I do want to interrupt your lunch, so feel free to keep eating, but as promised we are going to have a really good, important discussion that will help to draw on what we heard this morning and build by thinking a little bit about how to reset a strategic frame to support Good Governance. Think about all the things we heard this morning about some of the problems, some of the challenges that need to be addressed in fragile states. Governing institutions need to become more accountable. We have to work on ways to build inclusiveness, tackle the problem of marginalization and exclusion, figure out how to empower youth to take leadership roles. The importance of enabling Civil Society to be an important part of cementing a stronger Space Society relationship. These are all dimensions of governance in one way or another, and this is one of the central challenges of transforming fragile states to be more resilient. So how do we do that from the perspective of the United States . How do reset a strategic frame that helps to put into motion better support foror transformig governance to be goodo governance . We are very fortunate to have three superb leaders from the peace building world and the governance world with us. Two of them are members of the task force on extremism and fragile states, that have developed a set o recommendations on tackling the problems of fragility, the challenges of fragility to be a longterm solution for violent extremism. So we couldnt be more fortunate, and to help us with the discussion, to moderate the discussion, im really delighted to introduce to you mr. Nick schifrin. He is the Foreign Affairs and defense correspondent for the pbs newshour. I couldnt be happier to hand it over to nick to start the conversation. Thank you very much. I appreciate that, and let mey introduce the people you actually are to listen to. You are not here to listen to me. Needs no introduction but i will just briefly welcome secretary madeleine albright, 64th secretary of state, chair of the board of directors of ndi, chair of Albright Stonebridge group and Albright Capital management. Present and ceo of usip mitchell, president of ndi. It seems to me just to give a frame for this, in 18 years we spent a lot of time defeating terrorists, terrorism has increased. We have targeted extremists extremism has grown. We have overthrown governments but governance has not been improved. We have one battles, but certainly not one the piece. How do we create a way to do that . How do we reduce the personal and financial costs, its been 6 trillion, 10,000 americans dead, 50,000 americans would, hundreds of thousands of iraqis and afghans have been killed. How do we protect the country . How do we create a more sustainable and successful strategy . How do we prevent and extremism from taking root . How do we defeat not only todays terrorists but tomorrows terrorists . Nancy lindborg, could you give us a sensese of how we think we can do that . Well, thank you. Thank you everyone for joining us here today for this conversation and nick come he did a a great night out of the problem set. And to take a hard look at the Solutions Congress asked usip to convene a host, a task force, bipartisan, Highlevel Task force in 2018 to create a comprehensive plan for how should we address extremism in fragile states. It was based onfr more than a decade of thinking and lessons that havee identified the fact that its the conditions in fragile states where you have a week or nonresponsive orou illegitimate or all of the above governments, and a broken social bond between people and their government. That gives rise to a host of conditions that can enable extremism to take root, violent extremism. And so how do we tackle it more weffectively . The task force was cochaired by the original cochairs of the 9 11 report, congressman lee hamilton and governorgr tom kan. And they consider this to be Unfinished Business because one of the three recommendations of the 9 11 report was to adopt a policy of prevention. That recommendation was never taken forward. So that became the touchstone of the Task Force Recommendations that we need a policy prevention. They thought about it in p terms of really focusing in on addressing the conditions that give rise to fragility and, therefore, extremism, and by the way, civil war, extreme poverty, forced migration, hostex of bils that we face globally. But to do so in a more donated, comprehensive strategy across our u. S. Government. To just quote senator coons who was one of the many bipartisan cosponsors of the global fragility act who said, the problem is were trying to do with really complicated problems, and dod is blank football, the state department is playing soccer, and usaid folks are playing lacrosse. And nobody is the coach or the quarterback. So of course we are not going to make the progress that we must make to tackle this more effectively. Three main recommendations, a more coordinated strategy, longerterm more iterative approaches that require a different kind of mechanisms, legislatively, and coordinate more effectively with international partners. And to do so as you heard from joe, against principles for longerterm, locally led, iterativee programming. Courtney did strategy to create that strategy is a challenge. A quarter strategy, also think of a longterm, think o longtm coronation from the u. S. With partners in local countries, and make it international, create a fund. We talked about private sectors will. Lets examine those over the next few minister secretary albright, theres no one that i would rather ask this question two. Is this about democracy . Is this about enabling democracy to be more easily get in fragile states . If so, how would we do that . I do think it is about the fact that people everywhere want to be able to make decisions about their own lies. One of the things that i reset is when i was in office was people say, asians are not interested in democracy, or whatever. So i on purpose made my assistant secretary for democracy harold koh, a korean american. But i really do think we are all the same and we do want to be ablele to make decisions. The question is, how is it done . It is more difficult. We are proving it ourselves right here. I think that the question is, how do haveo that perseverance. In