united states. american journalists and politicians commonly referred to these people as refugees. but there are many other historical examples that we could point to. we have used the term refugee over and over again throughout american history. however, today refugee has a very precise legal meaning, and that meeting has developed over the past 60 years, as we will see in today's class. we don't see a distinct refugee policy until the end of world war ii. two congressional acts are generally considered the origins of american refugee policy. the 1948 displaced persons act and the 1953 refugee relief act. under these two programs, the federal government allowed 600,000 europeans to immigrate to the united states over and beyond the established immigration quotas, because it was deemed in the national interest. can anyone tell me why the truman and eisenhower administration would have deemed it in the national interest to accommodate european refugees and displaced persons? anyone want to venture a g

isolation of the united states. verification by the international community of the legitimacy of the iranian position really which is an important achievement not. as for iran but for the national community for the rule of law no. contact at the military level with our friends those contacts will continue usually these are not broadcast live on television i see you mentioned the european reaction and i do want to ask you about the europeans because i think in russia now nowadays finds itself in a station similar to the one that they're on it was with the g c p a way because it has invested in the pipeline in the north stream pipeline and now it's c.s. the europeans having 2nd thoughts of paying lip service to certain ideas for the out actually putting any muscle behind it. can the europeans still be regarded as this reasonable part of the west because they definitely are talking different talk from the united states but are they more reliable when it comes to international agreements and keeping their war it but as

it's a threat to the united states militarily -- maybe not in terms the united states being invaded and card kurd that's likely not going to happen. but it's still a military threat, we can be damaged by imperial japan and nazi germany. and perhaps even more significantly, it's an economic threat to our well-being. if the nazis dominate europe and control the natural resources, of europe if the japanese conquer and control the resources of asia, what will we do? you can say we'll trade with them, but what if they don't trade with us, what if they isolate us economically, how do we grow and prosper. remember 1939 1940, the great depression is not fully over yet. it's gotten better but it's still on. americans are really concerned about their economic well-being, this argument says we might be in the state of permanent depression. we may not have any capacity for growth in a world dominated by nazi germany and imperial japan. this is a threat to democracy for, us we are in danger. our whole way of life can be destroyed by world dominated, by these dictatorships. the interventionists argue

it really centers the united states or the idea of the united states of being a welcoming haven for people who are exiles. unfortunately the history of the united states tells a somewhat different, more complicated story. the truth is, we haven't always had the humanitarian impulse to welcome refugees. usually, we've only done so when it's in our humanitarian national interest. usually we've been more inclined to actually reject refugees than to accept them. and to borrow the words of historian eric tang, refugees who have been accepted for resettlement here are not only resettled, but are also deeply unsettled by the experience of forced migration and resettlement in the united states. to give you an overview of what i'll talk about about today, i'e you a little bit of background about american refugee resettlement policy after the second war. and then i'm going to use that background to set up why the 1970s were such an important period of change. that's when a small group of ugandan-asian refugees first arrived in the united states. they were followed by a larger group of refugees who a

the united states was a country of first refuge, meaning they came straight to the united states. especially to places like miami. the policy for cuban refugees was such that these refugees with the given asylum as part of a bigger anti-castro policy. a number of requirements were imposed on these early refugee populations. they illustrated how the united states pursued its own cold war self-interest. first, as i have already mentioned, the u.s. offered a special welcome to people fleeing communism. second, preference was given for refugees who were professionals or highly educated or skilled. this is in keeping with other immigration laws of the period. while welcoming people has been seen as a human acts, these efforts were often centered on the need of the united states. these images feature refugees who arrived in the united states during this time. the photo on the left features displaced persons who were registering at fort ontario emergency refugee center. it housed 1000 people displaced by world war ii. the photo on the right is the cover of time magazine 1957, featuring t

united states. especially to places like miami. >>> a number of remembers, and these requirements illustrated how the united states pursued its on cold warse self-interest. the u.s. offered a special welcome to people fleeing communism. second, the preference was given for refugees who are professionals or highly educated, skilled, keeping in of in with other immigration laws of the period. and while they humanitarian efforts were often centered on the needs of the united states. they images feature refugees who appeared during this per. on the left is displaced persons registers at ft. on on tear i don't center. >> and the one on the right is a cover of "time," featuring their chosen person of the year in 1956. the person of the year in 1956 was the hungarian freedom fighter. so let's think about this. what do you think this image on the right tells us about how americans viewed hungarian freedom fighters during this time. think about what it means for "time" to choose hungarian freedom fighters as

