Transcripts For CSPAN Key Capitol Hill Hearings 20140505

They are engaging. The issue for us is our ability and they talk about it with the United States and the prc has, and that is the existing world power and how did you operate together and solve disputes in a peaceful manner under international norms. The indications that they are continuing to try to solve those in an aggressive way we would not agree with. Some with relation to the philippines are disconcerting, and we think that is the wrong way to go. There are other cases where they are engaged and things are handled in a more appropriate way. It is kind of a National Strategy with china, which i am not sure how you would answer what the true united National Strategy is with respect to this prc. There is a case where we are looking at both sides of that someenge, is that there is kind of movement in their territorial game. I will merge a number of questions together. One is a lot of bilateral engagements, and most of your answers were bilateral in their description. Theres probably an opportunity for trilateral, multilateral operations as well. The specific forces thinking at a multilateral level or trilateral level . Countrys one you do not mention, russia. Tell us how you calculate rush into your thinking. Talk about it not enough, but going from bilateral to multilateral, we are working very hard on that. On the humanitarian assistance disaster response, the republic of korea is participating. We will have the philippines participate next year. Singapore, thailand, the United States. We had the republic of korea and japan and australia. We have significant larger exercises. Pitch black we will partici folksand there will be from many nations including singapore and thailand and indonesia. Were working hard on multilateral, and the federated defense and you have heard the general talk about it, as we face the challenges we face in the future we have to pull our friends closer and online war on that ability to operate as heather operate together. We are making a good positive response on that. The second question was i talked about the longrange aviation and what they are doing there. Increasinglyming active in the pacific and they have a long as a matter of fact it is not an area, but it is because we think about it all the time. We have forces in alaska, the closest point of approach between the United States and russia and how we operate with and what wegion, are doing as they continue to expand in the asiapacific. There are things that are concerning respects to how they operate and how transparent they are with other nations in the vicinity. Engagement and they have positive momentum. It is something that we a sickly consider russia we deal with it in our area of responsibility pacific boundary. There are concerns, and i will tell you what is happening in ukraine today is causing significant concerns in the asiapacific. How do you respond to those concerns . I think it is twofold. Fairlythere is the inressive act by russia crimea. For many nations that have territorial disputes or a unrest, the challenges they face in china, tibet, taiwan, in some ways that is disconcerting to them because of internal unrest, and in other ways the ability to take what they believe is rightfully theirs in some method other international law, that is something that is concerning on the other end of the spectrum. What allhe belief and of us do is spend more time abilityng allies of the to operate together, build stability, is dependent on how we Work Together and how well we engage as teammates as we go forward. Her dominantly when we respond, we are here, we have always been here, we will continue to opt rate with you and work as partners. You mentioned getting the exercises back on track after from pickup from cyclization. The lessons about logistics, and logisticr faces challenges like the pacific. What are your big concerns about logistics . What role do our partners play in logistics, and what happened to things like lower numbers that come to pass and that just come ok things even further . The lesson of logistics is not lost on anybody in my opinion. Supply the forced to engage is when you have to have logistics trained to support that. Commandst concern is gas and control, because you know those networks can be disrupted. Our ability to operate the command and control logistic and have the ability to to move forward. Part of it is the interoperability with our friends and allies and how we forge position things. One of the results of the agreement with the philippines is to put humanitarian which is a need cheermade disaster that has the same problems. If you remember during the earthquake in japan, power was shut off to the korean peninsula. That can happen by ill intent or by natural disaster. Command and control of the logistics chain and how you do that, again, angela the, and that is why we talk about flexible command and control. Stuff in theo put right place. Certainly, allies treaty partners as well as other nations, australia, japan, korea, singapore, thailand, some of those are close in our ability to operate as we work as a team. That will be part of the solution. Command and control is one of the things i think about most when it comes to logistics. Your raising of the philippines agreement last week raised some broader issues of dispersal as a tactic. You have refer to that as the past in the past as resiliency. How do you describe your thoughts on resiliency and your engagement as well as with planning . It is hand in hand. Resiliency in engagement is part of that discussion. The basic premise is that if you have a few numbers with a large capabilities,of those become vulnerabilitys. If you have a future amount of force, those that becomes a vulnerability. The ability to disperse and move throughout the theater if required for whatever case you respond to use you more flexibility. It also removes some of those owner abilities and large concentrations, small area. Everyis a balance because place you are you have to be able to support adjustably and defend. The resiliency is the ability to move things in multiple locations while at the same time ng able to sit port them support them. You do not put one airplane at 72 different locations so you have three squadrons of airplanes, but you dont put 180 in one place either. Peace,he resiliency there is a passive defense which is the ability to move out. It is fuel storage and then also your ability to move stuff and support that. We are piling the hard problems on, can i ask the gentleman to Say Something about cyber and space. How does a regional commander create strategies and operational concepts for two problems where attribution candy heart in cyber cases. A lot of what you do it is about allies. L withbout how you deal different domains. And what cyber com Major General williams and those folks in presenting the Cyber Command and control model for the department of defense as it directs with other departments within the u. S. Government. Complex, manmade domain that we have to figure out how to operate in. If you talk cyber, there is the ability to support your networks, defend yourself, and offense, soft kill or nonkill in the cyber domain. All of that is overlaid by authorities you have and do not have. Sam lock clear talks about the cyber support element, then we Start Building our ability to predominantly defend our own ape ability, command and the commandle and control capability. But has someve, offensive mindset to it in a way at least in trying to figure out there. Ability to deny potential adversaries, his ability to do that, in cases which are within the authority of a command and ones that are not. Then there is active cyber you will go out and take out other portions and how you operate that. Difficult as ay nation for us to figure that out and i will tell you in my opinion on the international front, working with partners, it becomes an order of magnitude more difficult cause of authorities. In some of our closest allies, andir a few of those, there are a few of those, we are working on those issues, but cyber is a huge challenge. You mentioned also shortages usesr, although you did not the word shortages. Go what are you doing across globalnd what role does hawks play in both u. S. And japan . It is going well. It will operate to get out of the typhoon belt for the summertime. We think we will probably get 70 greater utilization by operating it there. Australians announce they are going to buy the triton surveillance equivalent of that. The u2 ismponent, a key component of that. I will tell you across the word and with sam locke we are in the ocklear, ifmand l they had one more dollar to spend, they will go and buy more isr. We are Getting Better at using all the hip abilities we have. We have jstars and pacific for the first time this year. Ep3. D we are doing great work with our ability to use multiple platforms together. We are Getting Better at it and we are trying to take advantage of every little piece we have. Have a heckuva job. You are trying to understand and technology is going those who spent time on this are trying to figure out where the region is going. We appreciate you for being with us today. Thank you very much. [applause] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] if you missed any of this, you can find it at www. Cspan. Org. We will be back to the center for strategic and International Studies at 1 30 eastern for discussion on the continued tensions between ukraine and russia. This is heavy fighting reported today in an Eastern Ukraine city. That will be at 1 30. Looking ahead at tomorrow, the Senate Armed Services committee will hear from the top brass about the military Compensation Program in the military. We will have coverage of that beginning at nine 30 eastern tomorrow. On capitol hill, at the Supreme Court, a decision, 54, that allows prayers to open town council meetings. The court deciding that the content of the prayers is not as significant as long as they do not denigrate non christians or proselytize. This is a