just listening to nancy and you initially is, i have been at this a a very long time. I was trying to do when i was in office and then when we came out, what happened was, instance bill coe, former secretary of defense and i, did a task force on the prevention of genocide. It was actually the only task force except for this now that youre talking about, nancy, that had an effect and that president obama named something, created, there was a president ial decision of having and atrocities prevention board in order to be able to get a group of people in the u. S. Government looking ahead, trying to figure out what might l be happening to prevent it. We also, ive been, did some work in order to try to get the International Community involved in it to this g content of responsibility to protect. Any number of different ways and i was very happy to be asked to be on this task force. Because i do think it addresses the major problem, which is that we have just been a long time on it. I have said, by the way im no longer a diplomat, but i said that you dont have to be diplomatic. Exactly. I said americans are the most generous people in the world with the shortest attention span. And i think that part of the issue here is how to give it that strength, both institutionally and morally. That is, its going to take a while, and it does take this new statement whole of government, which is very hard, frankly. It always is hard but seems to be particularly hard at this time. The othero part is to fully understand what are the conditions that create fragility or what are the negative aspects that make sure that fragility continues and what are the positive aspects that have to be taken care of in order to be able tord be supportive of it ad understand that democracy is not a spectator sport. Anywhere else. We have to find the partners in these various countries that want to be a part of this and not have us be patronizing about it or say it has to be only american democracy. We have to recognize that there are other aspects in the way that people are able to make their voices heard in society. Lets zoom in. Theres a lot of secretary gave us, but just zoom in as you experienced in burma. Talk about the conditions on the ground and specifically with secretary albright was saying the condition you saw that creates fragility, some of the solutions to try to take away that fragility and work their partners, or other partners to work with as you saw . You are asking how we sold burma while i was there. [laughter] clearly theres a lot more to go so i had Lessons Learned tha bui can tell you at least how we went about it and the lessons at least as to what we heard in the Previous Panel i think to some degree. First of all the really important idea of context, of understanding intimately, doing your homework and understanding every context is different and defend every one knows its always been a blackandwhite issue. You get now into the nittygritty in th of the countd realize how incredibly complex by their own top 135 different ethnic groups. At least 20 or so are involved in peace. So the context is absolutely essential and doing your homework in that way you do no harm. The most important thing when you get involved is do no harm. To demonstrate that you get it, that is a longterm effort that means you have to work at this and to know theres someone you can count on. But third, the ambassadors are very important, because that is one focal point on the ground that brings it all together. We have a mission of different components, a id and defense and others its up to the ambassador and the operational person on the ground to bring this together. I was very lucky because i had president obama who really cared my john kerry and Hillary Clinton thats also extremely important in washington to put the resources and the time into it. Absent that used to people on the ground to understand the importance of coordinating all these instruments into think in terms not as we heard in the last session but an explicit program on and inclusion by integrating into everything you do. I would be asked tell us about your Democracy Program or your Peace Program. I would say everything we do is a Democracy Program or Peace Program because its how we do it. Not just what we do if we do health or agriculture we bring people together across ethnicities that creates peace from the bottom up. Is it working quex we also do a lot of work on that front. Its painstaking and takes a lot of time and there are those who will try to make it not succeed. But its worth the effort and required for sustained stability and fragile environment. You have worked in so many fragile environments walk us through from the us perspective to know the country to create trust and relationships and have an ambassador and diplomats that are also backed from washington what has your experience been quex what are these places looking for to make them more resilient and less fragile clicks. First of all every country would be different but some of the Core Principles were embedded in the recommendations which have now been part of the global fragility act as you heard from the last panel, we have an unbelievable moment right now those hard earned lessons with Data Research puts that into recommendations a lot are working on it and have translated into the global fragility act that requires the government to have a coordinated Ten Year Strategy to work along those core principle approaches so to answer your question, you said it already we need to have a longterm commitment less focused on resources and sustaining over time to do so in partnership with local actors and Civil Society and local governments where you can. They are in the lead. We heard a beautiful summary at the end of the last panel that if you look at one of the core issues that represents the breakdown between governments and the people you need to hone in on those to engage a citizenry to hold the own government accountable or enable a leadership so along the way where the quick wins as what you go through is longterm quex there isnt the patients for those who are hungry or in dangers of sometimes you need to work on getting emergency food and greater security. But do it in a way that doesnt smother the other elements to emerge so you dont not pursue