities have undergone a renaissance. there are more women in the workforce. we have cut teen pregnancy and half. have slashed the african-american dropout rate by almost 60%, and all of you have a computer in your pocket that gives you the world at the touch of a button. in 1983i was part of fewer than 10% of african-americans who graduated with a bachelor degree . today you are part of 20% who will. many of us say we were better off than our parents were in our kids will be better off than we were. so, america is better. the world is better. a wall came down in berlin. an iron curtain was torn asunder. apartheid came to an end.

a young generation in belfast and london have grown up without ever having to think about ira bombs. in just the past 16 years, we have come from a world without marriage equality to where it is a reality in nearly two dozen countries. we have lifted more than one billion people from extreme poverty. we have cut the child mortality rate worldwide by more than half. america is better. the world is better, and stay with me now, race relations are better since i graduated. that is the truth. my election did not create a post-racial society. i do not know who was propagating that notion. that was not mine. but the election itself and the subsequent one, because the first one folks might have made

a mistake. the second one, they knew what they were getting. [laughter] pres. obama: the election was one indicator of how attitudes have changed. in my inauguration, i remarked 60 years earlier my father might not have been served in a d.c. restaurant. there were no black ceos of fortune 500 companies. very few black judges. larry wilmore pointed out last week, a lot of people did not think lacks had the tools to be a quarterback -- blacks have the tools to be a quarterback. michael jordan is not just the greatest basketball player of all time, he owns the team. when i was graduating, the main

black man on tv was mr. t. [laughter] pres. obama: rap and hip-hop were counterculture, underground. now shonda rimes owns thursday nights. now beyonce runs the world. we are no longer entertainers, we are producers, studio executives. no longer small business owners, we are ceos. we are mayors, representatives, presidents of the united states. i am not saying they did not persist, obviously they do. racism persists, inequality

persists, do not worry, i will get to that. i wanted to start the class of 2016 by opening your eyes to the moment that you are in. if you had to choose one moment in history in which you could be born and you did not know ahead of time who you were going to be , what nationality, or it gender, what race, whether you would be rich, poor, and a or straight -- gay or straight, what faith you would be born into, you would not choose 100 years ago. you would not choose the 1950's, the 1960's, or the 1970's. he would choose right now. if you had to choose a time to

be in the world to be younger, gifted and black in america, you would choose right now. [applause] i tell you this because it is important to note progress. because to deny how far we have come would do a disturbance to justice, to the legions of foot soldiers, to not only the incredibly accomplished individuals who have already been mentioned, but your mothers, your dad's your grandparents, great-grandparents who marched and toiled and suffered and overcame to make this day possible. i tell you this not to lull you into complacency but to spur you into action.

because there is still so much more work to do, so many more miles to travel. america needs you to gladly, happily take up that work. you all have some work to do. enjoy the party. [laughter] because you will be busy. [laughter] yes, our economy is recovered, price is stronger than almost any other in the world, but there are folks of all races still hurting, who still cannot find work to keep the lights on, who cannot save for retirement. we still have a racial gap in

economic opportunity. the overall unemployment rate is 5%, but the black unemployment rate is almost 9%. we still have an achievement gap . when black girls and boys graduate at lower rates than white boys and girls. harriet tubman may be going on the $20, but we have a gender gap when a black woman earns 66% [applause] we have a justice gap went to many black boys and black girls passed through a pipeline from under crowded schools overcrowded prisons. this is one area where things of god mor spirit when i was in -- when i was in 10lege, -- black men are times more likely to be in prison right now that white men. around the world, he still got challenges to solve that threaten everybody in the 21st

century. old scourges like disease and conflict, but also new challenges from terrorism and climate change. mistake classic 2016, you got plenty of work to do. complicated and sometimes impossible as these challenges is, your the truth generation is better positioned than any before you to meet those challenges. to flip the script. that, how you meet those challenges, how you will about change ultimately be up to you. , like allion generations, is too confined by our experienced, too invested by

our own biases, too stuck in our provide much of the new thinking that will be required. heads have learned a few things that might be useful in your journey. but the rest of my time, i would like to offer some sick gesture -- i would like to offer some suggestions to fulfill your destiny and shape your collective future. going in the direction of justice and with the quality and freedom. first of all, and this should not be a problem for this group. be confident in your heritage. [applause] be confident in your blackness. [applause] one of the great changes that has occurred in our country since i was your age is the

realization that there is no one way to be black. from somebody who has had people ask if i am black or white. i've met with the queen of england and with kendrick lamar in the oval office. test forno litmus office and the city -- there is .o litmus test for authenticity what people don't know is how iowa is.s how diverse [laughter] this class comes from big cities .nd rural communities some of you crossed oceans to study here.

.ou shatter stereotypes some of you come from a long line of fighters. some of you are the first one in your family to graduate from college. [applause] y'all talk different. all dress differently. y'all dress differently. hockey fans, maybe. [laughter] and because of those who come before you, you have models to follow. you can work for a company or start your own. runcan going to politics or an organization that hold politicians accountable. you can write a book that wins you canonal award, or raise the run of the new black panther, or like one of your

alumni, you can go ahead and do both. [applause] you can create your own style, set your own standard of beauty, embrace your own sexuality. think about an icon we just lost -- prince. he blew up categories. people didn't know what prince was doing. [laughter] and folks loved him for it. you need to have the same confidence. or as my daughters coming all the time, you be you, daddy. [laughter] i have to put the variation on it, you do you, daddy. [laughter] because you are a black person

doing whatever it is you are doing, that makes it a black thing. feel confident. secondly, even as we each embrace our own beautiful, unique and valid versions of our the tie thatmember doesn't find us as , and that iscans our particular awareness of injustice and unfairness and struggle. that means we cannot sleepwalk through life. [applause] we cannot be ignorant of history. [applause] world with a the sense of entitlement. we can't walk by a homeless man

without asking why is a society as wealthy as ours allows that state of affairs to occur. we cannot lock up a low-level without asking why this boy did not have options. we have uncles, brothers, and sisters who were just as smart and talented as we are but somehow got grounded by a structure that is unfair and unjust. up foronly have to stand those african-americans who have , because yes,cky you worked hard, but you have also been lucky. if that is a pet peeve of mine, people who have been successful and don't realize they have been lucky. that god may have blessed them.

it was nothing you did. attitude.ave an [applause] but we must also expand our moral and imagination to empathize with all people who are struggling. not just black folks who are struggling. immigrants,, the the rural poor, the transgendered person, and yes, , whoiddle-aged white guy you may think has all of the advantages, but has seen his world upended and feels powerless.

you have to get in his head, too. number 3 -- you have to go through life with more than just passion for change, you need a strategy. i will repeat that. i want to do that passion. but you have to have a strategy. not just awareness, but action. , but votes.tag [applause] change requires more than just righteous anger. it requires a program and it requires organizing. 1964 democratic convention, then he will name her -- fannie lou

haymer skew a fiery speech of a fiery speech on the national stage. ton she went back mississippi and organized politics. she did not have the tools and technology where you could with of the movement in minutes. she had to go door-to-door. proud of the new black civil rights leaders who understand this. and thanks to the activism of young people, like many of you to twitter, to black lives matter is, people's issa been opened. there is a real problem in our criminal justice system. but to bring about structural change, lasting change, awareness is not enough. it requires changes in law. changes in customs. if you care about mass

you,ceration -- let me ask how are you pressured members of congress to pass the criminal justice reform bill pending before them? if you care about better policing, do you know your district attorney is? your state'sho attorney general is? do you know the difference? do you know who appoints the police chief? and who writes the police training manual? are and whatthey their responsibilities are. mobilize the community. present them with a plan. work with them to bring about change. hold them accountable if they do not deliver. passion is vital, but you got to have a strategy. and your plan better include voting. not just some of the time, but all of the time. [applause]

it is absolutely true that 50 years after the voting rights act, there are still too many barriers in this country to vote. there are too many people trying to erect new barriers to voting. this is the only advanced outcracy on earth that goes of its way to make it difficult for people to vote. and there is a reason for that, there is a legacy to that. even if wethis, dismantled every barrier to voting, that alone would not change the fact that america has some of the lowest voting rate in the free world -- voting rates in the free world. youth turn up -- was less than 20%.

four out of five did not vote. in 2012, nearly two in three african americans turned out. in 2014, only to in five turned out. do you think that made a difference in terms of the congress i have to deal with? [laughter] and then people are wondering why hasn't brought gotten this done or that done? do you -- you don't think i made a difference? what would have happened if you had turned out 50%, 60%, 70% all across the country. people try to make this political thing really complicated. what kind of reforms do we need and how do we need to do that? you know what, just vote! [laughter] it's math. if you have more votes than the other guy, you get to do what you want. [laughter]

it is not that complicated. and you don't have excuses. guess thehave to number of beans in a jar to register to vote. other people already did that for you. [laughter] go ask your grandparents, great-grandparents. what is your excuse? [applause] when we don't vote, we give away our power. we disenfranchise ourselves. right when we need to use the power we have. right when we need your power to stop others from taking away the voting rights of more vulnerable than you are, the elderly, the poor, the formerly incarcerated tried to undersecretary. you have to vote all the time.

not just when it is cool. not when it is time to elect a president. not when you are inspired. it is your duty. when it is time to elect a member of congress, a school board member, or a share of peer that is how we change our politics. by electing people at every level who are representative of and accountable to us. is not that complicated. don't make it complicated. [applause] finally, change requires more than just speaking out, it requires listening as well. in particular, it requires listening to those with whom you disagree. and being prepared to compromise.

when i was a state senator, i helped pass illinois's first racial profiling law and one of the first loss in the nation requiring the videotaping of confessions in capital cases. successful because early on, i engaged law enforcement. them, you guyso are so racist, you know, you need to do something. [laughter] do,derstood, as many of you but the overwhelming majority of police officers are good, honest, courageous, fair, and love the communities they serve. we knew there were some bad apples and even good cops with the best of intentions, including by the way, african-american police officers might have unconscious biases, as we all do.

engaged, and we listened and kept working until we build consensus. because we took the time to listen, we crafted legislation that was good for the police because it improved the trust and cooperation of the community and it was good for the communities who are less likely to be treated unfairly. and i can say this unequivocally, without at least the acceptance of the police organizations in illinois, i could never have gotten those bills passed. it is very simple. the point is you need allies in a democracy. that is just the way it is. it can be frustrating and it can be slow. us that theteaches alternative to democracy is

always worse. that is not just to in this country, it is not a black or white thing. go to any country where the give and take a democracy has been repealed by one party rule and i will show you a country that does not work. and democracy requires compromise. right.en you are 100% this is hard to explain sometimes. you can be completely right and yet still have to engage folks who disagree with you. if you think that the only way forward is to be as uncompromising as possible, you will feel good about yourself, a certain moral purity, but you will not get what you want. and if you don't get what you want long enough, you will

eventually take the whole system is rigged. and that will lead to more and less participation and a downward spiral of more injustice and despair. that has never been the source of our progress. that is how we cheat ourselves of progress. king's soaring oratory. his letters from the birmingham jail. the markets he led. but he also set down with president johnson in the oval office to try to get a civil rights and voting rights act passed. perfectlls were not just like the emancipation proclamation was a war document. those mileposts of our progress

were not perfect. they did not make up for centuries of slavery, jim crow, or eliminate racism, or provide us 40 acres and a mule. but they make things better. made things better. and you know what, i will take better every time. i always tell my staff, better is good. because you consolidate your gains and then you move on to the next fight. -- the next fight to a stronger position. a member of the black lives campaign 0,ent and 1 of the ferguson protest organizers, she joined our task force on 21st century police. one of our fellow activist questioned if she should participate. because she did, she ended up shaping many of the recommendations of that task force. and those recommendations are

now being adopted across the country. many of the changes the protesters called for. it is young activists -- if young activists like britney refused to participate, then those great ideas would have just remained ideas. but she did participate in that is how change happens. big and boisterous. significant nepalese contingent here at howard. i would not have guessed that. right on. you howust tells interconnected we are becoming. folks from sony many places converging, we are

not always going to agree with each other. howard alum, zora neal , nothing thatsaid god ever made is the same thing to more than one person. think about that. that is what our democracy gives us a process designed for us to settle our disputes with argument and idea" instead of violence -- with argument and , instead oftes violence. don't try to shut folks down the matter how much you disagree with them. aroundas been a trend the country trying to get colleges to this invite speakers te people with a

different point of view. don't do that. ridiculous you find what comes out of their mouths, as my grandmother used to tell me, every time a full six, they are does advertising their own ignorance. [applause] let them talk. let them talk. if you don't, you just make them a victim and they can avoid accountability. shouldn't't mean you challenge them, but have the confidence to challenge them. confidence in the rightness of your position. there will be times when you shut in compromise your core values, your integrity. and you will have the responsibility to speak up in the face of injustice. engage -- if the other side has a point, learn from them.