victory for the town of greece, new york, outside rochester, Justice Anthony kennedy writing for the majority said the prayers are ceremony and in keeping with the nations traditions. Elena kagan said the cannot be reconciled with the first amendments promise that any citizen owns and equal share of the government. Government a collection of interviews with some of the nations stock story tellers. When martha arrived in berlin family, she was in love with what she referred to as the and not see revolution. Zi revolution. She was enthralled with nazis. How can you be enthralled with that revolution . Larson, sunday ats at eight. Reporters from Bloomberg News and the wall street journal talk about local and National Elections noticing on changes in demographics, redistricting, and the Republican Party. Also a possible democratic president ial candidacy of Hillary Clinton, from last week the antidefinition Antidefamation League. A treat. In for this is one of the favorite sessions for all of us. This is our opportunity to talk to two of our favorite political reporters and have a chance for all of us to be able to ask them questions front and center in our mind as adl advocates. We are in the middle of a threeday conversation about adls mission and how we can make progress on issues like preserving the Voting Rights americans cherish or an acting an Immigration Reform policy that a majority of the American People crave. But being right and having the will of the majority on our side is not enough. Adl is a nonpartisan organization. We are completely uninvolved in campaign activity. But in order for our advocacy to succeed, we have to navigate the Political Landscape. We have to be mindful of the Political Landscape in order to craft a smart strategy that will take us where we need to go. We have with us two reporters whose work we admire who will help us understand as advocates what we can expect during this campaign season. Hopefully, we will ask them to make a few predictions. Larne meckler of the wall street journal writes about changing american demographics and the effects of those challenges on politics and policies. Changes on politics and policies. She writes about issues that are close to adls heart. She covers congress and has been a White House Correspondent. She has written thoughtfully about issues we follow closely like comprehensive Immigration Reform and the nondiscrimination act, two issue she will be discussing with house members tomorrow. Julianna goldman occupies one of the coveted chairs in the White House Briefing room, that is much smaller than it looks on tv. Shes the White House Correspondent for bloomberg tv, Bloomberg News, and bloomberg businessweek. Political junkies who watch morning joe or Political Capital will recognize her and her analysis of the inner workings of the obama white house. She has just returned from ukraine where she was with Vice President bidens entourage. She was with Jeff Goldberg who talked to us about his trip to ukraine this morning. Perhaps we can ask her about that as well. Please join me in welcoming Laura Meckler and julianna goldberg. Im going to dive right in with a couple of my own questions. Please think of your own. I have colleagues who will be giving you cards. If you have a card, hold them up. We want to take as many questions as possible. 50 years after the passage of the civil rights act, it is hard to imagine congress reaching consensus on something as profound as that was. The functioning political process, a functioning democratic process, and the give and take that is an essential part of a Pluralistic Society seems to be totally evaporated. The public has had enough. The ratings of congress and washington in general are at record lows. I guess the short version of my question is, what is wrong with our political process . Is there anything we can do to fix it . I will take a stab at that. Thank you for having me here today. I want to apologize. My allergies are getting to me, so if i keep rubbing my eyes that is why. I think there are a number of factors that have contributed to this polarization youre talking about. When we were thinking about topics for today, i immediately thought to president obamas remarks at a fundraiser before the 2012 elections and he said, i think if i win, the fever will break and republicans and democrats will be able to come together and Work Together. Clearly, the fever has not broken. It is still pretty high. I think a few factors have contributed to this over the past several years. One with redistricting. I think the incentives to compromise, especially for republicans where their ability to keep their jobs largely rests on winning a primary means they are pushed farther away from the center. I think also if you look at the wheeling and dealing over the past decades in washington, a lot of that has come from relationships forged between the president , lawmakers, between lawmakers themselves. President obama and members of congress have both contributed to the lack of Relationship Building in washington. In part, because of fundraising. Members of congress have to leave washington on the weekends and go raise money in their home districts. If we are honest with ourselves, we need to look at our own profession and say that the news media also contributes to the kind of polarization with the 24hour news cycle, with access to information fundamentally changing, depending on your political views, depending on how you have your twitter feed set up, you can access information that is already catered to the mindset of what you are already looking for. I think the immigration debate frames those three issues together. You ask, why cant we get immigration done if republicans and democrats both want it and know they have to come together . I went back and found a staggering statistic. This is from the New York Times in february 2013. It is not that most republicans come from very conservative districts, but also overwhelmingly white districts. In the 232 congressional districts represented by republicans, the average hispanic share of each district is 11 . Just 40 of the 232 republicans in the house come from districts more than 20 hispanic and just 16 that are at least 1 3 hispanic. You can see the challenges. Over this past weekend, House Speaker john boehner was speaking at the rotary club in ohio. What a change from several months ago when he said the reason we cannot get Immigration Reform done this year is because the president cannot work with republicans. Now he is saying republicans are not willing to step up for this. With the 24hour news cycle, it was any private event, the remarks came out. Congress comes back this week. John boehner will meet with his caucus and probably hear some words from his caucus. I think the immigration debate is a prime example of the polarization and gridlock. What is it going to take to change this . I think it is fair to say i dont know. I dont know anybody really knows. One would have thought after a tragedy like sandy hook where you have 26 children gunned down that would have been an opportunity to break the fever, break the gridlock and get meaningful Gun Legislation passed. Perhaps, this goes in cycles. Maybe we are at the tail end of the cycle. I dont see this changing for 2014. I think it is probably going to be more difficult to break it before 2016. I wish i could be more optimistic. Laura, did you want to pick up on any of that before we go to another question . There are several points i would make. I will incorporate it into my opening remarks. Everyone knows our entries at a demographic tipping point. That is what everyone is telling us. Talk about the impact of millennials and genxers and voting blocs of communities of color and how it is affecting elections. Thank you for having me here. This is my second time on the panel. The first time, i was moderator and got to ask the questions. I can be the moderator again next time. I think this question of communities of color and millennials is about the changing demographics in our nation as a whole, which the electorate reflects. It relates to what she was talking about in terms of the polarization in the house. Certain members come from certain areas. The best way to look at this landscape is when we look at National Elections. We can rewind back to november of 2012. The morning of election day, mitt romney woke up thinking he was going to win. The people around him thought he would win. Obviously, he did not. Why not . He won 59 of the white vote. That is a higher percentage than any candidate since exit polls began. This time, white voters accounted for only 72 of the electorate. It is dropping every year as minorities become a larger share of all voters. At the same time, president obama beat him 71 to 39 among hispanic voters, the fastest rising group. Things have changed. Numbers like that would have been plenty to have elected a republican president. That is one thing changing. Our country is becoming less white, more diverse. At the same time, you have rising young voters. They are overwhelmingly democratic. They are not necessarily identify with the democratic party. Theyre less likely to identify as democrats than any other generation, but they are liberal in their outlook, especially on social issues. In the wake of that election, republicans were left to look around at their party. A lot of them saw themselves as increasingly representing older white voters. The big problem with older voters is they tend to no longer be part of the voting public at some point. The country is becoming less white every year. There were a lot of alarm bells that went off inside the Republican Party. In both groups, republicans see hope for how they can do better. The answer to the question of how things can change is i dont think it will change on immigration because republicans wake up and decide i want to work with democrats. That is not the environment we are living in right now. If they pass the legislation, it will be because they decide is good policy and good politics for their own party. I plan