The u. S. Used to be one of the back. I just spoke to the conference and the sentiment is universally negative, very worried and very frustrating in how they treat the companies in the way that the law is enforced around the western companies and chinese and native companies into the whole litany of complaints. The espionage i think was the number one thing that made it difficult for the u. S. Business community to support china and its taken a toll. We know Many Companies that personally suffered from this to the fact that she came in september and acknowledged openly that what theyre going to do some thing about this are stepisour steps in the right direction. We need a lot more dialogue and i am not privy to whats going on behind the scenes. I know theres a dialogue thats continuing. Its slow and painful and steady but thats the work at a for this kind of relationship so we should continue the dialogue on that and this should be a wakeup call to china that the part of america that has always been pro trade with china and open relationships is in a way turning against the relationship and both sides need to do something to fix it. In the department of defense my question youve already touched more of the security relationship in the United States and china and india. My question is if these states are defining the way forward in asia pacific and beyond, where does that leave the crimes International Security order is defined by the relationships and where does that leave the u. S. Allies like japan, australia, thailand but are increasingly caught between the interest of powers that are considerably greater in terms of the geopolitical . Im not advocating that we change the Alliance System and this is the 21st century where there is a superpower and the rules of order altogether. That is highly unlikely to happen. I think the current Alliance System will continue largely the way it is. I dont think that we will enter into a formal Alliance Even though the partnership has become closer to the past decade including on the military side. I think a formal alliances and something india wants so i dont see an enormous change in the alliance structure. What we do need to think carefully about in this time where the rhetoric has gotten so heated and it has become so unpopular they need to think about what happens when you go down that path. If you have a trade war with china or a military confrontation to be wanted a new cold war or do we want something where certainly we have disagreements certainly we wouldve National Interest that diverge from each other but we are by and large in the lower the rhetoric and solve our problems as much as possible behind the scenes and where we emphasize cooperation because it is in all of our interests to make sure that this triangle gets along. Richard, last question. Thank you. The thinking of both indians and chinese today because i think that this conversation happens i if the pastor would he predominated more and the indians would have thought about pakistan more concretely and more often as in the length of the competitive relationship. They also would have thought about their relationship with the prism of pakistan. Are you sensing that they are retreating from the forefront of the policymakers and beijing and new delhi or how do you see that fit into the countries that you are talking about today . Lee might have a similar view on this. I do think that india is looking up strategically where they used to be preoccupied with their neighborhood to some extent china. Pakistan will continue to shape a lot of the thinking because the terrorism comes from pakistan, the Nuclear Weapons are still a concern especially the new smaller ones they are building. But its not predominate. And the more and more when we talked to the Indian Government officials, they want to talk about china and they want to talk about the world beyond asia and i think that is a positive thing that we should welcome. We have come to the end of the talk. I want to thank u. For sponsoring this great event and for coming and giving us a chance and all of you for coming. [applause] journalist Oscar Martinez talks about the origins of violence in Central America and u. S. Involvement in the region. Region. His pick of the history of violence living and dying in Central America. This was held at New York University. Thank you so much for coming to this event. I am the managing director of the institute of politics and my colleagues are delighted and very proud to b pupils who orgad this book event for the newly released second book called the history of violence living and dying in Central America. His work is hugely important. But i think for the englishspeaking public in the United States the circumstances of Central American refugees and migrants as they make in their own countries and as they make their way through mexico into the United States are absolutely a humanitarian crisis with many dimensions. The work in writing and Investigative Journalism is one of the key voices bringing circumstance to life and we are again honored and delighted to be able to host the launch of the book and have him here with us with our distinguished guests who will be introduced by diana in a few minutes. Before continuing, i would like to hand it over to sofia so she can say a few words. We First Published the piece in english and it was one of the most critically acclaimed books ever. We are so proud to publish a second book. Its based in london where the largest independent radical press and we see this book as politically important and central to the conversation for the refugees and Central America at large. Our moderator today is a a university professouniversity pd professor that performance studies in spanish at New York University and the author of numerous books including performance recently published by Duke University press and performing cultural memory in america. Shes thshe is the recipient