if they are wrong, become on the battlefield of ideas. and you might as well as to practicing now because one thing i can guarantee you is that you will have to do with ignorance, foolishness,m, trifling folks. [laughter] i promise you, you will have to deal with that at every stage of your life. that may not seem fair, but life has never been completely fair. nobody promised you -- ,f you want to make life there then you have to start with the world as it is. so, that is my advice. that is a you change things. change isn't something that happens every four years, eight

years, or placing your faith in any particular politician and then just putting your feet up and saying, ok, go. change is the effort of committed citizens who hitch their wagon something bigger than themselves and height for it every single day. that is what thurgood marshall understood. [applause] a man who wants walked this yard , graduated from howard law, went home to baltimore, started his own law practice. he and his mentor rolled up their sleeves and set out to overturn segregation. naacp.rked through the filed dozens of lawsuits. fought dozens of cases. years,er nearly 20 thurgood marshall ultimately succeeded in bringing his righteous cause before the supreme court and securing the

ruling in brown versus port of education that separate could never be equal. [applause] 20 years. marshall, houston, they knew it would not be easy, they knew it would not be quick. they knew all sorts of obstacles with stand in their way. i know that even if they won, that would just be the beginning of a longer marked to equality. -- they disciplinary had discipline. they had faith. and a sense of humor. and they made life better for all americans. and i know that you graduates should those qualities. because i've learned about some of the young people graduating here today. woman namedoung

sarah jefferson who is graduating. i am just want to use her as an example. i hope you don't mind. sarah grew up in detroit and was raised by a poor single mom who worked seven days a week in and auto plant -- and like auto plant. auto plant. an she was upor year, at 5:00 a.m. juggling homework, extracurricular activities, volunteering, all while taking care of her little sister. but she knew that education was her ticket to a better life. so she never gave up. she pushed herself to excel. this daughter of a single mom who works on the assembly line turned out a full scholarship -- turned down a full scholarship to harvard to go to howard. [applause]

of you, sheike many is the first in her family to graduate from college. then she says she is going to go back to her hometown like thurgood marshall did to make sure all the working folks she grew up with have access to the health care they need and deserve. as she puts it, she is going to reach back and help folks like her succeed. sierra are why i remain optimistic about america. [applause] are why ile like you never give in to despair. is facedthing that that is changed, but nothing can be changed until it is spaced. -- faced. graduates, each of us is only here because someone faced down challenges for us. we are only who we are because someone else struggled and

sacrificed for us. that is not just thurgood marshall's story or sierra's story or my story or your story, that is the story of america. the story whispered by slaves in the cotton fields. the song of marches in selma. the dream of a king in the .hadow o demanding the women to vote. the gis who bled overseas for our freedom. turn. is your the good news is you are ready. when your journey seems too hard and when you run into a chorus of synnex telling you that you are foolish to keep believing or that you can't do something, or you should just give up, or you should just settle, you might

say to yourself that little phrase i found handy the last eight years -- yes we can! 2016! ulations class of good luck. god bless you. [applause] >> a discussion about terrorism in your with the group new america.

it is also available outside if you would like a copy. without further ado, i turn it to you to give us your presentation. >> thank you. i want to express my gratitude to new america and to peter for giving you this opportunity to present my new book on jihadist terrorists in europe. it is an historical study. thanks david for organizing the event. the book is based on more than 12 years of research.

i think one of the main value of this book compared to many other -- onon terrorists terrorism in europe is the historical dimension of course. the attack in paris and brussels have historical roots both within and without your. that we base our understanding of this threat and policy.out counter when we do that, we need to take into account the historical dimension. jihadistexamines terrorism in western europe

between 1994 and 2015. studyer information and them in detail. i look at the biographies of the terrorists, how their radicalized, and how they join forces to launch an attack. detail, what they say, what they have done on the road to militancy. . also look at how they operate today i will focus on how terrorists cells are formed. with the alrts qaeda group gia and downed an air france jet over paris in 1995.

i ended the book with the hebdo. on charlie this slide shows the number of blocks per year. fail, spoiled, and -- foiled and executed attacks. jihadi, i mean anything that emanates from the -- what i aim to explain in the book is what drives jihadists to europe. i think how and why these

terrorists do. i want to shed light on what goes on within the networks more generally. per year gives to what istion as multiple terror and raises serious questions about the perception and the term "homegrown." see the number go up in the mid-1990's. we also see an uptick.

we find the escalation in the israeli-palestinian conflict that may have affected the threat pattern. i say this book because the events coincide in time, but analysistitative indicates this. the only event inside europe that profoundly affected attack activity was the danish platoon in 2005. there was a substantial increase in the number of terrorists in scandinavia and most of these were aimed at people and institutions involved in the cartoons.n the

it has been in france and the u.k. most exposed. what is interesting in the period following the mohammed number ofwe see the plots in scandinavia, maybe in denmark, actually higher than the number of cartoons in france. france is the archenemy of jihadists in europe. the event in scandinavia -- the event indicates that it is a homegrown driver. that is the difficult question. many of the people who were

involved in plots to a band the cartoon for under the influence of jihadi leaders, al qaeda spokespeople in terror zones operating within the framework of the groups and conflicts. you can ask the question of how homegrown is this dimension of the pattern? overall, attacks are linked to western world conflicts. it is highly surprising at all. with completely in tune what al qaeda is saying about the strategy and ideology. it is not something surprising at all. iteris cellexplains formation -- terrorist cell formation. i-84 network dynamics, which is the main focus of my work.

what about the network? nearly all of the blocks i studied can be traced to one network. this network was formed first in the early 1990's around the african jihad. then it spread across the region. with groupsexpanded operating out of conflict zones. inlready mentioned the gia nigeria in the 1990's and various al qaeda affiliates drop it to thousands. theffiliates throughout 2000's. they are formed around critical masses that have experience.

this is where the hub has been forming in the network. hubsinciple, i argue that may emerge anywhere and under different circumstances, and a half. not only in british suburbs and belgium and brussels. but as well as in small towns in scandinavia like norway. in my work, i distinguish between two interlinked generations of terrorists operating in europe. the first generation was dominated by the veterans of the qaeda's training

camps. this was the first operation. what i refer to as a new generation emerged in the mid to 0'susands -- in the mid- 200 in the u.k.. the iraq war was the main mobilizing cause for them. in branched out in europe. it was the main platform for new generation. most of the foreign fighters could be seen as part of the new generation. people behind the parison brussels attacks, i argue. at the same time, first-generation veterans of the network remain playing roles in

them in the shadows, behind-the-scenes, but also interacting with the new generation very -- with a new generation. i mentioned generations of european jihadists. this next picture is very interesting. butas not been confirmed, he is likely to have been coordinating the brussels network. alook was part of the very first jihadis attack in europe in paris by then it gia 1995. this picture was most likely taken in syria in 2014, most likely. malook escaped prosecution and

went underground and belgium. was, from there, he operating support cells for al qaeda for which he was arrested, transferred to france, prosecuted and jailed. this is another interesting taken in south-central france. lookhe left, you can see ma again. one of the brothers who attacked the offices of charlie hebdo and 2015. -- in 2015. recruiter -- is

an recruiter for al qaeda. he was arrested and jailed. in this picture, he was out of jail again. the other was also linked to terrorist action in baghdad. i don't have time to say what is going on here. but it is surely one of the most interesting cases or episodes i write about in the book. is the best example of how the generations of european jihadists collude in a sense. to explain terrorist cell formation within europe identifies reoccurring components. involved, social reasons, political grievance

over western interference in muslim countries, such as the invasion of iraq. nearly all of the terrorists had ties to radical features before engaging in terrorism. that is a pattern that is reoccurring. they spent time together and socialized and mosques, prisons, in the sports arena is, or online. acial interaction seems to be highly significant factor in radicalization and cell formation. that --so reflected in it is an example of people operating in loan groups or individually. also, and the vast majority of hads, at least one person

-- there was always a link to the conflict zone. this is the pattern. at the same time, we know that scores of european muslims struggle with life in europe. a tiny minority of them result in terrorism. many seek out radical features without becoming terrorists. all people meet face-to-face or online without any medical life in effect in itself. that it is only a minority among foreign fighters move on to international terrorism. this is why i emphasized the why itynamic to explain happens in when and where they do, which is the main theoretical contribution that i try to make in this book.

when i studied biographies of manyrists, i found generalizations -- young men dominate the picture. exceptions of the stereotypes were too many to ignore. jobless lose just his or criminals. there were quite a few examples of women involved. roles andto focus on interpersonal dynamic rather than social profile. for this purpose, i developed an ideal type model of a terrorist cell. interpretationmy

and how others depicted them. i distinguish between the -- epreneur cell matches this pattern almost perfectly. entrepreneur is more resourceful than the others and has been radicalized in a political and religious process through activism, reading, discussion, and in some cases intellectually. jihadistreading literature. he is strongly committed. this is one of the main features of the entrepreneur. has a talent for manipulating others. the entrepreneur is the one that binds together the various components of terrorists.

anduilds the cell, recruits socializes the others and functions as the link between the cell, transnational networks, and conflict zones. after pernod ricard is the one entrepreneurthe bring structure to the other types involved. the other functions as the second in command and has certain skills that the cell , for example,oses technical education. as for the misfits, he is drawn into the cell by a life decision. he may have suffered a personal crisis, the problematic childhood, come from a broken family, doubled in crime, or may have been into drug abuse.

for the misfit, terrorism becomes a way out from despair and meaninglessness, in a sense. ofre may also be an element cleansing oneself, especially if you come from a traditional muslim background and have something that does not conform with islam, and a sense. it becomes kind of a turnaround operation. the victor has no specific characteristic. this could be a brother, a brother in law friend, or a role model. for the social network and community, a kind of the tracks them and puts pressure on them practices with their and ideologies of the cell. and the last two categories, the

misfits and the victors, some ideological elements seem significant. adventurism,llion, culture aspect that attracts them, and so forth. me, just remain pathways to the terrorist cell -- ideology, grievance, and community. this is the deconstruction of a cell helps to explain why andingly ideological youth of acting according to the ideology of the root of al qaeda. it also bridged the gap between models that portray the -- andna in aspect economy.

you find that the leader-led aspect is more important to shaping the actions of the cell. even though we only know the paris-brussels network, we recognize the patterns. -- foot soldiers, criminals, act within the cell itself and surrounding networks. it illustrates an intricate interplay between terrorists and militants and bottom-up and top-down recruitment dynamic. radicalization usually starts at but is given capability by actors abroad.

they do not differ from control groups. the main difference is they try to dispense national jihadists and have come under the influence of entrepreneurs. the key ingredient for the terrorists to occur. when i emphasizes, i say no terrorist cell forms in the absence of the entrepreneur. exaggeration, but it makes a point clear. europeana perspective, jihadists are driven forward by from foreigneus conflict. this makes the threat more external than internal. than manyrganized assume. networks emerge and behave similarly in different countries under different circumstances over time. means when explaining the occurrence of

jihadist terrace in europe, network and amex and international conflict and that than are more significant societal conditions. i question the fruitless miss of talking about a homegrown threat. much in -- eve patterns and level of integration are poor indicators of who might become terrorists. that and openth the floor for discussion. thank you. we will have the microphone go around and get some of your questions. few --we date into a

before we dig and to a few perspectives, there are reports regarding the terrorists in brussels that security services and the analytic community really missed the boat that there was an organized system of self directed by foreign fighters that had gone to syria .nd come back given your research on the ,istory of terrorism in europe do you think that it is correct to say that there was an analytic or security service failure in not identifying publicly, at least, earlier that this was organized more top-down than what had been thought? securityk the european of then well aware

historical evolution of the network. they had worked on the cases for many years and disrupted many networks. they kept track of the people who were going to the conflict during africa the syrian war. issue is thatin the scope of the phenomenon grew so large that the services were experienced a capacity problem. think that is an analytical failure. think the services were well that there was more than one independent actor. but it was a highly organized network. >> in today's environment, to what extent does the current

-- otheren by , but they still localizing people, are not ?aying attention motivation cannot be tied to one conflict only. like the network, it has evolved over many years. people who i tried to say in my presentation, traveled to syria when the conflict broke out there and were already pretty radicalized during that -- and were already radicalized.