to look briefly at two issues i think reflect both changing demographics. Gay rights is increasingly a threshold issue or young voters. We have seen a remarkable transformation of the issue of how americans view gay rights and gay marriage over a short time. It has been a stunning change in public opinion. That is led by young people. For every opponent of gay marriage who passes away, they are replaced by a baby that will one day support gay marriage. A respected republican pollster said as a pollster, this debate is over. As much as the country is changing, you still see only three republican senators supporting gay marriage. The establishment of republicans has not changed much. I think what we do see is opposition fading away. Stacy mentioned the nondiscrimination employment act. What that hopes to do is bar employers from making Employment Decisions based on Sexual Orientation or gender identity of a worker. It seems not that controversial in 2014. When i saw this debate in the senate, two things were striking to me. There was not a Single Person who spoke against it. One republican senator registered mild objections. When it was on the floor, one person after another said why they supported it. Almost no one said why they opposed it. It passed in the senate with a vote of 10 republicans, four more than they needed. They only needed 60. They got 64 yes votes. Supporters were happy about that. When you look at the debate, you think it is over and easy. But now it is in the house. It is like a nonentity. It is like it does not exist there. It is not being talked about. Republican leadership made it clear it was not going to come up for a vote. It is not that they are violently opposed to it, but it is not part of their agenda. That is because there are parts of the Republican Party who are very opposed and see this as special rights. The immigration issue is striking. A bipartisan bill passed the senate. The whole Republican Coalition is for this bill. We are talking about religious organizations, including this one, business, law enforcement, evangelical christians. Lots of support for this. However, there is resistance from people who believe it is wrong to reward people who broke the law and who are living here illegally, people who are scared about newcomers taking american jobs. Now we have a situation where it is stuck in the house. The difference between this debate and the one we just talked about is that there is an enormous amount of political pressure on Speaker Boehner to pass this. Last week, it was not really a private event. There were Television Cameras with reporters taking notes. I am sure he knew that. I think his frustration boiled over. He would like to get it done. I think he thinks it is the right policy and because he sees it as important for his party to move past this. I wrote down what he said at the rotary club. He said, here is the attitude. Dont make me do this, this is too hard. He scrunched up his eyes like he was crying. We enjoy moments like these. He said we get elected to make choices and solve problems. It is remarkable how many of my colleagues dont want to. They will take the path of least resistance. The other reason is we are in a congressional midterm year. These issues of young and hispanic voters are more important in a president ial year where you have to worry about winning in all different kinds of states and where the electorate is more diverse. In Midterm Elections, it is a more republican electorate. Minorities and young people are less likely to vote, so these issues are not as urgent from a political point of view. That is why we see them stalled right now. Some republicans will tell you next year is the perfect time to pass it. There is always a next year. There will be political barriers next year as well. We will see whether they get past those this summer or whether we live to see if next year is the year. Thank you. I want to remind everyone you can send your questions. We have colleagues giving cards for your questions. We want to get as many in as possible. It has been almost 100 years since the first woman was elected to the house of representatives. We finally have women in politics who are Political Forces on the national stage. Polling shows the vast majority of americans would vote for a woman for president. But half of people polled say they dont think it is going to happen. Is america ready . I know Michele Bachmann famously said we were not. But i would like to hear from you. If you want to talk about whether you think hillary will run and if anyone can beat her, inquiring minds want to know. I think in 2008, whoever had won the democratic primary probably would have won the general election. In that sense, i think the country was ready for a woman president. If you look at the credentials of the leading female president ial candidate right now, former first lady, senator from new york, secretary of state, i am not sure what higher credentials or what more you need on a resume to be prepared to be president. I think the country is ready. My colleague just wrote a book on Hillary Clinton. I asked him if she is running and what his take was. The question is whether she is going to stop running. She is essentially running for president now. That gets into the big challenge for her, which is what dogged her in 2008. She does best when she is the underdog. If she has the frontrunner status and is walking into it like it is a coronation, that could hurt her. I think it will be interesting to see what issues she grabs on to and tries to frame to try to capture the underdog status. Last week she was at a speaking engagement. She said something along the lines of dont discount older women, we are not senile. I think that is one way she could be trying to find that kind of issue. Laura was just talking about the demographic challenges for older white women. That would be a way for democrats to be able to grab on to that demographic group. You asked is there anyone that could beat her . In a primary, i think the answer is no. I would not rule out the idea of joe biden running in a primary. Who would they be most afraid of . I think now they would be most afraid of jeb bush. If that were to be the matchup, it would be interesting not only because of the family names but also the friendship that the bushes and clintons have forged over the last few years with the tsunami relief fund. They did some work on haiti. Hillary and jeb were at an event recently together over the last month. I think there is also a respect the clintons have for jeb bush, so i think they would see that as more of an even matchup. So that would be fascinating. I would add it does look like she is running. Everybody who watches carefully thinks she is definitely running. Im not going to disagree. I would caution the premise of the question of whether anyone could beat her. Sure, someone could beat her. But we are still two years away from the first votes. A lot will change. Think about the predictions in 2006 were at this time. Was anyone talking about barack obama beating john mccain . Nobody was thinking like that. John mccain rose and fell a few times between then and when he was on the ballot. I think we everybody within 15 miles of my voice needs to keep in mind prognostications this far in advance are not worth a lot. Hillary clinton has talked about a double standard for women candidates. Julianna, you admitted the media bears some responsibility for the polarization in the public debate. Are your colleagues fair to women candidates . That was a good dual use of leaning in. I think that is an interesting question. I think largely yes and not completely yes. The whole conversation kicked off a week ago with chelseas pregnancy and her now being a grandmother, i found that to be absurd. Nobody asks that question [applause] i found there is a lot of Media Coverage around it will be talked about so we are raising the question. That is as bad as raising the question yourself. Nobody asks those questions of men. Mitt romney currently has 22 grandchildren. [laughter] nobody has mentioned this as a reason why he might need to spend more time with them. Not to mention barack obama ran for president with two young actual children who he was directly responsible for caring for. I do think there is some of that with the fact it was even raised. I dont think there is widespread sexism the way you would have seen some time back. Little things impact our public discourse. There is a new book out on the confidence gap. There are these gender issues percolating because Hillary Clinton is likely running for president. Last week, there was an article about whether you could have two women on the ticket. Could it be hillary and these other women . It is not just the women who could be potentially running mates. Elizabeth warren, Claire Mccaskill. It is not just gender. You have to look at other factors that go into picking a running mate. Geography as well. It would make sense for Hillary Clinton to have Elizabeth Warren on the ticket. You have two individuals from the northeast. Would it make sense to have Claire Mccaskill . Claire mccaskill supported barack obama in 2008. There are whole other range of issues and factors that would go into this decisionmaking the on the fact that there would be two women on the ticket. A few people are asking about issues that will be election issues this year. There is no question opposition to samesex marriage was a get outthevote issue. What do you see in a midterm year where candidates are playing to their base . What will be the get out the vote issues in this election . For republicans, the Affordable Care act. They see health care as a base driver. I think the issue has been neutralized over the last several weeks. You talk to democrats in the senate now and people watching closely, and they think this has turned. They think with the 7 million enrollees, they have this positive narrative, starting on a new page. Sebelius is out. It is a clean slate right now. The issue for democrats is they need to be able to get obamacare to be a