this is a decision that the president of the united states must make. the last candidate who indicated that he knew who his cabinet was going to be was mr. dewey in 1948. this is a race between the vice president and myself for the presidency of the united states. there are a good many able men who could be secretary of state. i've made no judgment about who should be secretary of state. i think that judgment could be made after election, if i'm successful. the people have to make a choice between mr. nixon and myself, between the republican party and the democratic party, between our approach to the problems which now disturb us as a nation and disturb us as a world power. the president bears the constitutional responsibility, not the secretary of state, for the conduct of foreign affairs. some presidents have been strong in foreign policy. others have relied heavily on the secretary of state. i've been a member of the senate foreign relations committee, i run for the presidency with full knowledge that his great responsibility, really, given to him by

he served the united states congress and he also served in the united states senate. he and his wife were the hosts during james be candidates administration in washington, d.c.. when the south left and formed their own government, they invited jefferson davis to become its first and only president. jefferson davis would accept that invitation and become the president of the united states of confederate america. we are standing in the cell were jefferson davis was held at the conclusion of the american civil war. in 1865 jefferson davis received word from job robert e. lee that they can no longer hold the federal army back from attacking the city of richmond. with that news, jefferson davis adjourned his cabinet assent his family on the road for their protection. jefferson davis soon after that would follow. he would finally catch up this family right above the florida state line. it is here were a federal mounted unit was able to capture him in his family. jefferson davis was placed on a boat and move back appeared to form an row and incarcerated in this very cell. s

>>> it's been a bad summer for the united states. the superpower and leader of the free would has fumbled its response to covid-19. now america neeleads the world covid cases and deaths. and then caught on camera, another black man by police. it caused americans to take to the street. meanwhile, the ugly political partisanship gets worse by the day. >> these people are clowns. >> on the world's stage, president trump is ruling over just about every moment of his presence. >> many trade deals will be under negotiation. the iran nuclear report and most recently the world health organization. he has upset traditional allies and he had made interesting new friends. how does the world see us at this critical juncture just two months before the presidential election. that will either keep donald trump in office for another four years or kick him out. that is what we will explore this hour and how they see us, a global view of trump's america. >>> we'll start the toe with tony blare, the former establish prime minister has been loyal friend

and that position is that the united states has a treaty -- a treaty with all of the organization of american states -- which prohibits us from interfering in the internal affairs of any other state and prohibits them as well. for me to have made such a statement would been in direct opposition to that treaty. now with regard to cuba, let me make one thing very clear. there isn't any question but that we will defend our rights. there isn't any question but that we will defend guantanamo if it's attacked. there also isn't any question but that the free people of cuba -- the people who want to be free -- are going to be supported and that they will attain their freedom. no, cuba is not lost, and i don't think this kind of defeatist talk by senator kennedy helps the situation one bit. mr. mcgee: senator kennedy, would you care to comment? mr. kennedy: in the first place i've never suggested that cuba was lost except for the present. in my speech last night i indicated that i thought that cuba one day again would be free. where i've been critical of the administration's policy, and where

on january 3, 1959, a foot in and start was added to the united states flag when the territory of alaskalimaxed almost a century's efforts to achieve statehood. admission to the union was celebrated in typical alaskan fashion. the 50th star was added when hawaii became a state on august 21, 1959. governor quinn, and hawaii's first u.s. senators participated in a statehood day celebration. he is the first senator of chinese ancestry in congressional history. no hawaiian celebration is complete without a traditional hula. acclaimed as an anti-communist hero and denounced as a threat to civil liberties for his conduct in senate investigations, joseph mccarthy became the most controversial period.l figure of the >> this morning we have been holding executive sessions covering the information programs dealing almost entirely today with the voice of america, dealing with incompetence, waste, subversion. and they say that we have good reason to believe that we will get full cooperation from the new secretary of state, mr. lles. narrator: his charges of common is causing by the army led to a cla

the united states is the most powerful economic state in the world. it has global interests. it is not weak and underdeveloped. it's a continental nation with global interests. and technology has made the world smaller. the old tradition made sense when the united states had the two greatest national defenses in the world, the atlantic and the pacific oceans. that was our protection. but that protection is not what it used to be. military technology has changed. air power in particular allows countries to project their military power in a way that's never been true before. the world is smaller than it used to be. we are in greater danger from a foreign power than we ever were in the past. the world has changed. the antiinterventionists argue, in that case, we need better hemispheric defenses. that's what we need, then. that only reinforces the idea that what we need is fortress america. we need to build up our hemispheric defenses, become so strong that no one will dare attack us and that means every bit of military hardware we produce needs to stay here with us, stay here in

