Security issue which has the Great Potential for souring the overall strategic discussion. I think it makes it hard. I think its essential for us to try to explore these ideas, but it becomes more of an academic or think tank exercise and less of a practical exercise if these sorts of perceptions create is much distrust. Last comments before i go out to the audience . Let me go out. We have a lot of hands and we have 10, 12 minutes. Im going to start with the gentleman way back on the left. Yes, you. Yes ill bill jones from executive intelligence review. Id like to just focus on this issue of the one road and one belt. Because it seems to me that the way the u. S. The attitude toward the one road, one belt will determine the course of human history. If it is willing to join this and to work in this, i think were going to have a flourishing of Economic Growth the likes which of we havent seen. We saw at the ufa conference nearly 50 of the World Population has said, we have to move in a different direction towards this infrastructural investment, road development, highway development. This is what the world wants to do. The United States has been invited to this. President xi personally has extended an invitation to the United States to be a part of this. But the attitude we get from the u. S. Mainly is either critical or even kind of paranoid about it. Because its china thats pushing this proposal. The new silk road as it has been put forward is largely a myth at the present moment. There is nothing being built. Theres nothing being developed. But it was used i think as a ploy to try and show that we have our silk road and you have your silk road. I dont think thats going to get it. I think the idea is that if the United States is willing to participate in this, the hand of the of president xi is open to that type of participation. But i dont think weve really got our act together in understanding the significance of this. Because were mired presently in a debt crisis in europe and the United States, and here we see asia moving ahead. We dont know how to deal with this and i think until we can get our act together, move in that direction, we ourselves will not develop. Look at infrastructural development. How much of that do we need ourselves . Our roads, our highways our railroads. We havent done that in a long time. I think if the u. S. Policy were oriented toward that, i think we could take that extended hand and work with china in trying to develop the world and to realize the common names of mankind. I think we have to somehow reexamine our own attitudes towards this the and understand the significance of this project. Let me take two more questions and then come back to the panel. So the gentleman up here in the front. I just want to continue from where you started. Could china and the u. S. Actually reconcile on this different approach . I think starkly different approach. The intervention, nonintervention. For example, china sea, very different. The arab spring compares with the u. S. Or when china sea and nato views over Security Council resolution on libya for regime change. China is very mindful of any Security Council bill on syria for example. The other is actually according to pew center survey, china actually is more popular in the middle east than ups. Very starkly different policy. So how you the chinese scholar and u. S. Scholar how you interpret this . Does that mean they like chinas approach or dislike the u. S. Approach . Thank you. One more. Lets go to the middle gentleman, second in there. My name is mr. Ruben assistant director for asia of the americanjewish community. China and india have had a very traditional close ties with the palestinians. People. And also since 91 have had growing ties with israel. How could both countries join the p5 1 . I agree with you, excluding china china. In trying to help forging a the middle east Peace Process, as well as ensure israels security with the kind of threats that iran makes . Thank you. Three really simple questions. The first is on the belt and road. Is the United States welcoming or not welcoming . And should it . Second sort of on how do you reconcile these deep differences . I think the key there is the different approaches and perceptions about the arab spring between the United States and china. And the third is could china and india help with the Israeli PalestinianPeace Process . Which i think is quite interesting. Im going to go down the row and you can pick and choose what you want to answer of those questions. Weve only got about five minutes. You want me to start . Just briefly its very good questions on the difference of perceptions of the u. S. And china at the popular level. Let me start with your second question first. Ive looked at the data a bit. And i think part of it may be this issue of familiarity breeding some contempt. If you recall in turkey, 2010, 2011, 2012 especially after the first year of the arab spring, there was opinion surveys that said turkey was sort of the more positive and favorable country in the middle east compared to all others. Thats changed substantially. I think turkeys very active in its role in certain conflicts. This is i think a cautionary tale for china as it thinks about its deeper engagement possibly in the middle east. Again, i dont think weve seen it just yet. Theres this issue of the more you get involved in a region of the world that is deeply fractious, then you get these scenarios where in the case of egypt United States still remains deeply engaged there but we probably have one of the lowest favorabilities at the popular levels. Because people who supported the Muslim Brotherhood