Atlantic Council Front page, or ac front page, a Global Platform for global leaders. We have had heads of state, heads of government and former cabinet level officials and International Cabinet level officials, International Organization leaders, and sometimes they also are new authors of this wonderful book that i am going to talk a little bit more about in a minute. We are honored today to host Lieutenant General h. R. Mcmaster, Board Director of the Atlantic Council and a senior fellow at stanfords hoover institution, and the 26th assistant for the president for National Security affairs. General mcmaster joins us for a discussion of u. S. Grand strategy with a particular emphasis on u. S. Foreignpolicy regarding china and the middle east. There are few who bring a more strategic mindset on these issues, as a historian, as a retired officer with 34 years of experience in the u. S. Army, and as one of our nations senior policymakers. In his new book, general mcmaster lays out what he sees as a new vision for a better u. S. National security policy. He advises the use of strategic empathy to better know and understand our adversaries and using that perspective to formulate consistent strategies rather than episodic or shortterm engagements to solve longterm problems. General mcmaster has cited one of the great examples of Strategic Thinking and character our foreignpolicy leadership as an inspiration and model for his tenure at the National Security council. As many of you who listening today know that the general was one of the architects, one of the great leaders of the council and he passed away at age 95 this august. Me, alongentor to with many others in the world. He actually focused on being a mentor and did not care about taking credit. Both of the cohosts for todays the center for strategy and security and the middle east ar histy initiative be name because they honor his legacy and strive to carry on his work. By that we mean work that would have a defense of nonpartisan commitment to strategy and security and would be embedded in everything we do with our allies and partners. At the same time, he had a remarkable dedication to the mentorship of the next generation of leaders, and he wore decency as comfortably as many of us wear our shirts. So thank you again, general mcmaster, for joining us today for what promises to be an insightful and enlightening conversation. We are at the cusp of a new administration, but in the way you write, you are really writing about issues that cross over administrations and over years. We are delighted to have with us today our moderator. Vivian is a veteran of Foreign Policy and National Security reporting with experience in washington, as well as around the world. Iraq, egypt, pakistan, israel, palestinian territories, United Arab Emirates and im sure other places as well. Like all of you, as im eager to hear general mcmasters insights, but also, buy his book. He writes in his notes to readers in the front that many were asking him to write a tellall that would have been more lucrative but not as lasting. This may not be a tellall from a personal anecdote standpoint from his time in the white house, but it is a learn a lot book and carry it with you. Itecommend that you all buy and you all read it. At this point its my honor to the program over to vivian. Vivian thanks, fred. I have my copy, too. So we will be talking a lot about it. I am honored to be back at the Atlantic Council and with general mcmaster, whom i covered when he was National Security advisor to President Trump. Its great to be able to continue that relationship on the outside. A few housekeeping notes, we have a hashtag for todays event. I definitely encourage you all to get out there on social media and share what we are talking about today. Also, obviously, this is never ideal right now what we are doing, this virtual conversation. We would love to see your faces, but we still want it to be as interactive as possible. You will see the q a tab at the bottom of your screen. Please send questions throughout. We have folks that will send me some of your questions. We will try to cover as many as possible, but i will quit the introductions and dive right in with general mcmaster. It is so great, congrats on the book. Its fascinating. A lot of really substantive subjects that are so important. I see over my shoulder that the incoming nominee for secretary of state is talking, so a lot to talk about with transition and your advice to the biden team. First, i want to talk a little bit about the book itself. General mcmaster, specifically you talk about strategic narcissism versus strategic empathy. I wanted you to flesh out those two concepts for folks into foreignpolicy, people like myself. You know, what has been the u. S. Grand strategy in recent years, and how do you see that moving forward now that we are on the cusp of a new administration . Lt. Gen. Mcmaster vivian, thanks. What a privilege it is to be with you and fred and the Atlantic Council. Its thanksgiving week. I am thankful for the opportunity and the great work that the Atlantic Council has done, especially in the midst of this pandemic. I am reading and consuming your products and learning as i do all the time about how the Atlantic Council works. Great to see you as well. What i read about in the book is our tendency to defy the world define the world in relation to us. And to assume that what we do or choose not to do will be decisive to a favorable outcome. I attribute this mainly to the loss of our Competitive Edge at the end of the cold war. That it was understandable to be optimistic. We had won the cold war, the soviet union collapsed. And of course we had the , lopsided victory over the fourth largest army in the world in the 1991 gulf war. There was reason to be