Booktv continues on cspan2, television for serious readers. Hoover virtual policy briefing series, im tom gilligan of the Hoover Institution with more than a century the Hoover Institution has been collecting knowledge and generating ideas that support freedom and improve the human condition. Are works profoundly affected Public Policy in the United States and around the world. These policy breakers provide an opportunity for you to hear directly from some of our nations top scholars on the pressing issues facing the world during this difficult time. As we unite to confront the challenges of the worldwide pandemic conversations like this have never been more important. We will take audience questions today so i encourage you to submit yours using the q a button located at the bottom of your screen. Today, condoleezza rice, senior fellow in Public Policy at the Hoover Institution, she served as 60 secretary of state of the United States, the second woman and first African Americans a hold this position. He was also george w. Bush at National Security adviser. We look forward to doctor rice being the next director of the Hoover Institution as well as fall, welcome, thank you for joining us today. You are an expert in the International System. How do you think the International System is responding to this pandemic . Welcome to everyone here. The real story is the International System is not responding. It is individuals are responding. If ever we have seen the triumph of property we see it now, not surprising when people are frightened or something that is unusual or we dont have any experience people tend to go back to what they know best. These are elected leaders that they can hold accountable so the responses been country by country. We see it in things like travel bands between countries, we see it in the fact that individual countries are deciding the pace and rate at which they tell people to shelter in place, you see the National Healthcare person or the National Healthcare expert is really there next to the Prime Minister or the president and so the International System really hasnt been on point. It has been individual countries and that cuts against the grain really, the way the thought about globalization and against the grain, we talk about this, in a place like europe where theyve tried for decades to create a borderless territory in europe where one passport where people move equally from country to country and now we see when it starts in italy it spreads quite quickly in europe and individual countries trying to clamp down. Lets talk about her International Institutions responds, people have commented on the role the un is playing, the World Health Organization, we have a question about should nato be doing more, seems there is an instinct for people who believe in the Global Community to what global institutions to do more. Is that a realistic expectation, how do you think about this . In phases, that is okay. Right now the response is that countries are trying to take care of their own, they are doing so by making sure they get their citizens back home. Thats one interesting response, lets get all our citizens home where we can take care of our own, they are responding with travel bands and airlines are basically not flying between countries but i think the time should come relatively soon when we see International Institutions take a bigger role particularly the g 20, the 20 largest economies in the world could take a role in helping to coordinate an economic response the way that they did after the financial crisis of 20082009. Certainly when we think about the effect of this pandemic on developing countries it will be important to leverage some of the work we have done over the last couple decades to improve the Health Care Outcomes in those countries. One interesting approach the United States can use, we have a huge network built up because of the president s emergency plan for aids relief starting with president bush, continued by president obama, going to donald trump where, we help developing countries build whole Healthcare Systems and Distribution Networks to distribute even the way out in the countryside. Those are the kinds of things i hope countries will band together. Kind of interesting, this is the opposite response that we had after 9 11 when after 9 11 countries realized terrorism was a borderless threat, and in fact you have to share information, you have to share intelligence information in law enforcement, we had within a very short. Go of time a way to track terrorists financing across borders and hopefully once we are through the really frightening part of this countries will start to band together to think about how to get a response and not let it happen again. The timing is important. It is totally understandable that Prime Ministers, president s will concentrate on what is happening at home. Lets talk about the us response. Should be doing more to respond to the global pandemic. What do you think of the United States response . Is inadequate . The United States is trying to save new york, wondering what is going on internally, that is understandable but not like we have done nothing. The administration has made available several hundred Million Dollars for covid19 response in developing countries. Im quite certain our embassies and places like that, trying to help other countries with their response. We also have the 80 emergency effort that helps countries in the developing world to respond to this crisis so in time i think the United States will take a bigger leadership role but for now the foreign assistance should be welcomed. It is not going to help to bring together a big conference to talk about response to the virus. It will not be helpful. It will be helpful in a few months to do exactly that also to try to help the world plan better for next time around. I am tom gilligan and this is the virtual policy briefing with condoleezza rice. You were National Security adviser during the sars outbreak. What are the differences between then and now . One of the unfortunate similarities, hard to get information out of china during the sars outbreak. We knew something had happened. It was hard to get answers out of china about what had happened and that is unfortunately a recurring pattern this time around and the most troubling aspect of this crisis. It is in the nature of the chinese system, an authoritarian system that control of information, control of the narrative is power so we shouldnt be surprised that when this outbreak happened they silenced the younger physicians and medical students who were trying to sound the alarm. Can