ofs awards including the Vice President of the modern Language Association and will be the incoming president in 2017. Also the founder and director of the institute of performance in politics and so i asked her to please cop on the stage and introduced the speakers and participants. Thank you very much. We are excited about this conversation and happy to welcome our guests so if you could come up here. They are going to be speaking some english and spanish and a lot of spanglish. Martinez works for the first online newspaper in latin america. The book was published in a second edition in 2012. In 2008 they won the National Journalism prize in mexico and into 200in the 2009 he was aware human rights prize to Central American university. He is most recently the author of the history of violence, living and dying in Central America though we are here to discuss and of course the books are on sale here. And francisco here to my left has published four novels and one book of nonfiction. His most recent won the [inaudible] keys correctly back to work on a novel the writing of the interior circuit. He is currently back to work on the novel. Francisco has been a guggenheim fellow, center fellow at the New York Public Library and at the american academy. Hes written for the new yorker, the New York Times magazine, harpers mother the leader libyan leader and many other publications. He developed the prius and every year teaches one semester at Trinity College in hartford connecticut, and then hightails it back to mexico city. And Jon Lee Anderson to my left is a journalist Investigative Reporter and correspondent and correctly staff writer for the new yorker. Hes particularly known for his reporting on latin america and as we know from the numerous profiles on political leaders including hugo chavez, fidel castro. He is also involved in the internationally recognized teaching in journalism and working to safeguard the rights of journalists and as the chairman of the columbiabased foundation for journalism and regularly teaches workshops for latin america reporters. Anderson has written several books including the lions grave from afghanistan in the fall of baghdad and is the coauthor inside the league from the killing grounds. The next book project is a biography of Fidel Castros think you very much for joining us. It is a great honor to say i really consider him the great journalist of our time. To briefly say a few words in his new book comes after the beast which is interesting because it narrates the journey of migrants through mexico into the United States primarily, and it more or less takes us back to the world that they are fleeing from providing a narrative that goes backwards in a sense to say a few words about the two books together. One is in some ways a great artist that both books are unbelievable torture of human cruelty and more so than Joseph Conrad or any book you can think of that makes us confront the of this when the migrants have the only route they can avoid the migration check planes and he chronicles you see so many along the path here. Its the prophecy of the future. Youre going to be like that, probably. As he tells we are so used to, these are local people preying on the migrants. These are farmers and ranchers to realize people were traveling through the area and if anything was done to them they are likely to go to the police so they realize we can rob them and ande and murder them and we are all humans get anything any human does in the sense of who we all are of course they are great examples of the bravery and resistance. They get food to the migrants along the way but this is a central fact of his writing, the stark truth. So it just fills me with joy to read it because i love to encounter finally the truth. This is what he read. Admiring you can bring us the truth with that mix of bravery and artistry that oscar had to make a scene. It also reminds us anyone that reads the beast and cds that terrible journey they undertake and understanundertakento undera Central American migrants comes across the border and get into the United States, theres a great victory. That is something we should stand up and cheer for because every single one of them is so brave and resilient they have to have so much to make you so proud of the human spirit and what human beings are capable of and you have to understand why they are doing it to do better for their families. Another aspect we cant overlook they go through so much. We will talk about this more later but hes so eloquent at portraying the damage left behind in the 80 o 80 of the t made the journey are sexually violated along the way. These our brothers and sisters all around us who at this moment are being in the political discourse these are people that have been through so much and who have to live and go on and have been through so much and are heroes of our society is in many ways. At last the new thing in the book especially yukon front so eloquently to describe this is all our problems. The United States, every citizen of the United States is so complicit in this situation and in the history of the situation. We see this deep culture of violence that has so many in its roots in the Central American war of the 1980s and this incredible distraction that was never addressed in any kind of positive way. We are not just the great consumers but its we also provide the arms and im sure we are going to talk a lot about how complex the issue is and how we are so intertwined into triangle. [applause] thank you all. Its a pleasure. My sentiments, hello, can you hear me . Now you can. I would just like to echo can you hear me now . His sentiments express as it is safe to say the foremost interlocutor of the brutal reality. He is the person who is braving the situation and has the extraordinary not just reporting skills, but the writing talent to bring us testimony and chronicles from an extraordinarily harsh and usually