think we sold them out. People who were against the Muslim Brotherhood think we actually were with the Muslim Brotherhood. The more you get involved in societies that i think are fragmented and fractured, the less dividend it pays in terms of popular perceptions. Your question on the sort of dilemma of resolving u. S. And china, which are the issues in terms of the different approaches, i think again the p5 1 test case of iran not just whether we get a deal today or this week, but what does that deal mean how can we actually extend it, is one of the best test cases whether it proves its value. I think the easier test case, like tunisia i would say even today, egypt is much easier than, say, libya yemen certainly iraq, syria. That in the short run figuring out if theres a practical way for the two countries to actually resolve its stated interests and then its stated program for the region i would apply it to those countries like tunisia, like egypt where theres a greater sense of basic stability. And not to those tough cases like libya or yemen. I think its really hard on iraq and syria, as we saw. Many people put forward including china a peace plan for syria. It just hasnt worked. The u. S. I think has a the difference of approaches of interventionism versus noninterventionism i think are easier to apply in those societies that have at least a foothold on stability. I would start in those places. First and foremost i would start with finishing the work thats been started on the iran front. I would just make some additional remarks. Number one the belt and the Road Initiative i think china certainly welcomes the participation and the endorsement of the United States. The silk road existed almost 2,000 years ago. But the name of silk road was not created by the chinese, but by the germans, 100 years ago. And now we take this as a new way of thinking. And we believe it will take about 30 to 50 or almost a half century to realize. And secondly, it is natural and be expected. We will have different concepts understandings, especially when the notion is just being brought up. For instance china and mongolia had different perceptions and understandings of this silk road proposal. Then after rounds and rounds of communications, then the mongolia president has said, we had the grassland vote you have the belt and the road, they can be integrated. And chinas proposition was doubted by the russians because of the socalled youre asianeurasian, but now we understood that we could be complementary each other. And india still does not endorse it officially. And when i visited the bay bridge in San Francisco area 30 years ago, i was overwhelmed by the United States capabilities on the infrastructure of these things. But now you are way ahead. Let us chinese do the infrastructure. You do more on the superstructure, finance, science, technology, planning, et cetera. So different nation has different strengths and weaknesses. And the last but not least about the surveys. These surveys you should not believe it totally. But you should not discard it totally. So in between. I think china and the United States reconciled on very difficult questions of vietnam war. And china and the United States had reconciled on these socalled tibetan issue human rights issue. Now we agree, these issues should not be damaging the overall china u. S. Relations. But it takes long time that we can come together. I will leave more time to my colleagues. Thank you. Lets take the infrastructure issue head on. First, does the United States need to improve its domestic Infrastructure Infrastructure . Absolutely. Could congress get off the dime and meet the president halfway and make a constructive step . Absolutely. Weve seen the impact on some of the economic post2008 economic packages in terms of highways and offramps. We only need to go to Fairfax County or you can go to the 405 and sunset boulevard in los angeles and you can see where the Infrastructure Improvements are made. But it is only a beginning. Now, in afghanistan the lack of infrastructure has prevented the development of the Strategic Mineral reserves that are there. That would certainly be for a country that is isolated and backward. The development of those minerals would certainly be a progressive step forward. The challenge will be not to find government money to fund that infrastructure but instead to create enough stability, enough moving forward so that the private sector will invest in commodities that it will have a longterm interest in developing economically. But to do that youve got to create a better environment for investment. I think thats the vulnerability of afghanistan today which desperately needs that infrastructure. So bring it into larger architecture for the region and suddenly you might have that stability. Infrastructure at home and Infrastructure Overseas are both necessary for this 21st century. I would say a little bit about china india cooperation in middle east. I think china now is more actively in Global International affairs. India actually is always very active in international affairs. And the china india can strengthen their cooperation. But comparing with a country like United States or developed countries, European Countries actually china india pay more attention to economic development. So, i mean, the driving force for china to push it forward the china india, how to say, proposals in global affairs, Regional Affairs are from the economic front. So as to that kind of middle east political dialogues i dont think actually the governments will have very strong driving force behind them. So it will be better for them to consider more about that