you imagine those people being silenced in the United States or in any country, germany, or brazil, somebody would have picked up the story in the press. It would have been known there was a problem. The chinese did what authoritarians do. They silenced those who were trying to sound the alarm, they wanted time to develop the narrative that would be blessed by the communist party of china meaning they have to go to beijing before you say anything and so it is in the nature of the system but is a real problem. Theres going to be a reckoning for a population that was anchored by the lack of information and certainly the International Community are to be why we always get this. Let me push you on that. All the questions on china, i want to combine a couple of them. Gina asks how should china be held to account for this . Roger says in your opinion what is the proper measured response to china and the ccp leadership who held critical information about the virus and the hundreds of trillions of deaths across the world . There is a public part of this and a private part of this. The public part of this over the next month is just to let it be known that china responded in the way that it did or didnt respond because the chinese are going to create a counter narrative. We found out about it, got on top of it, look how quickly through social distancing and quarantine, how quickly we recovered and by the way we have been helping the rest of the world by sending ppes and by sending help and aid, they will try to shift the narrative from their initial responsibility for not facing up to what was happening to we got on top of it and then helped the rest of you. Dont let it happen. We have to have a really honest assessment of how this happens, where it started, when it started, when the communist party new, and why they didnt get off it. That is the public part. The private part is you have to say you cant keep doing this. You have to be a more responsible partner, more responsible power given your weight in the International System. You are not a little developing country that when something happens it doesnt have an impact. Your people travel, your people work in other countries. There are a lot of Chinese Workers apparently in italy at the time. Was that the transmission hope . We dont know for sure but if we are going to get a handle on how this thing moved, the fact that china is such a big player, it is a big part of the story and so i think both a public acknowledgment of what happened but also private conversations with the chinese. Interesting and then a natural question arises, is it enough to get a more correct attitude toward the World Health Organization or Scientific Data that has an impact on the rest of the world or do you have to couple with sanctions or tariffs or limiting trade, how would you think about Something Like that . I would simply try the persuasion route first because i think if you keep the focus on how this started in chinas role in it they will be embarrassed by that. If you let them stoke the narrative to all they have done with sending out the ppes you wont. The security council, i call the meeting, they will try to veto anything that comes out of it but i would follow the meeting and say we are going to share, the United States will share the information in this is where you bring europeans along, and how we think this started and i would try that Campaign First because i dont really think the economy will be trying to recover, they will think we want to shock the system more with more sanctions and more trade wars so i would try certainly to try that method first, lets call it calling names and sending a message that what they did was unacceptable. Host a question about deterrence and how our adversaries use the circumstance. Jessica says i am a government student in boston. I wonder what you think russia is learning about how the us handles this kind of crisis. Guest very good question. Early on the russians were saying we have done this so much better because initially their numbers were relatively low. The numbers have started to go up. You are not hearing that so much anymore. You are starting to get stayathome orders and all the things you are seeing in the rest of the countries. Im told they are being issued by the mayor of moscow and the Prime Minister and Vladimir Putin has taken himself out of the bad news is i can tell you when it is over he will take credit for whatever happens but i think the russians initially would have set our system is so much better when it isnt that much better. There are two different russias. There is one russia of citydwellers who circulate, travel and theres also a russia that is probably going to see none of this because people dont circulate. It has to be a little bit which russia you are talking about. Host this pandemic has a lot of impacts. Tell us what you think will be the impact on globalization, Global Supply chains, Free Movement of people around the world and the trust that is necessary to sustain this. You just said the essential word which is trust. I people going to trust that it is safe to circulate again . That may take sometime. It may take some time before people want to travel eyesight their own country. We are learning we can do an awful lot through virtual means, we can do a lot online. We might see for a while all those conferences we are used to going to with huge numbers of people doesnt take place for a wild but i certainly hope that in time what we have built over decades and decades and decades, that people do travel, they do circulate, they do study together as we see in universities, the we will not see the putting up of walls because we had this particular experience. That may be an initial response but heres where leadership by the United States and leadership by other Major Economies could start to send signals that despite what we had to do in this initial phase for very good reasons we dont want to stay this way. We want to see the opening up of people doing business, we want students studying, not in Different Countries so that we keep continuing to get to know each other better. Those messages will be very important. I am concerned what the United States experienced in terms of foreign students. It is not just harvard that has foreign students. If you go to small liberal arts colleges there are a lot of foreign students, we want them to come back even if they have gone home, we want them to come back and this is a place that will be extremely important. There are already several bills about china and the first salvo is going to be about the pharmaceutical space. Either it