education or prioritize short term security that is repressiv repressive. That is a mistake that we make. Having all of those elements together in a coordinated strategy. How often have people like me accusing the Us Government of pursuing short term gains at the expense of longterm stability. Those to have solutions only pointing out criticisms. [laughter] so it seems to me what i would call longterm strategy your patience or the notion to develop education like pakistan or afghanistan or sudan but decades. Is it really possible for the Us Government to have a strategy that looks beyond one president ial cycle . I think its difficult because of the campaign and the carrying out of policy is in opposition what the previous people did. So i think what has to happen since we are a democracy and is not a spectator sport , people participate. They are open to pressure from the public. So to think about what our role is for those who are not in the government. And also in a strange way, then the senators are there longer in a cycle. I have been saying for a number of reasons, this is time of article one. I might not have said that when i was in the executive branch. [laughter] but i do think that part of the thing that has to happen , it has to be part of our dna that this will take time to require the group of people from a variety of different parts of our society to keep saying this will take time. And also for a little humility to say it has taken us time. It is difficult. I am worried generally about the four year cycle of Foreign Policy even by the same party because i do think there is a sense we have to do something totally different where i think picking up a project is a good idea. The other part i have to say and it was true when we were in office but to do something people just want to check it off and say now weve done bosnia. Or whatever. And it takes much more time. And we are not a patient people. And nancy this is something we have to work on with the fragility is to actually report certain deadlines that have been met or certain accomplishments so it doesnt sink into the bureaucracy and then set up a reporting system to the american people. But patience is not our best suit. And i do think that something we have to work on. Let me just add that the task force on extremism of fragile states, everyone but one asked to continue on so the task force is continuing and specifically looking at that kind of reporting. It seems we have a problem in the United States thinking longterm but also thinking even shortterm and coordinating between agencies. So talk about that how does the us develop coherence with diplomacy and defense . Is it even possible quick. It is very difficult and madeleine was talking earlier over lunch trying to do this across different agencies is very difficult. I do think if you have a particular challenge there are working groups and people at operational levels who can come together to think this through. We talk about the three ds im not sure we act on them we educate people, we bring them and train them to the Foreign Services and to operate. And if i may add to that there should be the fourth which we talk about which is democracy. We should run through all of this i was with a former colleague of mine a senior strategist who worked in the counterterrorism center. He said he did a study of all counterterrorism work and he came to one conclusion the biggest challenge we face is governance. Not many people get this not even in state you completely get it. May be mark green got it but running across the different divisions there has to be a recognition of how we do this is important in government to the success of environments with any transition. And what is good is the Additional Development world is starting to get this so then it starts to get easier to talk about these things on the government side. But more needs to be done through think tanks and through the institutes and training at the operational levels to get to the bloodstream of the Foreign Policy community to operate day to day and hopefully that transcends into congress. So part of Good Governance is government responding to their people it is the Democracy Movement protest and a Civil Society in general. Talk about the importance of that. How can we in the context of creating this longterm strategy support these people who try to make their governments more accountable and improve governance . Usaid was a Global Leader to establish democracy as a part of Development Agenda almost 30 years ago. The problem is it has never had rich amounts of funding and aid sometimes gets leery of jumping into situations that is political a lot of times its the politics that need to be understood to get democracy and governance right. Civil society and movements of people are some of the ways that the politics gets addressed in more repressed societies and the ability to support that, i have gone in and out of iraq for a decade and a half and one of the best investments we have made is the development of Civil Society. Such that earlier this year you saw people in the streets demonstrating not for their sectarian issues but for more accountable nonsectarian government as well as less iranian influence so to have that happen under saddam that was an Extraordinary Development that came through support of the International Community and a number of countries where we could talk about that. Supporting Civil Society and governmental institutions supporting elections is a long list. We need to do so in concert with an overall strategy and we can do this and fits and spurts and often in ways that dont listen to the local leadership and we can smother those efforts with too much love and attention at the same time. On that part there is an awful lot of goodwill what you are trying not to smother but we need to coordinate more among ourselves. Not so much the government but the nongovernmental sector to figure out where we should be working together. Im not even sure if people know what Civil Society means they think its being nice to each other. What are we talking about when we talk about getting people involved in the project and then to understand there are some kind of rules and what is the relationship between the people and the government quex the social contract has been