base issue for democrats, and i dont see that happening. That wont be a driver. You have democrats looking for other ways to do that. I think the president was laying the groundwork when he spoke at the al sharpton event talking about Voting Rights. The issue about the Affordable Care act for republicans is, has it peaked . She is suggesting it has. That is possible. They will have decisionmaking about whether they want to put more issues into the mix. They are considering bringing up a health care alternative this summer. That is risky. All these ideas have risks because then you put your own ideas out there. None of the solutions are pain free, and it gives someone else something to shoot at. Theyre talking about putting forward positive visions. The question of immigration goes back to that. Do they feel they need to do something positive . Do the benefits outweigh the risks for them . That decisionmaking will happen in the next couple months. My sense is the white house thinks Immigration Reform, 35 chance before november. But really, we are going to have to wait until after the primaries, the republican primaries, to get a sense of whether it is higher or lower. The president will have a big decision to make. Theres a huge amount of pressure on him to act on his own using executive authority to modify deportations and deport fewer people. There is enormous pressure on him from the hispanic community. It has shifted away from pressure on congress to the white house. At the end of the summer, if the house has not acted, there is a strong possibility we will see something from the president. That will be base motivating in certain circles. On health care, i was at a roundtable with a republican senator about a month ago. He said republicans cannot put all of our eggs in the obamacare basket. He said we have got to get Immigration Reform done for the health and success of our own party. In 2014, it wont be as big of an issue. But for 2016, it will be damaging to the party and brand. On health care, republicans see weakness in the repeal argument. Privately, a number of republicans see the polling and know that is not a wise political strategy. Democrats kind of smell blood. One of the arguments you will be hearing from the president , they want to latch on to the repeal argument because they know how unpopular it is. It will be a twofront attack. On the one hand, this is the law of the land. You want to repeal this . Here are the benefits that will be taken away. Secondarily, you ready to hear the word obsession, republicans are obsessed with repeal. They have been obsessed with votes on repeal. Every day they took a vote on repealing obamacare, that was the day they did not deal with minimum wage, pay equity. That is how they will be tying obamacare and the repeal argument, the weakness for republicans, back to the economy. This is a relevant discussion to us as advocates. On issues like immigration, the only way we can permanently fix the system and make it practical and workable is through legislation. But our guests have described how hard it is to legislate a solution. Advocates look to executive Branch Action and where you can have an impact because there is a human cost of not having a functioning immigration system. I want you as you to talk about money and politics. It is on everyones mind in the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision. Is there an uptick in the trend we will see in this election and 2016 . I am not an expert. It seems every election it upticks. I dont think we have seen an election where somebody said it seemed like monied interests did not have much to say. It seems to always be on the rise. People come up with more sophisticated ways and different organizations to channel money through. I think there is little doubt we will see advances on that front again this year. There are few limits now. If you have a lot of money and a cause that is important to you, there is little stopping you from spending what you want to get that out. Democrats are in the super pac game now. In 2010, republicans were winning the super pac game. Now we will see to what extent that evens out. It keeps getting more expensive. If one side can match the other, it evens out. I was having a conversation with a Senior Administration official recently. I said, remember in 2010, the big scary Corporate Billing with the chamber of commerce . What is going to be the foil for democrats this year . Are you going to go after the chamber again . The official said, no, remember that was about outside spending and money and our hands are dirty now. We cannot make the same argument because we are playing in the same sandbox. It will be interesting to see what shape influence takes this year and whether democrats can remain competitive. Following up on that and a previous question about motivators for the democratic base. Sometimes you see something that does not happen and that motivates people. The administration decided to postpone the decision on the keystone pipeline. That is something environmentalists care about. Theres big environmental money out there. There was a sense that if obama had approved it and allowed the pipeline, that would have suppressed the democratic turnout and possibly big money spent on behalf of democrats. Dont discount that sometimes decisions are made without that in mind. You have just come back from a trip with the Vice President. I want you to share some observations about that trip and the american interests in ukraine. When we go to capitol hill to talk to representatives and senators, we are a community very interested in Foreign Policy. Partly because of our history, partly because of our concern about the spread of terrorism, partly because we are concerned with the security of israel. Is Foreign Policy an issue in a Midterm Election . Leading up to 2016, what do you see as the role of Foreign Policy concerns in the election . We will have to see what happens with ukraine and how this plays out over the next several months. My own sense is 2014 will not be defined by Foreign Policy. It will be more defined by domestic issues. Health care, even if it is somewhat neutralized, it will be one of the drivers and what campaigning will focus on in addition to the economy. Oftentimes, Foreign Policy issues rise to the forefront for a secondterm president. In part, because of what we were talking about in the beginning of the discussion. Call it lame duck, but they have more sway and leverage on the foreign stage. If you tick through the issues the white house has on its plate right now, it is all coming to a head at the same time. You have mideast peace talks, the sixmonth window running out. It has already stalled. You have the iran talks, the sixmonth window coming to an end. You have syria. You have russia. There is a lot they are dealing with now. Their ability to get out the economic message will be challenging for the president. You saw the administration announce today the next round of sanctions targeting putins inner circle. They have been talking about these sanctions for the last 10 days after the geneva agreement a couple of weeks ago. They went into the geneva agreement pessimistic. They came out thinking it went better than we thought. Even days later, they were saying they dont expect anything to change with putin right now. Looking back, the geneva agreement bought putin time. I dont see that resolving over the next month. This could play out over years. Putin is very patient. I think that the administration is pretty hesitant and wary of going to the next level of sanctions. Going right to the heart of the energy sector. The president warned that there would be costs on both sides. There would be costs here. I think this will play out for quite some time. It was fascinating in kiev last week. We had some free time that was pretty rare. We got to walk around the square in maidan where the protests were. There are still thousands of people camped out there. It reminded me of occupy wall street. People are waiting for the may 25 elections to see what happens. Theyre in a Holding Pattern over there. I dont get the sense that they came away from that trip optimistic. I think there are Major Concerns about the governance. And whether or not they will be able to accept the help that the u. S. Is willing to offer. Biden announced a 50 million aid package of technical assistance. All they announced was 11 million to go to the upcoming elections, to make sure they are monitored. The u. S. Is helping with that. Theres also the question of how much ukraine can do. It is really a fluid situation, very fascinating. Did you want to say anything about Foreign Policy . I agree. I do not think it will be much of a driver. I think it is ironic that most of the issues on the agenda now are about Foreign Policy. It does not play out in a Midterm Election. However, i think it will play a bigger role in 2016. Especially if clinton is running. That will get additional scrutiny. She will be in a position to talk about Foreign Policy in a robust way. I do not think it will be gone forever. The average american will never be able to stay in, unless it is a true crisis that impact their lives. It is ironic because war weariness can be a constraint on government, even if it does not drive people to the polls. I would like you to think about some races you are watching that may be indicative of national trends. Give us some pointers to 2016. I think a couple that come to mind i think a lot about the racial politics and immigration. A couple that come to mind are colorado. One of two republicans needs that immigration bill to pass. Also, there is an interesting senate race in georgia. That is a state where some democrats have looked down the line that is a state they could move toward. It will be interesting to see if she succeeds there. Those are two. Help me out. Louisiana. I think one of the interesting dynamics to watch is how some of these incumbent democrat distance themselves from this president. And how hard they beat him up was giving the white house a little