>> in our research at new america, one of our findings is that the u.s. contact seems to be very different than what you point out. anywhereot really seen the extent foreign fighters returning from previous conflict to organize. beaded -- the mostly -- mostly mediated online. [indiscernible] there is a huge difference

regarding the strength of the network and the historical embeddedness of the network comparing europe and the u.s. hubs -- they had been spending time in new at -- they had been spending time in the u.s. the scope of it all is on a different scale in europe and a sense. -- in a sense. think there are similarities and differences between the european scene and the american scene. course, geography is very important because one of the main reasons that we now have or

have had foreign -- foreign fighters in syria is because of the ease with which they can go to the conflict zone. >> let's go back to historical cases. become sogeria central? was it the particular connections between the conflux, why did -- was it the intensity of the conflict that it was -- aftermath --at the the algerian war was symbiotically the most important -- symbolically the most important for the jihadist at the time and especially the community of militant

propagandists in london that were spending most of the resources on supporting the militants in algeria. the gia was expanding support networks in france and belgium and gunrunning for finances and propaganda and also recruitment. they did that from the very start of the conflict. over time, as the leadership gia,ed among the algerian it became more and more head on, punishing france and the touring france from interfering in algeria and that is when this in 1994 began with the first bomb attack in paris. involved ine people

those networks, they were arrested, they spent time in jail, they came out again in the networks and started recruiting others, working as entrepreneurs and then making -- going fromcharts spiking as a result of the algerian war to a prolonged few ifwhere there are any plots in the late 90's, and it picks up again. foryou explain the reason what a retrospect looks like a relatively peaceful time in terms of jihadist plotting in europe? >> that is interesting because you can see the pattern. there is a spike and then the downturn in the activity level, and it is something about the

scope of the phenomenon, because we are talking about variations between three or four incidents, up to mostly 16, it is not like a huge, enormous phenomenon and when the networks are express after an attack campaign, then i bit activity will go down a and then it will pick up, again -- then attack activity will go down a bit and then it will pick up, again. >> before we turn it over, can you talk a little about pakistan and the mid to thousands and what the role -- mid to 00's and whether or if you expect another upsurge in pakistan linked bombings.

mentionedects i dominated the phenomenon throughout 2000 when al qaeda and -- were operating camps. also -- was also a successful effort by the jihadists to mobilize among in the communities in london. i think -- this is one of the events in the history of jihadi

terrorism in europe that shows that military means can have an effect against the network, itause -- especially because affects the attack activity and also the tactics used by the wind al qaedaause came under severe pressure, that was when we saw the shift towards more single actor operations, though the people operating were seldom long move, they were usually part of a group,network -- loan they were usually part of a larger network. >> let's start with this gentlemen, here. , did your research

take a look at financial and how is thatd organized and where does it come from? a colleague of mine wrote a report on the financing of jihadist terrorist cells in europe where she went through the most well-documented cases. study wasound in her many of these cells are self financed. that is what's characterized in a majority. we work with open sources and i think some of the aspects of difficultis hard or

, but in general, the terrorists plots -- the -- terroristt in plots in europe have been very cheap. they use maxed out credit cards and in some cases, there are examples of transfers the a western union -- like western union. the were some indications that the attackers in paris and brussels made use of networks, but they were not confirmed and i do not know if that was the case.

i understand that the first cartoon published concerning mohammed and a bomb in the was inor head covering denmark and i think that was in 2008. the response to that in the muslim world was a boycott of danish products and i understand that denmark actually sold more danish hands abroad that year than they had in the past. there was no jihadist activity, at least until -- maybe small incidents until last year. what do you account the lack of activity in denmark as result of the publication of the original cartoon? >> the cartoons were published

in 2005, and the first response by bin laden came in march of 2006. he was urging followers to punish the cartoonist in denmark for allowing the publication. book,ocument in my between the publication and the attack on charlie hebdo, there are many plots that have not been executed, that were disrupted at earlier stages. when you look at the information that denmark, you will see the cartoons have been a main --ver and

>> give us a sense of why the -- oons seem to be we would think it has to do with -- they were under punishment for people who have insulted the et, you can find theological justification for that quite easily within the religious sources. a medievals using

ideological idea, using it in -- propaganda that i think for al qaeda at that tool, it was a very useful to recruit beyond the usual kind of recruitment potential. victory -- recruit more broadly because they had a better justification. in looking at the chart that you showed earlier of plots over the years, it seems to be that there is a unmistakable upward trajectory, particularly since the start of the syrian conflict, and we've seen comments from many european

political officials and security services remarking about. an unprecedented threat level. is there anything that european political leaders or security services could be doing that they are not doing or should be doing to try to mitigate the current threat environment? i think what needs to be done is more of what has been done in the past because the threat europe is facing now is essentially much of the same, scope.der in shiftsave not been any or a very clear shift in used,ing, in the tactics al qaeda and i.s. are pursuing the same ideology and they have

basically the same two goals that strategic goals -- strategic goals. is the numberem of foreign fighters in syria has ,eached unprecedented levels that makes for a huge capacity for a coded militant terrorist group with territorial control in syria and iraq. more has to be done across the borders. efforts need to continue to -- ent

if theou think that territorial holdings were to --ink or train can fascinate training camp capacity would be reduced that the plot numbers with decrease in europe or has the increase in recent years been locked in by a greater andlopment of the network if not syria, then it will return to yemen or pakistan? it is a question about long-term backs and short-term and i think al qaeda and pakistan show that military efforts against the networks and the camp's will make them operate differently or less successful in executing

successful attacks. the phenomenone, is generally transnational and i think the i.s. is facing much more pressure in the that in syria and iraq, today. i think the focus on activities will change. >> is there any mention in your --k about one of the leaders after 2003 interact now he is spending time in prison in norway and what do you think of -- like some people criticize the laws in norway that they are being too lenient against terrorism, especially international terrorist. >> i do mention him in my book,

because he was one of the inspirational figures for a community of extremists that emerged with the outbreak of the war in syria and it resulted in -- movementrsion of and it resulted in the improvement of more foreign fighters and he was an inspirational speaker for them, although he spent much time in jail, lately. among the scandinavian countries, i inc. norway is the country that has prosecuted the most of the return foreign fighters at this point. some changes in foraking, making it easier

prosecuting and potential terrorism. >> one of the questions that you're the, if question of entrepreneurs and the stricter types, and i'm sure you have thought about it or asked about it, what would people do most -- what could in order to prevent the drifters and the petty criminals from coming into contact or falling under the sway of these more entrepreneurial figures? -- gettingk that them by one means or another,

away from them or do you -- one of the things you hear is the -- in the circles is building football pitches is not the key, soccer pitches or whatever, but then listening to you, i thought maybe it is, maybe tractors and so on, maybe they needed it more football in their lives. what is your thought on how you can prevent some of these folks from falling into that orbit? >> that is a great question. think the one you added of buting at the interplay also -- makes it all the more difficult because you cannot do andhang, you need to all up prevente measures to the drifters getting in contact with these organized circles and

at the same time, contain the entrepreneurs. it is difficult because many of the activities data partners are art possible to prosecute, they do not break any laws. , so is a major challenge that needs to be in combination -- needs to be a combination. >> thank you. spikeswed examples of and -- in terrorist activity and times that are lower, i'm interested in policies that reduce tension and her first cycles of violence. is important to know what increases it more than what decreases it, but i would like

to -- i feel like a symmetrical could youmics -- suggest policy recommendations that we can do that can reverse --lence and motivation reallyesearch doesn't work specifically on and on measuring the effect of policies that reduce our increase -- what policies would reduce the see that of course we

interference in muslim countries and increase the activity that is just how it is and that because thatcted is the way they will respond to that. obviously that is a factor we have to think about, when and how to treat it in conflict and muslim countries. thethinking a lot about effect of structural factors and the role of integration because these are factors that are affects thecause it full of potential recruits of all the networks but at the same -- , i think

the terrorist threat would remain because we are talking militantte limited -- organize networks out of conflict zones, conflicting with extremists inside europe as well . emphasisk, i put more on agency and structure than secondary, see what kind of large-scale structural policy -- on thecould do terrorist threat. >> my question is two-part.

they first one is, when you think about the history of terrorism in europe and we looked back since the beginning to about 2010 or 2011, there were very few attacks in europe. onen think of more than during the 90's, and so on. -- those attacks happen around the world but you see an increase. why do they -- terrorists target those countries specifically, which is france and the u.k.? there are many european that they traveled

through syria and greece and italy. why those two countries, specifically? that is the first part. the second part is, is there anything you -- in your research about european terrorism that is also the other way around which theted even before -- since threats are to in syria, there were hundreds of europeans the came to syria, but is there anything done to stop them from traveling from europe to the middle east or is it just those from the middle east to europe? course, terrorism in europe is a huge topic. includingong history terrorism by the ira and other

groups. on the focuses only plots and attacks that can be attributed to actors that would define as jihadist. period inecific time 1994 when the first attacks happened until today. i have also focused on attacks activities ofand the foreign fighters are broad. -- e are other studies andor the policies to try prevent the foreign fighters from happening, i think the are

improving by the hour. it is becoming more and more difficult for foreign fighters to go from europe to the middle east and the numbers of foreign fighters have dropped dramatically over recent times. at the start of the conflict, it was very easy to get to the conflict zone, and it was nearly encouraged that by the discouraged tot the extent we see now and because of the atrocities of the syrian regime, there was a lot of sympathy for people who wanted to go to syria to fight aside -- assad.

we know from research on foreign fighting and the relationship to international terrorism that these are some of the different phenomenon. a minority among people who go to conflict zones will continue towards international terrorism. it seems to be a higher threshold for going into international terrorism than to go to a conflict zone. that is also from a ideological kind of perspective, as well, there a lot of justification for ofng to fight on behalf muslim brothers and sisters against a ruler, a dictator in a muslim country, whereas there are also ideological aspects of launching terrorist attacks in europe, and there are some

ideological thresholds are doing that, which contributes to .nternational terrorism >> is there any complex that involved jihadist abroad that was not produced by -- they did not produce any plotting in europe? in particular, and i may be wrong here, but it looks like al-shabaab and the somalia conflict not produce much plotting in europe. >> that is true, there have not been many incidents linked to out of up in europe. ofre have been some examples people going from europe to joining us above and in becoming involved in attacks in the region, and there have been at

least one of the plots against one of the cartoonists, also had al-shabaab. i was more intrigued by the absence of both linked to the bombing, in the boston because many foreign fighters and -- many fire -- foreign fighters with experience from bosnia were involved. can you explain that? >> the covenant of security is this ideological concept that reached him on some of

the military networks in europe, us -- but especially the movement -- it basically says that when a muslim lives when it not allowed to attack that particular country. there are three criteria. engagingtry is militarily against muslim countries. it insults islam. ideological concept that had an effect on some of the followers in london. pact05, he annulled this

for his followers. course, the fact that some people involved with his network began at kate -- activity after that. >> i am curious what you might perceive in terms of trends and sense any deeper trends in the ideological formation of militant islam and jihadist him. continuity, there

intensity andsing selective this and that ideology which makes it almost impossible to imagine grievance free scenarios. it is a particular nation intervening in the caliphate zones? are they by other political islam inves insulting a way that would call for retribution. backdropse historic of incidental conflicts that you describe, is there an accelerant here which has to do with increasingly fundamental and isolerant wahhabism that more normative than it had been?

what you see in the future in terms of patterns, should syria simmer down? thank you. that's a very difficult question. see the highest threat. it doesn't involve any new ideological trend. the ideology of i.s. and al qaeda are very similar. they are very similar within different groups. similar diverging andds between the purest

the muslim brotherhood. and moreke bin laden politically oriented leaders. seems more extreme. this point any political current within that landscape at all. that also may have to do with what kind of level or stage of evolution i.s. is at the moment. see -- they are quite similar. ideology is equally

useful. identify in europe same way. out of the question here. here.ther question >> why are you so dismissive of loan wolves at the end of your remarks? >> thank you. creates aoan will sense of unpredictable threat. you see terrorist coming out of the woodwork. rhyme with how i

interpret. it's more organized. it operates quite independently. usually have interacted with people. i prefer to call them so low i think the danish .olice intelligence service with thehat has to do strategy behind it. i think much of the debate on terrorism in europe is conflating a different phenomena. they are different. there is extremism.