what are the longer-term implications for the region and the united states and the region? this recognizes the reality that the gulf states recognized it shouldn't go without notice, not only have these nations chosen to recognize israel, but when the gulf states all got together and the palestinians demanded there be a statement that denounced what took place that did not occur. the only two countries that have vehemently denounced this were turkey. so there is a big shift in how these alliances are set. the previous administration took an iran-central focus. they undermined lebanese and iraqi sovereignty and stability, created chaos inside of syria. this administration has taken a fundamentally different approach to creating an opportunity for increased stability in the middle east and less risk to america. >> you mentioned iran. what are the implications for iran, do you believe? this week reported to be weighing an assassination attempt on the u.s. ambassador to south africa. i was in the middle east at the time we hit sulemani, that assassination attempt was ostensibly

do they want to follow the united states leadership? i don't think they do enough, and that's what concerns me. in africa, is countries that have newly joined the united nations, on a question of red china, only two countries in all of africa voted with us, liberia and the union of south africa. the rest either abstained or voted against us. four countries in asia voted against us -- more countries in asia voted against us then with us. i have seen cuba go to the communists. i have seen communist influence and castro influence rise in cuba. i've seen a signal africa. there are six countries in africa there are members of the united nations. there isn't a single rep senator in those six. when guinea became independent, the investor showed up that very day. didn't recognize them for two months. the investor didn't show up for nearly eight months. i believe the world is changing fast and i don't think this administration has shown the foresight, shown the knowledge, has been identified by what these people are raging to live ister, the aver

looking then to this problem of how the united states should move ahead and where the united states isoving, i think it is well that we take the advice of a very famous campaigner -- look at the record. is the united states standing still? is it true that this administration, as senator kennedy has charged, has been an administration of retreat, of defeat, of stagnation? is it true that, as far as this country is concerned, in the field of electric power, in all of the fields that he has mentioned, we have not been moving ahead. well, we have a comparison that we can make. we have the record of the truman administration of seven and a half years and the seven and a half years of the eisenhower administration. when we compare these two records in the areas that senator kennedy has discussed tonight, i think we find that america has been moving ahead. let's take schools. we have built more schools in these last seven and a half years than we built in the previous seven and a half, for that matter in the previous 20 years. let's take hydro electric power. we have developed more hydroelect

khrushchev had had a fight over the united states while he was visiting here? the answer is that communist espionage goes on all the time. the answer is that the united states can't afford to have an espionage lag or intelligence lag anymore than a missile lag. referring to your question, what i object to hear is the constant reference to surrendering these islands. senator kennedy quotes directly from what he read from a moment ago, but what he forgets to point out that the key vote in a vote which i've referred to several times where he was in the minority, was one that rejected his position. now, why did they reject it? for the following reason that the senators knew what the president of united states knew, that you should not indicate to the communists in advance that you are going to surrendering area. why? because they know and senator kennedy will also know that if you do that, you encourage them to more aggression. bill: senator kennedy? en. kennedy: number one on indochina, mr. nixon talked in the spring of 1964 about putting "american boys into indoc

isolation of the united states. verification by the international community of the legitimacy of the iranian position really rich is an important achievement not just put it on but for the international community and for the rule of law. north stream is is a very clear example that if europeans allow the united states to bully them when it comes to iran the united states can bully them when it comes to the lifeline and north stream is extremely important for europe as you know and the united states is even trying to intimidate clearly intimidate it germany from from engaging with russia in that so i think the lesson that has to be drawn from that is that if you allow a bully to operate in these new lives you know and i think the europeans need to realize that. we have said that with or without the united states iranian interest that or. guaranteed in the j.c. we don't want anything outside the g.c. people we simply want what is ours what was bargained what was negotiated within the j.c. pure and it cannot be renegot

it had only just become a united states state. and this guy, senator gruning, was a kind of hard-nosed realist. he was doing a cost/benefit analysis. his critique was, i don't get it. why does it make sense for the united states to spend blood and treasure going to vietnam? there was no big moral critique. there was no larger issue about the meaning of americanness. it didn't add up for him. but again, these are two senators. there's almost no visible critique as johnson launches what will quickly become an american war in vietnam. there were a few other voices, a few public voices that raised questions, mostly from that realist perspective. does this add up? hans morgan, a big guy, he raises those issues. walter litman, a famous columnist, had been making pronouncements about american policy for, by this time, some 50 years. he raised some questions. he also critiqued this as a really -- just not a reasonable solution to america's interests in asia. but otherwise there's a kind of consensus. it's an election year in 1964. johnson