kind of economic, social cooperation, that kind of thing in middle east. I think you might have the ingredients for a future report on u. S. china india cooperation. I want to thank everyone for joining us i want to that i can our panelists. Thank you for traveling from shanghai. I really welcome this report. Thank you all for being here. On the next washington journal the latest development in the Iran Nuclear Negotiations and an update on how the how select committee on benghazi plans to proceed with its investigation. Well hear from a couple of members of congress. First, representative Jan Schakowsky of illinois a member of the energy and commerce committee. Then later, republican congressman miami pompeo of kansas is a member of both the select intelligence and select benghazi committees. Washington journal live every morning at 7 00 eastern on cspan. You can contribute to the program by phone and on facebook and twitter. Homeland security secretary jeh johnson testifies tuesday at the House Judiciary Committee oversight hearing on immigration and enforcement live at 10 00 a. M. Eastern on cspan3. The city span cities country travels across the country. Lexington, kentucky. Edward pritchard was a state hero who had a tumultuous political career. In the mid1940s if you had asked who is a bright shining star in american politics on a National Scale someone whos going to be governor, senator perhaps president , a lot of people Katherine Graham arthur she is sin jer, would have said ed pritchard of kentucky. He was one of those people who worked in the white house in his early 20s seemed destined for great things, then came back to kentucky in the mid1940s was indicted for stuffing a ballot box. Went to prison. And so that incredible promise just flamed out. We also visit ashland the former home of speaker of the house, senator, and secretary of state henry clay. The mansion at ashland is a unique situation. Clays original home had to be torn down and rebuilt. It fell into disrepair. His son found that it could not be saved. He rebuilt on the original foundation. So what we have is a home that is essentially a fivepart federal style home, as henry clay had, with italian days architectural elements et cetera, and an added layer of esthettic details added by henry clays granddaughter and great granddaughter and so on. See all our programs from lexning to lexning to saturday evening at 6 30 eastern and sunday afternoon at 2 00 on American History tv on cspan3. Next, a roundtable discussion on fixed income markets and liquidity. Representatives from the securities and exchange commission, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and several wall street firms, spoke at this event hosted by the House Financial Services subcommittee on Financial Institutions. Its two hours. Good afternoon. Im congressman randy naugabauer from the 19th Congressional District in texas. And i am the chairman of the Financial Institution subcommittee on financial services. And first of all, i want to welcome our distinguished panel today and thank them personally for coming and sharing i think some very important subjects that if youve picked up a paper lately or watched a news account or seen a speech or heard a speech, that is very timely subject. So i appreciate our panelists participating in that. Also thank our guests for coming. I think youre in for a real treat. A lot of folks said why dont you have a hearing . And i said we dont want to have a hearing, we want to have a discussion. And this is a panel discussion. And really im going to get to do the very same thing that youre doing, those of you in the audience, those watching on cspan is get to hear these folks have a very important dialogue about a very important subject. One of the things, other than the fact that it seems to be out in the news and a topic for discussion, people said why have a panel . One of the thins that kind of came to my mind was that we focused a lot about whats going on with the individual entities out there . As the markets have changed, Market Structures change, regulatory structures change, a lot of changes to the entities themselves. That i think one of the things that we think is important is also to determine what kind of changes are going on in the marketplace . Because ultimately, thats important to every american citizen. Because in some way or the other, these markets touch america in a lot of different ways. Whether were buying houses, buying cars, financing a business, whatever. And so these Financial Markets are extremely important. And so one of the things i think is important that we all do is that we have an ongoing dialogue about whats going on in the marketplace. Today obviously were going to talk about whats going on in the fixed income space. Particularly as it relates to liquidity. I was going to quote chairman bernanke. He kind of summed it up i think what were talking about today. Says, anybody done a comprehensive analysis of the impact of all of these changes weve seen and he says i cant pretend that anybody really has. You know its very complicated. We really dont necessarily have the quantitative tools to do that. So i think its important for us to have a discussion. And so were going to have that discussion. And youre in for a treat because weve got, as i said, a really great panel. To kick us off, our panel today is s. E. C. Commissioner dan gallagher. As many of you know commissioner gallagher has worked at the s. E. C. In several capacities throughout his career. He was on the front line of the agencys response to the financial crisis. And since returning to the agency as commissioner, mr. Gallagher is focus