there is terrorism. it's not identical. there is an link. one of the most important things i want to do in my work is to .istinguish between out of the what works against terrorism will work against foreign fighting. you have any concluding remarks? >> i think no. >> thank you for talking with us. his book is on sale outside i'm sure he would be happy to answer any questions. >> i would like to say thank you for coming in listening. thank you very much. [applause]

>> live today at 3:30 p.m. eastern we will hear from loretta lynch about the lawsuit filed i the state of north carolina against the federal government. we will take you live to the department of justice for her comments. a look at social welfare programs from members of the military. had woodrow wilson center in washington for that discussion. that's live at 4:00 eastern time. a look at how much the federal reserve is changed since it was created in 1930 teen. the american enterprise institute sponsors that. we will have that on c-span.

communicators,he michael o'rielly on several key issues facing the fcc like net neutrality. politicals on the divide within the fcc. the direction from leadership takes the most aggressive approach to policymaking. the first goal of the item. it becomes the first all rather than any consideration of any collegiality or attempt to develop consensus. you wind up with a snare we have today. there is little interest in bringing my interest on board. >> watch the communicators tonight at 8:00 eastern on

c-span two. bus made ar campaign visit to pennsylvania during its primary. collegeed at grove city and washington and jefferson college. learned and professors about our road to the white house coverage. visitors were able to share their thoughts on the up coming elections. we ended up in warrington, pennsylvania. theirored 7/9 graders in video contest. you can view all of the putting documentaries on student cam.org. >> this week on "newsmakers," the governor of puerto rico, governor alejandro garcia padilla.

jonathan miller and the national tax reporter for roll call. governor, you tell us how puerto rico is $70 billion in debt? >> to get a very short history, in the 1970's due to a recession from oil prices, congress reacted and approved the for puerto rico -- with the help of that code, puerto rico will get out of the recession. but then later congress thought it was too much and repealed the section.

what governors did since 2006 and 2012, the empty space on wealth creation that's created in puerto rico through this section was filled with loans. the total debt of puerto rico in 1935 with $37 billion from 2006 to 2012, it was doubled. so we got to $72 billion in debt just because they tried to fill the gap.

not with adjustment in our way of competing with the rest of the world and bring thatacturing to put rico, with loans. that's the history and we have to deal with that. >> governor last year you declared the debt of puerto rico unpayable and this past week, the government development bank missed most of a payment. there was a larger $800 million payment due in july on the constitutionally prioritized general obligation debt. will you be able to make that payment july 1? >> today the answer is no. i don't think we will be able to have an idea to have that money. it's not an issue of whether i want or do not want to pay, etc. do not have the money. the money does not exist.

the same happened last monday and the same will happen the first of july. we don't have the money. >> last year the commonwealth did increase the sales tax charged in puerto rico so revenues have been running slightly above lester's level. -- last year's levels. why would puerto rico not have the money if year-over-year revenues are up? >> that is a very good question. the debt servicing freeze this year as well. we met our obligation last year but this year the debt service increased too. our debt service ratio to budget is 36%. the state with the higher ratio is hawaii with 13%. one third of puerto rico. the average in the united states

is 5%. the average in the world is 7% and we are at 36%. it is a burden that is too heavy for the commonwealth. >> governor, there is a bill before congress to help rescue the territory from its debt. conservatives and republicans in congress are very leery of what they say is bailing out puerto rico. one of the things they are concerned about is that they say puerto rico has got itself into this mess that it is not producing audited financial statements. the economy is in the dumps. can you give a guarantee that they will not be back six months from now or a year from now saying that they need further assistance? that they need a bailout?

>> let me answer that but first address the premises. we have not been asking and we have not been offered a bailout. anyone who has said we have been asking or offered a bailout is lying. second, if we do not act now in congress does not grant puerto rico a debt restructuring process law, then a bailout will be inevitable and it will be very expensive for u.s. taxpayers. if they act now it will cost 02 -- zero two u.s. taxpayers. if they do not act there will be a heavy cost. >> how heavy of a cost? >> billions of dollars. how much will it cost? is that the question? >> yes.

>> it will be dozens of billions. the more conservative estimate that i heard from an economist here is $20 billion in a couple of years if we do not restructure our debt now. that will not be needed. what we need from that bill introduced is that the restructure process that came out will be a process that is workable. something that is doable. i trust paul ryan's commitment.

i trust bishop and nancy pelosi's commitment and the president to the secretary of treasury. they're working together with us to fix that. we also need to fix the board. they say it is an oversized board but if you go into it it is a control board. it will not be applicable to new york state or michigan state. puerto rico is not a city. puerto rico is the whole jurisdiction. the control board will work. >> another revised version of the bill is expected next week. they hope to have a voting committee the week after, possibly on the floor of the house by the end of may. then were getting to june and in the senate we don't know. by this time, people are thinking we might not be able to get a bill until september. is that too late for puerto rico? >> it's already late. we are already into a humanitarian crisis.

septic tanks in public school are overflowing. now with the zika virus that makes it worse. we haven't been able to pay the full amount to the therapists for kids with special education. we haven't been able to pay the full amount of bus drivers to take kids to school. we are struggling to pay the fuel to patrol cars and firefighters. it's an everyday job of borrowing from peter to pay paul. it is something getting into an unsustainable atmosphere. we've been struggling here but we are getting to the end of the road. we have been there for the united states every time that

they asked us to fight for them. in a conflict or any war. recently, our infantry division were granted the gold medal of congress and we do not ask if the conflict is fair or unfair. if it's good or bad. we just go there for the united states. it's time for congress to let us know this is the by -- bilateral relationship. >> it is important to make one point that viewers may not be following. the reason congress has been asked to get involved is that for to rico does not have access to chapter nine of the u.s. bankruptcy code. what were talking about now is because of the 1984 amendments to the bankruptcy -- code excluded puerto rico from being able to file chapter nine, there

is this question of what happens if the governor puerto rico isn't going to be able to pay its bills. there isn't an orderly process to restructure its debt. that's part of the reason why congress is getting involved here. on the issue of this unitarian crisis you have an talking about and you been talking about for some time. this week there were reports that baseball players from major league baseball from the pirates who were supposed to play in san juan where seeking to move those games to miami because of concerns over the zika virus. i wanted to ask you, what method what message do you think that would send and what would you say to americans in the mainland who are worried about visiting puerto rico right now. >> that's just ignorant. >> the same chance you have to get zika in puerto rico you will have in miami.

zika is dangerous. zika is like the flu, it is less than a flu, but it is bad for pregnant women and for women expecting or looking to get pregnant. the only suggestion is if you are a woman and you are looking to have a baby. or if you are already pregnant do not go to florida. don't go to puerto rico, the caribbean, or brazil. is the u.s. olympic team not showing up in rio de janeiro. because that is the mecca of zika. it's just ignorant. it is offensive to puerto rico. roberto clemente died because he tried to get humanitarian help to nicaragua after the huge earthquake and there was a lake

there were people dead in the streets, the infrastructure was completely destroyed but he tried to get there. today, baseball players are saying no to puerto rico, just to try to move the economy a little bit showing up for some games in puerto rico -- to honor roberto clemente who died that way and they say no to a mosquito? it is offensive and ignorant. >> governor, what do you say to your own citizens? what you say to those puerto ricans and any citizen considering leaving the island now? >> i understand that the yard is always greener at your neighbors

-- you know the saying. now we are just helping people to move back because they went to the united states thinking they will get a job immediately and wouldn't knock some much effort. some of them are playing back again. the median age of puerto ricans leaving the island are 28 years. its young people and productive people. the fact is that we have -- we've been effective in reducing crime rates to the half and reducing the unemployment rate from 16% to 11% but we need to do it harder to convince people to stay here. it will be more expensive for

u.s. taxpayers puerto rico moved to the states and then claims a government aid in the states rather than puerto rico. that's another reason for congress to act and to convince them to stay, to convince them if they are rate left we need to continue reducing our current rate and our employment rate. so they are able to move your family forward here in puerto rico. next governor, one of the portions of the bill that congressional democrats are coming out against is the provision that lowers the minimum wage to $4.25 an hour. republicans are talking about a report put out by a commission last year by your government that said lowering the minimum

wage would actually help the economy in puerto rico moreover, the twist in the bill is that you alone would have that right to waive the minimum wage. the question is why not just let the minimum wage stay as it is, let republicans have a symbolic victory and not have to lower the minimum wage. >> the report that you mentioned is a report that i commissioned by the doctor and her team. she is a former economist. -- veryery head of competence of study. i agree with many of the studies. i put the study of completely with any amendment. i do not ask her to correct anything that was against it. but when we report and make public the study but publicly i was against that specific measure. because it goes against the

economy. there is plenty of evidence in places where people have the ability to have more money and leave poverty back. the economy improved. people who can buy more things, houses and cars help the economy to move on. what we need is the competitive advantage that we lost. i'm not asking for a new 936. but i'm telling congress about the action and reaction of what they did. and just about what some of you said before, that conservative members of congress are saying there are two things about that. the answer is no. they took us out of the bankruptcy code without asking. they eliminate section 936. puerto rico told them.

we were right. the beginning of this crisis was in congress. it was their action. thank god that our soldiers did not have the same attitude. when they're asked by the president to go to war. we do not say you got into that trouble alone you get out alone. >> within the bill, you would have the power alone to waive that minimum wage provision. you could do nothing and the -- in the minimal wage would stay the same so why not keep it in the bill? >> because i'm the governor now and i will always try to protect my people. if someone with that attitude of the past would come borrowing the attitude or trying to keep government people.

if the power is in puerto rico i think we will be safe here. it's not that bad, but i'm not running again. so i'm trying to protect the people of puerto rico of any government of the future. as you presume, the power is in puerto rico and we can not just decide not to act and then we will remain as in the states. the meta-something that we can live with. >> we have about five minutes left. >> governor, treasury secretary jack lew is going to bid for the commonwealth on monday and when i ask you if you think that the treasury should be prepared if congress cannot pass this bill to make some kind of commitment to exchange puerto rican bonds with treasury bonds to essentially refinance puerto

rican debt in the treasury debt with similar maturities. have you asked treasury if they would consider this? >> i think they really can do that but that will not solve the problem, that will kick the can and we are trying to convince congress to solve the problem, not to kick the can. that's the possibility and it's not in the treasury's view. they think they do not have that authority right now and i think they do. they are right when they said it will not solve the problem. to solve the problem, congress needs to act. >> your government has also issued a debt exchange proposal. what insurance is will investors have that puerto rico will not read a fault if they accept this

new offer from your government? >> two things. what i'm asking craters are one -- creditors are one group. group. they are general obligations and guaranteed by the sales tax and are subordinated -- those guaranteed by the government development banks. there are plenty of groups in the fight a lot among each other. what i'm asking for them is a deal that solves the crisis. sometimes i received proposals that will bring back the crisis in a couple years. that is something, i have to admit that.

i am not running again. january 2 year i will not be the governor so i could say to the public, i solved the crisis and kick the can to the next governor. but that would not be fair. i'm asking them to solve the crisis and to put parameters -- on the oversight board that we are proposing i'm proposing that puerto rico will be reliable through federal funding and many other measures if we do not comply with the plan that i proposed last september. i put it forward and it is already in places. five-year fiscal plan and in december and january i amendment -- i a mend it to make a 10 year fiscal plan.

what i'm saying is let's stick to that land and if i at any point do not comply with that plan then it can mature or there are some mature penalties that puerto rico will have if they do not stick to their own plan. but the plan is public and you can see it. during last september. >> governor, puerto rico has basically been reduced to begging congress to help save it. you have complained about the control board. the oversight board for there is realistically nothing that puerto rico can do when congress acts. i'm wondering if this whole debt crisis has changed your thoughts on the issue of statehood or nationhood. namely you would've had access to chapter nine bankruptcy in the earned income tax credit which you don't now. medicare, medicaid reimbursements. i'm wondering if this is changed your mind it all on that issue. your against statehood and nationhood?