overlooked, ignored, neglected reality. Its been there for a long time. Its getting worse. I dont mean this as a kind of chicken little statement but its always been overlooked even when it is said to be the Number One National priority for the United States years ago by the then president. The brutalization that went on in the name of warding off communism in the name of holding back the red tide and notionally Building Democracy in the 1980s was gothic and extreme. Of thos those ofto those of us t can never forget it. Theres nothere is now a time tt everybody that has access to youtube is aware of the kindest cruelties that humans put upon each other. About 30 years ago this was happening in el salvador on a daily basis and in guatemala over quite a long period of ti time. It was part of our population here in the United States aware of what was going on. Some demonstrated against it and some tried to help out as humanely as possible. But our government tended to side with the military in the country which visited evil upon those populations. The numbers of people fled. How many were given asylum in this country i dont know if anybody was. I think nobody was. Possibly there were one or two. I dont know. It was arguably an extreme violence into something you were saying about what happens to people who. Just as no woman in guatemala for that matter fell into the countrys Security Forces without being raped but usually sexually mutilated before being murdered. The degree that it went on has never been punished. Its never been castigated. Its still in the air. Though more in the early 80s and 90s ended with the oblivion following the model of spain postfranco. But in this case there wasnt a 40 year dictatorship to become a benevolent dictatorship. Although tons of blood was still fresh on the ground. And as we have seen in all of these countries, honduras being a country that didnt have a war but was nonetheless used by all parties in particular to subvert others and especially nicaragua. Theyve also come to a kind of tunnel shop of horrors in which the pastor urged the present. If before we had a situation where people were being killed in the name of democracy or in the name of the anticommunism, they are now simply dying because they are dying. And we dont have a kind of measuring rod in this country or a feeling of imperative to force a debate about it. The only debate we seem to have here involves the people once they cross the border. I returned to el salvador as one of the handful of people that covered el salvador. I met frank many years ago and also in nicaragua all those years ago i never really thought about it but i didnt return to el salvador and i realized i didnt want to go back to el salvador. I went back to el salvador because his brother that works within and this sort of team of reporters that are the next generation on our unique and quite extraordinary in that they have heart and passion and soul, they have anger. Theres a lot of anger in what he writes and its absolutely justified anger that comes through crystal clear. He controls it at times better than others. I think thats wrong. I think that he is driven by a kind of deep indignation that i would have to say i think it is worse before ther the further wn which you would go out and you kind of knew who was killing you. There were notional ideas but now even more people some days in el salvador are dying. Thereve been people put behind bars for barbaric crimes that they organized were committed themselves. It is as if a country lets its serial killers walk free and not just the country but the whole region. They are sitting at the same bar and cafe and in some cases they have to see them in uniform. Thats what we left behind. Its worth noting by the way that it was built after the earthquake in 86 and they built the biggest embassy in latin america through the huge White Elephant that sits there with no real purpose of course that the war was over and there for everything could be devolved into this idea of the chronic criminal insurgency in the same kind that we live in with our cities and many of the other countries in the hemisphere now. Many of the countries that were safe for democracy are now failed states or experiencing theiwere experiencingtheir own r violence. Those are very few exceptions and that itself is worthy of an interesting discussion and why thats the case. In any event i could go on a long time about this. I feel well represented nothing but here is a person who is an oldfashioned term we dont use much in this country but i would say hes the patriarch. In the sense that nobody uses anymore he feels the righteous indignation of the country that had its entire destiny taken away from it and its still being chewed up. Its still not a country that we would want to live in. When i go back to see them at their annual event and i talked with them about what they can just as reporters 30 years ago they live under the threat and assassins. They are the very same people that he sometimes needs and chronicles that can be turned on a dime including people who write about them so it is a great act of valor and courage in what his friends are doing and they deserve a much wider audience for the political debate in a much greater way. They are all around us everywhere and they are not a given visibility and place in society that they deserve. We placed them here. We placed them here and that is a that comes with a lot of baggage. I think that is the underpinning if it can be called a mission to somehow make us see whats going on and get the conversation going. [applause] first i cannot speak in english, i can speak spanglish if thats okay. Im going to try to speak in my language to explain my ideas. First of all, thank you in particular [inaudible] i consider you friends of mine who is a problem of this book make the product of the latest book a history of violence. I consider you not just friends but journalists