heads up it hopefully. We mentioned keystone. And mention some reporting on the keystone pipeline. In talking to some people familiar with the thinking, it would have been difficult to take out and separate control of the senate, mary landrieu, and keystone. If he had approved it before the election, it probably wouldve helped. Punting it does not help her or hurt her. It allows her to run against the president. What do you think will be the impact how do you think the effort to limit voting opportunities your organization has a strong input. Do you think there will be an impact or that will play out in the Midterm Election . I think the interesting thing is that people voluntarily limit their own opportunity. The turnout is so low. People are not fully eligible to vote. That is a much bigger issue. What you are talking about, restrictions, those become more important in a president ial race. You can get people out for less frequent voters. They dont think about it as much or have an issue that flags them. I think that is something that concerns a lot of people. You saw it was a huge issue in 2012. I do not see it going away. I think youll hear more about the white house and democrats using it to try to rally the base. Try to make that a driver. You talked a little bit about we talked about what is wrong with the political system. Talk about the homogenous districts. Is there light at the end of the tunnel . I think that it was laid out very well. These districts are gerrymandered within an inch of their lives. They are just packed with likeminded people to guarantee certain results. I do not member who to attribute this to. It is no longer the voters pick their elected officials. Elected officials pick their voters. That is what happened. You have very few people who really need to think about the National Journal does this wonderful graphic that shows how members of Congress Rate on a scale. If you can imagine that, democrats go from very liberal to middle. It used to be that they were here and they would overlap. You have liberals, republicans more liberal. There is a considerable overlap. Today, that is no longer true. The most conservative democrat is still more liberal than the most liberal republican. People just do not need to do that. The biggest challenge, especially in the house the biggest challenge that a republican will face is from somebody more conservative than them. In almost every district, that is the case. They are worried about being challenged from the right. How is it in their interest to reach across and compromise . We have gotten a system that we designed. When we created the districts, im not sure that these people realized exactly how profound implications would be. I would also add that some democrats, especially minorities, have been in on this too. There have been some states where africanamericans want to be sure that they have reliably africanamerican representation. You want to put them into a few districts and that sets them out. Very few House Republicans have any kind of substantial hispanic population. So, we have another opportunity to do this in 2020. The outcome will depend on state legislatures. They are the ones who draw these districts. If democrats win back more of these legislatures, they will have an opportunity to do it differently. We can take a poll of how many people think democrats will win. It really helps it was not good for the country, so lets do it in a bipartisan way. Or how many will say that worked well for them, lets do it the same way . We will see. You do have states that are very competitive in a president ial election. The delegations are overwhelmingly republican. The lines are drawn. I can take a few more questions in the back. We started off talking about polarization. An organization might be Antidefamation League has a real stake in people being able to come together to forge consensus. You alluded to you probably watch hbos newsroom what responsibility do you feel as members of the media to restore fairness and sanity. What are the conversations about this issue . It is not as dramatic. Also, not as annoying as in newsroom. Just to reassure you. The night of the Osama Bin Laden killing, i was by myself in a group at the white house. I was with my editors. There was no big newsroom. I was literally in my family room with a laptop and cell phone. Definitely not dramatic at all. There was a lot of room for self reflection on the part of the media. Making sure that we are practicing responsible journalism. The 24 hour news cycle, i would not even call it a 24hour news cycle. More like 24 seconds. Youre constantly under pressure to tweet, to be on top of every piece of breaking news that might be related to your beat. Under 30 word characters you see a lot of organizations placing emphasis on that over 850 or 1300 word stories. Beyond the headlines. The landscape is totally changing now. You have the new media. Everybody is talking about news organizations having the need to go digital. Everyone is trying to figure out what that means. People are getting their information right now on a smart phone. They can watch video, they can go to twitter, New York Times, Washington Post everything is right there on a handheld. What do i try to do to practice . One thing i do is when i am writing an event or speech or cover state of the union or press conference i really try not to look at twitter. I try to kind of get away from the group think and not necessarily look at what other people are writing. We all follow each other. There can be kind of an echo chamber. You can take yourself out of that and that is important. I think it is a problem. I do think that there are absolutely responsible journalists and organizations that are committed to explaining the world. Also, breaking news. Not doing the sort of noise out there. It is not a big breaking story that so and so called soandso a name. I cant think of an example. There are a lot of we can think of an example. During election season, it feels like everyones opponent is a nazi and they call them that. We get a lot of that. It is not enough of an insult unless they have been compared to hitler. It absolutely is true. I think that they answer really is you as consumers have a role to play too. Two sources that you think are giving you the information and a fair way. In a way that is plausible. That does not mean it is digital. I look at my news every morning. We are all in the midst of a revolution of how we deliver news. That does not mean that you cannot do it in a thoughtful way. That is what we try to do. Lots of other organizations try to do the same thing. So, you just have to decide. Where are you going to expend your energy . Some people spend all day long with cable news on. It plays a role. That is a great place to go on a breaking story. But, there are also a lot of talking heads. It is very easy as we said, to tune into the people that you agree with. There are people on both sides of the spectrum. People are guilty of that. Just listening to people who affirm your beliefs. I think that the more that you demand and reward more thoughtful journalism, the more you will get. Back to the issue of Foreign Policy, when you are making or your editors are making decisions, do you look at an issue through the prism of our americans interested in the ukraine story . Obviously, theres a lot of interest in that now. Or do you say here is a Foreign Policy story that is of monumental importance. There is no question that the United States is making monumental choices now about its role in the world. Do you look at it with an eye towards responsibility that you had to educate americans about their stake in Foreign Policy . Yes. Good answer. For my news organization, our audience is an investor focused audience. The way that we are covering or reporting, for example, the latest round of sanctions that might be different than the first take of the New York Times story. We also have a more market focused. What is the ruble doing . What is the effect on gas from it is just more company focused. I will say that the challenge for us as journalists has been how you write the second day and third day and pieces when you are in the firestorm of the incoming news. That is a challenge. It is picking and choosing where that analysis is. The wall street journal is committed to foreign coverage. We have bureaus all over the world. The ukraine is on the front page constantly. We are absolutely committed. We also have a business focus. We have a general audience. I do not think there is ever a question a lot of people care about this. There might be a third or fourth year story. Do people care about the controversy people are thinking about . I think the journal views it as its mission to make people care. What is happening in brazil right now . Maybe it is something people have heard about and maybe they should have. Choices have to be made about that. We have a very significant commitment to global coverage. It is something that has fallen away, frankly. There used to be a time when the major metropolitan areas had foreign bureaus. That is not the case anymore. I want to work in as many questions as possible. Thank you. I wanted to ask we look a lot of the issues of how candidates talk about their faith on the campaign trail. We reach out to candidates and we know that people talk about their faith. That is a good thing. It is done in the right way. When we look at some issues, like lgbt rights, there is a spark and elevation of awareness. In terms of church separation in general, it seems that the same questions and quandaries are still involved. Even the issue of religion in general. What are your observations . This this a problem . I think were getting a new round of similar questions that we dealt with when it comes to there have been a lot of movements toward gay marriage acceptance and in many states either through court cases or initiatives. The response has been to try to pass restrictions that allow people to claim religious exemptions to serving a gay wedding if it is not consistent