optimistic, but we were over optimistic about this new world war that would emerge. We bought into three overlapping assumptions in the postcold war period. First of all, an arc of history. The guarantee the privacy of our free and open societies over authoritarian systems. Secondly, the great competition was a relic of the past and our military prowess, our technological military prowess would guarantee our security going way into the future. And if any foe have the temerity had the temerity to challenge us, it would be fast, cheap, efficient and so forth. I argue in the point that this was a setup. It was a set up for being disappointed. Disappointed by strategic shots and surprises in the 2000s. The most among them was the horrible mass murder of september 11, 2001. The most devastating terrorist attack in history. Where a determined enemy used airplanes to bypass our military prowess. And we had the unanticipated length and difficulty of the wars in iraq and afghanistan. And we often debate, ok, should we have invaded iraq in 2003 . I think we ought to debate who thought it would be easy and why did they think it would be easy . And we have the financial crisis of 2008. As the Obama Administration came in, the emotional impetus behind our Foreign Policy shifted from over optimism to pessimism. Whereas, i think its a fair criticism of the Bush Administration to say that some leaders in the administration underappreciated the risks and cost of action in the invasion of iraq. The Obama Administration underestimated the risks associated with inaction and disengagement. Areexamples i think there the complete withdrawal in 2001. Vivian how do you achieve middle ground . How do you go into a country and try to promote some democratic ideals that the u. S. Might be a part of while not shoving it down their throats, so to speak . It is a balancing act. Lt. Gen. Mcmaster i think it is with this idea of strategic empathy is the first step. I am describing strategic narcissism. Theh really ignores degree to which others, especially adversaries, enemies and rivals have over the future and how they have authorship over the future as well. I think the most important step is to view the complex challenges we are facing from the perspective of the other, and to make explicit assumptions about the degree to which we, the United States, and might likeminded partners can exert influence over the future. I also recommend that we frame these problems more competently by applying design thinking. By trying understand these challenges on their own terms and paying particular attention to the ideology, emotions and aspirations that drive and constrain the other, but view these challenges through the lens of our vital interests. Americans today are very skeptical about inactive foreign so we have to be able to explain this. What does it stake for them in terms of our security and prosperity and our influence in the world . How will this affect future generations of americans and citizens across the free world . I think making assumptions about the agency that we have an crafting objectives. I think making assumptions about the agency that we have an crafting objectives. So often we having engaged in ,ustained efforts abroad diplomatic and military, we have a clear idea of what we hope to achieve. War,hen this happens in not only is ineffective, but it may also be an ethical. Unethical. We dont have that just end in mind so that the book is a criticism of our approach to these challenges that we face, at its an argument for strategic empathy and a higher degree of strategic competence. Vivian you mention something about adversaries. A very interesting folks at act between the white house right now who are coming to grips with the fact that transition is upon us and they talk about how much has changed in the last four years since biden was last at the white house. Especially when it comes to china, but also with russia. How you engage without fully embracing . How do you keep them in check versus trying to work with them . Think thatmaster i the real answer to that is competition. To recognize that russia and want us to leave them in a way that is consistent with the interests of the free world. How do we compete, in a transparent manner. Theyre assumptions that i discussed earlier was that china had to be welcomed into the International Order and would play by the rules. And it would utilize its economy and government. I had the privilege of convening the Principals Committee of the National Security council quite early. I think soon after my arrival, weeks after my arrival to frame a china policy, a new china policy. Policiesught with me of that meeting and i read a couple of passages from the previous policies and made the the moston that significant shift in u. S. Foreign policy since the end of the cold war, the shift was long overdue. I know these labels are of limited utility, but cooperation and engagement with the communist party to the competition. And competition doesnt need to lead to complication. Andink cooperation engagement, and not competing effectively with the aggressive policies of the Chinese Communist partys have a path to competition, maybe in places like the South China Sea where china is in the midst to achieve the largest land grab in history. Withn if you are meeting these teams, what would you tell them specifically with regards to china . Where to begin on a practical level . Lt. Gen. Mcmaster the first piece of advice would be forwards, dont fall for it. And it is what i think is by the to be promises Chinese Communist party to have a shift back to this general approach of cooperation and engagement. I think the false promises will be in two areas. In first of these will be the area of environment and climate change, and that set of interconnected