Transcripts For CSPAN2 Tonight From Washington 20110108

cnn, david ensor was the director of two medications in public diplomacy at the u.s. embassy in kabul afghanistan, the job he assumed in january of last year. david is just the title of this talk is about building an effective communication strategy in afghanistan, said david is going to really focus on that and questions that tell forward into that area. he may entertain coming but he may also not. he's really here to talk about what his job entails and what he hopes to achieve, what he has achieved. it's going to show a nine minute video of some of the projects he is set in motion, he and his team. he will then do a powerpoint and then we'll open it up to q&a. so with that, david is going to come into his presentation. >> good afternoon, everyone. thank you for coming. it's an honor to be here. thank you, peter and thank you to the foundation for providing -- for hosting today. i suspect that most in the audience, whether here in the room or from one of the cameras watching what we're doing still remember where they were on september 11, 2001, when they heard the two towers had been hit by two aircraft. i certainly remember. and i was in a traffic jam in virginia. the first call came from cnn, where i was then national security course on it. the second call came for my wife. she said -- all never forget the way she put it. she said, these two towers had been hit, and you know that? she said i think it's your people. i regret -- that's the wrong tone. but she had a point. i've spent much of the summer because my job was national security, hearing from sources in u.s. intelligence, one who is prominently remember to have had his hair and fire all summer, very worried about the intelligence suggesting that the united states may be attacked. some u.s. target ip attack with a major terrorist attack. and of course it did come to pass. and that sort of leads to where i am now and why and they are. i think it was that summer of watching the information that led them unfortunately to attack that no one could reject the shape or timing of comment that made me so convinced that what we're doing and that investing is very important and that we must persist. we must continue. we must have some patience. so, i am not a typical diplomat. i am not a service officer. i spent 32 years as a journalist at npr and abc news and cnn and that is the background and i'm proud of it. but i also care a lot about what we're doing in afghanistan and volunteered some time and says civilian volunteer if you will. i've been in kabul for 10 and a half months now and expect to be there for a bit longer. and i ain't we are beginning to make a difference for some of the programs that we started since i arrived. probably the best way though, because i am a tv guide, is to start a showing a little bit of tea. i think pictures are stronger than words. if we've got the technology to do that and i went up, can we do that? can we roll that video segment, please? >> even without a war, public diplomacy and afghanistan harsh rugged terrain was never going to be easy. with a 100,000 american troops in the country, afghans need to know that there are civilians here, too. >> a good afternoon, everyone. it's a great day to be in afghanistan. >> ambassador eikenberry is the face and afghanistan. most people in the street recognized him immediately. >> for every one piece of bad news that comes from afghanistan can all tell you there's 100 pieces of good news. >> in kabul we have all the classic diplomacy efforts, but we do them on steroids. fulbright scholarships have almost doubled this year. preserve and save the surat citadel. but it's not easy with immediate driven perception among afghanistan is all about death and destruction. it's become welcome to kandahar city hall, laugh all the body armor. >> with serious journalist like cnn jill dougherty, we are sometimes able to show the other side. >> is called cash for work, an american sponsored program to help these women, most of them widows, survive. >> public support is a key issue for the press section. a new outreach team organizes visits by journalists from troop contributing nations and since articulate young afghans to europe to make their case. >> the people in afghanistan are thankful for the support and sacrifices they've made in our country. afghanistan is on the road and they don't want to be left alone right now. >> the main audience though, the afghan people inhere classic public diplomacy is not enough. ♪ untold two d., and the evil four has garnered a and not events. [speaking in native tongue] ♪ >> afghanistan's fast-growing army is another target for strategic communications. ♪ >> show will air in daria and paschall, starting in next spring. >> is here that a new dedicated recessional defense forces emerging. this is the place for the birth of an army. >> and then there is radio and a nation that has low literacy come or television reach is mostly the cities, and has the greatest impact. we've invested enough in talent. [speaking in native tongue] >> some of the afghan talent is taking educational storytelling on the road. [speaking in native tongue] another major effort involves helping afghan government to better communicate with his people, the government media information center trains ministers, governors, spokesman, the world first saw its new capabilities applicable conference in july. >> for this conference makes it clear, the world is with afghanistan and the world stands in opposition to the common threat and the common enemy that stocks would fall. >> one of the most important new efforts reaches out to key tribal and religious leaders come exchange programs to take afghan mullahs to other muslim countries into the united states. key american visitors coming here. [speaking in native tongue] >> i am a man from washington d.c., where we have over 3000 muslims were for shipping from 37 different languages. students from the muslim countries like yours have come to america and were free and now i am a muslim, one of the 8 million muslims in america. >> an important statistic, 65% of afghans are 25 or younger. we will be bringing "sesame street" here soon for the youngest afghans to be translated from arabic. the cell phone is currently revolutionizing communications here. some people would rather go hungry than give up their mobile phone. from top thousand votes four years ago to over 10 million today, we are finding tower construction and other efforts to help commercial carriers reach more afghans were at the time. and we are helping afghan broadcasters to revive the rich musical tradition at taliban once banned. ♪ music, it gives people hope. ♪ >> there's a little video flavor. and i'd like to set out for you some of the initiatives that we're working on using a powerpoint presentation. here it is. let's see. yeah, i want to start with -- i don't know how legible that is, but i weeded out. i wanted to start sort of responding in a way to some of the assumptions that i read in here that many hold about afghanistan. and all of these assumptions have mary. is this basis in fact for each of them. they think that some of them are assumed to comfortably to be entirely true. living in afghanistan for as long as i have, you know, corruption, absolutely. there's a great deal of it. as a good deal in afghanistan, just as there is and the neighboring countries in that region. it is a very real problem, something the embassy worries about it works on every day. but so is the optimism of the younger generation in afghanistan. and this is a country that is 66% under the age of 25, 25 or younger. people that age are predisposed to optimism. they are the key demographic for the country. it's right to say that the future. they're actually matches the future, they're the president. we are working on that. many of our programs are aimed at demographic group. and they do think differently than their parents generation. there is hope in the way they think. and we want to encourage them to have hope. we're also doing a lot of things. one example here. another part of the embassy is working very hard to help afghans stand have its own fbi. and that group, while it has its problems, but sometimes get stopped in its third by others in the government has nonetheless arrested several high-level officials in shows real promise. as just one example. is the country fragmented against ethnic lines? it is certainly of the ethnic. their search may tribal tensions and even fighting and killing sometimes. all that is very true. you can't deny it. at the country has, since 1747, had the same boundaries that has now been the same sense of afghan nationhood. and it's real. if you live there, and afghans are proud of being afghans. they don't want to be pakistanis. they don't want to be anything else. there is a sense of national identity that practically every afghan unique makes very clear if. there also institutions emerging like the afghan national army, they're increasingly popular, that are multiethnic and that i think are the hope for the future of the country, which is why we are doing that documentary. we're helping to pay for that documentary, which is kind of a reality tv series that will be broadcasting during the spring about the afghan army. it's an institution that's already popular. we like to make it much more so. we like to show people it's becoming quite an effective institution. i go to training center sometimes to see filming contact people working on it. they tell me and these are documentarians who won awards doing films on other armies in the past, that a noncommissioned officer classes beginning to emerge in the afghan army that is worthy of the name, master sergeants. they are the key and they are beginning to appear in the afghan army, which is tremendous attention and money and resources are being spent on monday to shame. but it is beginning to show. and obviously the government is structured in such a way as to try to minimize the ethnic tensions. although they are very real. sometimes people say there's been little economic development since the fall of the taliban. well, certainly there hasn't been enough. at least in the area i work in the communications field, there's been quite a bit of progress and it has had a pretty dramatic effect. there were 10,000 cell phone users in 2002. there are between 10 and 15 million today, 15 million different chips. sometimes people have several. so that's why the disparity between 10 and 15. but the cell phone is revolutionizing afghanistan, just as it has so many other countries around the world. his change in the way people think. it's making them feel more confident. it's making them feel safer. and we're working to try, particularly with military colleagues to try and increase that, increase coverage, the time of day it's on and so forth. it's a very key project. and the other area i work in this of course radio and television, where according to the latest survey, done by outside consulting, there are now 175 radio and 75 separate television stations. and i'm talking about separate entities. in other words, in some cases, one entity will have several licenses. i'm not counting that. there are this many broadcasters. now, they vary. some of them are pretty ropey, pretty basic. some of them are water tv basically. but there are some very, very good journalists in afghanistan. and afghans seem to take to the idea of a free media. and they are using it in ways that i think almost all of us who had her careers in journalism are quite excited about. so, it's a green shoot. it needs tending to grow into a tree, but it's definitely on its way. and then obviously, we are building our ice cream colleagues with us, with our money are building thousands of kilometers of roads every year. there's a new afghan pakistan transit trade agreement. so, these kinds of things are changing the picture for the average afghan, who tends to be in the farming business and wants to be out to get crops to market. so you know, like pomegranates, for example as i mentioned at the top. so there is a lot of bad news from the very mixed picture, but there are some pretty positive things happening in economic development is filed. the old graveyard of empires argument -- i mean, as they say here, you know, what empire? there are 40,000 non-american troops from 45 countries, including muslim nations, serving in afghanistan. i think maybe sometimes in washington was sort of forget about them is on our news release the american. believe me when i go around the country and dealing with lithuanian and, you know, frenchmen, italians and herat. wheeler closely with them and they with us and it is -- what makes us strong as the coalition, the fact that afghans when you talk to them, they don't usually talk -- some of them do, most of them don't talk about american troops. they talk about coalition troops. they ask is the world going to desert us or will they stick with us? the world. and you know, that's the way the majority of them see it. every poll i've ever seen indicates that afghans do not want the u.s. and its allies to leave too soon. they are counting on help for some years to come. i was recruited by this gentleman to come into this job. and obviously, like i'm sure many others, so much regret his early passing. i believe richard holbrooke was right, and that we are not going to win this war. we see the airways to people who present themselves as false messengers and that we need a strategic communications plan for afghanistan, that medications are absolutely critical and that this is a battle of perceptions. so that is sort of mandate that we are trying to follow through on. i leave -- the section of the embassy that i leave at a budget in 2008 at $1.2 million. our current budget is $114 million, a very germanic increase in resources and i think an appropriate one. and i'm going to try and lay out for you some of the ways in which were trying to make those resources make a difference. some programs are already well underway. we funded a substantial amount of radio programming. i thought when i went to afghanistan that it would be kind of note in the mpr, a lot of radio stations. i didn't realize how much work has dirty been done. there really are a lot of radio and television stations. there are some pockets here and there were service isn't good. and we've helped a few new broadcasters. for the most part, with there isn't enough of it as good as can produce content programming. so we're in the first period of time that we've been working, we've been trying to invest in afghan talent in the area of programming. and there's a lot of it, happily. we've got some very interesting productions. you know, if you turn on television in the afternoon in afghanistan come you tend to see indians soap operas and people of soap operas and that's fine. but how about some afghan ones? the programs like usual for, and aegis site clip of, where the actors are afghan, the story is afghan, the producers, directors all afghans in its filmed in kabul, are hugely more popular than something produced on the indian subcontinent. so were working in that area. he sought in the clip we've experienced in with open-air theater, with messages about tolerance, against drug use about respecting women and women's right. and we've opened some of -- were opening a lot more link and learning centers, which are these libraries down the right-hand side there that are also basically internet cafés and are empowering a lot of asking young people to dream about something larger than village or town and their current possibilities. we also spent $1.2 million of the ambassadors fund on the restoration and here you see that her rat said it all, which is a symbol of afghan pride and is seen by almost everyone in the city because it's upon the. and we're looking for other projects like that. i have come to believe that cultural preservation and strategic communications if it's done right and people are told about it. we're sort of focusing on areas of national pride, whether it's the army or the corrupt to dell and trying to help enhance them. i mentioned eagle for in the other clip and the birth of an army and "sesame street." but we have an sms program. we are called pay whilst, which is a program where we are paying for a basically 80 million messages. it amounts to -- i hope i'm not violating copyright. it's basically twitter for afghanistan, in the sense that it is a social media product, which we contracted out in this company won the bidding, where people can -- anyone with a cell phone can set up a social group. for example, if you sell fruit and nut, hard market and you want those farmers and the surrounding area to know what it is you are offering mellon at 4:00 on a wednesday afternoon, you can send him a message in the 120 markets if they buy word-of-mouth will get it instantaneous and make determinations on the next week the prices will be better. but still we hope will help small businesses and farmers to just do a little better and communicate and use communications profitably. once the 80 million messages run out, this company and the four fund companies will together are working out, they've settled on some costs, some small charge. clearly the number of people will drop way down once it is anymore. for hoping it will be a sustainable group who find that this is a useful tool for them. cultural