>> people here in puerto rico are against it, too. there's more than one reason. let's ask these questions. is independence and nationhood going to save argentina and portugal or ireland or greece? from defaulting? is statehood helping illinois? did statehood help new york city or detroit city? the answer is no. >> so with chapter nine bankruptcy -- it would have in the case of chapter nine bankruptcy. >> it will not be enough. chapter nine will only apply to public cooperation but will not be enough. it's like what's happening in illinois. or greece or argentina.

what we need is a responsible government. my predecessor has $16.2 billion in loans. that's a lot of money. last month, the default took it in 2011. it wasn't something that happened 30 years ago, it was having that happened five years ago. to add liquidity to a public corporation because it was not solvent. it was very responsible. what we need is a responsible government. >> governor, there has been an intense lobbying campaign here in washington by groups believed to be back here. they're calling this a bailout even though there is no taxpayer assistance being offered in this bill.

some people believe they are being financed in part by investors that participated in the let debt offering that your government made an 2014. it was a $3.5 billion bond issue after the credit rating of puerto rico had been but downgraded. was it a mistake? no, those bonds allowed us to have more room to negotiate within and we tried. if you remember, when i said that the debt was unsustainable, everybody said that it wasn't right. now everybody agrees that the debt is unsustainable. the numbers are the numbers. this is not politics is that when you're before you declared it unsustainable you had been saying they would be payable. what changed over those 12 months?

>> well that i was trying to negotiate with them. i improved an increase in the oil tax. to add liquidity to the government development bank. i tried many measures. it something that's part of the plan. it something that you need to comply. etc. you do one thing today like a silver bullet and you end the controversy. you need to continue and some of those other steps were -- i wasn't able to comply with due to the inability to go to the market or due to the crater that was not able to negotiate. so we gain some breathing room. but now we are about to end that breathing room. that's why were asking them, let's do this that's good for you and good for us. have no doubt that this campaign that lies about puerto rico that

the race is about puerto rico that it came from voter funds. >> governor, we are unfortunately all out of time. thank you for being this week's "newsmaker." and thank you for having me i will be when ever you need at the other end of the line. thank you for having me. >> let me turn to the two of you and nick, if i could begin with you. what you make of him saying that they will definitely not make this july 1 payment? >> as you can tell it's a big question in the bond market now because the governor has missed a few payments already. as the governor explained there are different classes of debt. they fall in a different place in the debt stack. the general obligation debt is seen as the most senior debt. the governor has made a proposal where they would restructure

their debt miss a they could pay half of the debt service they have right now. some people are saying you have enough money to make this it hundred million dollar payment even if you may not have money to make some of the other payments for. so the fact he is coming out and saying right off the bat we are going to miss this payment, it will be seen as more of a watershed moment that some of these other defaults have been. >> how will the market respond? >> there is no surprise in the market that puerto rico is in trouble. puerto rico has been trading differently from other municipal credits for a number of years. puerto rico has not done well. it's not incredibly clear how big of a surprise this is but there is this question of the ability to pay versus willingness to pay and he is saying you don't have the ability so we will see how the market response to that. so what do you think happens if they default? >> i think you do have an

increased risk of litigation. litigation against the government and creditors. the governor claimed you do not have just one issuance of debt, you have competing pledges and there is a risk that some of them will sue each other. the upshot is, the puerto rican economy is not growing. as we heard, people are leaving the island easily. they call it the $99 solution. these are u.s. citizens. they have american passports. they are able to come here easily. the problem is how will you get the economy to grow if and not able to the capital markets and raise money and are not able to refinance the existing debt, what business will want to open

up and hire more employees in puerto rico and the environment. it doesn't really help the problem at all. >> the governor says if they default the could be a bailout that will be needed from washington which means billions of dollars? >> probably. you will have an increased request for health care funding, you are already having that. even though this is being categorized as a bailout, it is not a bailout because it is no pet -- taxpayer money on the table right now. you're talking about writing down creditors. i think you see increased odds that pressure will build on democrats and republicans to put real money on the table. >> will there be a bill passed on the house floor? >> that is the big question. paul ryan has a lot at stake. he has put his stamp of approval

on this bill. he said he wanted to get something done by march 31 and they blew that deadline. there is going to be the bailout next week, it's going to be talking about. there are a lot of people on the fence wing to see what the revisions to the bill look like. the people i'm talking to say they are close to getting the agreement but the proof is in the putting when they actually see it. >> one of the architects of that bill is the chairman of the committee. we want to thank both of you for talking to us, we appreciate it. >> tomorrow about the wilson center hosted a discussion by taking a look at the types of benefits that soldiers receive and how the programs differ from those for civilians. >> we will hear from the rep. lynch: about the lawsuit filed

by the governor of north carolina against the federal government regarding the use of public bathrooms by people who are lgbt. theill take you live to department of justice. government programs from members of the military. we will head to the woodrow wilson center for that. that is live at 4:00 eastern. how much has the federal reserve changed since it was instituted. we look at that at 5:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. communicators,he michael o'rielly on several issues facing the fcc like net neutrality and set-top toxins. he talks about the political divide within the fcc. they take the most aggressive

approach to policymaking. when that becomes the first therey goal of the item is any consideration of any collegiality or attempt to develop consensus. is little interest in bringing my opinion on board. i am less likely to be supported. >> watch the communicators tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span two. our campaign bus made a visit to pennsylvania during its primary. we stopped at grove city college and slippery rock university. , messieurs, local officials learned about our white house coverage.

visitors were able to share their thoughts about the up coming election. we ended the week in warrington, pennsylvania. we honored some ninth graders for their winning the student cam petition. thank you for helping us coordinate. you can view all of the winning documentaries. ♪ announcer: tonight on c-span, "q&a" with former u.s. ambassador zalmay khalilzad. announcer: this week on "q&a," former ambassador to afghanistan, iraq, and the united states, zalmay khalilzad. he discusses his memoir, "the envoy: from kabul to the white house, my journey through a turbulent world." brian: ambassador zalmay khalilzad, you have a new book out and you talk about where you were on 9/11. what is the story?

mr. khalilzad: i had been in the office with my colleagues. i used to have a morning staff meeting in the white house. i was a special assistant to the president and senior director to the region that included afghanistan. i had my own staff meeting, and the first plane had hit the tower. i was on my way to the senior staff meeting that condoleezza rice, the security advisor, chaired. we thought that the plane had lost its way and hit the tower at the first attack with the first incident. then, when i was sitting to condoleeza's left in the staff meeting, what happened in the operation area of the white house, the situation room, somebody walked in and gave her a note that a second plane had hit the second tower.

she closed the book and rushed out. i went back to my office, and the world changed that day for me and for the united states. brian: how long did it take them to figure out that you not only were born in afghanistan, you were a muslim and an authority on that part of the world? mr. khalilzad: it took them a few days because i had been so involved in government and foreign policy issues that who i was and my background had escaped a lot of people. i remember at one point there was discussion of reaching out to the head of the northern alliance, and people did not know quite how to reach him, because the taliban, were really the alliance, but claimed it was the government in somewhere in northwestern afghanistan at most

of these people were. i said, "well, do you want me to call him?" the president said, you know how to reach the president of the northern alliance? i said, "yes, mr. president, i do. when i worked in the reagan administration, i was involved in a policy supporting the afghan resistance movements against the soviets. he was one of the leaders, and i dealt a lot with him. in fact, i brought him to the white house to see president bush after he had succeeded president reagan at one point. i have his private phone number." that was a surprise. later on, i remember that during

the christmas party, when i came to the president's christmas party, he introduced me to the first lady, saying, this is the guy i have been talking to you about. all of the commanders in afghanistan who are fighting the taliban and are in touch with him. he exaggerated my role. i think he was surprised. i was touched when one day, he said, "i think our country is blessed. someone is looking after us, watching our back. to have someone of your background and knowledge and commitment to the united states at this time, there is a message there." i was very honored to hear that from him. brian: you have in your book, "the envoy," in the back of the book you tell us that george bush suggested to you to write a memoir. why? mr. khalilzad: he used to tease

me because the president's style of leadership was one that he selected the people, gave the person a broad mission, and then relied heavily on that person for advice, and gave them the room to maneuver to achieve that objective. he always said that he wanted to know how i did some of the things that i did, and he would like to read that. condoleezza rice and others told me that, too, because there were some things we had to do in the initial days after 9/11 because of travel and meeting with people. they did not have all the details that were communicated. they thought this would be one

interesting memoir because i was doing things where the rubber meets the road, so to speak. i was sort of in the theater, on the ground, dealing with a variety of interesting and sometimes unusual characters, a lot of stories that are in the book about the characters and events that took place that have not been really a lot written on. brian: i want to put on the screen some of your background so that people can know the different jobs that you've had. you can see there that we go back to 1985. i will ask you about before them. you were special advisor to the

under secretary of state for political affairs. deputy undersecretary of defense for policy planning, and director of strategy, doctrine, and force structure at the rand corporation. you were the u.s. ambassador to afghanistan, iraq, and the united nations. of all those jobs, which one was a most interesting for you? mr. khalilzad: they were all interesting in their own ways. but one in afghanistan was in some ways the most rewarding because i had been born there, and i had always paid attention to afghanistan even when i was doing other things, and i had felt that afghans had done something huge in the 1980's, and they stood up to the soviet union, and they did something that a lot of very smart people who were studying the soviet union believed it would not happen, which is to push them out because the soviets had this version of -- the soviets had this brezhnev version of doctrine that once you go in, you don't need at that time. and then, the soviet union disintegrated, which was a huge achievement, their archaeology got discredited. afghanistan may have contributed to that. but then we abandoned

afghanistan afterwards and a lot of afghans that killed. there's it is not destroyed in a civil war that occurred. i thought about that given what we had done together. after 9/11, to have had the opportunity to go back and help afghanistan get a new constitution, get a new government, to make progress, it was rewarding. initially, i was reluctant to

accept the job. i said to the president when he asked me to do the president, i said, "remember, mr. president, i left there, and what did he do -- and what did i do that you want to send me back? and he said, why don't you go as a presidential envoy? i was a special presidential envoy right after 9/11 for afghanistan and then for iraq, and free iraqis. they reacted very well to me. the afghans. we did a lot. that was a relatively easy job. it was a rewarding job. i have enjoyed all my jobs and i have been grateful for the opportunity that i was given. brian: names like hammad, and the current president, and maliki, and all these names the

americans have learned over the years, how many of those folks did you know before all this happened? mr. khalilzad: well, i knew the president of afghanistan. ryan: he is the president of afghanistan right now. mr. khalilzad: he and i came to america together in 1966. that was the most shocking things of my life, still, probably given i have been in war zones and there have been attempts to kill me. the most shocking expanse was coming from afghanistan to the united states in new york. i had never left afghanistan and i had lived in a small town. a small town in northern afghanistan. i came to a cosmopolitan city. by comparison. although it was quite a small town, 5000. and then to come to new york in

the middle of the summer, heat and humidity i had not been used to. afghanistan can get hot but it is dry heat. i did not have to use an air conditioner, the hotel had its own air-conditioning unit. i did not know how to operate a shower or bathtub, and i could not sleep the first night because of the heat. i had not turned on the air conditioning. and then seeing new york is a vast city with all kind of people and it, and how america was, and i ended up staying and i ended up staying in a small town in northern california called ceres, near modesto. but ashraf ghan and i went to college together at the university of beirut. and then again, i ran into him when i was teaching at columbia, my first job after i got my phd at the university of chicago.

he was doing his phd at columbia university. i have known ashraf ghani for well over 40 years. brian: you finished high school where? mr. khalilzad: i finished high school in ceres, california, in 1967. then i went back to afghanistan to get my bacculareate. brian: your next degree? mr. khalilzad: from the university of beirut. a bachelors. brian: what year did you graduate from there? mr. khalilzad: 1972. i got a masters also from the american university in beirut in 1974. brian: and then what? mr. khalilzad: a phd from the university of chicago in 1979. brian: this man has tremendous connections. you will recognize him.

this is just a clip. it is the only one we could find what you look like and sounded like. it goes back to 1980. he is deceased now. [video clip] >> there are some parts of the world where a law -- in asia, in central america, and so on. but there are some parts of the world where we have similar common interests as in the persian gulf. in such cases, many lives have come to recognize that sharing the risk as well as the burdens with us is very reasonable. -- host: who was he? mr. khalilzad: one of our great

nuclear strategists and general. he was a professor at the university of chicago. with him. it happened accidentally. encounter can make a huge difference in one's life, though you think getting ready and getting good grades, studying hard, those are important. sometimes an incident, and unanticipated element can make a difference in your life. in mye a big difference life. wasr school started, i living in the international house and developed relations with a couple of colleagues who live there.