broken. Something now all of a sudden the government feels it doesnt have the responsibility for helping the people and the people say to hell with this i dont want anything to do with the government so we need to think of the social contract aware that has broken down and we also i feel more and more strongly about this, we need to get the private sector involved i think democracy has to delive deliver. We need to understand when many of us were in college or graduate school would have discussions what comes First Political or economic and Development People want to vote and eat so what we need to do is get the private sector involved to help in a coordinated way so people see the results to have a rule of law to be a commercial code that people will invest and then hire local people. So this is a large agenda and it needs coordinating. Not just by the Us Government but some organizational aspect. I forgot to mention on the issue of people power, we have a whole practice area looking at the tactics and strategies of these movements and where we see movements across the globe to make an effective difference. There are specific strategies and disciplines that enable these movements and we cannot continue to support that. Where have you seen that work increasing private Sector Development quick. Just to build on the notion of the movements the past year that has been the theme with all these movements and street demonstrations there would be a list of dozens of these activities whether hong kong or wherever there is that frustration and the challenge are movements of anger and frustration but i got very frustrated when Mark Zuckerberg gave his speech at georgetown and try to wrap himself in the cloak of human rights and democracy. No. Does allow people to have a voice but that is not the beall and endall democracy as people saying listen to me or listen to us. Governance is about building an institution and the harnessing of that. To build Political Parties and channel Civil Society to ensure the left is managed fairly and effectively. So for example the challenge we face now in the aftermath is how do we channel that range and one rage and anger . So in a critical moment of transition theres been cuts related to the election and if this doesnt go well people will get frustrated so then are we getting economic benefit . Do we have jobs or place like nigeria was a step back so we have a plan. We look at stride nigeria 2023 what will we do between now and then . A id, partners on the ground how do we get from here to there and people feel the processes responding to the need . If we dont it starts to unrave unravel. And that decade that started with arab spring and then just ended with global unrest. Secretary albright, as what we try to do talk about what the west tries to facilitate there are actors trying to thwart those efforts. The Trump Administration mostly has gotten the credit for the National Security strategy calling china a threat but certainly the return of the idea particularly china is a longterm threat to the United States looking at the promotion of democracy how much are china and russia are doing to thwart that quick. I do think both in their own way are trying. But also in terms of the belief that the chinese maybe we have not paid enough attention to the economic part of building new societies. So in many ways i have been saying the chinese must be getting very fat because the bill gets larger and larger. [laughter] they are everywhere so they go in and say they will provide a project that is good for the country for instance i remember being in kenya there was a discussion about building a road and would harm the serengeti. The American Contractors were very cautious of that the chinese said where do you want it . May have done in a variety of different places. They are not very patient either actually but their entry point is very attractive and they dont care what the government is. Russians try to undermine anything that we do and try to separate us from our allies and our various ways they have no money internally so they wont do that but they try to research as a major power so they say what the americans are doing is something contrary to what the country wants its interesting to see the research in the middle east and egypt specifically talking about arab spring. They are out there it would be better for you all Work Together but the chinese are the strongest to separate us to develop these issues its easier to build a road then to create these various institutions. You boasting one both engage with the question starting with Southeast Asia and that part of the world china believes it needs to reduce influence what was your interaction with china and how do we respond to their challenges quick. Secretary albright i grabbed onto that early as ambassador and because people may remember companies could not invest for many years and my first day as ambassador basically was right after so i had in my residence all the companies that were interested. I challenge them. They are now counting on you to bring those values with you and what you do. But the chinese bring their values or lack of that of openness and transparency you must demonstrate you are operating in a different way and if you do the Us Government is in bad effort because i used to say in burma when i challenge the companies we invest we will invest in local communities and train people and give back and we care about the success of the country that is in our interest now other countries extract because they think we want resources we have excess capacity, there is a different mindset so there is an advantage this century the fundamental is not about china about the values or the norms or the rules of the 21st century. We had a certain rule base that followed world war ii we were the hyperpower for a while how would that be shaped . And with every resource we can the private sector is a very Strong Resource they can be an ally we should challenge them to be and we should engage more actively which includes the tech sector. This is also about results in a democracy needs to produce results. How do you see that balance in the us answering to spread those values to confront the chinese threat and also results on the ground . A couple of points. We see the more fragile