affairs, as mentioned, we are greatly increasing the exchange programs, standards of classics like the fulbright program. we would increase even further if we could find enough candidates who could pass the exams, but we're going to keep aggressively trying to find good afghan fulbright scholars. and were up to 642011. international visitors program has till the last two years. but coming up with new ideas and groups would like to have come. people with particular specialties in interest that could benefit and bring about a local government officials in groups here. we'll be bringing religious groups and we think that's very, very useful. in the film you heard the mantra hari, which is a bit of a rock star when he came to visit afghanistan recently. we're working aggressively to find others like him who are articulate, charismatic and do our american and muslim to spread the message to afghans, many of whom don't seem to realize we have muslims in this country and they do pretty well in that this message, this is a tolerant country and were not against muslims. so i'm bored -- the longer and there, the more i believe in the person-to-person, face to face exchanges of this kind. we have a lot of plans in that area. the way forward includes a lot more attention to something were already doing, which is the government media information center and headquartered in kabul with head office in kandahar. they hosted 202 press conferences in the last year. and they are the primary platforms with people these days. they're doing a terrific job training spokesman, hoping ministers and governors to find the right voice, the right way to talk it to be more proactive about getting out there in explaining their. we have plans to open >> satellite offices. we don't have plans for the afghans have plans and we've told them where we want them to. there's five or six more that they want to open over the next year or two that we are helping them in any way we can, mostly with money, but with advice as well. there's a new security news desk, which is staffed with not only the ministry of defense, asked and industry of defense and interior personnel, but also people from isaf and from kind of the international forces. and it is a one-stop shopping place for journalists to go if something happens, if an ied goes off and they want to hear our side's understanding of what actually happened. they're trying to be quicker responding to some of those lies for the most part better put out by the other side. cultural heritage and preservation. as i mentioned earlier, i really -- the longer in there, the more i believe ms is something around which afghans can coalesce and be proud. the country has a deep history, going back many, many centuries. it's extraordinary the kinds of things that are being excavated out of the ground and in afghanistan today. these pictures right here were taken at i am not, which is a certified to seventh century buddhist center of civilization. and this is stupa, which is the religious temple. and it happens to be on top of the second largest copper reserves in the country. so we've been working hard with our chinese colleagues because it is a chinese company that will be doing the copper mining. with the afghan government first and foremost to try to ensure that it can be a win-win. another words, appropriate archaeology can be done. time can be allowed for that and then the copper mining can also occur because those jobs are so badly needed by the country. down below, the herat mitterrand were special favorite of ambassador holbrooke's. he wanted to make sure he saved. right now there was sort of the four lane highway going right to the middle of them. they will shape them every time they default chart goes through. unfortunately afghan minister, administer regime is aware of the problem. he and other ministers have been working to try to solve it and we have been quietly helping in any way we can. there's going to be a bypass road. a lot of the houses of our defendant condemned and paid for and there's a bypass road, basically in preparation, which will take the traffic out from there. once it is out, it will be possible for unesco to come in and do some of the means to be done to make sure these important symbols, you know, remain for many more years. so we're doing a lot. we're going to try to help the national museum in afghanistan, which is wonderful, but woefully understated and means everything. we're going to be looking at a major program to help them were also going to try and have an offense we reach out to the international community and get from other members as well. the english-language programs. here i'm talking really about two things. one is english-language. when i got to kabul, we were spending -- very blockers in the audience but i think about half a million dollars on training of one kinder another in afghanistan. we have a wonderful experience and season guy and i've given up $10 million said let's make a difference. and he's been doing remarkable things. this is something i'll take a a little wife. this is not something quick and shallow like a tv show, but the outcome will be hundreds of millions with a skill to interact with the rest of the world. that is deep south, useful stuff. the other half of the slide i guess would be -- were spending quite a lot of money this year on getting construct dead, some media centers at major universities, starting with kabul and herat. these are state-of-the-art buildings that contain a working radio station, a working television studio got a license. .. would be to say, and again, the longer i'm there the more convinced i am we must do this and more of it and the afghans need to do more of it and help them and that is we need to reach out to the tribal and religious leaders in afghanistan. we need to empower moderate voices among them in any way we can find, and we need to give them a chance to resume their rightful place in the global discussion among muslims about what is their faith, what does it stand for, what is its way for word? i think by one of the ill effects of the taliban was that they were isolated, they were cut off from the discussion and a very extreme and many ways of false vision of islam was imposed instead and in a country that was -- where literacy is very low people don't actually know what the koran says on certain areas. now i'm not muslim and we are not the same as a muslim nation and we can't lecture to people on this subject. it's none of our business naturally. all we can do is enable discussions among muslims so we are doing the things like organizing with usitc in 100 afghan mullahs to travel to egypt for several weeks to indonesia and to the united states and have discussions about topics of mutual interest with imams from those countries. we are not dictating what conversations will be. but it is important for us in a national security interest those discussions start to occur so that is one example we are looking at quite a few other programs of a similar nature taking people out, and we are also working to set up a distinguished islamic speaker's serious to try to bring interesting speakers to afghanistan and then clearly we sure their events and speeches are promoted and that they are broadcast and people hear about them. very important area. this is too though. we are, mentioned the demographics dreyfus in a useful deduction, drive a lot of our money and effort in the youthful direction and we are working with him ngo to identify sites in a number of major cities where we could have them construct sports fields and sports facilities, locker rooms and in door space because that is to be the only place that women can play sports safely in afghanistan so volleyball courts, basketball courts that can be used by either gender are a valuable thing and we are going to try to do that in at least several if not five or six major cities as one of our key projects. also as an old tv guide a kind of believe in sports broadcasting, and sports as a unifying factor. so we are working to get sports broadcasting trucks built that are suitable for the afghan market and they have to be a rugged and not too complex, but the equipment that will allow afghans to watch the teams play each other live on television with instant replay and the whole deal and i hope we get some excitement. i know in other countries tv comes first and then pretty soon the banks when their names on the t-shirts and so forth. it could become a sustainable model and it's worth the try and it's targeted at young men more than anybody else and they are a key demographic for us. the parliament came to us and said we wonder if you would be willing to help us to get ourselves into the 21st century in terms of equipment so that our sessions can be easily broadcast. here we are on c-span. they basically want c-span there. and we are trying to help them do that. we've got a contract with a very respective broadcasting company which we hope to finalize very soon to have them put in robot cameras because right now this chamber journalist and they are all for the place and the legislators say it's too much for them so it will be a lil' bo system where you can just plug in and get a feed much as the u.s. congress has now. we are also looking with another guarantee at developing an fm radio station the will belong to the parliament. it will just be in kabul. this is another initiative we started not too long ago that's already bearing fruit, and that is of course we are the embassy to afghanistan, not anywhere else, but because of the war, the struggle that is going on right now, there is a need that afghans have to be able to reach out to the countries contributing troops and speak to them and given the afghan perspective on the importance of that and the importance of their civilian efforts. so we are trying to help with a small team to arrange those kinds of conversations. the team is planning to help host miami media tours to afghanistan. this is media tour journalists that have troops there, and the emphasis of the tour is to take people around to some of the civilian projects that the afghan government is doing or sometimes with our help, sometimes someone else, but to show the journalists that there is more than blood and guts to what is going on in afghanistan. and as you saw on the cliff i should earlier we are also organizing for the particular dhaka and spokesman of one kind or another to go on speaking tours to some of these countries. the one you saw, the young lady that was on the clipper leader was invited to the house of lords and testified before the committee on women's rights while she was there and they also were on the bbc and meeting with an ngo, and they did this not only in the u.k. but italy. this is a picture and the battelle university they were wildly successful, and i think that, you know, again, it's not our job to tell our allies why it's important that they, are there. it's the afghan shot to say why they want these countries to stay for awhile, please come and it's so much better when they do, so we are trying to help them do that because they don't have the means themselves. we also had one recently we had a pakistani media tour recently and we had an arab media tour coming into afghanistan. i talked to both groups and we are going to do more of that. that obviously have those some of the countries are in fact on the ground with troops so they are very important. that's basically my presentation, and i come back to the point i started which is, to cut the long story short the president is right. we are in afghanistan because of 9/11, and it is still not safe for us to reduce our effort and will take some time the president and the other leaders decided to maintain combat troops at least until 2014 that was an excellent call in my view questions may bring this out and i should be honest in saying things are not going well in afghanistan. this is very tough work and it is not assured that we will end up with a good situation. it is going to require perseverance and require time, but i guess the main point of my presentation is it's not impossible, it is quite doable. there are many pieces of evidence i have seen in the ten months i have been there that afghanistan can pull itself together. not to be switzerland, but to be a workable state with some sense of motion and hope and that is with that country needs. thanks very much. i would be happy to take your questions. [applause] >> thanks for the presentation. >> [inaudible] because of the c-span cameras, wait for the microphone to come to you and identify yourself. [inaudible] aye. >> thank you. do you agree with me [inaudible] and european and afghan and dealing in public opinion it is small only that he would focus in kabul i think that you are meeting in washington it's not showing afghanistan a lot of afghan community dias what they are come indicating they should stay in. i think that part would not be successful and there's a great effort for you do with washington and allies and the front page of the media nothing about afghanistan. everything is negative, so i think the proper timing of the achievements you've done, the efforts at least bring it back to the media both sides not only approach in afghanistan but here which is important. there was no lack of courage in afghanistan, there was a lack of resources and training and the image that now the international community has this is light you do as a favor you do not do the favor to afghan, you were there because of the safety and the europeans strengths. this image should come from both sides, not only there that you're focusing in afghanistan, but i believe part of my job is also in washington is very difficult when i see that most of the people do not understand our mission off of afghanistan. they are not willing even from who leaders they are using the wrong terms which are very sensitive like the words mentor, coach which are completely different meaning it's not a playgrounds all these sensitive words would be our politicians, your petitioners also. >> just to summarize the question then [inaudible] its not being communicated to the american public who is against the wall. >> that's why i'm standing here today to try to start communicating about what we are doing and i think we are making some difference. i think we are going to make a lot of difference before we are done, and i do want the taxpayers who are paying for it to know that at least in my view as a public servant is trying to lead this effort within the embassy context and under the leadership of ambassador eikenberry, i think the money is worth it. i think it is making a difference and i think we need to persevere. on the question of the public opinion in the west, i did talk about the partnership nation outreach effort we are making that we are the embassy to afghanistan and our focus primarily on a 98% is on the afghan people. i am very cognizant of the falling and support for the troops and for what we are trying to do in afghanistan i'm very worried about it that's why i am standing here, but i -- well i think our leaders have made some good calls lately. obviously i deleted the leadership or i wouldn't have joined the government. and, you know, i think we have got some time now to get this right. in terms of the media, i am not going to be a media basher, i could hardly be after 32 years in the business. i love the business and spend most of my life and i believe in it. but let's be honest, you know, if something blows up in kabul, that's news. if three schools open in kabul that isn't news. it may be more important actually in the long term but it's not news, the way the news business runs, and you can't blame reporters for that or editors because in the 42 years i was in the business i saw many pieces of data clear that while people think they don't want to see negative news all the time in fact that this will be watched. that is what people are interested in, so or read about. if everything is fine, why her report? so we're up against a structural problem as we try to tell the message things are not so bad in afghanistan, good things are happening but a bit of patience it will be okay because that doesn't sound like a news story but it's very true and i think if we reach out and as many ways and imaginative ways as we can find we can get it across to the american people and the others that have contributed blood and treasure to this effort. >> thank you. dominick from the british embassy. i wonder how you measure the effect of the activity and how you were able to satisfy yourself when you do your evaluation that the progress to sort of feel anecdotally and through watching the the defense is actually taking place within afghanistan. could you see something about the ivan you ration? >> it's a difficult question because this kind of work is highly subjective to be honest, and i will be on the stand stand here and tell you i have long experience in this area but i am using my instinct more than anything else based on my experience to find out what i think will be effective. we are planning to fund a study that we are going to get outside help to tell us which of our programs are working well and i am very keen on being nimble. we have put out a lot of different efforts, and it's important when you see something is working to plus it up, when you see something isn't working close it down, save it for