i was taking a class on comparative politics. i was heading back and when i ran into my friends in the hall that i had met at the and theyonal house said why don't you come listen to this professor. the course was called classical and nuclear wars. about president kennedy, he refers to him as jack and calls kissinger henry. stories.l of unusual you might enjoy just listening to them.

i said why not and sat at the back of the class. talking about the probability of fixedr war, there was a probability of war. nuclear war ultimately becomes inevitable. i raise my hand and said isn't there a fixed probability of permanent peace at any time? if the same logic were applied, we could get to permanent peace at some time. i told him who i was and he said i want to talk with you after class. he said you have to take my

i took all of his classes and i shifted my area of interest. nuclear strategist and he had a company that advised the defense department. there was a project that i couldn't see because the government classified it. i was not yet a citizen. i could not read my own work again for a while.

he was a brilliant man who made the pieceference in of the world by coming up with the context of a second strike requirement. what the requirement of the second strike was and he worked toward the end of his life on proliferation issues, including visiting iran and the shop because he was concerned about the nuclear program. then the attack on pearl harbor, about the warning. host: and other disciple of his was paul wolfowitz. this man who married his

daughter -- this is from 2004. let's watch this. >> you dedicate your part of the .ook to mr. wohlstetter >> he was a great man and a good friend. he was probably the single most significant influence on strategic thinking in this country in a postwar time. of researchman council at the rand corporation and university professor at the university of chicago. he was a man trained in mathematics and logic. he was extraordinarily rigorous. he always asked the question, is this true? host: what would he have thought of what we did in afghanistan and iraq western mark >> the

first time, when i was working and we hadagon outessfully pushed saddam callsait, i took a lot of from albert at that time. he was very persistent. one thing else about albert, when he became convinced of something, he was not ranked conscious. he kept pushing his point of view. he thought at that time the united states should have pursued saddam.

by helping them was not only arms, but by u.s. air power effectively employed. he would call and say you need to tell paul wolfowitz. undersecretary of, cheney, that they are blowing it to what need to adjust they wanted which was u.s. air power and iraqis getting rid of saddam to solve this problem. not to use the word they are .lowing it the secretary and the chairman,: powell: --: powell, they think the morale ofeved

the armed forces. they are not going to be very welcoming of your prescription. why don't you tell them you have achieved a lot. they are blowing an opportunity by stopping where they have. not in terms of the objective of overthrowing saddam. we -- how we did it, he would have asked a lot of questions and then very rigorous

i suspect he would have proposed a different strategy. these are somewhat non sequiturs, but i want to get some of these stories in. the prime minister of iraq was going to hang saddam hussein. where were you and what role did you play? this was around christmas time and i had taken a few days off and left iraq. ambassador[at that time and -- i was ambassador at that time and i got a call from the person in charge at the time,

margaret. she said the prime minister had and saddam wanted to enforce the judgment of the court, which is that he should be hanged. i was concerned by the timing celebrationislamic aj, the visit of muslims to mecca was eminent. talk to maliki. i said are you sure, mr. prime minister, that you want to do it?

the gathering takes place and there's a time of festivities and to hang someone at that time, usually you pardon prisoners as part of the festivities, not aime you hang people. thergued with me that difference by one day, the shia celebrating and the sunni celebrating one day. he said he had information that terrorists or extremists are going to take over a few schools to bargain for saddam.

let me talk to my management and get back to you, premised her. i talked to dr. rice who was secretary of state and stephen hadley who was the national security advisor on the phone. the broader islamic world, especially the sunnis, we needed sunni support for iraq because of the composition of the waslation of iraq which sunnis as well. they said we should defer to the prime minister of iraq and the country was sovereign.

if he wants to go ahead, let him do it. baghdad tofolks in turn them over. to turn over saddam. host: how long did it take for them to execute him? mr. khalilzad: a few hours. host: you are a sunni and maliki is a shia. difference -- i have asked that question to a lot of guests, but no one has ever to find the difference between a sunni and a shia. mr. khalilzad: the fundamental who was thes legitimate successor to the profit question mark when the

prophet died, mohammed, who should have succeeded him? ali, who waseve ,he son-in-law of the profit imammed ali was the first of the she is and was married to the prophets daughters. the sunnis believe that it started right after the death of the prophet. the first -- the sunnis have the

caliphate -- even isis is talking about reestablishing the caliphate. host: and that is basically what? mr. khalilzad: that is basically the ruler. that was the first difference. ofy believe he was a usurper the right successor to the profit. afterward, there was a series of imams from the house of the profit. that is the fundamental fault line as to who is the ruler.

--ouple of other differences how do you pray? there are some differences. it became much more significant, embracedly, once iran as the state religion with arabs and turks mostly adopting city is him. the sunni legal system, the daughter is not entitled to .qual inheritance rights even some sunnis who have only

daughters, in order to keep the wealth in the family, they become paper shiites so the daughters can get all of the wealth rather than it going to other relatives because they did not have a son. there are minor differences. islam is the last religion, the perfect religion, the last word of god to man and mom it is the koran is the book of islam and sharia is the law -- both shia and sunni leave and is. host: you marry a non-muslim at your two sons take her last name. explain all of that. this is to help the kids in the united states.

because my last name is not easy to pronounce. my wife, who was a feminist. that theynly right have their mother's but it would , my lastasier for them name being so hard to pronounce. host: and their last name is bernard. another story before we run out of time -- the story of vice president joe biden. mr. khalilzad: two stories about the current vice president. when i was special envoy, he came once and i was very impressed with them. -- the embassy was very rudimentary at that time.

we all slept on the floor and he brought his own sleeping bag and slept on the floor like i did. host: in the embassy? mr. khalilzad: in the embassy, in the office. .e had caused me a huge problem he threaten the interior of afghanistan with b-52 attacks and i said what do you mean? i told him the northern alliance , if they do not behave properly , the taliban -- the b-52s are still flying and the minister got very angry and got up and walked out. my read of the constitution does not put senators the chain of command for ordering attacks.

i said we will have to fix this problem and he said what do you mean? is it we are going to call the guy and he is going to fix this. we just liberated these people, remember. i left because i had an early morning meeting, but they stayed on until the middle of the night. that westory is again have very limited facilities in kabul in those days. we have 180 people.

he did not pull rank, though he , he was standing in line with a towel around him. a young marine from behind took a photo of the back of his head and he turned around and said what are you doing? the guy said he's taking his photo for his mother. back? said from my so he turned around and said and the photo now marine did and he was very pleased. he said some colorful things also. host: this is not a serious policy issue but you talk in the

book about staying at the waldorf astoria. you say we pay $60,000 a month as a country for the ambassador from the united states to the u.n. to stay at the waldorf. here's some video from you in 2008 and your wife in the u.n. apartment you were ambassador from abc. incredible work of the ambassador's life. the apartment at the waldorf, which we toured with his wife. >> he was at the reception. he can easily get stepped on. >> in this elegant home filled with american art and personal family treasures come a prominently displayed, you find a memento of his previous service. host: what was that on the wall?

mr. khalilzad: that was a machine gun that belonged to saddam hussein. it was given to me as a token of appreciation for my service in iraq. $60,000 a month obviously got your attention. is it worth it to spend that kind of money? mr. khalilzad: i would prefer that we would have taken a someonel townhouse that has given to the united states to be used by the u.s. ambassador. the state department in its wisdom rejected that. nowun's secretary-general

lives in that house offered to the u.s.. it is quite expensive. one reason he said i should take the u.n. job is he referred to the accommodation, saying his father had that job and used to go for weekends at a time. had he known when i was ambassador that my accommodation which wasbassadorial a couple of containers put together, although there was some improvement, when i went to nothing like normal places are used to. that was one of the selling

points. what kind of power does the united states ambassador have in a place like afghanistan or iraq? mr. khalilzad: quite considerable because when you are in a war zone and you have a lot of responsibility with regard to that country, we have intelligence operatives there and we spend a lot of economic resources. we have a role in facilitating agreements. we have an agreement to be facilitator among iraqis or afghans. your influence is considerable. very anxious to meet with you. they summon you a lot.

people are always leading with you for help to deal with problems that they face. you also have a lot of information so you know what is really going on. in those situations, and were zones, where we are forced to have an american ambassador, it is an influential job. book, you talk about a man who was assassinated. here was some video from 2001. you suggest this had a major impact on what was going on over in afghanistan. my message to president bush is the following -- if he is not interested in peace in

afghanistan, if he does not help the afghan people to arrive at their objective for peace, then the americans and the rest of the world will have to face the problem. how important was he to the story? important.ad: very he was resisting the taliban in afghanistan. he had worked against the soviets during the occupation. host: their occupation was 79-89? mr. khalilzad: right. he was in kabul as defense minister and when the taliban took over, he had to go to the mountains in the north. the taliban and allied

themselves with al qaeda and al qaeda became kind of sponsor of .he taliban they allowed al qaeda to operate, recruit, and train on its territory. it's a couple of days before 9/11. two people of moroccan and north african origin who had belgian the extremist presence in brussels had deep roots and had been going on for a long time. journalists and wanting to interview him, but were in fact working for al

-- blew him up. this was a favor al qaeda was doing for the taliban and was in exchange for what they must have known was coming, which was an attack on the united states. hopedng this favor, they the taliban and would not abandon them. to get rid of the really serious opposition that existed. taliban did not turn over al qaeda and osama bin laden after 9/11 either turn over al qaeda or they would attack the taliban. brian: you referred, earlier in our conversation, about you were threatened. somebody tried to kill you?

mr. khalilzad: quite a few times. it was always intel about this or that plot, but one time, the afghan authorities arrested a group near where i was toward the end of my tenure, that had come across the border from pakistan to assassinate me. one other time, that i thought the end had come. it was in iraq where general casey was the commander of our forces and we were turning over a military facility in tikrit, saddam's birthplace. it sounded like a rocket had been fired towards us.

the next thing i knew, general casey was on top of me and he had put himself at risk to protect me. i joked afterwards, no one can say that military operations and relations are not excellent in iraq. there was also several attempts, i don't know whether it was specifically focused on me, the residence in baghdad. so, i had excellent security. i did not live in fear. but of course, being in a war zone, flying around, driving around, i did not want to be locked up in the embassy. there were risks, but i understood the risks. we took the appropriate security measures. brian: we have lost 6877 americans in afghanistan and in iraq. here is some criticism of the whole event by a fellow named

joby warrick. we play this so that we can get some background on somebody who disagreed with some of the stuff we did. this was recorded back in 2015. [video clip] >> i strongly believe that the iraq invasion was the original sin. not the invasion itself, which essentially gave the jihadists the cause that they wanted. they predicted the fight would take place in iraq and was ready for the americans were ready in 2003. anybody was a professional inside iraq in the early 2000 had to be a member of the party. anybody was a professional inside iraq had to be a member of the party. dismantling the armed forces. there were plenty of iraqis that would've fought the americans anyway. he was able to melt this religious extremism. those people, the start of that movement, 2004, 2006, that is isis today. [end video clip]

brian: you were in government in 1991 with desert shield? mr. khalilzad: i was. with the pentagon. bryan: and you were there in 2003. what impact did you have on the 2003 invasion? mr. khalilzad: well, i think he had some good points, particularly, whatever you think of whether we should have invaded or not, and in the context of the time, there was universal belief that saddam hussein had chemical and biological weapons, and both the president of the united states and the prime minister of great britain, and quite a lot of our other leaders in the united states, given the vote that took

place, thought that the problem of saddam hussein with wmd needed to be addressed. it turned out we had a huge intelligence failure that in fact he didn't, he was pretending, as i later on learned when i was in iraq, he was pretending because he wanted to deter iran from taking advantage of the conventional weakness of iraq. after our defeat of iraqi forces, the balance that shifted against iraq in terms of conventional weapons, he was signaling that he has weapons of mass destruction. but i do think that what the gentleman was saying about some of the things that we did afterwards, the disbanding of the army, the deepti ratification and the politicians it used by others. mostly politicians led shiites against the sunnis anorak, -- against the sunnis in iraq, that contributed to the violence that later on we saw.