global challenges we face. Face, and the second will be in connection with north Koreas Nuclear program. The problem is xi jinping can pledge all he wants and say the right things about environment and climate, Carbon Neutral by 2060, but the Chinese Communist party is financing globally 70 coalfired plants a year. They will make pledges on north korea, but whereas we have a north korea strategy, china has a u. S. Strategy. That strategy is to reuse issues in the region, in this case the nuclear and Missile Program of north korea, as a wedge to drive and driveom allies the United States out of northeast asia and indo pacific rockley broadly. T xi jinping was if china succeeds, it is not only bad for us, but really bad for the countries in the region. I hear often times these days, dont force us to choose. We hear this from some of our allies and partners. Dont force us to choose between beijing and washington. I think the response of the new biden Audit Administration ought to be, we are not asking you to do that. We are on the side of your sovereignty. Reopening of this the indo pacific is, about and i hope the Biden Administration will see this as a key element of continuity as they put together Foreign Policy. Vivian you mentioned nuclear. , they havet the u. N. Been lighting fires under countries around the world to take notice that Nuclear Armed countries are going toward more tense relations. Its not just china and russia and north korea. Even india and pakistan, there is a buildup. Talking to the Biden Administration, what can we do here . Even in recent days, the Trump Administration has been trying to get a new deal with the russians because there is a deadline. Table, get china to the how realistic is that and where do you see this going . Lt. Gen. Mcmaster i think this is immensely important. We dont want to think about it because it is unimaginable, the use again of the most destructive weapons on earth, but we face the dangers associated with nuclear buildups that could be destabilizing. With russia, these new weapons that Vladimir Putin announced, remember the speech he gave . Nuclear missiles descending on maralago, florida. This was a speech he gave. These socalled low yield Nuclear Weapons, under this theory of escalation domination. This is very destabilizing. In a way that ss missiles were destabilizing the cold war. Nuclear building up capabilities and has not been party to negotiations because these were largely bilateral with russia. Arms control itself should be an area of emphasis. But what we have to remember is an arms control agreement is not an end in and of itself. An agreement that improves security. You areer problem alluding to i think is proliferation. If north korea gets a nuclear weapon, who doesnt . The only hereditary communist dictatorship in the world. Its a country that has never met a weapon it didnt try and sell to somebody, including the Nuclear Weapons programs to the Israeli Defense forces that bombed it in 2007. If north korea gets a weapon, there will be a conversation. South asia is an area increasingly gaining interest. Between Nuclear Armed india and pakistan, tensions not going away. Of course you have the around problem. If they have the iran problem. About the complexity associated with a world in which so many countries have Nuclear Weapons and some of these countries are run by leaders who have an ideological bent that could lead them to justify the use of these weapons. We know that pakistan is getting pretty close to that several years ago. Certainly the nuclear diane dynamic in the middle east will be dangerous. Vivian with the buildup of tensions we talked about, tensions in the middle east still on edge, afghanistan, all these places we will get to iraq and afghanistan and a moment but your former boss, President Trump, always touted america first. He sort of tried to work with allies but has been received in different ways. He put tariffs on allies in the name of National Security and done other things that disrupt a lot of our traditional allies especially in europe. What can the Biden Administration do moving forward to build coalitions to renew things that americas part of the team . Lt. Gen. Mcmaster i would say first recognize that there has been a high degree of International Cooperation below the level of the president s offensive tweets, more allies and skeptical statements. Example,cisions for truce replacements without consultations with allies. Below that, there has been a lot of International Cooperation especially on the aggressive actions of the Chinese Communist party. Japan has done a great job taking a lead on wto actions associated with fair chinese trade and economic practices. India, australia, japan, the u. S. , it is invigorated. We have been sent a bank to xi jinping because hooves attack his attacks, the bludgeoning of indian soldiers on the himalayan frontier, european allies are much more cognizant in the postcovid period of the threat in the Chinese Communist period. Our partners in africa are also deeply concerned about chinas economic aggressive aggression. I think this is a positive time to come in and reinvigorate multinational efforts to overco me the challenges. China is one example. What we have to do is recognize alliances. Multinational corporation has to be for a purpose. Other International Organizations like the human , that council or unesco these are competitive spaces of themselves. There is no prize for membership. We have to compete within those organizations to ensure china and other countries hostile to the free worlds interests, dont turn those organizations against their purpose. I hope our alliances will be reinvigorated, but reinvigorated with a clear purpose. With the u. S. Nly in the lead, to rally in support of hong kong, you talk about