and writers. The process of the two books, why do you think that, because in 2007 in mexico i started to understand and i have several problems with time. I started to understand how the people cross mexico in 2007 meadlo. Its the brutalization of organizing crime that i saw in my cookie or my career to sell with the north borde northd extortion migrants. So in 2007 i know im starting with the piece, that im going to verify that a history of violence. Its at the top of the train and starts to be a problem with organized crime. That happened since 2007 as anybody went there and saw what happened on the field. I dont know why that i but thaa kind of behavioral belief i never saw a migrant in the press conference. Its important to understand what the government thinks that its more important to the field. So i would say its like a roadway because i started for three years to understand all the things i migrant suffered two come here and try to get into the United States with nobody and i remember in 2008, a priest from the United States asked me in the gulf of mexico he asked me okay if theyre going to ask you all these things would have been behind in Central America and i start to feel i cannot answer that question at the moment. Journalists in Central America and think that is part of the problem to explain for example guns. We dont know where they come from or how they started or when they arrived in our societies. That happened i realized in 2010 during the Central American form of journalists. I asked that question and started to understand that it wasnt to migrate but to flee, to leave because the situation generally in 2011 i started to try to answer that. What happened and how its possible. Some people ask me what happened after the Peace Agreement and why we are not a peaceful society. They think it needs and their components but my answer is and how weve become a Violent Society or how can we be so violent for example, last year maybe you can understand that way that one of every 972 person was killed. This 330,000 if it was the homicides last year. My answer is that we never live in peace or have a society with peace. I can remember for example how we get into that in 2009 as the most violent country in the world. It is a construction of society of the strong components it on one side and theres a few people that the construction of the state is made for the few people. Its made to resolve the problems and for example its the most murderous country in the world right now. Its one of ten that go to trial. One of every ten has the possibility of a good result and i dont know to tell you that number of the poor people or the working class to the construction in the state is in a lot of time and a lot of people are fleeing from that situation. They have no response from the states and they try to leave for natural reasons they try to come here because there is an effort from a lot of years ago. So the second book talks about that situation and one of the missions of journalism tries to put life on the darkest corners of society. If people experiment day by day its 20 years ago but its still a dark corner of our society. If anybody told the situations thats what i try to do in the book because its different if you hear that theres a country so violent if you can read about the last name so i try to get close to the situation by myself the question why this pic is in question here in the United States. Whats important is that you read the book and im going to be honest with. Im not talking about people who dont live here im talking about you, people who are in contact with you all day, im talking about people like francisco said a few minutes ago they lived a quiet life around you and they are part of this society. And in second place because i think i vibrate too much about that but you can make it or answered about that. But i dont have to say to you that the society is in the north of Central America have a lot a lot to see what the politics of the United States. But you have to put the name of a president if you are goin youo find a lot of huge examples. But im going to put one example about how the government of the United States or some precedent i expect to do it. Take a decision like at the end of the 80s and the beginning of the 90s 4,000 gun members from the south of california to the three countries that guy didnt understand the process of migration. Right now you have some members who were found in washington for example. So, that is 4,000 gun members at the end of the 80s and beginning of the 90s. Right now they become in 60,000. The second reason to read the book is because i think the government of the United States have a moral responsibility about the constitution of the society in Central America and guatemala. We started one in the 80s. For a group of military thats how it started in the 80s. The United States supported the 12 more years. That army that committed that crime, 12 more years. So, i need to pass on to the questions because ive already said all the words that i know in english. [laughter] so please, help me a little bit. Thank you for being here. [applause] thank you so much. Before we open it up to questions and answers that we would love of course to have a conversation thats mainly the point of this, i want to ask just a couple of questions because we have three great journalists here have covered the same area of the world in different moments. I would like to ask the first question picks up on the histo history. The violence and the criminal politics, the very misguided political decisions that have led to this crisis and the racism, sexism, all the things that are particularly violent. So whats the role of journalism has been broadly construe as a public to Pay Attention to. The information isnt out there. Why dont we know it in a way that we somehow feel obligated to do something about it. So thats the challenge journalists face and thats one