somebody else. we are trying to be nimble and do that. how do we measure? i can't resist saying to you i think if -- i think if police recruiting is up in the period after eagle for finishes running i think we will be able to play a little bit of credit for that so there are ways like that of at least pointing to concrete difference is that certain programs may make the you point your finger on a difficult problem and its, you know, i don't have all the answers but i think that we will do some monitoring. obviously we can check a lot of things. did the show broadcast or did the s hammes program work? these are checkable facts and that, we are doing. >> from the new american national defence university, you it was to begin your contrast between the news coverage of the bombing versus opening schools the counter in search and strategic communications conundrum which is the insurgents tend to cause a vast majority of the casualty the decanter insurgents are blamed for the lack of security in the country, so with a budget of over $100 million but facing a very media savvy taliban for representation necessarily, but what are you able to do with your budget to try to beat them in a punch, punch about the level of insecurity and particular bombing attacks and so on? >> you put your finger on a very important issue in communications and afghanistan is 1i would say is the primary concern of general petraeus and others who are working on military partners and they do work on that, they do try to respond quickly to particularly with our allies about civilian casualties, and i know general petraeus is put a emphasis recently since he has come in on stressing any way possible when a large scale sufficient to meet the civilian casualties are caused by the tel dan but there is a debate internally about how effective is that. i talked to some of my afghan staff who say i hate to tell you this, say to me, eight to tell you this but you don't get much traction, blaming the taliban for the civilian casualties in the end people think it's because you are here and they are fighting you and that's the way warfare is. it's very difficult to kind of put the blame on the taliban and a forceful way all the line of my military colleagues are working in some interesting new ways to try to do that. for our part, i think on fuzzily inside, our major effort has to be not just to respond tit-for-tat each time, come change the communications peace in afghanistan. broaden and deepen it, so helping to expand the cell phone coverage, helping to make the television and radio signals of television and radio stations we think are sensible and reasonable strong greenup reaching more people. that is changing the space with which the taliban has to operate. people tell me how effective the tel dan propaganda is and how worried i must be. i have to tell you when i look at polling data how popular taliban design not so sure that is true. they are not popular. they are heated and feared by most population but they are very effective in some ways, too to read your being one of the tools of course, but they are very quick on the internet, they are very quick with -- the space magazine publications they put out that looks like actually. one of the ministers and the government brought me one and said my stuff isn't as good as this what can we do about it? so jian-li are working on it and his ministry, we are going to help his ministry to plus up their capabilities and put out better looking publications that are a little more clear and attractive and have better colored pictures and so forth. it's not brain surgery, but we are very actively trying to help the afghans to figure out how to respond to some of the taliban propaganda. >> brian, dod. you mentioned that you work a little bit with my isaf. i know there's nobody here from the staff. do you work with the media teams because they do a lot of polling on the effects of some of their efforts so much feedback do you get? >> we work very closely with them. we have an interagency telecommunications group that meets every week. we have a lot of different forms in which we work together. we are working to cover on some projects that we are both funding. i meet with the admiral every week. we are very much in partnership. we come at the problem from a different perspective. there's went to be an embassy for ebro hope and we have to have relationships with those ministries whether we like the incumbent or not, so our perspective is a little different sometimes come but there's plenty of good will and common work going on. >> thank you. national television officer several years ago for terrorism. you quoted president obama saying we have to remember why we, are there which is to go after al qaeda and make sure they cannot strike against the united states or western interests. are we not in danger of having confused the taliban ethnic differences and problems with the problem of the taliban and therefore made nation-building and counterinsurgency the response to what is a terrorist problem? >> well, this is a little outside of my area but i would say if the taliban want to change the nature of the discussion, they could publicly state -- the could publicly foreswear al qaeda. they haven't. i would love to see them do it and it probably would change the nature of our deliberations, we and our allies if they were to do that, but they haven't. i guess that is the only comment i can offer on that really. as long as the taliban does not denounce al qaeda and we are left with the situation as it is now i think we have to be worried about the prospect of the taliban ever coming back to power in afghanistan. very worried actually. >> could you talk a little bit more about what you're up against? how did the taliban communicate with the afghan civilian population? >> welcome as i mentioned, there is everything from by the local standards slick publications that are printed -- i'm not sure where they're printed actually they are not printed afghanistan but i know people in afghanistan helped write them, everything from that sort of thing to the night letters on people store threatening them and warning them to stop working for the afghan government to read a wide variety of different communications tools and fear is obviously as i mentioned one of their most effective tools, but they have others and, you know, let's be honest, the afghan government is still, you know, kind of a nascent effort. afghans are eager for justice. they want to have a system, a fair system, and that's the work in progress and so when there is a perception that the rule of law is not strong, that is a tool to the taliban can use. so, you know, it's a difficult. it's certainly not a black-and-white situation. islamic just a quick follow-up. on the outside border of pakistan the taliban has a pretty effective set of radio stations for which they were tracking relatively small transmission areas, but they were very mobile and cost little. do they have something similar in afghanistan or is it being taken down? how are they communicating with since retial is the best form? >> there are small radiobroadcast that pop up. sometimes they are in a van i gather there was once even one on a bicycle, a transmitter. so you will see broadcasts showing up better taliban broadcasts from time to time, but it's not a really huge phenomenon. it's something the military obviously works on to try to close quickly, but it isn't sort of huge. >> voice of america. hi, david. i want to talk about on a programming point of view, i am in charge of the programming for radio and television and voice of america, and i have seen tremendous changes in afghanistan in the four years i've been working there in terms of the appetite of the people and you hit on something i saw was very interesting. this summer we hired a sportscaster for our television and radio and it's been an unbelievable success from the web and the television and the kind of reaction. you talk about these with trucks. i think in a way it becomes a metaphor for the democracy that's -- it's something the sidey increased mind these are the kind of changes i've seen and i wanted to find out more about the trucks to get your thoughts, because i find it remarkable the reaction we get to it now. >> afghanistan has been having some success in the arena of sports recently. they have a really good team for one thing they are good other sports as well and it's another thing around which people can coalesce and be proud. so, you know, i think it's an important area to try to be encouraging but at the end of sports facilities young afghans can use to get good at sports and at the end of television broadcast where the best can be watched by the nation and they can be proud about that, i believe in sports for any country but certainly for afghanistan. >> i'm currently spending a few months of the wilson center but for 20 years i was with of the bbc world service affairs analyst. hand on heart were you comfortable when you got the call having been a journalist? just the point of fact you know there has been a great sometimes quite fierce debate about how many muslims there are in the united states. experts or others say there is between 2,000,002 perhaps four or 5 million. how come you're so sure there are 8 million? >> i'm not so sure there are 8 million please don't take my number as final. that is the number that was used on the tape and i was simply echoing his number. i am not an expert on how many members there are in the united states, millions but i don't know how many. hand on heart, was i delighted when i got the call from ambassador holbrooke? yeah because although i had been -- i was a journalist for 32 years and i'm very proud of that. i will probably always think of myself as a journalist more than anything else. i care a lot about national security issues for the united states. this is a big one for my country and for yours and i just think we need to persevere. i feel very strongly about it, and i also felt that there are some things that those of us who, you know, you are another one who spent our lives in broadcasting can contribute to this effort. broadcasting is quite important in a country that has, you know, 20% literacy. >> thank you for your initiatives and coming here to explain them. i'm with the department of homeland security. how do you reach out into the more rural areas and continue with cell phone usage and the education programs and the message to counter the violence that is occurring and also how do you explain the success stories of job creation and the people that you are able to hire? >> how do we explain it to the afghan people? >> yeah, and spread that picture? >> welcome on the last point, we have had since i became director we've had a number of media tours where we basically put an embassy aircraft 16 seats and fill them and take people around and show them, usually it's on one subject, say water projects, and it's a two day trip. we've done this several times. we decided recently to start trying to do it every month saw in working closely with usaid, we are working closely to try to develop an interesting set of programs, but the first one we did was on agriculture and it was hugely successful. there were something like a television pieces and i forget, ten or 15 radio pieces that came out of the trip which told afghans about some of the things happening, so i believe in that, i believe in the afghan media. transportation, getting them around. we have a unique asset in that we have aircraft and they can't always travel around the way we can so that is one tool we are using to try to get the message out. what was the first half? >> [inaudible] in addition to the stability they wanted the employment and how do you communicate okay, here are the people we are employing and these are the areas they are working in and there is an increase in employment? >> you know, in most cases the employers are afghan. we might be funding a program, but it's afghan jobs and an afghan entity for the most part. that's not always true, but we try to help them to get the word out, and they are. you know, rural areas, that is another issue, but in the city's people know what's happening, and the polling data in the city's is pretty positive although they don't want us there forever, they are a proud country and rightly so, you know, they are eager to have afghan policeman on the corner and increasingly they do in the cities rather than foreign forces. in terms of the rural question, that is more difficult, but the reader reaches 83% -- 83% of the country years retial at least once a week so its huge and powerful and it reaches the into the countryside so that is an important tool. use of the equal access project where we have actors, traveling troops going around and performing and it's a lot more wonderful, it's really fun. and again, it is an afghan project devised by afghans for afghans. all we are doing is providing the wherewithal to make it happen and encouraging it. but the rural areas are more difficult. that's why i am giving this afternoon to talk about the low reached issues having to do with mobile telephones. the more places that have mobile phone coverage, you know, the more plugged in people will be, so i strongly believe in trying to help to make that happen. it is happening but we would like to speed it up. >> i work at the imf. at the beginning of your presentation, you mentioned a time line, 1772 and until recently there was a continuity of ethnic dominance in terms of government in this country until actually as late as 1978 the had dominated the government of the country. in terms of your outreach to the community, since most of that ethnic background people are taken sympathizers after the taliban is there a special effort to be able to address them and taking from the leedy that that is a moral outrage is for most of them are because the present focus was predominantly as i felt maybe from the perception i got was more open based, or is it the beginning of the effort to? >> one thing you said i'm not sure i may have misunderstood you, but i don't think i agree that the passions are perceived -- i wouldn't want them to think that we were you think that they are all terrorists and they are not. it is a wonderful community with some very talented people and it is a big piece of the country. i guess the best way i can answer your question is to say we are funding the various efforts to increase the amount of posturing language broadcasting, the television for example, which is a kind of moderate and sensible language station has now got a much stronger signal thanks to investments they asked us to meet and we have made in their broadcasting and other facilities, broadcasting facilities, so we are trying to get more of a discussion going as to what the future should be for their country and for them. >> is it just like the number of muslims in the u.s. the number keeps growing. is there a debate on what is the percentage of the passions within afghanistan but definitely your respective of whatever number you come up with which is more than 40% in any case and they are the largest community, so and the taliban the from the area and part of pakistan and afghanistan being predominantly pashtu in so there's a perception i didn't [inaudible] there is a general perception these people are sympathizers, so i think a focus on them communicating to them may also be to have a very positive impact. >> i take your point. >> all right. thank you. you mentioned might letters. i'm wondering what your office is doing to combat those letters >> to be honest that's a good question and a question for the military. because you're talking about a military matter. >> i guess the question is why not combat -- why wouldn't that be your job because if you want to hit people where they lived using journalism terms, it's one thing to do a tv show and it's another thing to say i will tell you. that tends to have a greater impact. so why not make that part of your proof you? >> well, it is in the sense that some of the kind of programming we are working with afghans on are designed to eliminate basically how that intimidation factor is being used. shine light in a dark corner and it's not so dark anymore. a certain amount of that is being shown by some of the courageous afghan broadcasters that we are helping to fund doing either fiction or nonfiction programming that addresses that subject. but i'm not tit-for-tat let's do a press release responding to that might letter. we are not doing that. >> [inaudible] -- your not geographically positioned -- you don't have people -- >> that's right. but the military does and if there is a white sweater and they know about they are looking for how to respond to it both in terms of what they might say and what they might do. i have no doubt about that having been there. >> are there other questions here? >> what are you doing to leges integrate ward address the foreign media domination in certain areas? what i'm thinking here is i spent a little bit of time there and the television and radio stations tend to be a iranian and it isn't always destructive, sometimes it is quite constructive, but are you working with or in some cases working against [inaudible] >> well, we are not the only nation that is investing in this sector as you point out, and i guess we are just very conscious of that and watch what the others are doing, but