taiwan in your new book, how do we approach that moving forward . Lt. Gen. Mcmaster i do. I think that there are probably counterintuitive actions we can take. Iina is effective, and what write about is they have a strategy broadly of coop us with the lure of process, actions access to the markets, loans. Once you are in and they coerce you to adhere to their worldview , all you have to look at is the nba. This is effective for countries as well as companies. I think there should be some International Agreement where Likeminded Companies agree they will only invest in china and only allow chinas investment in our countries if those investments, from the standpoint of an economic hippocratic oath, do no harm. That we are not helping the Chinese Communist party stifle internally, but also we are not enabling them to create these servile relationships and to game this position of privacy that is exclusionary and compromises the sovereignty of countries. That we to also agree are not investing in chinese businesses and industries to give them a differential advantage. The differential advantage in whereta driven economy, they use our free market system against us. Certainly we shouldnt be investing in the Peoples Liberation armys effort to over match our militaries. I think an International Agreement, that is kind of the key of 10 democratically governed countries that have advanced technological and scientific programs, that is a good initiative. There are others we can take. What if for example we said, any Chinese National employed by our companies, who comes under the coercive power of the Chinese Communist party, you and your family get a visa . Reflexively,hink reduce chinese immigration to the United States, that they are engaged in a sustained campaign of industrial espionage. Let the fbi worry about that. But i think there could be a brain drain associated with that. We ought to be confident for many reasons. One of them is people want to come to our country. There are not too many people trying to immigrate into china for many reasons. We ought to use those advantages to our benefit. We have to be cognizant of and build on our competitive advantages in this competition. Vivian i have 7000 followup questions, some folks in the q and a. But while we have a little time, i want to talk about the situation in afghanistan and iraq. You have been in the media talking about your opinion about the proposed drawdown by january 15. I dont want to unnecessarily have you repeat your stance on it, but i do want to ask you where this leaves us on january 20 in terms of, do we have alternatives so that we dont create a vacuum in these two countries which happen to be near and dear to both of our hearts . How do you basically stop history from repeating itself . The Obama Administration, withdrawing into thousand 11 and then going back into iraq . Lt. Gen. Mcmaster thats exactly, we have to be capable until our most recent history. I think the Trump Administrations foreign policies have fallen short mainly in areas where they doubled down on the deficiencies of the Obama Administration policies. This was in afghanistan and particular. I know americans are frustrated. Endow weather is a call to the endless wars across the political spectrum. But i think this is a failure of leadership across multiple administrations. I dont think President Trump did, i dont think president obama dead, make a big effort trying to explain to the president obama did try to make a big effort trying to explain to the American People why we need to care in dayton, ohio or peoria, illinois about afghanistan. I think we can make that case. We can say, we are prioritizing our security here. We will prevent jihadist terrorists from ever again gaining a safe haven support base they can use to commit attacks on the scale of 9 11. But the second question to have an answer to is, what is the strategy . What is the strategy that will deliver that desired outcome, at a cost that is acceptable . In afghanistan, we were down to a very small we are down to a small number of troops. The afghans are bearing the fight. We had 10 courageous soldiers give their lives this year for us in afghanistan. In that same period, 30 Afghan Soldiers and policemen ended their lives today ensuring the taliban is never able to reimpose the brutal rule they to 2001der from 1996 and give safe haven and support basis to terrorist organizations. This is probably the most dramatic example of strategic narcissism i can think about. And afghanistan, we actually conjured up the enemy we would prefer rather than actual enemy, the taliban. An American People need honest description of this enemy rather than this fantasy we have developed. I think americans will support the sustained commitment at a sustainable level if they understand what is at stake and what the strategy is. Did thatesident trump in august or september of 2017, but then he backed off of it in large member because there is a move towards retrenchment. Vivian you are not a fan of talking to the taliban necessarily . Lt. Gen. Mcmaster if it was up to me, i would have closed the Taliban Political Office in doha. They are living in fivestar hotels. Do they really represent the taliban . Im not convinced. Think it has helped them maintain a degree of cohesion and with funding a group like this, you want to fragment them. You want to keep the door open to some kind of diplomatic solomon settlement. But i think thats a result of the key taliban leaders concluding maybe they can compromise the use of objectives through force. The way went about the concessions we increased their will to continue their Violent Campaign against the afghan people. During the negotiations, after we sign the agreement, they attacked a Maternity Hospital and killed infants and expectant