is for the ingredients or a lot of generics are made because of cheaper conditions or how dependent Major Pharmaceutical Companies are on assembly and manufacture in china. There are those who think we need to bring that capacity back to the United States because it is shown to be strategic, a matter of National Security that we have our own supply chain on the pharmaceutical and medical side. That will be difficult to do but i think you will get a lot of pressure, that has been going on for some time anyway because of the extended trade war. Companies have been reevaluating the supply chain. Peter navarro said the other day we may bring benefits, bring manufacturing and supply chains back home, they may not stay in china or other places, we will see some major reordering, this will be very secure and they will take that message. David asks about bad actors. Taking advantage of the crisis, what are the more dangerous threats to deal with . That actors could take advantage of distractions, focus on the crisis or even that they are not paying attention. I will tell you after 9 11, the very first thing i did when i got to the bunker was get the state department to send out a cable to every post in the world and say the United States of america is functioning and that is a message to your friends but also to your foes, dont try anything. It is a different situation but im quite certain that our intelligence agencies, our defense agencies, the pentagon may not be on the heightened state to a certain on either stages of vigilance to make sure nobody is going to try to take advantage. Im sure they are watching the north koreans like a hot, watching the iranians like a hawk because you dont want anyone to take advantage but while all the others even members of the National Security council staff, others are worrying about this crisis we certainly have people trying to make sure that no bad actor takes advantage. Tell us about the developing world, what is going on there, hows the pandemic going to affect them in our relationships with them over the years to come. The biggest impact is in big cities where people circulate, peoples like south africa, the economy is very integrated into the International System and people move around a lot. People are a little surprised that we havent had an explosion of this virus and a lot of the developing world. It may well be it is the lack of testing or lack of reporting that is the reason for that but there are some other theories. For instances it because the populations of the developing world tends to be younger so they may be asymptomatic but you are not getting the catastrophic effects of the virus because we know it affect older people more than it does very young people, even very young populations. They have been through a lot of pandemics. Is there something building up there in terms of their system, maybe in terms of immunity that we dont fully understand . I think the one thing we should be focused on is through the ad relief that president bush that and other administrations have continued we really helped a lot of developing countries build up a pretty good Healthcare System and we help them build up a good Distribution System even for places that were quite far from the city, to the degree that those are still in place we are to be encouraging countries. We were not the only ones. The Global Aids Fund did some of this, some of the g 20 countries, European Union countries help to build up these Healthcare Systems, we should really be helping to mobilize now just in case you get a pandemic outbreak in the developing world. You read Henry Kissinger in the wall street journal last week which predicted the world order would change dramatically, lauren has a more pointed version of the. After the world watch the response to the pandemic and with china emerging as an economic power or political power is this crisis marking the end of the western hegemony on earth . I dont think weve had a hegemony for quite a long time. Theres an old saying that the United States finally gets it right after he tried everything else. Theres been a lot of times we started slowly, world war ii we started slowly but pretty soon the great capacity of this country to turn out war material, put women to work when men go to war, the ability of individuals in the private sector to mobilize made us able to ultimately defeat the german war machine and you see some element of that now, i saw an interesting piece this morning, people making masks, selling them on various sites, we will have more medical masks, ordinary people want to go out for a walk. The ability of a decentralized system to respond what looks like chaotic way but ultimately effectively is something we shouldnt underestimate. As for china, back to this narrative they are trying to build, that system should have responded to those people who are trying to sound a warning alarm early like that young doctor. Instead they fired him, they threatened them, they arrested them and that caused the thing to spread. If we let them turn that into a narrative, we are giving out masks in the world, there is some backlash to this diplomacy by sending out supplies and it is coming from people who are reminding them they might not have needed those masks when this started. I go back, this isnt the first time we had this, we had with avian bird flu. This is going to have to be, at times when theres a reckoning for china and we should have responded much more quickly but now that we are responding we are seeing some of the strengths of our decentralized a lot of questions about china and the World Health Organization and taiwan, john asks the following question. Do we have some leverage with the chinese relative to their isolation . Guest this is an important point and something we ought to press. When i was secretary of state we spent a lot of time trying to get the chinese to allow taiwan to be admitted to the who. We dont have to suggest that taiwan is a separate country who want to be a part of the Health System of the world, they wouldnt. And you are seeing the back story to why the World Health Organization shutdown that young woman who was trying to question about taiwan, china has made it one of its most important efforts to make sure taiwan never gets represented in anything that might suggest that it is not a part of china and the World Health Organization was responding to that in the way they answer that question so yes, it is time to have that discussion. Im fully in the view that we need to look at whether the World Health Organization has been politicized. It hasnt responded particularly well. It seemed