with their beliefs. That issue has manifested itself between public duties and religion. We see that now in the hobby lobby case. That is before the Supreme Court now. Whether the government can compel private businesses to cover contraceptives. That is part of their Health Insurance plan. There are already exemptions for overtly religious organizations. What about a hobby lobby . It is owned by christians. It is against their beliefs to provide contraception coverage. Those questions are still left us and they pop up in different ways. I do not see that going away. I do think it is a little different than the first thing we talked about. That tends to be more of a humanizing thing. People get to know them. It is interesting when you think about mitt romney and barack obama. They have struggled with that issue. We sell president obama having to explain about his pastor. We saw mitt romney struggling with being a mormon. These issues are not always a positive for candidates. I think youre right that i have a question about some you said earlier about postsandy hook political drama. Michael bloomberg has announced a 50 Million Investment in gun safety initiatives. He is trying to go ahead with the nra. Do you think that will have an impact in the midterm . Do you want to touch on that . I will start and you can add. Maybe it will. So far it has not. One of the reasons is because people who oppose gun restrictions feel a lot more strongly about that than the people who support them. Even if there are more people who support them, this is generally not a voting issue. So, that is part of what explains why we have not seen any action. I felt like if it was not going to happen after sandy hook, i was not sure what it would take in terms of the tragedy component. I do not know if that will make a difference or not. I would think less about making a difference and more about laying the groundwork to continue to push for Gun Legislation. To the earlier point, if a tragedy like sandy hook if crisis is a terrible thing to go to waste it was not going to happen, then it will be difficult to get it done. I want to close by putting you each on the spot and asking who you think will control the senate after the next election . Oy. [laughter] look, i think if the election were held today, theres a chance the republicans would be taking control of the senate. Quite a bit of time between now and november. I mean, it could very well change. We could see a scenario where 5149, either way. I think republicans have a good shot at it. That does not mean they will win. My prediction is different it is worth very little. I think that each of your productions is worth an equal, small amount. We can all guess. This far out, there are different races that will turn on. It is important to remember that democrats are playing defense in a lot of places. That is what a lot of people think not because they are dominating every one of these races, but because we have a lot of democratic incumbents on the defense. And very few republicans who are. It is probably republicans to lose. We are way too far to know. The way that the white house thinks about this in the opening remarks, you said that romney woke up on election day thinking he would be president. As he talked to president obamas advisors, they thought that barack obama would be reelected. All along, they saw the polling, state by state. It played to democrats advantage. The fundamentals do not play to their advantage for 2014. They have a weaker hand this year. I want to thank you both for informing our conversations. Thank you for your coverage of the issues we care about. Were going to keep following both of you so that you can keep informing our strategy Going Forward on these issues that we care about. Please join me in thanking our panel. [applause] in just a couple of minutes, we will take you live to the center of strategic and International Studies for their discussion this afternoon on the continuing tensions between russia and ukraine. This is the interior history they say four officers have been killed and 30 wounded in fighting in the eastern part of ukraine. The treasury announcing undersecretary david is heading to europe for more talks about a third round of sanctions will stop thats coming up at 1 30 eastern, about five minutes away here on cspan. The house and senate are in this weekend. The senate apples in and about ready five minutes. News from the house side that speaker john ayre has appointed a republican from South Carolina to head of the select committee looking into the benghazi attacks of 2012. Hes a former federal prosecutor and he will serve in that role announced today by Speaker Boehner. But we will go live to the center for strategic and International Studies in just a minute, but as the election season heats up with primaries tomorrow, this morning, we focused on some governors races, including florida. Of your concerns, especially your thoughts on the primary. The miami heralds us. T leader joins mark caputo joins us. Host our last caller wanted to address crists chances in the democratic primary, if you could start there. Charliethe chances of who isosing, everyone remotely objective about the race dont see the primary as being a concern for Charlie Crist. Rick scott also faces primary opponents. They are not the same as nan rich, facing Charlie Crist for Florida Governor in the primary. She had been running for 19 months prior to crist jumping in the Florida Governors race in november. He has now raised 14 times more than she has. Lagging indicator of support. It is not a leading indicator of victory. A republican governor, yes he was a republican turned independent turned democrat, democrats at the time said he was a better governor for democrats than chiles was, the last democratic governor of florida before jeb bush. It is comforting for some very liberal democrats and certainly a large number of republicans who are trying to stir up support for nan rich to tar Charlie Crist, the chances of him having a tough primary are really small. The chances he will not win by double digits are smaller. Host marc caputo with miami herald. Take us through the general election. I want to talk about polling. There has been a lot of polling on this race, where does the rick scottCharlie Crist matchup stand . Guest i have averaged and cross averaged and skewed polls. Is aheaduess is crist by anywhere from 2 Percentage Points to 5 Percentage Points, probably around 3 or 4. The governor is on pace in two 8. 5s to have spent million on television since march. Who advertises in a governors race in march . Rick scott has to. He is doing badly in the polls. He has been faxed by poor poll numbers almost since he barely won the 2010 governors race. He is up against a seasoned heitician in Charlie Crist, has run five times for statewide office and is wellknown. Well like and better liked than rick scott according to polls. Host maybe you can answer this tweet that came in. What isleclerk asks, the unifying message that democratic governors want to convey . Guest judging what i have seen across the nation, democrats want to make themselves sound like reasonable problem solvers. Their argument is that republicans are simply obsessed ruiningan obamacare, obamacare and they have no ideas. That is not me saying it, that is the messaging i am getting from various democratic candidates. Whether it is Charlie Crist here or what i read about democrats in other states. Minimum wage is of great importance and they want a turnout for the womens vote. Probably were who among the most crucial voting bloc to putting barack obama back in office for a second term. Elections, the problem the democrats had is that their days are their base are, relatively speaking, that voters. Bad voters. In florida and 2010 registered outnumber registered republicans by about 500,000, yet every statewide office w as won by a republican. Democratic voters disproportionately stay home to conservative voters. Southeast florida, palm beach, broward and miamidade counties consistently underperform in Midterm Elections. If they perform at the statewide democratn 2010, the would have won by about 250,000 byes instead of losing 65,550. For some reason, democratic voters do not seem to understand that as much as republican minded voters. Host marc caputo with the miami numberou take the 150 and option the h block, you need to figure out what comes out and 2020. 18 the work to identify the spectrum needs to start right now. You mentioned the cisco rejections mar staggering. They predicted between now and 2018, the demand for mobile wireless bandwidth will increase eightfold. If you thought the traffic in washington was going to increase eightfold between now and five years from now, you would say we need new roads. Thats the same problem. You need more spectrum. Technologym, new will help, but we ought to be looking at figuring out what the next part is. What is next for the wireless industry, tonight at 8 00 eastern on cspan2. We take youspan, back live to the center for strategic and International Studies and her discussion this afternoon on the continuing crisis in ukraine. Thank you for joining us. Cesa senior fellow at the iso program and im polish to be joined by three of my favorite Foreign Policy and security experts, the people whose opinions i want to hear on this issue. We are going to turn to them today to discuss the ukraine crisis and its implications for u. S. Security. Over, i want to provide a little framing and i will take it from there and we will open it to questions from you at the end of the session. Days of the past several in Eastern Ukraine have underscored the growing danger of a prolonged civil and sectarian conflict. As high as the stakes are within ukraine, they are potentially greater for the United States, not just in europe and eurasia, but globally. Fundamental questions about u. S. Security strategies are being asked just in washington and oped ages but in capitals from the world. Considering this framing of the crisis by unamerican two days after the crimea