mothers. They have executed a tax on the American University of afghanistan and gunned down people who are trying to understand strife in their country. We forced the afghan country to release 5000 prisoners and then i just think it was not only an unwise policy but also really unethical what we have done. As you alluded to, i think we will be back. We will be back because we have not really play this out in our minds and when we see the humanitarian catastrophe but also jihadist terrorist organizations in this echo system, we see them emboldened, enriched by the narcotics trade and profits associated with it. You will have to go back just like we had to go back in 2014 after isis took over territory the size of britain. Vivian it is a sad cycle. I have a little bit of the q and a. Thent to go back to Atlantic Council director for the middle east Security Initiative and also a former ns initiative. Official. I give you the floor. Thank you so much. Iq said, a thousand burning questions there is this that this will lead policymakers to these warmer, fuzzier approaches to adversaries, but in my experience working with you, that greater understanding of adversary can sometimes lead to practical insights that may toughen the u. S. Position. If you were sitting down with the biden team to drop a new National Security policy, how could you recommend amending or reframing u. S. Objectives in light of lessons you are drawing from the strategic empathy approach . In what areas should we be turning the shift . Lt. Gen. Mcmaster thank you and thank you for your Extraordinary Service on the nsc staff. It was an honor to serve with you and you made tremendous contributions. Great to be with you today. Not to beu begin kind of fuzzy, i am kind of a huggy person. [laughter] but im a staunch advocate for interests and i recognize we need to compete. But i think it applies to iran in particular. I would encourage the Biden Administration to take a hard look at the ideology, the emotions, aspirations that drive the Iranian Regime and not the fake Iranian Regime. , but thehop window real Iranian Regime of the supreme leader, the council. Looking at history now, four decade long history of our relations with iran since the revolution in 1979, you really see the failure of multiple approaches towards a ran based on the ideal that conciliation with iran will lead to a change in the nature of that government such that it would cease its the greathostility to satan, us, the little satan, israel, and arab monarchies. Also europe and the west, we have to remember iran is the greatest sponsor of terrorist organizations globally as well and has executed attacks in europe, argentina and panama. Mobley. Globally. Thats what i would encourage. Go back to this idea that if we go back to 2016, i would say look at what a did i ranran did after the nuclear deal. Iransntensified actions across the region. That would be my number one application of strategic efforts in terms of advice for the Biden Administration, looking in particular at this policy. Theres a lot of questions about the jcpoa, the inevitability biden will in some form pursue talks with iran. Thethat likelihood, given likelihood, what is your advice iranem in terms of keeping in check, but also allies in the last couple months have sort of teamed up with israel as a way to maybe couch possible adversarial spikes in the region again, how does it play out . Lt. Gen. Mcmaster first of all, i think theres a great achievement and the Trump Administration should get credit for that. It goes backs to back to President Trumps trip to riyadh. People said, what the heck is President Trump going to riyadh for . The speech that he and king solomon gave, it was a time of great hope. Whenever you get your hopes up in the middle east, they get , ined to a certain extent the way that Mohammed Bin Salman consolidated power, the murder of jamal khashoggi, a u. S. Resident and a journalist. Whenever you get your hopes up in the middle east, they tend to is dashed, but i think this a Significant Development over time of a recognition that there security interests align with those of israel. The reason they do is because of their four proxy war against arab monarchies, israel, and us. This is something that can be built on. And with good effect, not only for Regional Security dynamic of deterring iran, but also removing ideological support for jihadist terrorist organizations because it is the specter of iranian backed militias and allowing sunni communities to view terrorist groups as patrons and protectors and keep them on life support. I think when you look at the broad region, the strategy we are putting together is you want to put a brake on these forces associated with the sectarian civil war causing so much human suffering, humanitarian catastrophe and increasing Political Risk to countries in the region. I would say dont go on that, and recognize there are some aspects of a Trump Administration policy we are following up on. , any new thing is administration coming up, because of the approach to the region previously, this was also the Trump Administration approach. Do not view the middle east mainly as a mess to be avoided. Just when you think it cant get worse, it actually can. This is not a call for vast numbers of troops in the region or the u. S. Taking on the burden of all the regions problems, but recognizing disengagement creates hedging behavior that makes the situation worse. It was the unenforced redline syria in 2013 and 2014 that led to russian intervention in the Syrian Civil War and then led to serial episodes of mass homicide such that have to syrian population is dead, wounded, or displaced. That placed a burden not just on countries in the region but also on europe and created a political dynamic where the refugee