to accept it initially the chinese argument that there was no human to human transmission with this disease but a lot of people thought there wasnt human to human transmission, but it hasnt been to my mind a very effective response. Its important to look at it and there are un organizations that seem not to get is politicized like unicef has been an organization that has been very effective at not being political and therefore being able to operate in all kinds no matter the circumstances. We are puzzled why the United States wasnt more prepared for this pandemic than we were. George w. Bush called for the country to prepare against a coming pandemic in 2005 at the National Institutes of health. Why wasnt more done to prepare. And what happened . President bush read a book about the 1918 men pandemic and he Read Everything he could about pandemics and came back and said weve got to be prepared because it will come one way or another is my colleague fred townson at the Homeland SecurityDepartment Said i was dealing with terrorism, to i have to deal with pandemics but he was right and what happened is what often happens. When we have Something Like a pandemic, we mobilize and things tend to go back to where we were. Maybe it is time to learn Something Like what we would did with terrorism. We created the National Counterterrorism center which institutionalized the ability, linking to Solar Systems built in other countries which i think after this is over we need to look at whether we need a more permanent structure on the pandemic side. I had colleagues who will tell you that we are going to continue to experience this, not just this kind of pandemic but a friend of mine if we think the bug maybe winning we need a more permanent structure. I will be a little im a little bit sympathetic for those in the position right now because you can never quite plan for what you actually experience so if you had said this is a pandemic that is not going to affect children practically at all, you wouldnt have thought that. The next crisis, the next pandemic will be different but more permanent structure to deal with it may be necessary. We read in newspapers and news reports about the uncertainty associated with the origin of the virus so thomas has a question that gets to that. Is there and including that this could have been an unfortunate natural biological i dont believe it was intentional in any way or some sort of bioterrorism. I dont theres any reason to believe the chinese would have endanger their own population in their own economy in that way. There are some inklings out there that there was a lab that was engaged in experimentation to try to prevent the next sars pandemic so it was for good reasons that they were doing it. There is a news report out today in one of the major papers that some people in the state department who were serving in china visited a lab near there is the practices dont look very good here, so there are inklings here and there is the question are said but i dont think we know after this again is a conversation to have with the chinese and to put together the testimony of people who might have been around and watched what the market was the market really the place where this happened. This is the place the chinese could really come clean and help a lot but i dont think it was intentional. Might have been something other than a wet market, remains to be seen. Host refer to your experience as secretary of state. I dont think she means it as asking you to assess mike pompeo either. If you are currently secretary of state what would you recommend the first step to get the us economy going again especially as relates to a relations with other countries . Guest the question of when the us economy will get going again is one the president and governors have to wait, the healthcare advice they are getting from their Health Systems and experts against the continued shutdown of the economy which is starting to have huge effect on peoples lives and i dont have anything particularly to add to that except to say that everybody is going to want to see the economy get going again and it will affect us leadership how quickly we come out of the economic recession that is now being predicted by any number of people but i will say the signals we send about how we intend to come out of that crisis are important signals. Do we signal that we are going to engage in more trade wars with people . Do we signal that there are more sanctions coming. These would be elements that i would think would fasten the sentiment for economic recovery in ways we dont need at this point. It is another reason and i keep mentioning the g 20 because the g 20, the largest economy, they actually did get together during the financial crisis of 20082009, they put out some principles about not engaging in protectionist measures, to be fair some still engaged in protectionist measures but there were those signals about how to come out of this together because the truth of the matter is the us economy cant fully recover in isolation given the nature of globalization and so just sending a signal that we are not going to engage in trade wars even if we want supply chains to come home or manufacturing to come home, that could be an Important Message to the world and pretty early on if you start some discussions about what trade agreements or policies you would like to restart with the uk or others that would be very good. Another question asks you to align your experience with this time as a leader in education, renaud said from the uk wants to know what do you think the impact of the pandemic will be on Higher Education on the Higher Education system . This is a question we need to give a lot of thought to is leaders in academia. We have known for some time that Online Learning was coming in ever larger, people engaging in ever larger numbers. Weve known for a long time that our students are much more proficient at the Virtual World than we are, those of us who teach them so we are really going to have to, now that we said we can learn online essentially as well as you can learn in a classroom particularly with larger classes what do you want the role of Online Learning to be in the context of a broader educational experience . How much do we want to be in huge classroom where in some of the disciplines they might be better off doing personalized learning where they can learn at their own space . I would have benefited from personalized learning in geometry but i never got it and maybe going back over it for 5 times online i would have gotten that. It is up to educators to say we told you to study online. Lets