he looks to the united states and the u.n. and says hey, i need your help to kind of bring these guys in the fold to crush this rebellion and bring it into the actual new state of the congo. the united states for their part was like i don't knowwe don't k want you to have complete control. still, this notion is kind of trapping, remaining of we don't know if you're capable of self-government quite yet. those are those kinds of ideas that are still kind of circulating in terms of the congo and the united states would much rather exert that jimny over the region instead of helping patrice out with his drive to unite the congo. well, he needed help any way, so he said, and this is probably his most fatal flaw as it turns out, he said, well, okay, if you guys won't help me, we'll see if the soviets will help me. the united states says uh-oh, threat, this new government is going to you know, sort of align with the united states, or excuse me with the soviet union, then that's a problem that needs to be rectified. and so to rectify t

but that's not the doctrine that evolved in the united states. instead, the doctrine that evolved in united states, the marshall court and the 18 twenties and thirties explicitly says and a couple of important treaty documents, it explicitly says that the european doctrine of discovery remains in force. and it's funny because marshall is sometimes being used by this doctrine. but he says, this is just the way it's always been done in this way we're still doing. at the two most famous cases, which took it cited all the time in this context are johnson be mcintosh, which involved land sales between pack and shaw indians who decided in 1823, and for the first time chief justice john marshall says the discovery doctrine that european crowds used in earlier centuries still the doctrine that holds today. and he described the piano shaw 's in this opinion has perpetual inhabitants with the menu diminutive rights and goes on to say to describe him as an inferior race of people without the privileges of citizens and under the perpetual protection into til

and also from various circles in afghanistan as well that the united states has given too much weight to the taliban is that the case well we are not happy about the. release of some of those prisoners yet you facilitated it yes because we wanted something that was very important is very important for afghanistan for the internet. community. we wanted afghans to negotiate an end to the war which is i don't think any country that unhappy about the release of prisoners as i said we were through with said no let the war go on. we appreciate their expression of unhappiness. empathize with them we think the goal of making afghanistan to be more peaceful for afghans to come together. in the war for afghanistan not to be a threat to the international community and for the burden of afghanistan. to reduce on the international community as you referred to at the beginning of the program are significant goals and objectives and sacrifices to be made tough decisions difficult decisions had to be made. if nothing important is easy. to achieve and we had to do those tough things difficult t

here in the united states which -- and the grand coolly another dance in the northwestern united states. at the present rate of hydro power production, that is the hallmark of an industrialized society. soviet union by 1975 will be producing more nuclear power than we are. these are all the things that i think in this country make our society strong or make it standstill. i'm not satisfied until every american enjoys is full constitutional rights. a neat row baby is born and will puerto ricans in mexicans. he has about one half as much chance to get through high school as a white baby. he is one third as much chance to get to college as a white student. he has about as third as much a chance to be a professional man, about half as much chance of owning a house. he has about four times as much as to be out of work uttering his life is a. baby i think we can do better. i don't want the challenge of any american to go to. west waste i think there's things people who say we can turn everything over the government. i don't think it. all i want the states to meet their responsibilities but i

united states had a real problem. this map is envisioning a system that will encourage the rapid occupation settlement of a gigantic new territory of land. but as people take up the challenge or take up the promise of that possibility, there's very good possibility that the united states would not be the sort of superintendent power that best would serve their interest. in the early republic when a lot of people in the southwest were more interested in spain as a possible ally then they were in the united states. >> wasn't the oregon territory, i may be overstepping the bounds of the class a little bit, but wasn't the oregon territory split between britain and the united states for a good long time? >> right. the oregon country was split and it's not resolved until the 18 forties. that it is resolved without a fight. but originally, the dividing line between u.s. and british claims in oregon was fuzzy. the treaty of paris didn't really draw the line that far out hard. this territorial system, i just want to stress, it