there is no law against it. there is a lively voices on the airwaves and yes, some of them probably are influenced one way or another financially or otherwise by their neighbor to the west. we watched it with interest, but it is an afghan matter if there's a problem with it that is a decision for afghan ministers to make, not us. >> in the absence of other questions i want to thank david for a very rich and stimulating -- >> thank you for coming to speak on the record. [inaudible conversations] inaudible to the president of the claremont institute brian kennedy tater knocked about u.s. national security in the recently ratified s.t.a.r.t. missile treaty with russia. mr. kennedy's director of the institute ballistic missile defense project. his remarks are one hour. >> good afternoon. my name is david. i served as director of the allan kirby jr. center for constitutional studies. launched in 2008 and located on capitol hill, the kirby center teaches the principles and practices of america's constitutional principles here in the nation's capital and around the country. welcome to today's first principles on first fridays lecture. it's part of a monthly lecture series that addresses significant and timely political historical and economic issues from a constitutional perspective. we are pleased today that this lecture is being broadcast on c-span and thank them for the public service they do in their program. hillsdale college has been dedicated to the teaching of the enduring principles of the constitution and the declaration of independence since its founding in 1844. in the civil war college's michigan campus emptied out as we send more than 400 students to fight for the union cause. today, all of hillsdale more than 1,350 students take a course on the united states constitution. the kirby center which is located here in washington, d.c. marks an extension of hillsdale teaching purposes. the center is dedicated to the reestablishment of the fundamental conditions of freedom. true savitt education in our schools pride self-government within society and an understanding among our elected officials of the enduring principles of the constitution. you may find it more out about our programs online at our website, thekirbycenter.org. we also invite you to visit us in person when you are in washington. our next lecture in the series will be february 4th and will feature richard brookheiser speaking on the topic james madison, father of american politics. on this stage, jennifer ressa finton 1789, but the electors for the first presidential election in american history were selected. we all know who won that first election, and all of george washington's fellow founding fathers knew who was going to win. the reason washington was first in the hearts of his countrymen was that he put those countrymen, his fellow citizens and his country first. washington said the constitution is the guide which i never will abandoned. it is for that reason that he is properly esteemed for from he is. george washington understood what we today often forget that the federal government must be responsible to the american people, not for them. it must protect our liberty. it must do so, washington knew by protecting us against external threats and in so far as we see the nation's ability to ensure the country's security, we endanger our liberty by limiting the government's size and reach, citizens help to ensure that there will do the things that it must do. that is why we've titled today's talk it's not just the economy, our speaker today understands the threat the nation faces today. mr. kennedy as president of the claremont institute. its mission is to restore the principles of the american founding to their rightful preeminent of viridian our national life. president of claremont institute excellent quarterly publication the clermont review of books, mr. kennedy is also the victim of the institutes ballistic missile defense project. his written widely on national security issues in "the wall street journal," the "national review" and investors business daily among other publications. he also sits on the independent working group on missile defense. brian kennedy has been for hillsdale college on many occasions. we are pleased to welcome him today for the first time to washington dc. please join me in welcoming brian kennedy. [applause] -- before, david, for every kind introduction. well good afternoon, everyone. thank you for having me here today. it's a great honor to be here for hillsdale college. i share with hillsdale students something important. i, like them, and a student of hillsdale president who has been a friend and colleague of mine for 20 years. he hired me 20 years ago at the claremont institute. i am proud to say the same thing of the jeffrey, who many of you know is in the back of the room. the august decline at indispensable intellectual behind the best parts of the conservative movement whether it's been hillsdale college or at the claremont institute. thank you for having me. as was said by david i have the pleasure of serving as president of the claremont institute. our mission is to make the first principles you hear so much about these days the first principles of the american founding preeminent in our politics, to link them matter not just to save them that make them a reality. as a practical matter, my colleagues and i remind, alert and otherwise explain to the most important americans including you that their freedom can be lost, the prosperity and domestic tranquility our country enjoys can be taken away. in the great history of the world no country like ours lasts forever and certainly not a space republic like ours, we have enemies like to see life destroyed because we as americans that represent freedom in the muslim world. on their plan here from california i've had next to a very pungent a christian minister coming here to washington i asked him what he was going to be doing while he was here. spreading the good news of jesus, see it. he asked why was going to be giving to the and told him spreading the bad news of brian. [laughter] because i think the situation today is much more serious than our elective leaders would let us believe. abraham lincoln called us the last best hope of earth. we are that to be sure. we the people don't always appreciate this. we are a blessed people, blessed to be here in north america, protected by two oceans and with neighbors in canada and mexico that we have been a very careful to cultivate these past 200 years. some of us like those in this room are aware we have permanent enemies, enemies that are capable, more capable than ever of seeing us destroyed. indeed the question we should be asking when it comes to our national defense can america and the free world actually destroyed. do we have threats to our very existence, but even in these tough economic times when we are still worried about how to create jobs must we not also worry about our national defense. we are told we are the most powerful military in the world and we will have no serious challenge for some time to come and we are confronted with three reassurance is meant to end a serious discussion of that national security policy. we know the reassurances well their first that islam is a religion of peace. second, we will never go to war with china because our economic interests are so intertwined and feared and less controversial america won the cold war and that russia is no longer our enemy. these myths are probably the left and right and we would like to believe them because to believe otherwise would suggest we have enemies to seek destruction on the marginalization and subjugation to read but we see transparently the unfashionable thing we have enemies in the islamic world in russia and communist china. they operate abroad and here in the united states, we know from aristotle and ron common sense everything is done for a purpose. the office in their interest. when we got real leverage planning to spend enormous pressure, materials and organize them for a purpose, then we know the statecraft is at work. we must understand who our enemies are and take the necessary steps to defend the united states or we will suffer the consequences. these consequences may be the end of the american way of life on the constitutional government with a very lives of the american people it would be easier to tell you all to listen to your ipod or facebook and watch 300 channels of cable tv i can't, that wouldn't be right. you are all too important for that. you have a responsibility to know better, to do something about it. as do others in this room that have made their work to defend this country and its principals. let me address to the areas of confusion in the current understanding of the national defence. they are the islamic threat, communist china and russia. first, islam is a religion of peace. we were told this after the attack set september 11th after islamic operatives hijacked into the plans in the world trade center, the pentagon and were thwarted for another target here in washington probably not very far from here. president bush was a very good man, and he believed it was otherwise persuaded is mom was no different than a strain of the judeo-christian heritage that its adherents, the islamic adherence more peaceful of decent people who report what happened september 11th. president bush even said on october 11th 2002 that islam is a vibrant faith. mel little bo citizens are muslim and we respect the faith, we honor its traditions, our enemy does not read our enemy doesn't follow the great tradition of islam these high-tech degree religion. and of quote. it's common to circle the wagons and the president when he's thought to have conservative leanings and even today since we know president bush was another decent man, but mr. bush and his administration did the country agree to this service by saying that islam was a religion of peace for it was trying to understand them as we would like them to be whether how the in fact are. although islam organization as balto and a belief in god whom they call it is more purpose for the discussion a political ideology organized around the koran and its teacher mohammad. the teachings about the subjugation of 1.3 billion people, like most people, are inclined to believe there is a god and that his profits have spoken to man. but where has christianity asks its adherents to render unto caesar what is cesar's and on to god is god islam teaches the koran is the absolute word of god, not subject to interpretation. the to disagree with the 6,000 on the verses of the koran that are organized into 114 chapters or even reinterpreting them blasphemy, publishable by death. the islamic authorities of the major schools of islam teaches us the koran must be written so that the parts written last that were written last rule over the other parts. they do not come last numerically in the koran since it is arranged the largest chapter is our first and smallest chapters are last. the so-called theory of aggregation requires that we look at chapters of the koran which were written after mohammed went to 99 and 620 to 80 for guidance. so although there may be peaceful parts of the koran come they do not died with him as not to believe. now this hasn't been done especially here in washington let us look at the chapters of the koran returned last, number nine and five. number nine, quote, fight and sleeve young believers wherever you find them and watching and wait for them in every strategy of war but if they repented and establish regular prayer and practice regular charity, then open the way for them for the law is most merciful that is number nine versus five. fight those who believe not in the law or the last day or hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by the law or ed lynch the religion of truth even if they are of the 40 people of the book until they pay with willing submission and feel themselves subdued. number 91st 29. let me repeat the earlier one. findings leave the young believers and wait for them in every strategy of war. ravee who believe, take not the jews and christians for your friends and protectors. they are but friends and protectors to each other and he among you that turns to them for friendship is of them barely it is not the in just. that is verse five number 51. .. under the principle that they should not be friends with him, except as deception and they can kill the infidel. this is not by the way, one man's interpretation. this exists in the book, the koran, not subject to interpretation, except by punishment of death. if a muslim says otherwise, it is for all practical purposes a line that to deceive us where it's not our job to interpret islam in ways that would make us feel better. our job is to defend these united states, from all enemies foreign and domestic. her job is to understand them again as they understand themselves. and it matters not whether the number of muslims who actually believe that if a thousand or a million or 1.3 billion. we know it is believed by parents to islam, who have taken up arms against the united states, who have operated a terrorist and control regimes abroad who are sponsored against the united states like saudi arabia or building nuclear ballistic missiles such as iran. it is the doctrine of our enemy who is making more both here at home and abroad. in this country coming to take the form of the muslim brotherhood and organizational items, such as the council on islamic relations, the islamic society of north america, muslim student associations and others. their job is to persuade american elites that islam is a religion of peace. documents obtained at the holy land trial in 2007 in taxes to investigate terrorist funding, including the following -- include the following from the muslim brotherhood's strategic memorandum north american affairs. they actually didn't memorandum internally so that they understand internally what they're doing. they say in their internal memorandum, the general strategic goal of the group in america -- this is straight from their document, the general strategic goal of the group in america, which was approved by the shura council and the organizational conference from the year 1987 his quote in a moment of islam in north america meeting, establishing an effective and stable islamic movement led by the muslim brotherhood, which adopts muslim causes domestically and globally in which works to expand the observant muslim base, aims at unifying and directing muslim offers, present islam as a civilization alternative and supports the global islamic state for every good. having established its leadership, the memorandum states that wrote the muslim brotherhood in north america, they continue to say the process of settlement and civilization g hottest process, with all the means. the acorn, meaning the boatswain brotherhood must understand that their work in america is fakery and jihad in eliminating and destroying the western civilization from within and sabotaging its house by their hands and by the hands of the believers, so that it is eliminated in all his religion is made with aureus over all other religion. again, this is coming from their document. they say without this level of understanding, that their goal is the establishment of islam here in north america. without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for g javier. it is a muslim's destiny to perform jihads and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes. and there is not escape from that destiny, except for those who choose to slack. but what the slackers and the mushy dean equal. again, if one were to ask the average muslim if they know any of this, the answer would be no, of course not. indeed very few understand the muslim community the karate with any detail. it's within the islamic world that are violent, this is what they believe. they who live in the united states in fact believe this. and they often influence operation here in the united state to have us believe that islam is a religion of peace. we of course have evidence, not that i even need to mention it of the first bombing of the world trade center, the attacks on number 11 in isolated attacks, most recently at fort hood and elsewhere. more than anything else, before were a free society and liberal people in the best sense of the word, what anything else, this notion that islam is of peace has counted american policymakers to believing that islam is a religion to be treated like any other religion. indeed to mention the threat of islam, as is islam in any kind of serious ways to be labeled a bigot or a racist. some of the groundbreaking work done on the threat of islam was by nature stephen conlin, who while working as a lawyer for the joint staff and the pentagon try to explain the ideological and practical threat islam poses to the united states. this work led ultimately to the book sharia, threat to america those co-authored with frank gaffney, andrew mccarthy, jim woolsey and other members of the national security community. i'd recommend not put to you. in it, we describe the threat that islam presents to a free society. since we do not want to see our fellow countrymen as potential enemies of the state, we americans don't think that way. we don't want to think that way. the part of our problem is we really don't know how many muslims there are in the united states. we don't know how big of a problem this actually is. and to suggest that there may be a security threat raises the specious charges of bigotry. because it matters at some level just how many muslims they are. during the bush administration, they use the number of about 2.5 muslim americans. the pew research center in 2007 estimated there were 2.35 million muslims in the united states. the council on american islamic relations care with 5 million muslims in 2000. president obama in his cairo speech in june of 2009 put the number at 7 million. so there's quite a bit of discrepancy they are. other people i now think the number could be as high as 9 million. the pew research center again which did that lower number did a survey of muslims in 2007 found a few interesting responses. i say this not to vilify any muslims. essay simply to understand them as they're trying to understand themselves and we can look with clarity, moral clarity at who they are and how we can live together. 