problem accepting that democracy brings things like that. that in democracy you have to accept if people vote for those parties. my country.only for we have clear rules and our constitution and red lines that you cannot cross, but within those red lines of the constitution, people have the right to vote the party that they think represents the political elites. democracyl yourself a , you have to deal with that. parties havether to prove they are up to the challenges that they can offer something to the electorate and came back some ground for themselves. i think we have reached the point where they understood that.

and to share more of their concerns and then get back more of that ground. >> [inaudible] the difference in the way that the u.s. has conducted policy under democratic and republican administrations -- in some cases, it has been more violent and one part of the region than in another. it seems tot illustrate the values that the united states proclaims to be .ringing to the world this promoting democracy and so on. for the people living in a place like iraq which was under the most brutal sanctions in human

history for over a decade with repeated invasions and drove warfare. if this is what one gets with a democratic administration, i'm not sure that the rise of a double -- donald trump phenomena , for people who have lived in the middle east with these realities for decades -- i'm not sure that makes a lot of difference. on the one hand, people might be shocked by the brutality of the rhetoric, that they have had to live with the brutality of the policy. >> i was struck by your remark the effects of immigration rift g crisis in europe might even be worse than the current existing crisis because of the stresses and

divisions it is creating. i'm interested if you would not speculating. get in terms that of the divisions in the union? >> i am not a prophet. [laughter] i am not convinced. the project of the european union is so big. to create a political body that might be able to abandon war -- i am the first generation in europe for ever that has never seen a war and this is thanks to the european union. that is so big and so important and not only for europeans because if it goes well, it might offer a kind of organization to other parts of

the world too. fightingink bars and might go on forever but we have managed to have a compromise and solve our problems without lunch shed. utopia that we are trying to realize there. i can't imagine that we give it up for one particular topic that should be solvable. europe is big, europe is strong. it is a rich part of the world. absorb refugees and we should do so and i pray every morning at this project survives because it is so important. not typical for a diplomat to pray every morning. >> or to get the panel of thoughts on the question that the profession or -- the

professor asked. have offered a diagnosis of part or all of the situation and each of you have implied certain solutions. it is the question, at least the way that i would phrase it. >> one can look at your diagnosis and solutions as ones that will work only if we hold to a relatively narrow expansion. refugeesion of the 1951 -- one can look at your solutions as underscoring that regime really needs to be resolved or completely rethought and asked the question, who was the refugee in the first place.

are your solutions at challenge to the refugee migrant distinction or do they require that we maintain that distinction? >> i think the distinction is a good thing even though it still proposes enormous problems but there is a difference between somebody who flees a country where his life is threatened compared to someone who is looking for an economic better life. we should keep the red line here. but the reality is it is so difficult to find black and white solutions. just consider if we opened those doors. himselfy who considered a refugee as such, the numbers would go up and i'm not sure about political stability then .n our countries

>> and think it is important to not let the perfect to be the enemy of the good. convention were to be opened up from scratch at this particular moment that the results would be much worse for conditiondesperate than we are right now. like to see more legal .rotections speaking as a citizen of the world would like to see more punitive measures and asked return for a serious, wide, legal mechanism. >> [indiscernible] >> it is.

someone in syria not under the control of a persecuting group that that person would be able to apply for asylum in the u.s., or canada, or wherever and travel directly to that place of refuge. if the doors are left completely open, when asylum seekers come to a place like europe and if at their determination they are found not to fit the refugee criteria, what happens? typically, people are not deported. in favor of'm not mass deportations. like to have a serious refugee status determination than the current system which has this deliberately high cost in human lives because of the impossible transit.

>> about the united states. leaving aside the political -- accepting refugees, just considering economic issues and cultural issues, how many refugees per year, coming years, do you think the u.s. could accept from the middle east? what's the cost, individual upfront cost that you estimate? how do you think it could be financed? >> good question. you know, for most of the 2000s, the u.s. has been accepting about a million legal permanent residents per year and right now we're just taking something like, what is it, 30,000, 50,000 refugees. very, very small number. clearly the united states has a

massive capacity to take more capacity to take more refugees. if you fly from los angeles is to new york, it's a big country and there's a lot more room for refugees. i think we need to be honest about the fact that up front there are costs, resettlement does incur costs in the first few months and maybe few years and that depend on the human capital of the person who comes. if those investments are made early on, they will reap returns in the future. but i think we need to be serious about the fact that, yes, we need more congressional appropriations for resettlement. >> would you mention some figures? i would be interested in some ballpark estimates of the costs and if this makes sense to you. >> i don't have specific estimates to give you but what i can say is this is something that would require congressional action because it's not something the president can do

to appropriate more money towards refugee resettlement, that would require congressional action and clearly there's no political will to do that now. >> well, it has been said that the refugee crisis that started in 2011, immediately after the arab spring, is not quite a crisis anymore since it has become quite a constant phenomenon. medical practitioners in the receiving countries say that the real crisis is the fact that they can not afford to pro vid -- provide enough care, enough care, especially mental care, they're suffering from ptsd, the sexualization of torture and they say this as the real crisis. some of these clinics, and they are called ethnoclinics, have their locations or their names classified because some of these

victims testified to clear human rights abuse and my question is has there been a movement towards documenting the stories of these victims who testified to these abuses to their carers, to their caregivers to build an oral history and oral archive of the human rights abuses like in bosnia, because whatever happened in bosnia happens in terms of torture with middle eastern refugees and has there been -- at least in germany, a movement towards collecting these witness testimonies so adds to persecute perpetrators of human rights abuse? >> i don't know that. sorry. >> i know there's a lot of work

being done documenting refugee stories but whether it's specifically -- there are particular groups that are interested or focusing on human rights abuses that i simply don't know. >> well, there's definitely an effort to collect evidence for prosecution but it's not focused on. [inaudible] it's focused on collecting documents and photographs and accounts of what have been happening. [inaudible] >> i heard a story on npr this morning that doctors are collecting. [inaudible]

>> so if there are no further questions i'd like to thank our panelists. [applause] and thanks to all of you for attending this event. >> i never felt the urge to make money. what turned me out in the 60's and as an admirer of the kennedys was to make policy. that is always what drove me. interview, a two-part with mark green, author of "right generational future." drive.have to have a

that you have to wake up and go to sleep and say, i want this so much. if you do everything, you win, said lyndon johnson. air at 8:00will eastern in part two will air on c-span two. on c-span, a look at first ladies influencing public policy. the speakers are michelle obama's current chief of staff plus two former chief of staff describe nancy reagan's behind-the-scenes influence on the administration's approach to dealing with the soviet union. many arounde president reagan who wanted him to take a hard line against gorbachev. i have some friends who were advising at the time and they

nancy inday exasperation said, why does everybody assume my husband is a warmonger. george schultz was on one side, others were on another side, but her sensitivity, her knowing where her husband wanted to go in history on the issue was extremely dispositive. she gets very little credit when she was first lady for what she did to help him navigate all of that. reputed tos, she was be able to call a spade a spade more in terms of people than he was and that got her into hot water too but she played a really important role in history. look at the first ladies

influencing public policy on c-span. >> on newsmakers we are joined by the director of the national institution on health, director anthony fauci. to help with our questions in studio, we have jennifer have her core -- jennifer and leena from the washington post. we are chatting on friday afternoon. a few hours ago you briefed president obama about the zika crisis. can you give us a sense of what you talked to him about in that meeting? >> the meeting was a meeting between the president and secretary burwell, the cdc director tom frieden and me. we gave the president an