of things i would like to reflect on. I think that journalism is an answer in a certain way. I mean, you used to ask whats the solution and that is a difficult question of journalists at least it is a difficult question for me but to the society is part of the solution. I dont understand why, and thats what i want to ask the United States to look at the corner of the world. Why did they leave after the war, what happened in the process of peace, what happened in that . There is a historical explanation and that is the soviet union collapsed. They have been won. There was a huge event. The guerrillas in Central America sue for peace under the auspices of the un and they now turned into a goodwill ambassador for as i was saying before a kind of spanish hear no evil see no evil transition in which the Transitional Justice wasnt contemplated. Things were frozen in place and nobody got punished and everything was supposedly hunkydory. The United States had a major shift in its access. It looked east and was also the gulf war. There were a couple that had to deal with americas frankensteins. Those were the only two that became an interventionist power with grenada in 83 the First Time Since vietnam. Central america had been kicked us, so america looked east and i was a young reporter then. I wasnt one of the big media. I was a nobody. I began going to see the rest of the world as a freelance reporter. But, what i can say with certainty in the intervening years is that there is a pattern of this happening. After the soviets were pushed out of afghanistan, there were no reporters left their either. I remember in 89 there were four reporters, tens of thousands of people fighting for the reporters. Nobody was looking. The station apparently we learned that after 9 11 they went home because there were not anymore for any more for a whil. We have as a nation at every level politically and every other way. I think the pattern im getting too into that ive seen in the course of my career the media interests, thinterest, the decie the media should cast tends to be set in washington. The editors of course there are the better editors than others and there are contrary ends and right wing and mainstream. But pretty much everybody follows whatever is uttered out of the white house and Central America ceased to be imported into pretty early on those of us who heard it became a story that was not of any National Priority and it remains so to this day. For the occasional incursions to the National Agenda in the campaign and Donald Trumps remarks and those that arrived on the border for america to react thats the case. This is the ultimate land of free speech. And you know, by and large that its a fairly true statement. But its incredibly oriented on how the agenda is set in washington and thats the main reason why. So, until the president says as Ronald Reagan did once upon a time, naming a particular country in Central America this is important to all of us. And this is not just meet you say i think there is a great story in el salvador and im talking 1992 were not talking about which publication but it was not the new yorker. [laughter] nobody is interested you have anything on the middle east . Then the same answers anywhere in africa anywhere as a free lancer there was no blogging or internet or self publications that we know of someone out of business some are not what they were but they would still survive but they determine what gets out there those people that run those publications or back in the 80s and the 90s pretty much determines what people will read it is not a good story they will not get in. But the region of the country may be tangential to the story but again he is in just a good reporter but a good writer we have a unique opportunity to get the story out and the real issues with a straight up reporting that made to read news brief and one of the issues of Central America but it doesnt just have the same impact. This is it. That was all about what has happened and all the countries of the human revelation that happened 57 years ago i would argue and i would bet in the last yearandahalf since they normalized relations. [laughter] im sorry president obama and president castro that there has been more positive coverage of the pages of the New York Times of the last yearandahalf not from the previous 56 years it is exactly what i said before taking the cue from the white house if obama said the embargo was a mistake and everybody starts that is just the way that it works until somebody says Central America is important im sorry to sound so cynical. So to turn this back i will quickly contrast to stories that journalistic persistence as it has forced a story in the media sometimes the ad journalist editors of newspapers have a story that is where they are made even when the focus is on. So very quickly with a positive story but those 43 students in mexico, two years of persistent coverage determine that the margins not the Mainstream Press to a level of reporting, if you call it that has broken one aspect of this story after another after another after another working in concert with the journalist and have now made that story impossible to ignore now gets into the front pages of the New York Times that is the work of journalists. This person wrote that part now to go to the overside which i found so fascinating we just had months and months of coverage of castillo and el chapo but there is the section where they are murdered and there is a most remarkable job to put the whole context of the miracle and that they wrote about but the problem is talking to all prosecutors he says United States has said obsession with trophies. They cut nin and one after the other then they are extradited any time el chapo is extradited it creates more problems. With an endless supply. And when to talk about those just as workers bike guatemala has a counterproductive story like why did the new yorker talk about