80% of american muslims, again, american muslims said that suicide bombing, 80% of the muslims said that suicide bombing can sometimes be justified in defense of islam. the simple math if we take a number such as 7 million, that mr. obama said, that would be 560,000 people who live in the united states who think suicide bombing can be justified. among muslims aged 18 to 29, 15% believe that suicide bombing could be justified. among this age group, 60% thought of themselves first as muslim and second as americans. among all ages and met 2007 survey, 5% had a favorable view of al qaeda. now that we have not suffered another large-scale attack after september 11 is due in part to some fine work by law enforcement. for more than likely come the inability of the muslim brotherhood to capitalize on what they built. and there is i will say the great uncertainty as to how americans would react to widespread terrorism within the american heartland. american navy is very genteel people, but also people whose passion for freedom could leave them to drastic measures. i believe the muslim brotherhood doesn't quite know how we would react. in the meantime, this stealth jihads that is going on presents a threat to the united states that lingers just below the surface of public debate and one that presents a unique challenge to both law enforcement throughout this country into the u.s. intelligence community. it's one thing to have hundreds of individuals to deal with. what if that number is thousands or tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of citizens whose allegiance not to the united states, but to an operational form of islam that seeks the destruction of the united states. we don't like to think in those terms. it will divide u.s. society, create animosity among citizens and fatness of our focus amongst equally dangerous threats. because where is the islamic threat here at home, which is yet to be fully realized presents great danger, it is only one of other threat. including the islamic threat, which is in fact existential in nature from iran, the islamic republic of iran. so moving away from america to our threat abroad. stay in iran, the enriched uranium that they will convert to plutonium, which they would use in a nuclear warhead sometime. the iranians -- we think of them as backwards at times. they are not. they have advanced ballistic missiles such as the shop three that they can launch from the land or from a ship off of our coast. the iranians, the islamic republic of iran possesses missiles that can destroy an american city or they are able to deliver the war had as electromagnetic pole slept in. they will destroy the electronic structure of the united states that could result in the deaths of hundreds of lives of americans. again, this is her a country that believes it must destroy the infidel with every stratagem of war. we do not yet today have a missile defense to defend the united states from this ship launched attack or from the attack from china and russia. so they say their purpose is to destroy us with every stratagem of war. they build ballistic missiles. and what do we do in return? how can we thought to be serious about our national defense, we americans, who will not defend us from such a ship launched attack or from a nuclear attack or the chinese and russians. this is in part because not doing really understand islam can we no longer understand superpower conflict. consider here china. we trade with china and they buy our debt. indeed they are 2 trillion in debt reserves, about 1.1 trillion which is in treasury. their economies and markets are intertwined. they would never go to war with us because that would be to destroy their main export market. and despite their intense desire to unify with the free people of taiwan, who they consider a renegade province, it is that the chinese will never fight chinese. but they are building an advanced army, navy, air force and space based capability to limit the united states and our ability to project power in asia. the chinese today have 2 million men under arms and they are not as sophisticated as the united states or russia, they still possess an untold number of icbms, most of which are aimed at the united states and hundreds of short and medium-range missiles for use in an asian of combat. chinese military thinking is openly anti-american. in the military journals they write openly about such strategies as an restrict warfare coming using a combination of military means along with cyberwarfare, economic warfare, atomic warfare and terrorism. this is what they write in their military journals. they're also working to develop a space-based military capability. they're investing various launch vehicles including man's baseplate, space station and extensive anti-satellite weaponry to mitigate the global satellite coverage. they like russia will do everything in their power to discourage the united states from deploying things such as missile defenses that could stop the chinese nuclear capability and the ability of china to operate at will in the pacific. as in a missile defense that we currently do not possess that can stop chinese ballistic missiles, the u.s. will be hard-pressed to maintain security commitments in asia, given the advances china has made to its offensive nuclear forces. the u.s. seventh fleet however capable cannot withstand the kind of nuclear missiles and nuclear tipped cruise missiles that china could employ against it. the destructive capability of the chinese df 21 d. against our aircraft carriers can raise the stakes of a conflict in the south china sea that would not pretend well for the united states. the chinese have studied american capabilities for the past 20 years and have built a sense of what weapons to mitigate our previous advantages. whether or not these chinese advances are effective is unknown. but what we do know is the united states has not taken, in my view, adequate steps to modernize our forces, to meet ballistic path of our enemies. the ss and 22 cruise missile called a sunburned cruise missile which was designed by the russians and iranians presents a technological challenge because of its mach three speed and enormous size. these are physical problems in time and space that very smart people try to figure out and do something about. they have thought about these problems. they have tried to solve these problems. that's at the level of capability. china has for sometimes carried out a policy of what has been termed the peaceful rise of china. they have no clear intent of being an aggressive power if that's what we've seen so far. while loosing lately is the rise of a scholar such as tom ben have termed the red card generation. these are the generals that are about 8065 years old, who grew up during the cultural revolution and who are now taking the reins of the chinese military. they are no longer interested in communist china being a secondary power in the eyes of the world and they believe themselves that they can match their economic power with military assertiveness. now this can manifest itself by a desire to take back taiwan by force, avenge themselves of the wrongs done by imperial japan removed the united states is the preeminent military power in the world. however far-fetched this may seem to the american policymakers said a not very far from here, it is widely held that america is a superpower and the decline. with economic problems that limit our ability to modernize our military and maintain our alliances around the world. one can see in the "washington post" today talk of cutting back our defense germans. and because america? adequate conventional military means to wage war against the country as large as china, it is thought the u.s. would have to resort to full scale nuclear war to defend its asian allies from an attack by china. this is a prospect that caused mostly tongue to turn the united states a paper tiger. although we possess economic and military power, we'll not use them toward an inch. now this may only have been propaganda. and i'm not saying i believe that. the current chinese aggression against japan in the east china sea and their open assistance of the athenian nuclear program as well as sale of arms to the taliban in afghanistan to the chinese. they would suggest the chinese martial is the immense states in play the role the soviet union once played a sponsor of global resolution against the west. which brings us finally to russia and the degradation of strategic thinking during and after the cold war and in this age of nuclear weapons. we used to be guided by the principle that the central strategic objective of the united states is the prevention of direct attack upon the united states. that is simple and straightforward. for the past 50 years, we've been taught something different, that great power politics is beyond the grasp of ordinary policymakers or even generals. we must understand the balance power between nations such as the united states and russia, especially since we possess nuclear ballistic missiles, then america cannot seek superiority over other nations less we create strategic instability that is the common view expounded by universities, intakes and schools of foreign service. there is the collect of you and i exaggerate only slightly that america is hardly worth defending her anyway but american military power is fundamentally suspect. and far from a french point of view, these people occupy the foreign policy and national security establishment of this country. you will see these are the intellectual shortcomings of the last. perhaps. conservatives for their part have been basking in winning the cold war, a war i will say not to be one. so mentally invested in the great, conservatives fail to appreciate that we did not disarm the russians of their nuclear arsenal or stop the act of members to notify the west or create a liberal democracy in russia. what was winning the cold war all about and why should it be celebrated so constantly? for the past few decades we paid to dismantle nuclear warheads and they dismantle anyway. we on the other hand have not tested a nuclear warhead as 1992. so to be clear, we don't know exactly if they work. we have no more tactical nuclear weapons thinking a superpower conflict or any super challenge would not come to the united states. nor did we build a missile defense promised by ronald reagan as this is no longer necessary, since of course we won the cold war. instead we preferred to be vulnerable when we know we have the ability to prevent their nuclear arsenals from destroying or keeping us hostage. this is true and republican and democratic institutions alike, including the last one. why does missile-defense matter, you ask? it seems like a specialty issue, doesn't it? kind of like the national security equivalent of the flat tax. but of course it is not merely a specialty issue. it is the single issue upon which our national security must hinge because so long as the russians possess offensive weapons that can destroy us, we must substantially see to their demands less we exploit dimensions to full scale their nuclear war, which i hasten to add we will not do. it is said that every war is a moral struggle, moral and that involves life and death, the force will recognize many materials used to wage war and ultimately the dreary defeat. and although the cold war said to have been won by the west, it was not so much a victory as an interlude and we would do well to get on with the prices at hand. for instance, the senate just ratified the new strategic that will reduce our personal and likely causes to further delay missile defense because now to build missile defense would be somehow to sour our relations with the russians. perhaps the question not to be asked, what is the morality of finding a treaty with the nations such as russia engages in massive deception against the united states, supports enemies abroad and builds ever more advanced nuclear weapons whose purpose is to blackmail or destruction the united states. the debate over the new "star tribune" might've been easier if you were merely deficiencies in the language, restrictions on missile defense in the unverified ability on nuclear infections. something more insidious to work and ratify new start reveals the foreign-policy establishment of this in an extraordinary self-deception by those who know better. at the heart of our strategic defense today is the notion that we will use massive nuclear retaliation against the nuclear power that attacked us. but absent the reliability of our nuclear arsenal and a smaller nuclear arsenal, how can such a strategy work? today we possess an aging nuclear force that we are not really sure will work if we have to use to retaliate to russian, chinese, iranian, north korean or undetermined group attack. so perlis is this lack of modernization of our current nuclear arsenal but the upon the industry shouldn't leave could induce senator jon kyl into leading the charge for approval of new s.t.a.r.t. senator kyl binkley knew better and did his best to stop it. new s.t.a.r.t. so we are clear will not modernize the single warhead within our arsenal, bull instead create the illusion that america is better defended. after all, is that not the point? why does one not make a treaty? so they are better off after the treaty. the question of nuclear modernization of our arsenal should be debated. hearings should be held on it and we should look at the condition of our nuclear force and take whatever steps are necessary to ensure our nuclear deterrent. second it is not at all clear that your weapons make us safer. the strategists have often warned fewer nuclear weapons are likely to encourage other nations to build nuclear weapons themselves rather than discourage them. catching up to the united states is a powerful incentive if one wants to dictate world affairs to their liking. third, the russians make this treaty because they do not engage in a single act of foreign policy without consideration of what will give them a global advantage over the united states and its allies in the west. new s.t.a.r.t. is no different. the russians did they wish us to reduce our nuclear arsenal and forgo nuclear defense. they are modernizing their forces and possess themselves a crude system of missile defense companies in service to air missiles with nuclear tipped interceptors. we have no way of knowing today how advanced the russian offense of course is and has become or how detailed they missile defenses have evolved to. but even in well-meaning policy circles, russia is thought not to be an adversary. even "the wall street journal" says russia is not an adversary. russia wanted by treaty because it gives them strategic advantage. and the united states they will not even contemplate building missile defenses to stop the russian or chinese nuclear missile and that the united states. the argument made that limiting our nuclear arsenal and not developing new and better nuclear weapons give us the moral high ground dealing with other nations. really, can a nation like ours be said to have nuclear superiority when in fact we won't do the most basic constitutional duty and provide for the common defense of our people by building a robust missile defense. missile defense is referred to these days as if we already have one. and i'll say this again. we cannot stop a single russian or chinese ballistic missile, nor are we planning to build a system that will stop the russian or chinese missile. this is a fact unknown to many americans and unspoken like many american policymakers for fear of the rightful anger it would engender in american citizens. if there is any more profound moral statement a country is willing to make them that they willingly, knowingly and purposely keep their citizenry vulnerable to missile attack because of the morally corrupt notion that it's better to engage in full scale nuclear war, rather than build a defense against such weapons. let me say in conclusion that if we're not going to defend the american people from these many threats, we have to tell them. that is the candor do a free people. now what i said sounded like bad news. i don't mean it to be because it's the american people actually understand these facts, if their elected representatives actually tell them these facts, i think they will demand something be done and something be done quickly. we have the technology to build missile defenses, to