the united states -- u.s.at has taken the lives of around 800,000 people, but they're also indirect deaths. deaths caused by the destruction of local infrastructure, health care services, hospitals, food sources. and those total deaths could never upwards of 3 million people. and i think most people in the united states, myself included, have not really reckoned with the total damage that these wars have caused. we h haven't even begun to read our minds around what it would mean to have this level of destructction in our lives. amy: and you have, for example,, the effects of soldiers on bases like what happened in the philippines where the authoritarian leader president duterte just pardoned a u.s. soldier who was found guilty of murdering a trans womaman off base. >> yes. this is anotheher cost of war. we need to look at the cost of war in terms of -- the human cost in terms of directct combat deaths, injururies in these wars on terror, numbering in the tens of millions. but we also need to look at thee dedea

so you didn't have a lot of in-house experts in the united states on these issues. last, we didn't have many in-house experts in the state department or cia either on vietnam, but that's another can of worms. so it was hard to get information. okay, another turn of the same story hard to get information, you've got young people, all kinds of people saying that. i don't trust time magazine, i don't trust "the new york times," i don't trust the president of the united states. a 26-year-old graduate student in new york, an english literature major, she's sort of part of this new lab. she was involved in protests in the early '60s. she's trying to take advantage of her skill set. i can write, i can do research. i'll setup an alternative media on this issue. and really an incredibly rapid time with almost no money in her pocket at all, she gets a little grant from a teachers union in new york. remember the united auto workers helped fund some of the early snick activities. i'm talking about at this point hundreds of dollars, but enough to get a new graph machine and a few

well there's no question if you look at hispanics in the united states the valley. you that they get here let me give you a statistic that's going to blow your mind especially people out there who've been hearing the sort of propaganda that is very untidy is panic for the most part in the united states. if this panics in america were a nation they would be between the 8th and 12th biggest economy in the world they represent a contribution to g.d.p. of about $1.00 trillion dollars that is a huge number you know you wrap your head around that and it makes you wonder and ask people so wait a minute trillion why israel and little move it seems often 1.7 trillion dollars that's crazy a number i would there be a move to to. why would why would there be a move to move against hispanics to move them out i mean you hear signs of i know it doesn't represent the general population but you hear people constantly saying you know leave the country get out of here speak english than the other and we get to do a lot of that stuff but it actually would be if the united states lost t

now a reason for hope is there is a and of independent journalists in the united states and that list is growing by the day and they're doing some amazing work and they're boots on the ground all over the country and then all over the world i mean tailors in london right now so the optimist in me says eventually we'll see some types of policy. that aid a healthy new structure something like other countries have i mean norway for instance comes to my mind 1st but i think that's going to take a lot of time and i think it's only it's not going to happen until you know the grassroots becomes so powerful that it really cannot be ignored anymore and it becomes kind of kind of the main game in town but that's slowly but surely happening i mean especially amidst younger generations that are turning away from cable news more and more in droves and i mean you're absolutely right because cable news will never give you the context of a story so it's very hard to comprehend it's meaning and unfortunately part of my job is the watch a lot of cable t.v. and no my dear were you people that the p

of jobs that have been stolen through the chinese communist predatory economic activity in the united states and cannot continue. that connects to the second piece, international allies. i spent a year and a half with the director of central intelligence agency, to a half years as secretary of state all around the world, not coercively, not threateningly, just data, just facts what the chinese communist party is doing, the threat to their sovereignty. it has been awarding to watch the shift, the tide has turned, whether there recognition of the cover-up that took place with respect to the chinese virus or the activity that is failing all across africa weather is other countries i spoke with last week to understand these attacks on their economic activity and resource loans are things they can stand up to, to do it alongside them. these are powerful shifts and commercial activity that engaged with china will reflect, i have seen from american business leaders, they understand more clearly the political risk associated with operating insider country dominated and controlled by the chinese comm

not just in the united states, but about the united states. that journalists cannot solicicit information f m sources. and to solicit information is to be involved in a conspiracy. amy: accomplice. typesterms of the charge that it is trying to charge me with does include conspiracy and conspiracy for espionage. this is rubbish. we cannot tolerarate this at the political level or media level. amy: that is julian assange inside the ecuadorian embassy before he was taken a year and and ago by british pololice put in the belmarsh prison. this is nils melzer, the united nations special on torture who --ited julian last year special rapporteur on torture, who visited assange last year in london's belmarsh prison. metaphysical examination for an hour by hour forensic expert and we had the two hour psychiatric examination. all three of us had the same that he showed all the symptoms that are typical for a person that has been exposed to psychological torture over an extended period of time. amy: that is the united nations special rapporteur on torture