referendum vote. He said like a mirror, the situation in ukraine reflects what is going on and what has been happening in the world over the past several decades. After the dissolution of bipolarity on the planet, we no longer have stability. Room wouldy in this agree with mr. Putins analysis, but we would agree that the events in ukraine are forcing reflection on what the next decade has in store for the u. S. And its allies and partners globally. The risk of oversimplifying a complex of issues, let me offer for key areas we can go into hasy errs, ukraine opened questions about u. S. Russia policies dating back to the end of the cold war, specifically questions about whether the clinton published bush 43 and Obama Administration fundamentally mishandled russia. They failed to properly acknowledge it interests and humiliated in ways that haunt us today or today try to hard to accommodate a russia that ask ways acts in ways contrary to International Stability . How does this change the way we think about the salience of Nuclear Weapons . s toler sieve and Successful Use of diplomacy, rational operations informational operations has raised security about other states in russias periphery, including nato allies belarus, poland, and others. Today, the United States has responded with smallscale rotations of its forces in its and its nato allies have done likewise. Diplomatic messaging has occurred in sanctions have been veryg, but they have had little impact on russias decisionmaking. Moreover, it has raised questions about natos longterm ability to stand up to the challenge. Secretary of defense chuck hagel suggested the next nato ministerial must include ministers of finance, noting that today, americas gdp is smaller than the combined gdps of our 27 allies. But americas defense spending is three times our allies defense spending. Third, just eight months after the russiabrokered syria chemical weapons deal, there are tough questions about the u. S. Being willing to use force when push comes to shove. From allies and partners, ive heard sharp voices about a United States that has vacillated from drawing red lights to it would not enforce to a united taste that refuses to set red lights at all. Her words, not mine. On this point, potentially most damaging to this presidency, president obama weighed in last week during his trip to asia. My job as commanderinchief is what it is that is going to advance our security interests over the long term, to keep our military and reserve for when we absolutely needed. There are going to be times when there are disasters our difficulties and challenges all around the world and not all of those will be immediately solvable by us. Where we can make a difference using all of the tools, we should do so. There are occasions where clear actions can be taken, if it makes a difference, we should take them. We dont do them because somebody sitting in an office in washington or new york thinks it would look strong. Watching wonder ,ow might deflect attention particularly in a time of overall significant fiscal pressure on the department of defense. They have asked how u. S. Response may be viewed by that regions fast rising power, china. With that, let me say how grateful i am to be joined by three tremendous foreign and Security Policy experts who will share their views on issues today. I will introduce them in the order they will speak. To my immediate left, joined by andy hutchins, a senior fellow and director of the cs iso russia and eurasia program. He has written and commented extensively on russia, particularly over the past six months as demand has skyrocketed to understand russias role in syria, and Edward Snowden affair, the sochi olympics, and now ukraine. He has just returned from Research Travel in central asia, where he was able to gauge key officials views of events. Though he probably supported the need to reset relationships with russia, he has not minced words regarding the administrations handling of ukraine. In a march 30 commentary, he wrote barack obama is making jimmy carter look like attila the hun with a series of empty threats and too little, too late. Russiars against putins ergo i will let him add some context around those remarks. Next is clark murdoch, a senior thesor and director for defense and National Security group and the project on nuclear issues. Hes an expert on defense planning, the nuclear mission, and strategy with decades of executive branch, congressional, academic and think tank experience. His recent work has concentrated on the military force construction under continued sequestration cuts. He also spends time thinking about how to use hard power smartly. In a late 2013 analysis of Lessons Learned from the serious crisis, he wrote that there are three primary factors that should guide u. S. Policymakers on use of force in maintaining stability first, mean what you say and say what you mean. Second, per pair to carry out your threats and deal with the consequences. And third, since actions always speak louder than words, use force from time to time to demonstrate your is all. Last, but certainly not least, im glad to be joined by vikram singh, who recently joined the center for American Progress for american policy. To departing the Obama Administration after five years of service, he was most recently assistant deputy secretary of defense when he was on the front lines of the asiapacific rebalance for that for that, he was the Deputy Director for relationships on u. S. And pakistan. He cautioned that failing to impose a meaningful cost for russias forceful annexation of foreign territories would further embolden russia to take similar steps and other neighboring states. It would also affect the strategic calculus of other nations and territorial disputes , increasing the willingness of states to use coercion, subterfuge, and military force with less fear and significant or national backlash. Let me turn it over to andy to get things started. Thank you so much. I think we can go right to the questions and answers. You address the key questions and it sounds like we all agree from what you quoted from us. The only good news i have to report over what has happened in the last couple of months is Vladimir Putins was to become dictator life, it is great job security for me. And the likes of us. Before i addressed these questions, let me say what i think is actually motivating Vladimir Putin in ukraine right now. To me, it is fundamentally about domestic politics in russia. Its about a new political strategy he has for himself will stop for most of the time in which he has been the de facto leader of russia, there has been an economic social compact. Russia has russians have lived more prop for more prosperously and has grown while putin has been president , with the exception of the time during the Global Financial crisis and shortly after he became president again. Happened since he became president in 2012 hummel and the russian economy was till growing at the rate of about 3 , underperforming, but performing reasonably decently, the growth before the situation in ukraine started. It had already come to about zero. He faced a fundamental decision was he going to take the measures to restructure the russian economy so it would be more efficient . To do that, he would have to build more transparency, better governance, address corruption, improve the investment environment, etc. He could not count upon a multiple increase in oil price that occurred during his first two terms in power. He could not count on a 50 increase in production as happened during his first term. He could not count on a virtual as in theey party second term of his president that made the International Community ready to lend to russia a lot. It isoblem was, and to me a reminder of the soviet union around the early 1980s, lets say 1981, the year i graduated college will stop despite the fact the oil price was at a high , and Oil Production in russia had grown tremendously, soviet Economic Growth was at about zero. Did the soviet ownership under mr. Brezhnev or on drop off or chernenko and the rapid succession want to deal with that and structurally reform the system . No. It was too politically risky and thats the decision mr. Putin has made. Get the he going to basis for his Political Support in the future . The new strategies accommodation of a return to what nicholas the officialolicy of nationality in the Second Quarter of the 19th century orthodoxy, russian nationality, and combined to that, this greater russia project he has in mind. Russia has to be, despite the fact it is x times larger than any country in the world, it still needs to be larger. That, combined with foreignpolicy successes of the nature we might have regarded, putins performance on syria in the summer. That is a fundamental starting point for how we got to where we are around late february to today. Unfortunately, i think it is a very, very injuries and risky strategy on his part, not only dangerous for him, its probably going to result in ultimate failure. But there will be tremendous Collateral Damage all across the board. One of the first things that hit my mind on february 28, when crimea was seized by the polite green men, was that gorbachev and the ussr went out with a whimper. Something in my bones tells me Vladimir Putin is not going out with a whimper. Very ugly andery, we are still only in the early, they parts of this all stop march 18 speech he gave to the federal assembly in moscow right after the annexation, which was really a mind bender, probably the most significant speech you before that was in munich and to thousand seven. I could agree with a lot of what mr. Putin had to say at the famous munich speech economic balance of power, changing in the world, typically followed by a change in political power. The United States needs to adjust, etc. Even his New York Times editorial at that a lot of criticism, i could find a lot to agree with. At this march 18 speech marked a new putin. And a very scary putin. Ie congressional testimony, included future historians may