stop an iranian ballistic missile, north korean ballistic missile, which we can somewhat today. and we have the technology to build missile defense against russia and china. today we don't do that. there's something unconscionable about that. which is explained to the american people, i believe they will rise up in anger -- and anger that will rival the tea party anger over the mismanagement of our economy and obamacare and other problems today. so i went to thank you for listening to all that i'd be happy to take your questions. [applause] yes, sir. >> dr. kennedy, first of all thank you very much for your sobering comments. i'm not sure if i'm nervous about your comments or scared about them or not. i was speaking with my 17-year-old son and he said that islam wants to either kill us or kill us. i said what you mean by that? as if they want to change our spirit, morality as whoever they want to kill us as we die. the heritage foundation has 33 minutes, which it gives an excellent resource for those that are not aware of it. will you do me a favor, please and comment on whether or not you think that our political -- are what you think our political liberal leaders, such as nancy pelosi, harry reid, what you think their endgame is for the united states 10 years from now, maybe 15 years from now? .. i think they believe the republicans when there's a crisis will figure out what weapons system to build or something else. i myself believe that my remarks were not aimed at them. i don't expect them to do these hard things, but i do expect republicans to take this seriously and there's a lot to worry about. the title of the panel was about you know it's not just the economy, and i think we meant to say to republicans but and to democrats but republicans especially this is something to be worried about. we want to create jobs, absolutely but we also must provide for the common defense that is among the first requirements. and the time will come in my judgment where you will have a chinese general who wants to do something as he is tired of being thought of as secondary and people have ambition. if there's one thing we have learned that men desire glory. whether that happens in the boardroom or elsewhere, could happen in the war room. is there a chinese general who thinks of putting china on top of the world? are the people sitting in rooms like this in beijing or moscow or tehran or damascus who are figuring out how do we make our power the preeminent power? we on the right need to take that seriously because i think they are taking that seriously. yes, sir. >> for at least a month we have heard ceasar chavez talk about a treaty with iran which will put iran's missiles in venezuela, but i have heard from either side any mention of the monroe doctrine. would you comment? >> thank you for mentioning the monroe doctrine. that is john -- john quincy adams would be proud. that is a violation of the monroe doctrine. hugo chavez and venezuelans should not be allowed to make treaties with powers outside of our hemisphere to build weapons aimed at the united states. it is a sign of our moral bankruptcy but no one eats for and raisins the notion of the monroe doctrine that no one would seriously say that is not going to happen. say it publicly, say to the american people. much of our diplomacy is done in private after wikileaks i'm not sure how much of it. but it is worth telling the american people things with candor. on the economy if we are bankrupt tell them that. we can afford certain things tell them that. if we have enemies tell them that. guess the monroe doctrine. don't let people in our hemisphere that seems to be an outrage. the question about the left, i expect no one expect no anomalous to say that. what are the people on the right saying what you just said? excellent point. yes, sir. >> i'm applying to graduate school -- and i am really concerned that is more dangerous than any nuclear bomb to me because if it is used it would fry every electronic component. transportation would fail. distribution, whole communities could starve to death because nothing could be transported. i read too that they said the military was more equipped to handle amt but i could see -- while i doubt our capabilities to protect itself on the military side as well as you know, just like washington d.c.. if one was to be exploded how with that attack our nation? >> that is an excellent question. the question really is one can take a nuclear missile, launch it in the high atmosphere say 300 kilometers above the earth and creating electromagnetic pulse in a vacuum of space. there is no fireball explosion like there would be in the lower atmosphere. is just a pulse but this pulse destroys all electronics by destroying the transformers that distribute power through the united states. so if an electromagnetic pulse bomb went off to say over chicago and in line of sight covered the entire united states the transformers are all destroyed and a lot of simple wiring is destroyed. your cell phone might turn on but the lights in this building though out. the elevators won't work. your card may or may not work. you are walking home today. when you get home your refrigerator won't be working. you won't have water because the water is pumped electronically. you have enough food and water for about three days in your house but you are like a typical american. after that you run out of food. the stores run out of food after three days or a week. the electromagnetic pulse commission, a commission convened by congress, thought that the industrial infrastructure of the united states absent electricity can support life here for about 30 million people. we are a country of over 300. what happens to those other people? they don't have food or water. it is a horrible weapon this electromagnetic pulse weapon. it was that during the cold war that we would do that to the russians or the russians would do that to us. today the iranians are building nuclear weapons. they practice twice in the caspian sea launching a ballistic missile from a ship for the iranians practicing in the caspian sea launching a ballistic missile from a ship, a ship which some day could be off our coast. when they practice this in the caspian sea the missile was not used to go up and then re-enter the atmosphere to simulate a nuclear warhead. the dummy warhead was exploded in the high atmosphere to simulate an electromagnetic pulse bomb so it is not a secret the iranians are practicing this now in the face of those two things can happen. you can either build a missile defense that was stop such a weapon or you could harden the system. i would advocate that you should do both. you could build a robust missile defense because she will defend us from not merely the iranians that defend us from the russians and the chinese and the north koreans or anyone else. but also harden the system because given just natural solar occurrences there may come a time when we need just technologically a more robust electronic system. that is a very good question and it seems lech just such a common sense -- i tell this to many americans some of these things and they all look at me as if i am master of the bleeding obvious, right? it seems like such common sense that if you have enemies practicing to destroy you, why wouldn't you figure out ways of preventing that. because we have an alternative by the way. if we know that the iranians did that to us it would actually happen. we would have 200 million americans dead potentially. we would have the option have been trying to obliterate 75 million iranians. what good would that do? what comfort would that give your starving child? none. build a robust missile defense. we have it within our budget to do. as broke as the united states is today we can afford that. the technological advances we would achieve just by doing that, the technological advances our economy enjoys today are much because of aerospace program of the 1960s and 70s. this would actually be a program that would employ people and defend the united states. yes, sir. >> back in the clinton administration there was talk of sharing technological information with the chinese. nothing much ever boiled to the surface in objection or outrage to that. can you measure today with the consequences of that sharing of technology was with the chinese? >> the question is during the clinton administration we transferred a lot of technology from american aerospace to the chinese. and, it did improve their ability to both miniaturize their nuclear warheads and it improved their guidance systems. the combination of those things puts our fleet at risk in the south china sea should we try to project power there. with smaller warheads and better guidance systems one can find on the water aircraft carriers and battle groups and those aircraft carriers and battle groups have some missile defenses but not adequate and these advanced chinese missiles both nuclear ballistic missiles but also nuclear tipped cruise missiles that they are able to use with that technology has made the chinese into a very formidable force. i don't mean to paint the united states as backwards or incapable it is just that we have not kept up with some of their development. we can catch up by the way. that should be our business. we should tell americans as a free people that they can be defended, that they will be defended, that they should be defended and i believe the american people will rise to that challenge. at the chinese are very hard-working. they are very creative and they need to challenge us in the world. yes, there in the back. yes, you. >> immigration component. you mentioned the islamic immigration threat. what about the chinese-american immigration threat because there has been so much espionage that has come out both industrial and military from chinese-americans and what have you. >> yeah, the chinese-american immigration and the potential for espionage. we live in a free society. i don't expect we keep many secrets. i don't expect us to keep many secrets. i think that is okay. i think it is good to be transparent. i think as i say it is good to tell the american people today they are undefended. if you tell them they are undefended they will demand's defense. if america has a strong army, navy, air force and missile defense, that need not be kept a secret. i don't think there is anything we can keep secret from our enemies for instance. we live in a free society and they are going to find things out. there is the internet, there is wikileaks, there is ours going to be espionage. i don't think it needs to be chinese-american that actually move here to sell our secrets. i think any american, or excuse me an american of any race might sell our secrets. people will do such things. in the history of espionage it has not been so ethnically motivated as simply there are some people who wish to betray the country. i think we can build the kind of defenses that can overcome whatever espionage may be waged against us and i doubt sincerely in our history we kept very many secrets. i believe the russians and the chinese have always known almost everything we were trying to do. we have a tremendous capacity for deception but unfortunately that is mostly self-deception. at the highest level. [laughter] yes, maam. >> you used the term earlier military establishment, and i was wondering if you could comment on why there hasn't been more of a demand within the generals and the joints chiefs of staff to demand more funding for exploration programs and defense measures, if it is merely politics, if it is a blind optimism or if you could give some are the reason why there might be. >> the question is why are the generals raising more of a stink about this and that is an excellent question. that is a hard one because you look at the generals and they put their lives on that line and they are good men and they are decent and they have done some great things for our country at u.s. them sometimes to think about politics and it doesn't go so well. look at all the generals that were in favor of a new s.t.a.r.t. treaty. look at the number of generals who were for a world without nuclear weapons. just because you are general and you put your life on the line doesn't mean you understand all they nuances of strategy or that you are going to be in the business of demanding these things. i think we give too much credence i think to generals and two military experts about such matters. i think if you asked the average citizen in kansas what should be done to defend him, he will tell you whatever is necessary. find out what are in these are doing and make sure we can stop that. we send people to congress to figure these things out. we shouldn't have to ask generals. most of the things i told you or almost everything i told you you can read in the newspaper. some newspaper somewhere said what i said today. to talk about the chinese, talked about their views. you can read the chinese military journals. you could read about advancements in the literature and the actual aerospace literature about russian missiles. you could find out from iranians and congressional hearings but they are doing in their nuclear programs. we know these things. we send people to congress to study these things, to debate them and to build the fences for us, so let's not rely on the generals. i don't think there are any generals in this room but i think your own common sense could tell you that we have enemies and we have to meet those challenges. we have time for one more question. yes, sir. in the back. >> yeah, a part of increasing the defense budget, what about cutting some of the things we are already spending money on to build up china like military-to-military exchanges, export-import bank loans etc.? >> we want to be very careful about any kind of expenditures that are unnecessary. with the chinese and with the pentagon themselves. my colleague mark halperin mentioned recently in "the wall street journal," if there is a wasteful expenditure in the pentagon we should cut it. absolutely. on the other hand if there is something we need we must absolutely fund back-to-back. , should be spent on a national defense as a percentage? some people throw around numbers. 3%, 4%, 5%, 6%, what's the number? i would say it could be 100%. it could do but ever it takes to keep us a free people. it will have to be 100%. that's ridiculous, right? but we should figure out whatever it takes to make sure that the russians, the chinese and the islamic world believes that it would be a bad idea to try to destroy the united states and if we do that either way, don't think we will have to spend as much. they will be discouraged. they don't want to fight a war with the united states. that is a bad idea. we simply need to tell the people of the united states what will be required for their national defense. i want to thank you for listening to me. i want to thank thank hillsdale college for inviting me and there is a lot to do. i thank you for your attention. thank you. [applause] >> i think news organizations have adapted. is a great that we are not overall are not doing as much for news and doing more domestic news? the public has a responsibility here too. the public bears responsibility of keeping themselves informed. >> speech at a state department briefing began with an update on earthquake relief efforts in haiti. next wednesday will mark the one-year anniversary of the quake. that is followed by the regular daily briefing where the new ambassador to syria was introduced. the new ambassador is a recess appointment who was sworn in earlier today. this is an hour. >> good afternoon welcome to the department of state. if you look back at 2010, one of the most compelling stories of the year was the tragic earthquake in haiti just about one year ago. and the international community led at the united states mounted an enormous, sustained recovery effort in the aftermath of the earthquake. and to people here with us, cheryl mills, counselor counselor to secretary clinton and rajiv shah the administrator of usaid, the two of them have spent probably more time than anyone else in the united states government focused on the challenge of haiti represents in the aftermath of the earthquake. as we approach the one-year anniversary i thought it was a good time to bring them both down to give you an update not only where we stand in haiti today but the way forward. we will begin with cheryl. >> good afternoon. how are you all? i want to start by just appreciating, saying a vote of thanks t-wall but also many others who covered haiti because one of the things i think everyone always assumed about haiti was that one day it would leave the front page and it wouldn't be an enduring story of interest in an enduring opportunity for ways in which we think about is the world community to support others. i think one of the things that the media has done a good job of and certainly that many of the partners around the world have done a good job is to continue on the job to stay focus. i think the fact that as a rule you all play but some of the others have played have been critical because obviously what happened in haiti transcends most of what we could have imagined at any given time. family members that are no longer with with the man at the state department and other places across the government. we have those who we love and support who we also lost in haiti so