estate is the more vulnerable that is to the influence of regional or great powers and we see that with china and russia. So creating a world committed to democracy. I worry a lot even as our National Security strateg strategy, there is good reason for doing that. For these issues fragility are not gone. At some payroll do we risk shifting all the attention away from addressing the kind of state fragility issues to extreme poverty and significant migration . And third the to do all this requires the resources and longevity we are seeing with the global fragility act. I take great heart we now have a path that is a binding commitment to create these longterm strategies that we need to look at. Because we really risk losing focus at the time of recommendations and high level validation. We could easily wander off field because we are easily distracted. I hope we can take that global fragility act to use that as a momentum to put these ideas into action. Because bureaucracy is a hard thing to move and thats what we have to deal with. The dangers of making this anti china. But we dont want to be instrumental lies. We care about the success. It is heartfelt. But only in certain cases that are geopolitical. Then we diminish that strategically because countries see us as geopolitical and wet china is bringing to the world. So the notion should be affirmative its important for a secure world but also because we truly do care. We have a little less than 20 minutes. The firsthand i saw was on this table. Vice president of global peace service. The United Nations has a been mentioned much today and i would like the secretary to say where she sees the organizational infrastructure it seems to me it seems the impact has diminished so where can we strengthen those organizations to reflect on the International Structure quick. I have been very concerned the International Structure is weakening that those organizations need refurbishing. So we need to see where those weaknesses are and to strengthen is very important and that cliche frankly if it did not exist we would invent the human what has happened positively in terms of ad hoc operations like the g 20 or other smaller groupings to see what can be done through them because i do think there needs to be some kind of structure and to have an organizational part i would totally describe those organizations but also we need to be more supportive of the human. I am from british south cameroon. With the issue of the diminished status of United Nations so my question would be directed to secretary albright. With the United States policy has shifted from Subsaharan Africa in the backyard of europe. So based on your own experience how do you feel of that statement with respect to the presence of france in west africa and most of this fragility were talking about is not collective in Subsaharan Africa. I do think there has been more attention it would be very useful if more americans understood africa was not one country and that there really are differences among the 54 and there are some good stories and some very difficult ones. But there has been more interest in some of it has not been useful frankly but on the whole there is beginning to understand the diversity and the power of africa and the potential of africa and that positive aspect and what is the role of the human and peacekeeping operations and the who and how that deals with the bola or any number of Different Things so there needs to be some understanding of a multilateral approach to face specific attention and then hope it spreads to the other countries. I hate to say this but there are political figures that just africa because they think its one place. We need to understand that colonial history since that period has been over. Thank you for your in the year of summary protest and social movements as you mentioned, young people are often on the front line, and as we heard from samhsa and others this morning, its not only that sense of exclusion how do we build a set of capacities and build upon that interest off emerging Young Leaders at a time where we see a lot of our investments in emerging young leader programs either flatlining or going down . For example, the chinese Just Launched a major new Scholarship Initiative for youth, peace and security bringing thousands of people to china. What should we be doing better around supporting emerging Young Leaders . Well, first of all we should look at all the ways that we can increase the funding for that. As we heard, i think the panel that we heard from, our four Young Leaders was very encouraging about the kind of leadership that can make a real differencece in some of these me fragile environment. They havefr ideas. They know the context. They are the next generation that will make the difference. This really goes its hard to keep harping on this but this goes to the heart of the global fragility act, and heart of the Task Force Recommendations thatk says, we are not going to solve these Critical Issues through military, military or kinetic means. That we need theseea longerterm solutions that are working in concert and certainly developing Youth Leadership in all the ways that it enables you to play a more active, positive role is key. So continuing to bring that forward and with hopefully less directed funding that is available through these ten pilots, that needs to be a priority. And its how you get movements out there to provide the strategy strategic, Tactical Training for that. All the ways that you trained leadership and provide support. But i would also go back to what i said earlier, and that is you have to be careful we are not doing it in a way that it becomes about us. Its got to be in a way that puts the Young Leaders outfront. Yes, maam, right here in the front table. We will do two in the front table here. Thank you. Im from south sudan and i just wanted to pick up on the aspect of locally led processes as one of the pillars of the act. The current understanding of local lead is looking more like the programs and projects designed in the west and then taken to the global south and dressed in local faces to look like they are locally led. What that does to the concept is they, prepackaged with very minimal room for flexibility. They come prepackaged imagine issues as they have to pick