regard this up at may regard this as the point at which russia tipped into becoming a fascist state. Look up fascism and i think youll see a myth picture of mr. Putin on the map. I dont mean to be flip, but that is kind of what it is. Extreme nationalism, a very corporate type of lyrical come economic linkage in the political system, quite dissidents,o any and a focus on territorial acquisition and an aggressive foreignpolicy. That is it. If he is talking about orders, its not just the post cold war world, not just the post war ii borders, it is virtually any border mr. Putin think is a legitimate is illegitimate. He ready to defend . Is it ethnic russians . It evensian speakers . Compatriots, a very broad category which can be very flexible. Extremelyt and frightening speech and a quantum leap in the evolution of mr. Putin. Bei see there will increasing pressure on all neighbors. There is essentially an attempt to unwind 1991 and perhaps even earlier. And this will not stop as long as mr. Putin is in power. Correct and the starting point is this is part of the strategy for maintaining support , hes got a huge binge in Popular Support so far. You have to keep on feeding the beast home a if you will, and that is not a happy scenario. Let me turn quickly to sams question. Do first question had to with what is your view of u. S. Policy since the outset of the crisis in ukraine, has a midweek, provocative or about right . I think week and provocative are not mutually exclusive categories. For me outset, i think it has been week and thus provocative all stop for me, it started with the initial response on february february 20 eight. Already, the airport had been seized by military forces, it had to be at the behest of russia. The parliament had been seized, the speaker of the parliament had been seized, and was and when mr. Obama came on at 3 00 eastern standard time, ira member at well because i was at the university of indiana, where my son who is a freshman there for the fatherson weekend was watching the press conference and one would have thought none of that had already happened. President obama talked about the would be costs for russia and im thinking, dude, im here in indiana and x has already happened. Disheartened to read a story in the wall street 10 days later about the disagreement within the Intelligence Community as to what had actually happened. Im afraid a lot of our intelligence assets, certainly human assets, are not available in that region. The ground andn crimea if the story is true. It was very clear that if there was any weak spot in ukraine, it would be crimea. Looking at february 20 1, 22. Did we not have eyes on what was happening there on the ground . Some kind of intelligence failure happened and i think thats something we will need to look into. With that, it kind of began the series of too little, too late responses. I think there has been too much emphasis on a search for a diplomatic solution. Of course we need to do that, but there was never a shred of evidence that would support putin was interested in a diplomatic offramp during this crisis. Second, and this is kind of but the United States needed to take a firmer role in leading the alliance. Economicopes deep investment with russia, it was not realistic to expect them to take a leading role, given the differences in europe in general. I think we need to be more forwardleaning. For example, when president obama was getting ready to leave on his europe trip in the latter part of march and the second round of sanctions was announced, what was striking to me is while these were significant sanctions, none of them were going to have a negative impact on the u. S. Economy. We were not going to go to europe and say we think this is a significant problem and we are ready to take a hit on our economy. If we are not going to take a hit on our economy, how are we going to make the case to european to ardmore deeply vested . Thirdly, theres been too much emphasis on punishing ukraine excuse me, punishing russia rather than trying to help ukraine. Unfortunately, the Ukrainian Government has been in ways criminally irresponsible at least since the war and revolution, probably longer, leaving themselves in an extremely vulnerable condition as far as russian pressure, but this is the core of the problem. If ukraine can succeed, that is how mr. Putin loses. This on theack to economics sanction a little later. I was extremely disappointed with the speech the president gave in brussels in late march. Mom and latitudes, apple pie and beautiful values, but virtually nothing concrete about what we were doing to support the sovereignty of ukraine. Politically, economically, militarily or otherwise. Theynclusion was in moscow are laughing and it kiev, they are crying. Second question i will go to these faster leave a question or two. Ok. To leave the military option off the table question for you. I feel real sorry to follow because we both occupy a little of that space. I was just trying to follow instructions. The asia rebalance of course this is going to affect the asia rebalance. How could it not . We thought the security was virtually solved but the pie is not growing. I will leave it to my distinguished colleagues for details. But me Say Something about china clearhink it is pretty National Sovereignty is a sacred pillar of chinese policy is a cell a slow self. Ell. Slow s its value is reduced. I think there is an ambiguity in china about this. Ping hasevel, i think to admire Vladimir Hooton for what he did in crimea are in crimea. Chinas going to benefit economically and politically from russia possible strange but with the west, but i think it will be very cautious about signing up for vladimirs new cold war. We can watch carefully to see what happens with mr. Putin when he goes to china at the end of may. Russias position has weakened and he will get a lower price on the gas deal. Let me conclude with something on the sanctions. Can economic sanctions substitute for use of force . Clearly, no. That is obvious. But its really a problem if feels himself somewhat impervious to taking a significant economic hit the top economic hit. Heres the problem he knows the economy is in trouble, sanctions, board, that simply gives them the argument that well come a it is the west, the outsiders trying to weaken us and punish us. This is the source of our economic troubles. Its going to play pretty well into his political narrative. Would make isnt i that tools are designed for the war on terror in rogue states. Is impossible to isolate russia. This is the sixth or eighth or 10th largest economy in the world depending on your denominator. States in themany world, including many european allies which are not ready to enthusiastically sign on to this. The last thing i would say about sectoral sanctions could be interpreted by mr. Putin as an act of war. Ofhink we better be aware all of our own vulnerabilities because we could be dam sure he will becoming back at us very, very, very hard will stop i think we will be in a very long haul and difficult time with mr. Putin as long as he is leading russia. Followonly did you instructions, but that was a great opening. That vikram can hold his own. He was specially selected to follow you. Is it on . Ok. Im happy you did not use the word redline, because i want to talk about redline. Talk about the way obama and the United States and others have acted in terms of how you use force to get somebody to and do or not to do something you want them to do. From a broader perspective, strategically, people are saying s weakness and the Washington Post has been tough on him blathering and dithering and so on, but that is responsible for putins grabbing crimea. I dont think so. I think hootons plan a failed. Moscow asuys fled with the rose revolution and other flower revolutions led to had toe of power, he change his game plan because he has a lot at stake in ukraine for many of the reasons danny was talking about. Strategic sense, it was not obamas weakness that led to to do what he did, it was optionotons first failed, so he went to the backup option. I would also argue, however, obamas alias at the tactical level in far in so far as how you use redlines lead putin to underestimate him in terms of obama possibility to play the game. I go back again to the group of eight meeting in mexico where you see the two of these leaders in the same room together. I have not gone on the blogs, but apparently there is a film that shows the language of these guys next to each other for about five minutes will stop and disdain putin had for obama was almost all bubble during that time. You could cut it with a knife catch it inu could pictures, much less the video. I dont think putin had much respect for obama as a competitor, whether list chess, checkers or dodgeball. I think that same issue in the tactical level is something that has really bothered our allies. I have a few quotes on that because theres no question as doug paul said, all of the big players out there watched what the United States did in syria and were appalled and worried about with the United States do the same thing if things went south for them on a particular issue . When you are dealing with china who makes no bones about its territorial ambitions, that is something they think about during that time. Of redck to obamas use lines in syria, where he was a specific about the redline issued in august of 2012, where he says we have been very clear to the assad regime and other players on the ground that a redline for us, we start seeing a whole bunch of emma moving or been utilize, that has crossed it. Then we go through the same time he is talking about a game beener, we think he has using chemical weapons on small scales. It took the United States three months to confirm he has been using them on a small scare and , a thirdtier white june official announces in we are going to take some action. We will increase our assistance. We are going to meaningfully engage on this. But does not say anything about punishing syria for its use of chemical weapons