stories of el chapo . What about how this affects . I know what to try to complement that with that experience i remember three years ago i was writing an article for a National Newspaper we dont say names but in a moment to the board in Central America and i remember the editor told me that is a headline from one century ago but i thought it was incredible that the editor did not know basic information from the south of california. So what they chronicle what they talk about, guatemala with extradited. [speaking spanish] i would ask the former minister of security i asked if they really want to extradite. He said no. They said he is like the referee he is not the priority and is a priority of another government they give helicopters so i ask in the moment did you use those resources to do something about security in guatemala . And his answer was the fight against the government the gang members. So yes maybe somebody can help me but i remember the investigator of mexico said one thing about drugs and crime in Central America. He said. [speaking spanish] and knowhow to translate that. [speaking spanish] they have the right to a Central America does not but our government can just say yes. And those that started in 2003 s. In 2003 the embassy of the United States agreed with that kind of politics more than a decade before they know that does not work so some moments we feel like an experiment with National Security but i think that happened in terms of those issues involved with those numbers to organized crime but but we the journalists, [speaking spanish] we didnt say nothing about that we did not understand guns in 2003 because we didnt used to go into the neighborhoods but they do. So that is a huge part of the problem. In fairness also lot of people have been killed doing this one filmmaker i remember what year but he goes back and was killed two weeks after resaw him. It has never been an easy task even if you decide you will talk to those people. In my particular case because i said i need to more months. But in a lot of countries like mexico the media doesnt kill the journalist because if you are a journalist in the newspaper since it to you and the next morning you have to cover the game of football but in the afternoon you have to go to organized crime, that is responsible but not for you. There is a lot of journalists who go to places they dont understand anything because in Central America a lot of voters of newspapers and radio think that journalist is working in a pizza shop. , and i think that is the reason like even in honduras they died because they have no support for perot even mexico for example some journalists talk with them one journalist his salary is 30 pesos a day that is like 2. 50 said day they have to use part of bad to put gasoline in his car so how do you do work under those conditions . It is impossible. And other journalists said he was a taxi driver. But i cannot help but mention the breakers that come through the journalists on the market and American Free lancer wearing the same set of clothes for year or five years. [laughter] a freelance reporter to discover there was no fire basically and those that were run that of the country and federal police in the case and it turns out freelance positions on the rooftop to discover the film evidence apparently the prosecutor of the case planting evidence. Should be open for questions . There is a microphone over here. Thanks for being here in the work you have done a lot to touch on an issue in your introduction that he alluded to the fact you see some of the same things happening i just want to ask your opinion there is of book that is very much like the work you have done about the murders in los angeles and her conclusions were completely the opposite of the current understanding of what was the problem in the ghetto. This can now one year ago and is corrupted the urban operating principles of how the Justice System should work with criminal behavior in the ghetto. And it is a very substantial argument in should argue there is no Justice System but the homicide rate has dropped the diseases they and the black communities. There is simply not operating Justice System. So here we have a reporter who has an entire discussion of the method of reducing homicides in the United States. And if we look at that, at the operating principles is there a parallel or similarities . In this conversation . Yes. A lot of them are wrong for example, but like two weeks ago the nations drug summit but it is the war against drugs that was based on nothing but it is a great example have not to construct a country with the study to have a good society [laughter] but not now but years ago to solve that problem the issue of guns is a problem of identity and a group of people a security problem but they still apply the same methods. I dont have an answer but maybe the media are not enough not too strong or maybe society is so divided if anything happens that is something very common in Central America sometimes you can show things that anything can happen Quetta Mollet is not the best example but for example, we have pictures to shrink government and guns march march 2012 and with thatchers but the opinion of the society will come down the interest is less dead but with bullets to kill them all that is the solution to resolve resolve with bullets not with dialogue. I am following up. My question basically is the idea of guilt and innocence and this plays out how the four inmate aid money is delivered so somehow that they are the ones that can be rescued from their circumstances to make those corrective decisions the same with the attention given to those Child Migrants i was in washington they said this is the main thing that matters to forget about the young adults in their 20s and 30s. So that breaks down the distinctions that they are victims of circumstance than they are 18 to be treated as criminals. Yes. It is very