crisis interacted with nativist parties. We could go on about this. Problems in the middle east dont stay in the middle east. It is worth a sustained longterm approach to prevent hedging behavior that blocks the path toward longterm solutions. Vivian im going to try to squeeze into more questions. We have about four minutes trico. Anonymous question from someone out there. How do we overcome chinas longterm strategic view and efforts such as the belt and wrote Initiative Given the u. S. Only has eight yearlong strategies and depends on the Current Administration . Lt. Gen. Mcmaster thats why i wrote the book. I wanted to write it in a way that is nonpartisan. I think we ought to be able to come together around the challenges we are facing and craft nonpartisan solutions that are sustainable across multiple administration spirit. Obviously, Foreign Policy has to be flexible. You will always interact with adversaries and conflicts in environments that are unanticipated like a pandemic. There are things that will happen that you cant anticipate adequately. But i think an overall approach to the policy is what i try to make in the book are the one danger is this idea that after we emerge from these quadruple , ases of a pandemic recession, social divisions laid bare by George Floyds murder and the aftermath, concerns over inequality of opportunity and unequal treatment under the law, and now of course this vitriolic political season that we are still i guess in, we have to put Foreign Policy on the back burner. But i will tell you, if we learned anything from covid19, it ought to be that problems and challenges that developed overseas can only be dealt with at an exorbitant cost after they reach our shores. We should learn this from 9 11 as well. The book is an argument for a sustained and sustainable approach to Foreign Policy. I hope an arena to bring us back from this partisan polarization we have seen recently. Vivian thank you. One last question, i thought we would go personal because we got a lot of students who attend virtually or in person these events. , youave been an author have a doctorate, National Security advisor military officer. Can you talk about, for students who see you and want to be like you, how do you achieve these things . What is the path for you, either as a student or military officer, or someone senior in the Foreign Policy world . Lt. Gen. Mcmaster thank you. I look back at my career, it was just a great gift. The ability to serve in the army, the ability to be alongside incredible young men and women, to learn from so many , i think thates service can be immensely rewarding. You have seen the hardships of it a lot but it is hard to grasp the less tangible rewards of being part of the team that is engaged in a mission that is bigger than yourself, being part of a team that takes on the qualities of family with shared hardships and under the challenges you face. A team in the military in which the young men and women next to you will give everything, including their own lives for you. It is immensely rewarding of a career field to serve in the military, but outside the military as well. I would encourage people to take a crack at service upfront. We hear so much these days about the deep state and everything, i think its nonsense. You can make a d big difference for your government, citizens, for humanity. The second thing i will say is i get a chance to interact with amazing young people here at stanford. A lot of people want a map of their whole career from graduation. I would say dont worry about it. Do something thats fun and exciting and challenging and that will allow you to make a difference. So many opportunities will open up to. I thought i was going to be commissioner in aviation. I was in commission in aviation. I was going to get out for five years. It 29 bonus years beyond five years in the army. The opportunity to go to graduate school and study and read and think about history. It was probably the best preparation i had for many assignments late in my career, especially as that of National Security advisor. I have been continuously learning. Battlegrounds, i write in the conclusion of the book that the strength of our society is an educated populace. For young people, i would say if anyone is trying to feed you and orthodoxy, dont buy it. Read more. Read different perspectives. Talk to people of different perspectives. Be tolerant. What i worry about today is there is a loss of empathy. In connection with National Security, but also like we have lost the ability to empathize with one another. We are more connected than ever electronically, but we are growing more distant from each other emotionally and psychologically. I would just say welcome those who have different viewpoints. Have meaningful, respective discussions. Bringing america back together and restore our confidence in who we are as a people and this great gift of our democracy. Vivian general mcmaster, thank you so much for your time. Congrats on the book, its fantastic. Next to everyone at the Atlantic Council. We appreciate it and hope to today, it is a look at the future of the Transatlantic Alliance and natos role in securing georgia. Easterns at 11 00 a. M. At cspan, online at cspan. Org, or you can listen live with the free cspan radio app. Tonight, a Washington Post columnist discusses the impact of the trump presidency. At 8 00erage starts p. M. Eastern on cspan, online at cspan. Org, or listen live with the free cspan radio app. Three nominees to the federal Election Commission testified at the Senate Confirmation hearing. The nominees said they had no reason to doubt the legitimacy of the 2020 election. If confirmed, the fcc fec would once again have a quorum to conduct business. This is an hour and a half. Alf. [inaudible conversations]