we did a number of things that together were problematic. one, we had said we were not going to rule iraq. we declared an occupation authority afterwards, in violation of what we had committed. we had said we were going to reform the iraqi armed forces, not disband it. and then, after the occupation authority was established, it was decided by that authority to disband the armed forces. essentially, angering hundreds of thousands of people who knew how to use weapons, and then, we did this deep the ratification. so yes, some mistakes were made. part of what i tried to do in the book, why the changes occurred. why we went from one set of

plans. people say we did not have plans for afterwards. the fact is, we did have plans, but we abandoned them afterwards. why did happen? -- why did that happen? i took my time. i interviewed the president, president bush, interviewed many of the principals who were involved. ambassador bremmer included. as to why the change, how the deliberation occurred, how my -- how might an assessment of the implications of the change have been taken into account. we did not have enough forces to maintain order, yet we disbanded the forces we were going to count on to establish order or maintain order. and then the borders of iraq were not guarded. so there was a set of policies together that did not help and added to the insecurity and violence that we saw, that the extremists such as zarqawi exploited. although we then corrected it toward the end of the period

that i was there, by the surge, by reaching out to the sunnis, reaching out to the forces, to bring about security. violence was way down. but unfortunately when we left, the vacuum was filled by rival regional powers, tearing iraq apart. violence escalated and we have a -- isis now. brian: when did you start this book? when did you start the research and did you keep a diary? mr. khalilzad: i kept a diary, not every day, but often i would write notes. i started work on it, i would say, within a year after leaving the government. brian: what year was that? mr. khalilzad: 2009. i did not want to do a rushed book. i wanted to take my time. i let the heat of the battle, so

to speak, between the various people and forces internally dissipate. i had time to reflect. my goal also was to draw some lessons for future diplomats and intelligence officers and military officers, and hopefully, to be helpful to them. brian: over your government work all those years, who did you disagree with the most that you had to work with. -- that you had to work with and what did you disagree about? mr. khalilzad: well, i had the biggest disagreement was in the period when i was going to afghanistan, and our goal became, not only to overthrow the taliban, but to bring the

people who had committed the attack of 9/11 to justice, and to make sure that afghanistan did not return to being a haven for terrorists. the third goal, i thought, we did not have a strategy of consensus about what to do to avoid that return. we did not have a plan for afghanistan when 9/11 happened. everybody was shocked, my god. in our leadership. this is a country known for quagmires for occupiers. now, what do we do? state and nation building was very unpopular at that time, in fact, president bush had been elected criticizing the previous administration for doing nationbuilding in the balkans. the same way with secretary rumsfeld of defense, very much against protracted engagement and entanglements.

i had thought that a piece of territory that we regarded as vital, that strategic, if not vital, we needed to have friendly forces control that territory. we had done it in europe and korea and japan after world war ii. if this piece of territory called afghanistan was strategic, because of the issue of terrorism which had become a huge challenge, and we recognize it, and it needed to be held by friendly forces, and that in me -- that meant we had to enable those forces to be able to hold that territory, that meant that we had to help them establish institutions to be able to carry out that mission, and therefore, we had to do, or what we would call state and nation building, and we came to that reluctantly. i remember secretary rumsfeld telling me, get your hands off

of the bike. one time, i lost my cool. i said, mr. secretary, show me where this damn bike is. because when i went to afghanistan, there was hardly anything. this was a state that had been at war for over 20 plus years, kabul was like a dead city. there was nothing in their banks, literally. if they had no army or police. there were two currencies that were worthless. one printed in the north and one printed in the south of the country. i was shocked what we had taken on given the depth of the problems.

there was one area that at one time, i said give me -- slowly, we embraced that idea that we needed to help afghanistan along with others. not only ourselves, because terrorism was a problem for europeans and others. so to do it in a burden-shared way. we brought nato along and other countries taking lead on different issues, the japanese on disarming militias, the brits on counter narcotics, the italians on building the police force, and germans and others also playing important roles in the police, german in particular, and italians did rule of law. so that was an area of, at the time, that was initially there was some disagreement. brian: you mentioned early on that your wife is a feminist, and then you tell us in the book that you have got two sons, and your wife and sons are on two sides politically.

mr. khalilzad: right. i remember when i was at the u.n., and it was the election, that john mccain was the republican nominee and barack obama was the democrat. although during the primaries, hillary clinton was obviously also running. and cheryl was supporting hillary. my younger son, max, supported president obama, who had been then senator obama. and my older son, alex, supported strongly senator mccain. we used to have have very lively debates, obviously, publicly i was neutral. representing the united states in the u.n. but i was a republican and i was obviously supportive of senator mccain. although i was pleased about our

country and that we did what the vast majority of the u.n. members did not believe we would do, which is to elect an african-american as president. that says a lot about america. brian: the name of the book is "the envoy: from kabul to the white house, my journey through a turbulent world." former united states ambassador to afghanistan and iraq, zalmay khalilzad. thank you very much for joining us. mr. khalilzad: thank you very much, brian. i appreciate it. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪ announcer: for free transcripts

or to give us your comments about this program, visit us at q&a.org. "q&a" is also available as c-span podcasts. authorxt week's "q&a," adam hochschild. coming up, attorney general loretta lynch on north carolina for lawsuit against the federal government for its law banning transgender people from public bathrooms that much their gender identity. we will take you to those remarks live at 3:30 p.m.

eastern time. first, governor patrick rory speaking to reporters earlier today about the lawsuit and after his remarks, you'll hear general counsel taking questions from reporters. -- governor pat mccrory. governor mccrory: good afternoon. our nation is dealing with a very new, complex and emotional issue -- how to balance the expectations of privacy and equality. most privatee , restrooms, lives locker rooms, or public shower facilities. this was not a north carolina state agenda. no one in north carolina was

talking about bathroom policy until the charlotte city council imposed a mandate on private businesses. this mandate required, with potential penalty of fine, access to restrooms, locker rooms, or shower facilities be based upon one's gender identity or gender expression. a similar policy was rejected just months earlier by the voters of houston, texas by 61% of the vote. this caused major privacy concerns about males entering female facilities or females entering mail facilities -- male facilities. our state legislature believed

this was an unnecessary government overreach into the private sector, imposing government regulations and impacting once personal privacy. the state legislature and this governor also believe that guidelines then needed to be put in place because of this new for government buildings, schools, and our rest stops, to ensure privacy and expectation of privacy for everyone. just five days ago, the u.s. department of justice sent letters to my office, the department of public safety, which reports to this governor, the university system, suggesting that having government employees use the bathroom, locker room, or shower facility that corresponds to their biological sex is in conflict with federal policy. the department of justice asked all parties to set aside their constitutional duty and refuse

to follow or enforce our state law. this was a substantial request with a very serious implications, and the u.s. government gave us the mirror three business days to respond three business days to respond to this letter. we asked on friday for additional time. we asked for an additional two weeks, but they refused unless i made a statement where i would publicly agree with their interpretation of federal law, and if i did, they would give me one additional week to respond. i could not agree to that because i do not agree with their interpretation of federal law. that is why this morning i have clarifyfederal court to .hat the law actually is i anticipate our own

legislature, other private sector entities from throughout , and possiblytes will join us in seeking this clarification, because this is not just a north carolina issue. this is an issue which imposes new law on every private sector employer throughout the united states of america with over 15 employees. a court, rather than a federal agency, should tell our state, nation, and our employers across the country what the law requires. and let me say something. our nation is one nation. especially when it comes to fighting discrimination, which i support wholeheartedly. , i think it is time for the u.s. congress to bring clarity to our national

antidiscrimination provisions under title vii and title ix. let me repeat that one more time for all of our representatives in the leaders of both republican and democratic parties in congress. ultimately, i think it is time for the u.s. congress to bring clarity to our national antidiscrimination provisions ix.r title vii and title right now the obama administration's bypassing congress by attempting to basice the law and set restroom policies, locker room policies, and even shower policies for public and private across the country, not just north carolina. and i still asking the north carolina legislature to reinstate the ability to sue for wrongful termination for discrimination in state court. i encourage them to do this and do it quickly. i also welcome additional

dialogue with the city of our stateand legislature, which is been ongoing for the past week, and i want to ensure the people of our state and our country that north carolina has long held .raditions of ensuring equality the majority of our citizens in our great state and this governor did not seek out this issue. however, the state of north carolina and this governor see seekas an opportunity to solution for the greatest nation , the united states of america. thank you very much. >> thank you. i am bob stevens. i am governor markell rory's general counsel -- governor

mccrory's general counsel. ph. ix question is why was title added to this lawsuit? the answer is that was raised to to the university system. not directed toward the governor, nor the department of public safety. those of the two claims we addressed in our lawsuit. the university system will make their own decisions about what they want to do with that title ix issue. sure. >> [indiscernible] >> do not know. my understanding is the board of governors's meeting tomorrow and my assumption is they will take that up then and make a decision. >> [indiscernible]

>> in the grim case, mm-hmm. >> [indiscernible] >> they have not. they have not. and it is important to note that. what happened in the fourth circuit case, and split panel, a decision that a district court, the lower court had used the wrong evidentiary case.rd in deciding the was to sendit panel the decision back to the district court to have the trial over again. so, no mandate was issued to the district court. the district court has not conducted any further proceedings. until that happens, it is not the law, nor is it the law in north carolina.

now know the defendants in that case have petitioned the fourth circuit banc, whichg en means a hearing before the full fifth circuit, all 14 judges. that was stayed up to this point. the fourth circuit has not yet ruled on that. rules,he fourth circuit that is not the law in north carolina and in fact what you , there is no law in north carolina that answers some of the questions we are raising. that is why we have gone to the court to try to get them to get the court to do it. >> [indiscernible] >> we -- i can't tell you. depend- that is going to on what the other side does in this case. i was a litigator for four years before i became the governor's

general counsel, and i learned reallyn, you can't anticipate what's going to happen. we believe that this should be decided on motions. we believe it should be decided very quickly, and we believe and hope it will be decided very inexpensively. >> [indiscernible] could possibly avoid a long court battle? >> we will certainly see. we will have to see if that is what happens. right now we simply have a letter for them that -- from them this is our statute that we commonly refer to as hb2 violates title vii. >> [indiscernible] >> we have had no conversations, so the answer is yes. there is no basis. >> [indiscernible] >> this is our response to that deadline.

>> [indiscernible] >> that to be what? i'm sorry? >> [indiscernible] >> well, we will see. we will see what happens. this is our response. so we met the deadline, and now we will go forward. >> [indiscernible] >> again, i would like to dust off my crystal ball and answer all of these questions with specificity for you. i expect it may be more than months, but we really hope to expedite this thing. we have asked for a declaratory judgment. i do not need to get into the weeds about what that means, but in law, declaratory judgment actions are given preference. we hope we will get this in front of the court and have this decided very quickly. >> [indiscernible]

>> in the first place when you say it is the federal government, remember, this is a letter. this is a letter from the department of justice that says we have violated title vii. and the governor said title vii -- let me back up. we have specifically not violated title vii and if the justice department believes that we have, then they are going to need to go back to congress and get congress to change the law, because right now, in spite of , the classetter says of people that the justice department are referring to are not a protected class under title vii. until congress changes that, -- our billill therefore does not violate that. >> [indiscernible]

live now here at the department of justice expecting to hear shortly from attorney general n lynch about the lawsuit that was filed by the governor of north carolina against the federal government on the use of public bathrooms who are part of the lgbt community. why did the department of --livee, here on c-span at the department of justice, here on c-span.

announcer: we are wait to hear from attorney general loretta lynch about the government filed by the governor of north carolina against the federal government by the use of public bathrooms by people who are in the lgbt community. we are waiting for the attorney general's comments. later on at 4:00 we will look at social welfare programs from members of the military. theat 5:30, a look at how federal reserve has changed since it was created. all of those events live here on c-span. back wait, we take a look

about the 2016 presidential campaigns that candidates positions on foreign policy. for the center of policy. talk about foreign policy as it relates to the presidential campaign. we have seen something of a role reversal in this election. the likely democratic nominee seeming to be more inclined to get involved overseas and the republican nominee less inclined. >> i think it is more complex than that, that is a superficial view of it. i think it is true that the , hillaryc candidate clinton, has a track record of engagement overseas. most recently with her job as secretary of state.