to be prepared for a virus or to be able to contain it united states it's forming a person of the world evil and 25 percent of the world's koroma cases and a rona debt other countries have been able to protect and contain in a way the united states as not the last time we had an endemic like this in the. 19 a the guy who was already in the army of the united states and the base and says no responsible adult holding the american virus this lloyd by mr truong is a. effort and it is interesting to watch the chinese be cautious be as margaret be as co-operative in their response as they are they showing the restraint that is the literal opposite of the rest of self school. of mr truong well it's funny because you're very much right on point there to president trump is facing backlash for his alleged mishandling or his mishandling of the pandemic a some say and accuse him of christie other countries are also getting increasingly nervous here and they reiterate that china and the u.s. they must reconcile we're talking about the world's 2 largest economies how will they be affected i

communications platform from the united states is a really significant interference with the speech of americans and that requires a very high level of justification so it takes more than a vague. statement that this. well armed actual security there really needs to be specific and we've never seen those specifics on that that's not enough to pass a constitutional test. my account see you come to us with the perspective from china you work a lot with social media in china how is this ban being perceived in mainland china and beyond well actually also just what what micha now says actually is something that you also hear a lot by chinese experts and social media responses that people say this ban has nothing to do with the national security of the u.s. this has everything to do with protecting american digital hedging moni and the american authorities being afraid of the social media landscape in the world shifting 2 words the westernization and shifting towards the digital rise of china and i mean america used to be the main player when it you know when it was about social media but th

united states.he said it would only ever be suffragist and never suffragette. when she created her own publication for the national women's party, it was called "the suffragist." when we talk about american women who advocated for the right to vote, we use the term suffragist. we talk about british women who advocated for the right to vote, the correct term suffragette. 36th tennessee becomes the state to ratify the 19th amendment to the constitution. what happened next? guest: women did vote in the 1920 election. they voted probably -- the turnout we can estimate between 33% and 36%. women's turnout increased over time. by 1980, the proportion of women voting in the united states menassed the proportion of voting in the united states. the editorial cartoons with the caption "sky's the limit." in 2020, an african-american woman on a major party ticket, the third time there has been a woman on the ticket since 1984. guest: it is all in a continuum of history. that is why i like that cartoon. it shows

not the united states. the united states has an extremely bad record. united states that has to show it's committed to this deal, that it will not violate it again. that it will not make demands outside the scope of the deal. that is will compensate iran for the damages. the united states withdrew from jcpoa without any reason. it incurred a lot of damages on the iranian people. you know, today iran is not able to even buy vaccines for influenza because the united states does not allow us to transfer the money. right now, as we speak, our order to buy back -- vaccines for the flu not covid, to pay our own money. we're not asking anybody for donation. so, i think the united states, whoever is president, it's not -- it's immaterial for us who sits in the white house. for us, what is important is how they behave. and the united states has behaved extremely irresponsibly, dangerously in the international community. so, it is up to the united states. the united states has to be -- take into account it is up to the united states to prove to the rest of jcpoa

it's president asked for aid from the united states.n the first application of the eisenhower doctrine, the president dispatched u.s. marines to beirut, despite strong russian protests. the presence of the marines quickly restored order. when an acceptable plan was adopted guaranteeing the integrity of lebanon, american troops were withdrawn in favor of a u.n. force. a simmering international problem came to a head in 1958, when the red forces of mao se tung, shelled the offshore islands, garrisoned by trips from the republic of china. the united states seventh fleet prepared for action, though america's allies opposed intervention. kai-shek was persuaded to disavow intentions to invade the mainland, and the shelling dwindled to a stop, leaving the china conflict unresolved. in cuba, several factions united to fight for the overthrow of the dictator batista. the american naval base in cuba was reinforced, but the u.s. maintained a hands-off policy. fidel castro entered havana in january, 1959, following the flight of batista, and castro

grothman: and because the united states was there, right? amb. khalilzad: afghans are living longer because of our presence. they are living longer, they are healthier than they were. although still they have a long way to go. more afghans are -- have access to education. more afghans have access to telephones. to communicating and networking with each other and with the rest of the world. it is a different country than it was in 2001. and i keep telling, and when i talk with the taliban, this is not their father's afghanistan. this is a different afghanistan and they need to adjust and accommodate that change. rep. grothman: i just found something else here i'll tell you. in the 20 years since we've been there, the population of afghanistan has almost doubled. did you know that? kind of amazing. ok. rep. lynch: the gentleman yields. the chair now recognizes the distinguished chair of the full committee on oversight, the gentlewoman from new york, for five minutes for questions. rep. maloney: thank you very much, and welcome to our panelists, tha