i do want to start technology and the very human tragedy that the earthquake, that is told to con so many people notably the haitian community. i think one of the reasons why haiti is such an enduring power is that it has really the ability to transcend even in the face of an extraordinarily challenging framework. if you think about where haiti started even before the earthquake that you had a country where 80% of the people were living on less than $2 a day, the unemployment rate was in excess of 70% and 50% of young people, children, were not in school and less than 12% had access to electricity, you start in a fundamentally very challenge place and yes haiti has captivated certainly in our country the imagination and the community and the natural relations that are built to the diaspora of how to think about the connections that would be necessary to actually help haiti be the haiti it seeks for the future. when we think about what the earthquake did in terms of the told that it did not lean human lives of more than 200,000 people and injuring 300,000 but also in terms of what it means to strike at the heart of the capital capital in terms of losing so many public servants and also losing facilities that they actually get up and work in each day. it also created a loss of an opportunity for people to even get out of their normal place, their homes. certainly in excess of the million and a half of them lost their homes. weekend at a very almost unimaginable place. roche will be a will to speak to you and certainly answer questions about the success that i think the leadership of usaid was able to provide in our rescue effort and relief effort with respect to how we were partnered to haiti in its most trying hour of need and what was actually accomplished in that space. i want to focus on the fact that today we still have a lot of other challenges that still are there for a moment and then obviously answer a lot of questions. that is we still have about a million people intends. that is certainly better than the 1.6 million people intends. we still have about 9 million cubic meters of rubble that needs to be removed certainly better that we have removed somewhere between a million and a half to 2 million but it's not all that rubble there needs to be moved. there can be no rebuilding without the removal of significant amounts of rubble. there has always, there is also the need, then during need for jobs because the employment rate is still what it is and to the extent the international community multilateral donors and others are going to be good partners we also have to be good partners and how we go about doing the things defined hardin united states and provide for economic growth. i think there are a number of things for which we can be properly please to see the progress in, but there are many things for which we are going to need a lot more progress and i think that will be the challenge for the next year or two. because while progress happens over time, haiti's needs are immediate whether or not those needs are cholera or whether it not those needs are for transitional housing or for jobs. those needs are immediate and we have been taking steps to meet immediate needs while also planning for the long-term. that is what i hope today we can engage in some questions and to that in a way that helps inform the writing you are doing and continuing sharing that you are providing for what needs to happen in haiti and certainly with the people of haiti hope will happen for their country. so with that i will actually ask my colleague, roche, to do his opening remarks. >> thank you cheryl and thank you for all of you that are here to take an interest and help support and provide visibility to many of the successes and many of the ongoing challenges that exist today on behalf of the people of haiti. i think it is important to recall that approximately a year ago we had a really tremendous earthquake that really represented one of the greatest humanitarian challenges we have ever faced. and in light of that humanitarian challenge, with several hundred thousand people literally losing their lives and with 27 of 28 haitian government ministries being destroyed in the physical earthquake, the president and the secretary asked the united states to mt. a swift, coordinated and aggressive response that would measure up to and as best we could, meet the needs of the challenge of that moment. and i want to take a moment to just thank the thousands of military servicemembers and civilians servicemembers and implementing partners and humanitarian organizations that in fact took on the responsibility and went to haiti and works to really help the haitian people recover from this immeasurable tragedy. we will recall that effectively represented the largest humanitarian effort ever mounted with the food to station that at its peak reached 3.5 million people with efforts to get shelter material to 1.5 million people with nearly 2 million metric tons of rubble removed, a pace that was faster than what we saw in the first two and a half years after the tragedy in indonesia. so there were a number of things that took place immediately following the earthquake with a large global humanitarian response that really did live up to the president's commitment for a swift, aggressive and coordinated effort. we also took great pains over the course of the year to work in partnership with the government of haiti to really try to avert further disasters. the amount of preparation and effort that went into protecting the drainage system in port-au-prince to protect against floods and then impending hurricanes and the rainy seasons was very important. the efforts to invest in agriculture and see in some parts of the country where we were working with the government of haiti, a doubling of agricultural output, was very important in helping haitian food system get back on track in terms of an effort to provide his or its own people. and efforts to provide clean water, immunizations and public health messages were very important and make sure that the disease out rakes were prevented and precluded. even today as we look at the actual it epidemiology of the current colorado bread -- outbreak this areas that got the most effective humanitarian response or are or the area to is us that are compared to distal rural environments. over the long-term and cheryl points out the success of this overall recovery and reconstruction effort will depend on both a deep partnership with the government and people and institutions of haiti and our collective will and commitment to see the effort through. and in that spirit we have taken a number of steps to try to put in place the innovations and how we work to make sure that we are really capturing the opportunities of the moment to go back at her, even in a very difficult environment. i'll just share two examples. one is, we have invested together with private foundations and efforts to bring mobile banking and global financial transactions to the people of haiti. and we are seeing some real progress in that area which will be able to talk more about in the next few days. second is that we have been pursuing some of the reconstruction efforts especially on housing in terms of diagnosing and repairing homes that were partially damaged during the earthquake. we have have put in place many of the principles of our procurement reform efforts which are really geared toward supporting local institutions and local companies to develop improved construction standards and to be part of the reconstruction effort, thereby creating some of the jobs that shero reference and also creating a more vibrant local economy that is capable of sustaining and seeing through the overall reconstruction and recovery effort. so while we have examples that keep us incredibly hopeful, we also know the road forward will be challenging. and we have remained committed to the principles we outlined at the beginning of this response, that we will be good partners with the people and the government of haiti, that we will prioritize efforts to build local capacity and local institutions and that we will continue to focus on this effort over the long-term until we know that is the most appropriate embodiment of the relationship we have with the people of haiti. i thank you and look forward to some questions. >> i was in haiti just after the earthquake for 13 days and i'm still in touch with some of the mayors. and the picture is not very rosy, as you were pointing. how far the u.s. is supporting the u.n. program, food for work or graham? >> well, the united states has had a broad range of programs that have supported food for work and cash for work, both in the early days of the recovery and in the current ongoing way. i don't have the details of what the current level of support for the u.n. specific food for work or graham is but i would point out that in the early efforts, most of the cash for work prague rams and food for work or graham said for employing haitians to do things like rubble removal and site preparation for the construction of t-shelter, transitional shelters and other housing opportunities were provided through u.s. government grants, contracts and commitments with the haitian partners and ngo's. .. >> i was not mentioning -- i was mentioned about the slideshow in behind you while you two were speaking. they were very brosius flied. >> we couldn't see it. sorry, okay. >> picture is not rosy assumptive mayors are saying. most of the focus in the first weeks at least was around the center city, five, six miles out of the city it was just flat. so how far -- that's one. in the second one was near the airport you have these pictures come which are being shown to the world, the u.n. tags. but just behind those tents were really, really, very, very horrible conditions. for those too, have improved quite i have heard that not much has been done. >> do you want to address the first piece of that? >> sure. well, it's true that the early response was focused on the airport, the port, other major trunk lines of communication and transportation because the goal if you recall was so much trouble so much uncertainty and little logistics capability that the u.s. military working with a broad range of our implementation and humanitarian partners had to create a logistics systems that allowed all the different countries to get their resources from fieldhouse pills to commodities like safe water purification systems into the country and distribute appropriately. but that was a part of the early response, absolutely. i think if you look at how that played out over time, the response clearly went well beyond both the immediate area around the airport and certainly throughout haiti, even outside of the areas in port-au-prince. and currently, the effort around health services in efforts to do at the genealogical surveillance tracking and treatment for cholera demonstrates that the commitment has been throughout the country, not just in port-au-prince. >> thank you. >> sorry. i just want to make sure i'm not like stepping on somebody's toes. >> from cnn. this is a broad question and you mentioned that he be, even before the earthquake was in pretty bad shape. but is there any overall kind of ballpark figure out how we going to take to get haiti even back to the condition that it was before the earthquake? >> i think that's a fair question. certainly from my perspective, there's two things i would say. everybody's goal as they would say is to build back at her. i could think in a lot of ways cd is building a new because it's really better to build new and not just better because you can sometimes take leaps over where you used to be. i have a tendency to be relatively impatient and like things happen faster than its real estate. one of the things that have been very helpful to me in thinking through what rational and we'll do i know from a lot of the development partners i work with us was very for them. i spent a lot time would have how long it took to rebuild when did they start cursing up a plan in what looks like nothing is going on, but starting to see the buildings go up, starting to see the programs implemented in a way you can see the transformation and actually understanding in the end you had something more sustainable that the government itself could maintain and the people at most could maintain. that process really is a three to five year process. the real challenges you got to live in night in between. so the question is what should be due by year one that actually make someone's life a livable life. i think from my standpoint we have a unique obligation in haiti and i don't just mean read the usg, but everybody to address the rubble and housing issue. it's hard to live is basis without those things getting aggressively better. the other anything had to get aggressively better to acknowledge something all of the wealth instigated aggressively better looking in the united states is people need jobs. how do you create jobs at the opportunity for kind of private investment that means people will be meaningful increases in the number of jobs. those are the three areas where i feel like even if he wants in the next in the next three to five years see something that is transformational, we have two in the next period of time deal to address those in a fundamental way. otherwise whatever we see in the long term won't have people get there in a fashion that's consistent with what i think we should all embrace as tolerable. >> i just want to follow up on this. the government itself, the government of haiti, what is its capacity right now, would you say? again, i know it's a broad question, but are they functioning? he said 26 or 27, whatever were destroyed, is a functioning government right now according to what you think? >> yes, there is a functioning government. the challenge of the functioning government for anyone but his face the kind of challenges that haiti has come for us all not only an earthquake, but that's acquainted that some of the hurricane subsequent cholera. they are flied out with a lot of challenges that the average government isn't even confronting and they start out with a much more challenged governmental capacity and faith. that means they are starting out at a place that is a lot harder to confront the kind of challenges that have been -- that they've been blessed unfortunately with. i think the other challenge is there also do. whether getting ready to go through an enormous part of transmission and that is always a little bit of a challenge. they are going from a sitting president to a bigger one. how they get there is always a bit of a challenge in haiti and that is the process i think we on the international community want to ensure we are supporting that they get the leadership they voted for but also to the leadership they need in the future. i think that is itself going to be a challenge as well. >> i decide to that briefly? i'll just add that if you look at how services, water sanitation and hygiene, transport and logistics companies and mobile connectivity to provide information services, baking platforms, and if you look at agricultural performance, which is still 60, 70% of the haitian people depend on for food and substance. you have performance that was essentially faster -- you have a faster recovery and most international standards. if you look at rubble and housing, as show points out, that's of course slower to sell on track with international candidate and no one more so than the people of haiti. the economic and governmental capacity pieces are obviously the most important, but also the most enduring and will take the longest time to fully develop and fully get to providing the type of opportunity and resilience for the haitian economy that it will need overtime. so we are looking at that. and i would just make a point that our commitment to one of the suspects continues to be really just as strong as it was the moment after the earthquake. >> hi, leslie kark from the "miami herald." i wanted to ask in election related question. you had a number of haitian americans yesterday who told the vice president of some of the results of the november election to be carried through. what are you prepared to do it the oas results showed the plenary results should be honored? and can you talk about your concerns about continuing election problems were facing some of the fragile progress that's been made? >> so i think you're speaking about the oas mission right now, which is doing a review of the election results. >> the day of the anniversary. >> which are least anticipated to be forthcoming shortly. certainly we have supported the oas mission from the standpoint of wanting to ensure there is a comprehensive review and that that review went to war as a result in a fashion that actually was consistent with what the people of haiti foti. we are very interested to see what the results will be. we obviously expressed our reservations with the announced results in a statement that we issued right after the election because it was inconsistent with at least a preliminary analysis of permission, quick count and other things that we've been privy to. i modestly not going to address the hypothetical about what happened if the oas includes one way or the other. i certainly think we are just as committed as we were the day after the election to ensuring the people of