really understand that experience, it cant replace the one on one seminar we dont think but our students are very adept at this universal world, this is going to change how we deliver knowledge and i hope we are ahead of the curve, not behind it. Host a student of liberty and governance and democracy. There are a couple interesting questions here. Katrina asks do you think this virus will have a negative impact on the democratic processes in developing countries . I presume that means the tendency for authoritarianism to deal with it and can United States mitigate this . Guest absolutely there will be authoritarians who try to take advantage of this and say i am able to control these circumstances, you will do better in a controlled environment, try to control what knowledge people get, there will be that. I really do believe authoritarians are not very good at governing and their people will see that. Those of us who care about the spread of democracy across the world care about those people who want the same rights that we have should be preaching that message and we should be showing up Civil Society to help to deal with some of the problems these countries are going to face. And a lot of these places Civil Society is the last bastian against the spread of authoritarianism. People in their small groups, election reform or womens rights or environmental sustainability in these countries, that is the kind of last line of defense which a major effort to shore up Civil Society would be very helpful against the person who asked the question is exactly right, there will be authoritarians who try to use all the tools whether it is tracking or the like, Contact Tracing which we have been seeing, Contact Tracing and hand of democracy is one thing, Contact Tracing and has an authoritarian regime is quite another. These are things to watch out for. What might a longterm impact on us liberties be . Will some of the restrictions imposed by local agencies are made in place after this thread has diminished . Contact tracing, you mentioned, use of technology, google, facebook, etc. To trace people and find out what they are doing, what their temperature is, the ability for state and local officials to tell people stay at home. I discovered something about the power of governors in the past month. Will that continue . It is going to continue for a while. If you ask the majority of americans they are voluntarily willing for the time being to be told what to do. That will go on so long. We have seen a little bit of slippage. In a crisis like this it is always been the case that we look to authority and are more willing than at other times to limit our individual rights and liberties for the greater good and that is what we are doing right now. That wont last forever and it is one reason governors are starting to think about what relief valves can they use to give people the sense that theyve got control of their own lives again. When it comes to things like Contact Tracing, what google and facebook are doing, a lot of that will be voluntary, you can say you cant take my temperature, i can see you cant go in here and potentially infect other people. Some of it will be voluntary but i will say this but i worry not at all about the permanent loss of liberties given the measures we are taking right now because we have so many institutions at so many levels in the free press and Civil Society that is going to be a check on how long these authorities can control what we do. It will. It is already a conversation about whether certain liberties are being abridged. That is our great protection. And authoritarian systems no one is having that conversation. We balance security and our liberties across institutions. The presidency is always going to be as commanderinchief and protector of the country more concerned about the security side. Congress will pass laws to determine how much of this stays in place and how much doesnt and ultimately we have the courts and i can guarantee you that somewhere along here somebody is going to take it all the way to the Supreme Court if they think their Constitutional Rights have been violated so we have the protection of institutions that i think will function just fine but for now, let me be very clear, we are doing something quite amazing. Authorities can order people and there are penalties for not following the orders. We are asking 300 million americans to make good individual choices on behalf of the greater good and i am pretty proud of the way we are doing it right now. Host thanks for your comments. We have reached the end of the hour. I want to close by putting some pressure on you. You served in government during tough times, 9 11, stars, the great recession. You were bound to learn about resiliency from that. You are bound to learn some lessons about governing in conflict. What can you share with us about our current times and is there any optimism . Guest i have seen so many times how resilient the United States is, first and foremost because we have so many sources of resilience whether it is individuals who have taken on responsibility for making sure the person next door who might be elderly is getting their groceries, whether it is people making masks and selling them on the internet, people in healthcare workers and First Responders taking their own lives into their hands to go and serve and we owe them enormous gratitude and best protections, they are there, volunteers around the country who went to new york to help under the circumstance, government cant order that. That is resiliency that comes from within, individual citizens helping individual citizens, innovation, efforts to get a vaccine, multiple efforts to get therapeutics that might help to treat the disease for those for whom it is more catastrophic and the resiliency of a federal system that doesnt put all the pressure on washington but where governors and healthcare officials are trying to make good decisions for the citizens so i think the resiliency, i want to say something. Sometimes it takes a while to get going, the private sector gets involved in the way that they are, this is a pretty Resilient Society because it has so many sources of resiliency and finally when we get through this i think we are going to go back out into the world and help others to be resilient too which is the lesson of the compassion we have in dealing with the aids epidemic in dealing with ebola and i think we will be there to do it again. Host thank you for todays discussion. It was really fun. Guest thank you. Now on cspan2s booktv, more television for serious readers. We are highlighting program