complicated. Thinks were question i will do my best. I talked about the migration of the Central American child and in the context. Maybe more valuable than someone in other parts of the worlds. But that area from the rural areas but the question of that crisis is that people ask what changed . A lot of people in Central America the perception of violence because the dissolution ed is the lowest. That will include a lot of people of course, you have to display a role. You have to walk to United States just to the border. To your question what do i do . If i am doing a lot about that because they feel it is very important to explain the life because it is a complicated age. If you have 20 or 23 years to get involved with gangs youll have a lot of pressure if youre in the neighborhood you will suffer to suffer as a teenager the islamic and place to leave. And tries to understand i hope the message was not okay. And a number i answered your question. Rigo because of the International Commission does that make a difference . I think so phenacite the National Commission established in what amounted 2005 under the united nations. I understand why gives these steps did fact for example, that they have a problem of the internal refugees we dont need the help so i understand of salvador that yes we need that in a country. And of those Political Parties right now with the security lost so they want to say no to the reform. But if we talk about corruption than the former prosecutor fifth with the highest politician rang now i dont know how to say that. That is the highest level. And so, you know, they had a fully different experience in terms of the state and violence and theyre spent work in the communities so that was the first question. But what is the context of the culture and violence and second is that i think most people here to an extent they may or may not know think of us as hispanic latinos but we also have the whole school and other groups in the region. I dont know if you can speak to some of that from the point of origin to some of these groups. Okay. But i dont know much to say about that. When i made coverage i never made the difference between that and another group. I understand thats more that i have to do here. When they arrived, for example, there is a huge difference for a lot of Indigenous People who in fact cannot speak spanish. So, i suppose that it is twice complicated. But i started last year to make some coverage with the communities they published three articles and i think im going to be working on it the next two years without Central America and violence. So thats my answer. But i know that for example in the communities of honduras. Its in the first year it had the two or is to assume violence are not so violent. I have an opinion i dont have the answer but i have an opinion. My opinion is that because one side had oneway, today it creates the society in the first years after we dont have a network of society you have the gang members you have the 2,000 habit tends. How can you explain that because we dont talk for anybody in the street. For example there is one they tried to escape from prison. The police or rescue him and believe somebody called him. In his community anybody could go. [speaking spanish] just one in spanish, please. Very briefly the first was in the first book for example if the 72 migrants that were kill killed. How have the receptions of the book then in spanish . My first answer is no. Ive never used that way when i called on migration. I never saw the indigenous population. I didnt pretend to end the work about migration across mexico is but was a product of the coverage that needs to be done. Its changing all the time, so no. Yes i dedicate some chronicles to talk about indigenous populations in guatemala. The state of north the government say in 2012 they are leaving a lot of communities in the area so there is a huge success of the government. When they move from that area it is indigenous who leave their because they dont have the land to leave to and of course if you see a plane near you im going to give you 100 thats normal, thats fair. You have to do that if you live like this kind of people. So, yes there is a chronicle about life and of course in guatemala like in mexico it is easier in the indigenous population for the same reasons. [inaudible] supposedly it is going to remember in spanish we make it a process. I thought anybody going to read the book because it was about, nobody. Nobody i think theres a good acceptance here in the United States. The read the books. I appreciate. Without no solution. I think we have time for these questions and then we will have to start wrapping up. What solutions do you think could be taken to stem the violence . To see any particular signal of change in the country, no. I dont think the solutions apply for the real combat. No. My answer is no. [speaking spanish] [speaking spanish] why is there so little mention how it has affected both mexico and Central America . It is complex to explain but i think they would see hi a lot with the paper mexico is still developing right now in the part of the country. Yes, i have the same answer. It doesnt explain all. It is an approximation of the organized crime. Of course i say mexican government. If the organized crime has no contact with government, its not organized crime. If you dont have contact with the government. There is a fabulous artist we work with very closely for talks about organized crime which is the government and then you have the transnational crime which we havent talked about today the transnational corporations extracting the technologies handle this and its killing people and so forth, so you have all these crimes going on but the only organized crime of th that. The Mexican Organization of crime of the 28 crimes that you can connect under a big dont connect just one. The role of mexico with the migration of Central America is more now than in