haiti's voice and vote his respect did and stepping through whatever is the appropriate partnership to ensure that that occurs. >> are you ready now -- or at this point, whether or not cancellation of the election and a redo, is that off the table? i mean, obviously the oas mission clues that cancellation or redo or any of those things are steps that need to be considered. we obviously would be interested to understand how they came to those conclusions, would want to review whether or not those conclusions were one week to thought we could support in what engagement that would mean, whether supporting elections, whether engagement in supporting whatever other results. all those are things we are prepared to entertain, but it would be able to tell you what we would be able to do obviously because until we know what they conclude and how he concluded, were not in the best position to be able to. >> can make it in one more in terms of whether or not he would support the president's extension of office if no new president is on office in february? cannot all those things that are going to play it in the next week or so in terms of stepping through if it is the case the oas mission comes out with its results. i will help change whether or not and what i might there will be a transitional government. cannot think i'd be in a place to anticipate that until you see what they actually recommend. >> just one more concern, which is a concern addressed by most of the officials out of port-au-prince to say that the u.s. is not moving out of the main -- the capital city because if you have one camp, the local people gather around and it starts. and there's no -- the other ports, the other cities, even when i drove from dominican republic, there's hardly anything left. have you got a program to go beyond -- >> thank you for us tonight. people are going to believe i asked you a >> , but i'm very grateful you did ask. we're pretty vested in the whole concert to run decentralization, has made is one of its action plans. that's why we have wanted to build the quarters we're focused on making significant investments in. as we are signatory strategy with respect to where we are going to make investment, part of what we have both provided to the congress and our plan as well as outlined as our objective are to work through a process that not all looks at how we can go about providing housing in the north would be the track is john, what we can do to support the industrial park. we obviously find to him a use them and working through foreign investors on how to go about attracting them to an industrial park and were prepared to also provide the kind of electrification necessary not only to support such an activity, but also in support of creating greater access and that's also an area we articulated in our plan for the congress. we actually are focused on the north. in addition to that there's also the agriculture in the north that we are interested in helping supports and in particular there's export crops up there in both mangoes and pick out that it is pretty impactful for the haitian economy. so we are focused. it takes a while to do all those things are not the hard part. when you're sitting in planning blix that nothing is going on. but he also does we should ask the question again on tuesday. [laughter] >> i have a non-haiti question. >> i'm your man. >> there's been some criticism of the ihrc. is there a plan for you looking at ways of improving it? >> i think two things. i actually would commend people to take a look at how long it took karachi to set up a similar commission, which was actually on a much more extended window of time that had they been approved its first product and the ihrc has. i think it has provided something to donors that if left tangible, but certainly incredibly impactful. i think we all looked at the ihrc as an opportunity to be able to ensure the haitian government's plans got concluded in the way they look like in their own vision and created an opportunity for the coordination and collaboration that should have been. while it provided what it is really done is provided an enormous amount of transparency for us among ourselves as donors that has allowed all new levels of collaboration to occur because you now know what canada is doing for you now know what venezuela is doing for you now know what the e.u. is doing. and that is meant as an partnership achieved that has never been part of it in the past. certainly with rebuilding the general hospital is not one we have had a history of. i can go through a number of different projects and also investment will be made because of the ihrc because they created a unique form. it is also created a unique platform for the private sector to participate a number of activities did not historically had an organized way to be able to engage. and so from my perspective, i think there are legitimate concerns about how fast the ihrc was able to move, how fast he could staff. but the reality is that what actually has been achieved because of it in but it has facilitated among the international community's, both organization and investment ineffectiveness i think is the unseen, but very valuable piece of it. to me the most obvious answer instance of that is when they canceled one of the meanings to have it as a telephone conference call and everybody from those representatives are norway and france to japan and also nearby thought that was a horrible thing to have time. how could we not all be getting together to address challenges that were there. and naturally spoke a different level of collaboration because most of the time we need to be doing their own thing. >> i would decide very quickly to that at that it's been really helpful for the planning and taking forward in a coordinated way. and while their initial, there are significant activities going on and to recite our culture and shelters that are making up a bit from the immediate relief and recovery to long-term reconstruction. some of the early results from those, whether or not widespread and will be the types of things that will solve these problems overnight, but doubling corn and sorghum productivity and certain part of 80 will set the stage for a really enthusiastic and important set of investment that hopefully will replicate the process in a much broader way throughout the haitian countryside in 2011. being able to provide 11,000 transitional shelters and to review 400,000 damaged units to identify which ones can be reconstructed and building a small scale haitian reconstruction industry that can use improved rebar and demand to reconstruct those two earthquake standards will set the stage for much more rapid and much more effective shelter strategy through the coming years. so a lot of what has happened is also real activity that sets the stage for the opposition. >> are you a part of the presidential delegation and then you talked about the second position with india. given the sense of what are the steps you are taking now for the second green revolution with india. >> i was a very exciting program of part of our feed the future effort to address hunger and poverty around the world. one of the real unique attributes of that program is to recognize that india and india partners, innovators in technology and agriculture extension in agricultural science had a lot to offer to other parts of the world like sub-saharan africa and other parts of asia. as a follow-up to that announcement in that program were currently working with the government of india to bring the benefits of the program to other parts of the world. but was really unique that effort was it was both president obama and prime minister singh making a commitment to both focus on improving agricultural performance and therefore poverty and hunger reduction in india. a really finding those unique areas, whether using mobile phone-based extension systems or legumes research, with those types of efforts could make a big difference in sub-saharan africa comes of medicine the focus of our follow-up from there. but thanks for asking. >> as a drawdown of troops begins in july, is the usaid changing its strategy and implementing programs in afghanistan? >> overall or in a particular area? >> yeah, overall. the transition starts in july. >> we've actually gone through the course of the past years a significant transformation of the civilian assistance program in afghanistan to be highly coordinated with the military campaign in the military effort. so as overtime transition occurs, our commitment to the civilian enterprises supporting farmers and providing health and education services in helping the government's stand of its own capacity to provide services will continue in a very strong and continued way. thank you. >> thank you. >> will continue on with the rest of the world, so to speak. earlier this afternoon, the secretary of state sworn in as the new united states ambassador to syria, robert ford. he is one of our most qualified diplomats. he is tough, principled and scott with a proven track record. he is exactly the right person for this job. we have significant interest in damascus and across middle east. the ambassador serves no other purpose than to disadvantage the united states. i have represented a damascus will make it possible to deliver strong and consistent messages to the syrian government and further u.s. interests and security. putting an ambassador in damascus should not be reviewed as a world war ii the syrian government. it improves our ability to deliver for messages to the syrian government and articulate clearly our concerns and priorities to syria. the secretary later this afternoon will travel to new york this evening to visit with king abdullah of saudi arabia to wish him well as he continues to recover from back surgery and we are delighted that the king, a valued friend and ally is ready to risk the visitors and the secretary will wish him a rapid recovery. also in new york, she will meet with prime minister saad hariri and reiterate report for political independent, lebanon. several fus yesterday about this report of allegedly u.s. citizen detained in iran. we have no information to collaborate this alleged incident. in addition to checking out records, he is content art medium authorities on tourists was protecting power, the iranian government concerning these reports. neither iran nor armenia reports having any record of the u.s. it is and crossing for attempting to cross the iran armenia border as indicated in the accounts. we also take note of the fact that earlier today a lady, catherine ashton confirmed that the next round of the p-5+1 for e-3+5 will be in istanbul later this month. we look forward to the next round of discussions. we would like to see a meaningful negotiations process emerge. our partners are committed to pragmatic others to resolve the international community's concerns about iran's nuclear programs. but we are equally committed to holding iran accountable to its international obligations and will continue to focus on this until iran demonstrates through tangible steps that it is prepared to resolve international concerns. ambassador steve was worth is on his way back to the united states. he met earlier today with vice foreign minister kenichiro sasae and assistant chief cabinet secretary chikao sase. yet very useful and productive discussions chairman he next steps on korean peninsula issues has the opportunity to report to the japanese government on the results of his travels and discussions in seoul and beijing this week. >> what prompted your comments from the ambassador? >> he was sworn in today. >> there wasn't a complaint on someone? no. >> you're not referring to iliana ros-lehtinen? >> now, the fact he has been sworn in and win the coming days traveled to damascus. i think there are some consultations that he will have here in the building, but i would expect ambassador for it to be in place before the end of january. >> on the secretary's meeting in new york today, do you expect a trilateral meeting between the king and her re-re? >> that's not my understanding. i believe they will have separate meanings, but we find that both are in new york and there's a good opportunity for him to check in with those king abdullah and also the prime minister. >> is the meeting only to wish the king good wishes because the timing of these meanings comes with she really announced today that the king achieved to defuse tension in lebanon? i think her prime focus is to wish him well. i wouldn't be surprised if they do get into knowing the king and get into a discussion of regional issues. certainly she will emphasize to the king as well as to prime minister that our support of the democratic government in lebanon as well as our ongoing support for the special tribunal. >> p.j., another question. there is a case apparently transfixed mohammed, an american teenager detained in kuwait and the allegation he said he was detained at the behest of the united states and tortured. do you have anything on that? >> well, as to the first, he was not detained at the behest of the united states government. we have been providing him a consular services. i'm not at liberty to say a great deal. we don't have a privacy act waiver, but we are aware of his detention. we have provided 10 consular services and we are ensuring his well-being as we would for any citizen in detention. >> same in the region, what is the position that the u.s. on the visit to the u.s. by mr. al-sadr? >> we touched on a couple of days ago. he is out is the leader of a political party that won a -- >> the question was about a visit to the u.s. -- >> i'm sorry that it was visit to iraq. i'm not aware of any plans for mr. al-sadr to this day. >> york and desires of the national prayer breakfast had been approached to a certain manner -- and to invite him for in february and the reply is not yet time. and now they are looking at 2012. so what is the position of the u.s. if he wants to come? >> allows with -- as with anyone around the world they are free to apply to come the united states and we will evaluate that request. >> and. >> and i go back to the appointment -- to the assumption of the duties by ambassador ford for a second? you mentioned, mr. crowley, that they should not be perceived by theory as a reward. how should it be perceived? is it -- i mean, our relations back on track? is there improvement in relations? and how do we -- how should we interpret this? >> we have ambassadors in place in countries with which we have significant disagreements. our ambassador is there to serve the u.s. interests and two on a daily basis be able to communicate our views to the syrian government. i would say, you know, if other groups coming in now, including hezbollah have the opportunity to communicate with your everyday, the 90s they should have the same opportunity. >> just a quick follow-up, the former at a very low point, should we say that we are now beyond the low point and that we are any better point? >> that's a tough one to answer. we obviously want to see syria play a constructive role. it has at times. we have great concerns about, you know, activities that syria hasn't aged and in the context of it ongoing support for hezbollah. so you know, this is why we have chosen to place our ambassador in damascus at this time. >> on the secretary's trip to the gulf, is she going out there with a specific shopping list to get these gulf countries to do specific aims vis-à-vis setting up the embassies in iraq, attending the arab league summit? does she have it tailored this for everybody out there? >> first of all, the secretary enjoys traveling to the regions underrate other basis. it is a good time for her to touch base in key countries in the polls. they will be a range of issues that they will discuss. i'm searching the issue of iraq and helping to reintegrate iraq and the region will be among the topics discussed. ..

Related Keywords

Surat ,Gujarat ,India ,Caspian Sea ,Oceans General ,Oceans ,Istanbul ,Turkey ,Beijing ,China ,California ,United States ,Herat ,Afghanistan ,Syria ,Russia ,Washington ,District Of Columbia ,South China Sea ,Brunei General ,Brunei ,Kabul ,Kabol ,Mexico ,Egypt ,Dhaka ,Bangladesh ,Switzerland ,Karachi ,Sindh ,Pakistan ,Chicago ,Illinois ,Claremont ,Norway ,New York ,Haiti ,Canada ,East China Sea ,Japan General ,Japan ,Damascus ,Dimashq ,Germany ,Armenia ,Iran ,Hillsdale ,Dominican Republic ,Virginia ,French Point ,Indonesia ,Lebanon ,As Iran ,Az Arbayjan E Sharqi ,Michigan ,Taiwan ,An Goes ,Sulawesi Tengah ,Cairo ,Al Qahirah ,Seoul ,Soul T Ukpyolsi ,South Korea ,Iraq ,Colorado ,Saudi Arabia ,North Korea ,Kansas ,Prague ,Praha ,Hlavníesto ,Czech Republic ,Lithuania ,Capitol Hill ,France ,Venezuela ,Italy ,Kuwait ,Americans ,America ,North Koreans ,Germans ,Venezuelans ,Pakistani ,Iranians ,Iranian ,Afghan ,Italians ,Haitians ,Russians ,Japanese ,American ,Haitian ,Chinese ,Russian ,Afghans ,North Korean ,Soviet ,Lithuanian ,Syrian ,Pakistanis ,Frenchmen ,Jill Dougherty ,Tom Ben ,Hugo Chavez ,Rajiv Shah ,John Quincy Adams ,Allan Kirby Jr ,Jon Kyl ,Ged Lynch ,Nancy Pelosi ,Jim Woolsey ,Richard Holbrooke ,Stephen Conlin ,Catherine Ashton ,Kyl Binkley ,David Ensor ,King Abdullah ,Robert Ford ,Harry Reid ,Abraham Lincoln ,Leslie Kark ,Ceasar Chavez ,Al Qaeda ,Frank Gaffney ,Brian Kennedy ,James Madison ,Andrew Mccarthy ,Kenichiro Sasae ,Saad Hariri ,Miami Herald ,