but it is engagement of a kind which has been profoundly troubling, certainly for folks like myself. there has been a theme of engagement, but on other people's terms here a trans-nationalist form of engagement. law,med by international basically anybody -- anything except our own sovereignty. the opposite view is certainly being expressed by donald trump. there are things about his policy line that are absolutely consistent with that of people like myself, national security minded folks. there are things that are a little bit worrying. there are some things that are simply unclear. i think what we will have happening over the next few months is clearly going to be a lot of sorting. at the end of the day you will still see the republican candidate be a more robust, more

pro-american. and the democratic candidate being less so. talk about trump's foreign-policy outlook. you have listened to his speech he gave, what do you make of this? >> there are some things that stand out that are appealing. -- broadly defined it, peace through strength. that americaiew has to rebuild its military, the iran deal with a -- it a disaster, we have to secure borders. the notion that the united states will continue to engage in one-sided trade agreements.

but at the expense of the national interest, and at worst, the formula for a transnational governing arrangement and that has never discussed, but i think that is any works. those are positive things and worthy of debate at the highest levels of our government and of course correction. there are some things i'm not keen on which i hope will be clarified and hopefully refined to the point where they change fundamentally one, for example, is the idea of america first, which is a loaded term for those of us with any memory at all, which speaks to isolationism. i hope that is not what donald trump has in mind. >> a headline that caught my eye, the national security apparatus will not automatically get behind trump. what do you mean by that? because of concerns i just

express our worrying to some of us. nato i think is an important alliance, it is one that we -- if we did not have we would have to create. in recent days, we have seen vladimir putin's rising aggressiveness, not just in terms of harassing aircraft and ships, but ukraine and syria. his nuclear buildup, this is hardly ever discussed, it is really alarming. we are going to see the entire russian nuclear force modernized probably within the next three years. the entire thing. we have hardly touched ours since we stopped engaging in nuclear testing in 1992. some minor upgrades of a very old systems come up there is a real worry here on the part of a lot of us which we are entering a phase of national security .olicy

i think this is the most they dress time we have ever seen, with not just the russians but , koreans, jihadists, latin america, these are all problems where there are serious problems for national interest and a national security as well as here at home. these sorts of things that are required the a steady hand and i'm hoping that donald trump will provide it. >> if you want to talk to frank gaffney. i wonder, since you had left the cruz campaign have you had conversations with the donald trump campaign? cruzm sorry to say the campaign left all of us. i have had conversations who are working for the campaign, yes. >> you think you will work for

donald trump? pieceby jindal has a today which is indicative of my view. i am very much opposed to hillary clinton and her positions. , andpeaking personally personally i believe a continuation of the kind of program that she and barack for theve engineered past eight years will be disastrous for the national security of the united states. my hope is donald trump will offer a very pronounced course correction and do so in a way which will be consistent with what i think are the pressing national interest of our country. john a republican, go ahead. >> good morning, thanks are having me.

yes, i'm doing it right now. john, go ahead. >> yes. donald trump's foreign-policy suggestions so far seem very reasonable. without hischanan campaign and -- his campaign is abdicated without the social policy. the united states is not the world's policeman. it is diminishing returns as far as what we get in return. de-industrialized. what amazes me is that some republicans who are abandoning

crystal, who will basically never was much of a republican other than the pro-israel foreign-policy, middle east -- because now donald trump is rejecting this ,ggressive interventionism crystal now want to have a third-party candidate. it is harangued us. -- it is horrendous. chance to respond -- respond? >> there is a similarity between some elements of the trump platform as it has developed so far and that of pat buchanan. we disagree mightily on some pieces of this am a particularly the idea of disengagement from the world. i do not think we are the world's policeman, i do not think we can safely be isolated

from it, either. i think there is a happy balance to be struck. i'm convinced, based on a lot of hard experience, that the world is a safer place when our strength is unquestioned and when our allies have confidence in us. and when our enemies are persuaded that there is no profit to them from acting aggressively against us, our interests or our allies. that is something here had talked about somewhat but less so that i would like your -- wou ld like. is an old friend, i think you have done a disservice to them. i think a third-party candidacy will result in the election of hillary clinton in a policy approach that i would not support. >> ron, good morning. >> thank you very much, i am

honored to speak with you. the thing about donald trump is, he really scares me because he does think and he reacts off because -- off the cuff. unfortunately, i think if i were , --ident that is just not the thing to do to a ship in a very sensitive area and situation and bad things can happen. and without really thinking it through i would have given the order to shoot those ruts and i think donald trump would --those russian jets down and i think donald trump would too.

the cuff and off that will come to bite us. >> if he is elected president i think there is reason of concern of not being terribly steeped in national affairs and security on the one hand, and being somewhat impetuous, could produce undesirable results. on the other hand i think the fact is the process of becoming a candidate and running for office and possibly being elected to the commander-in-chief position, combined with good counsel from people around him, including the united states military, can attenuate that. that the kind of behavior we have seen so far, if this is the standard we want to see set, by barack obama

specifically and buy some extent hillary clinton, has given rise to the kind of provocative behavior you have just described. let's be clear, that ship was operating in international waters. what is frankly an attack profile. they did not turn on their radar and cannot not seem to have ordinance under their wings and that may have caused the commander of the ship to suck it up, but the truth of the matter is if you want to say to the russians don't do this, do not think about doing barrel rolls over our aircraft to my do not think about asserting your powers with it will be harmful to us and international security interests -- we have to be signaling a degree of opposition to them which we haven't. it is not enough to say this is unprofessional behavior.

you will get a lot more, and that is what gives rise to miscalculation and possibly conflict. >> jason, good morning. you have your guess on. i'm glad he is pointing out the fact that republicans and democrats are both parties of war and intervention. dangling alliances with none. we are getting involved in places we should not be. the ukraine, for crying out loud? this is a middle east civil war that should be handled by people in the middle east, not the united states. >> when you've your that term, america first, is that appealing to you? >> know because i do not know what that is. he has not defined it enough to be clear. is doing the minimalist in

terms of his description of any of the policies he is advocating because he lets people mentally fill in the details with what they want. this is a sales technique, this is not different from selling soap. is, the american public has had enough of getting involved in four interventions and paying for. the sole thing -- this whole thing -- out, but go cut ahead. to a pointeaking which is there are certain points to donald trump's speaking and policy approach which are not adequately clear at the moment. we will hopefully be learning more about them as this campaign goes on. i want to speak to the central point. when our founders talked about

no entangling alliances they had the luxury of being an island nation. a large ocean, great distances that greatly to finish possibility of foreign wars. that is diminished these days. you might note of be interested in war but war is interested in you, has shrunk our planet. of people toccess our country as well as our strategic interests all over the globe, which are all over the globe. we tended to lose sight of that. how much of our economy is dependent on foreign trade. the indispensability of our ability to have freedom of navigation so that trade can continue unimpaired. the chinese, which for example, are taking positions in the south china sea

, one of those critical lines of communication -- and by the way, chokepoints from the caribbean ,o africa to latin america literally around the globe, all of which i believe has its purpose. being able to confine and if necessary, interrupt, our vital trade operations. coming outew book which tries to distill down all of the evidence of what the chinese are doing to prepare for conflict. it is not to say they will exercise the option that it is a very real option, increasingly, by the day. >> what is your group? >> an easier way to remember it is secure freedom.org. it is an organization i started with a number of my friends, many from the reagan

administration. was about 28 years ago, and the purpose was to try, as the reagan administration wound down, to maintain the philosophy and the capacity that reagan described as piece strew -- peace through strength. we have been most particularly engaged since before 9/11, actually, on the global jihad movement and the threat that that represents and trying to help people understand how serious that is in what we have to be both clear eyed about its true nature, it's catalyzing force, and how we can best defeated. >> you have talked about this. earlier this year, the southern policy -- the center for security policy a respected think

tank focused on foreign affairs to a conspiracy oriented mouthpiece for the growing anti-muslim movement in the united states. as i said earlier, i have been in this business for about 40 years. i do not remember very fondly things that were suggested about my previous reputation. there was a lot of criticism because people thought i was a hardliner in terms of the nature of the soviet union and what we needed to do to deal with it. but look, this is not about name-calling, this is about facts. as one of my friends and colleagues recalls from his time as a federal prosecutor, every conspiracy begins with a conspiracy theory. the difference between just a theory and an actual conspiracy is facts.

people have acted on their runry of how they could monti operations, perhaps, or run a civilization jihad. i want to give you a copy of this. i consider this to be the single most important book we have published. it is called "explanatory memorandum." as evidence ined the holy land trial. it is the most important document in persuading the jury to convict the conspirators in that case who were charged in raising funds for hamas. , not justent lays out what the holy land foundation was about, as a muslim brotherhood organization, but what the brotherhood itself was involved in. there is the violent jihad, which we are all familiar with. of thes this phenomenon

colonization in europe. there's something which is a for jihad,draising among other things, but notably for jihad. then there is the civilization jihad of the muslim brotherhood. what they are doing, by their own words, are trying to destroy western civilization from within and the hands of the believers so that god's religion is made victorious over all other religions. using stealthy techniques, subversive techniques, which are, again, chronicled in this book. don't take my word for it, read it for yourself -- you can read it, by the way, at secure freedom.org for free. pdf's are available there.

this is the rosetta stone for what we are doing with. groups that are part of the red green axis, or the islamists. --ing to it moves it from a series to an actual threat to our country. we need to stand up against it and not allow our freedom of expression to be stifled. >> let's allow our callers to express their opinion. >> good morning c-span. this call is not about doctrines and it is not about policy. it is about insolence. party leadership is not going to or get to have much hold to even first base with trump. i look to his rallies and his endorsements to establish this assertion. mentioned, or you

asked if it means something. it does mean something and it is uncomfortable. this is what is in the back of my mind, as well as other items that i just mentioned, that wednesday's endorsement that has not been repudiated of donald trump. if i look at that with the junction in america first, i am concerned. i'm concerned republican is going toas -- have influence -- he will not listen to you. and that is my comment. nowhere near republican leadership, but part of the phenomenon of donald trump is the widespread repudiation by the public of the republican leadership. i think they have disappointed in many ways, so you are probably right.

certainly of his discussions with paul ryan. doesn't seem terribly interested in the views of the republican establishment. as i've indicated already, i am concerned myself about america first. what does translate into historically it has meant, which is an isolationist attitude. arehat is meant by it is we going to put america's interests first, whether it is trade negotiations or our dealings with the russians or the chinese or the jihadists, i'm good with that. what this is one of the things that to be clarified by donald trump in i'm reasonably sure the next couple months will do that. >> dave, good morning. >> i have one comment in one question. goes, is foreign policy

think the united states should russia andiance with get out of the middle east altogether and we could start buying oil from russia if we needed to. as far as my question goes, last year we spent about $600 billion on national defense yet all i hear is that the military equipment is dilapidated and fun apart. where does all that money go? >> two important points. a number of folks like yourself, including i suspect in the trump campaign, that think a partnership with russia could make sense. russia shares a problem that we do. most of the middle east is considered to be infidels by the jihadists, and therefore a target.

in russia and increasingly elsewhere as well. that and dubious about maybe it is just because i have spent a lot of time studying the russians and trying to understand what makes a guy like vladimir putin tick. that it isis clear rampant hostility towards the united states. he believes the greatest catastrophe of the 20th century was the fall of the soviet union. you have to overlook a lot of really bad things that happened, including to the soviet union itself, to consider that to be the worst thing that occurred. animus towards the west, europeans, towards nato, the united states, all of whom he holds responsible for the collapse of the system he served, mainly the ussr, nixon a very unlikely, certainly an unreliable partner.

question of whether we are going to find ourselves able in the future to basically come home america or not, i think the answer is only, look to history. look to what we have experienced when he tried to do that in the past. it has not worked out. typically what happens is we diminished our expenditures on the military, and usa question -- and you asked a question where the money goes. for an all benefits volunteer force, which are very substantial. it is the medical treatment for those personnel. it is the other counts -- kinds of housing and so on. and we have spent a fair amount of it on the various conflicts we have been engaged in and as a result, when you combine that

with what i believe has really been a wrecking operation by the obama administration against the united states military, it has deliberately sacrificed readiness and compounded problems that were there when the budgets were not adequate for training purposes, for example. it has essentially pushed off, and definitely thought most of the necessary modernization programs. are using increasingly obsolete equipment. it is true of aircraft and ships -- >> why do you think they would want to sacrifice readiness? would the president want a wrecking operation against the knights is military is the larger question. when he came to office he says he was in the is is of transforming america. one of his core convictions is that strong united his military