the objectives that were predesigned to be achieved through that process. And also most of them happen to be really short term. You have three months, six months, one year, and were looking at can for example, a country that is been in constant conflict and people looking to transform a conflict. I never see how a three month project in six months, one year can transform or create a positive impact that is actually going to be sustainable. And the other aspect or challenge around that is also the lack of sustainability that comes with that because it comes as a support, a comes as the funding, its creating a lot of dependency syndrome within the communities that people are always looking to receive instead of utilizing the local resources that they have. And also comes with a lot of accountability from the civilad society to the west. My questionet is, how will this locally led pillar of the act be any different from what we are already experiencing in ourre various contexts . Eric, you want to try that, or nancy . You raise i think the heart of the question that we will need to figure out. This goes to the difficulty of change. And what you just articulated i think everybody agrees, but how you do that will not be the first way that it happens with this new approach. But myha hope is that the global fragility act will push us to think differently, to try differently, to really understand what local leadership, we cant be doing it from washington. It has to happen in full partnership in the field, with mutual accountability. There willl be a process. There will be a process for getting that right, but i dont think it will happen right out of the box. Another question right here, and then well go back and do two more comes up questions. Im from tunisia. My question is about, will be about preventing violent extremism. In tunisia, north africa, what we saw is that not in iraq to fight extremism were more attractive for young people. So my question for you, and especially for ms. Albright, is when will we start working on Counter Measures that can make democracy more attractive for these young arab muslims at least in north africa . Since 2011, suggesting that our democracies are important. It was brought in my country free election but is not enough. We should work more on prosperity, also on something very important for me as a woman, freedom. Ry because still difficult, even though we ought a good path, it still difficult for me, for example, to say that im nonreligious. My country, the democracy, the emergent democrats democracy come that protects me from via the act. So we are working but we are in a way feeling alone. We should Work Together on making democracy more attractive with others. Thank you. I have to say the National Democratic institute has taken a particular interest in tunisia. We had our Board Meeting fair this last year, and really looked at a lot of things. But this is also applicable to other places. We cant just operate in capitals. We have to get out of the capitals and it has to do with what youre talking about, local aspects, and workingca with peoe that are not part of the government. But are the Civil Society, and especially some of the young people and the women. And that is one of the things we have been concentrating on and asking a lot of questions when we were in tunisia to, how was it going locally . What was going to happen . And i have to say it may not seem that sexy the people to go to some small town somewhere, but in many ways it is more important than being though tunis is beautiful, i think theyre important to get out of the main cities and deal with people that are not used to hosting foreigners all the time. So there are more questions, unfortunately i think we dont have the time, unfortunately. Im very sorry for all of you who still have your hands up, please join me in thanking secretary albright, nancy lindborg, derek mitchell. Thank you very much. [applause] thank you. That brings us to the close of the program this morning and little bit this afternoon. Let me just begin as we close, just again to thank our excellent partners at the george w. Bush institute, the National Endowment for democracy, and at the National Democratic institute. They had been five and his partners in putting all of this together. Usip will continue to work with these partners, to continue focusing on these Critical Issues. Weve had a number of sweeping conversations today, and many of you may be eager to drill that in more detail. We are going to work with our partners to schedule and the very near future a set of roundtables where we will really focus on trying to be a little bit more concrete about what kinds of solutions we can start to identify. So as we say to make things dramatic, watch this space. In the meantime let me wish you all a very happy and peaceful new year, and ask you again to please join me in thanking this superb lunchtime panel. [applause] have a great afternoon. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] the house will be in order. For 40 years cspan has been providing american unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and Public Policy depends from washington, d. C. And around the country see you could make up your own mind. Created by cable in 1979, cspan isnt brought to you by your local cable or satellite provider. Cspan, your unfiltered view of government. Right now that were in sort of a twilight zone, in between, part of this is because while the constitution is actually more specific about impeachment and it is about most things, it doesnt say everything and it leaves this question as to when will these articles of impeachment be presented, to whom, how come all that is worked out for in the past its going pretty quickly. In fact, as an agent with the clinton trumpet went so quickly the senate wasnt even in session when the articles were sent over. This is something for the leaders of the two houses to wrangle with each other about. Live coverage from the Brookings Institution expected to get under way shortly on cspan 2. [ inaudible conversations ] once again, we are live from the Brookings Institution this morning waiting for the start of an event with u. S. Army secretary ryan mccarthy. He will talk about iran and the indopacific region. Live coverage here on cspan 2