On behalf of the United States Institute of Peace, we're delighted to welcome you to this important discussion with Ambassador Jeffrey Feldman. My name is Leigh Scrone, and I am the president of USIP, which is established by Congress in 1984 as an independent, nonpartisan national institution dedicated to preventing, mitigating, and helping resolve violent conflict abroad. This conversation comes at an important time. All of us here are deeply worried by the spreading violence in Ethiopia and the military coup in Sudan. The world watched with great hope when Prime Minister Abbey initiated reforms three years ago, setting the foundation for transition. The unprecedented voter turnout in the June and September elections and the initiatives by civic leaders to promote national dialogue and bring together youth, women, and religious leaders to bridge divides, show a continuing commitment to finding political solutions.  When Ambassador Feldman was appointed US Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa in April, 2021, he was tasked with leading a US diplomatic effort to address the interlinked political security and humanitarian crises in the Horn of Africa. We invite everyone to follow today's conversation on Twitter with hashtag at US Policy Ethiopia. We're now very pleased to introduce Ambassador Feldman, who was appointed the US Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa in April this year. Ambassador Feldman brings a very distinguished record to this position. He served as Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs from 29 to 2012, was the US Ambassador to Lebanon from 24 to 28 and has served in Erbil, Baghdad, Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Tunis, Amman, Budapest, and Port-au-Prince. Ambassador Feldman is the recipient of two Presidential Service Awards and a number of State Department Superior Honor Awards. From July, 2012 until his retirement in April of 2018, Ambassador Feldman served as Under Secretary General and Head of the UN's Department of Political Affairs. He was the Chief Foreign Policy Advisor to the UN Secretary General and oversaw all UN mediation and conflict prevention work across the globe. He has recently worked at the Brookings Institution and at the UN Foundation, both based in Washington, DC. I hope everyone joins me in a very warm welcome to Ambassador Feldman. Good morning, hello to everyone and President Grandi, dear friend Lees, thank you very much for that warm introduction. I am really delighted to be here at the US Institute of Peace to talk about these issues because the US Institute of Peace has shown such leadership with the programs they have in Ethiopia promoting dialogue between Ethiopians. I was honored to be a member of the Red Sea Study Group that USIP organized under Susan's Against Leadership. And of course, Lees, it's wonderful to see you in this position as President. You and I were UN colleagues together and I saw the heroic efforts you did in getting life-saving support to people in Yemen under war and the life-saving support in Iraq for communities devastated by ISIS. So thank you very much for this opportunity. Now had someone previewed for me back in 2015, which was the middle of that six year tenure that I spent at the United Nations as Undersecretary General for Political Affairs, that I would someday serve as the US Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa, I would have scoffed. Government service fell into the been there done that category and I was very happy in my post-UN quasi retirement at Brookings and the UN Foundation, the things Lees mentioned. But when the Biden Harris administration urged me to take on this portfolio, my sense of duty kicked in. Having spent time in the Horn during my UN career, I knew the strategic importance of the Horn's geography, demographics, politics, and security, importance not only in Africa, but across the Red Sea and beyond. But had that same prescient person back in 2015 who said, Jeff, you're gonna be the special envoy for the Horn of Africa, asked me to envision what my primary concerns would be in 2021 as Special Envoy, I would never have guessed, I would have guessed, I'm sorry, I would have guessed that Somalia, still troubled today, would top the list. I would never have guessed that Ethiopia, an exporter of stability via peacekeeping during my UN career, a longstanding important partner of the United States, to be consuming the bulk of my time and my worries and my conversations with Secretary Blinken and the White House. As a boy growing up in a small town in the Midwestern United States, I knew of Ethiopia's biblical references, as the origin of coffee, it had been a World War II, close ally of the United States, and as a courageous example of African independence against colonialism, I didn't have the advantage growing up in a small town Midwest to know members of that talented Ethiopian diaspora that have contributed so much to our country. Then as a young adult, I began to learn more about Ethiopia. I was so moved in 1985 by the reports of the Ethiopian famine that I made modest contributions. And subsequently, as I immersed myself professionally in foreign policy, I learned much more of Ethiopian's politics and history. And I love the story of Negus Dawid I, his 15th century delegation to Venice, which is sort of an early example of global North, global South, exchanges among equals. And like so many others, I've basically graduated into a greater appreciation of the leadership role Ethiopia has played in Africa and beyond. But my initial firsthand experience to the reality of Ethiopia was in September, 2012. At the start of my third month as United Nations Undersecretary General for Political Affairs, I represented Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in Addis at the funeral of Ethiopian Prime Minister, Melisa Nali, a man I had never met. To my embarrassment, you can still see on YouTube just how banal my words were. You know, the UN has an uneasy balancing act between the lofty principles of the United Nations Charter and the parochial interests of 193 member states and leaders. And so the UN does not habitually criticize deceased heads of state or government. And my remarks that day bypassed entirely the subject of human rights in emphasizing the Melis economic legacy. And I had no idea on that day in September, 2012 that a ceremonial representational appearance would nearly a decade later be fodder for misinformation on social media that the newly appointed US Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa was somehow hopelessly partisan in favor of a man I never actually met. And this distortion reflects the strong views that exist on Melisa's legacy on today's Ethiopia. And it's also a reminder that Ethiopia's social media is, if nothing else, wonderfully creative. And what I recall about that first trip to Addis was the whispering. Whispering in the Sheraton. Whispering on the margins of the funeral events. Whispering even the gardens outside. Conscious efforts to place cell phones at considerable distances from the conversations taking place. Fingers pointing to the ears and pointing to the ceiling as a reminder that walls in Addis have ears. What people were whispering would happen to Ethiopia now. Ethiopians had endured some very dark days in their modern history. And whatever one thought of his domination of Ethiopian politics, in the wake of Melisa and Allie's death, the Ethiopians I met in September 2012 were contemplating their uncertain future with foreboding. In hindsight, we now recognize that the transition created a welcome opportunity that the Ethiopians eagerly seized for gradual opening of the political space in which they could raise their voices more freely to express their aspirations for their country. That peaceful transfer of power in 2018 to a government led by Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed opened a new chapter in Ethiopian history as well as a promising new chapter in US Ethiopian relations. The new Prime Minister wasted no time in unveiling his ambitious economic and democratic reform agenda. In lying with his vision of a vibrant Ethiopian civil society, he welcomed US democracy support and governance programs that the former government had firmly rejected. His decisive shift away from discredited Marxist theories promised to attract considerable foreign investment to create jobs in economic growth. Our assistance and partnership programs, which were already considerable, grew to unprecedented levels. From 2016 to 2020, the United States provided over $4.2 billion in development and humanitarian assistance to the Ethiopian people. To bolster the momentum of reform under Prime Minister Abiy's leadership, the administration and Congress provided tens of millions of dollars in new development assistance. Innovative programs supported the Prime Minister's economic reforms aimed to promote private sector growth and investment. US funded capacity building programs aligned with the Prime Minister's emphasis on democratic governance worked to strengthen the independence of the judiciary, electoral bodies, and the Attorney General's office. We even hoped that the reconciliation that Prime Minister Abiy promoted between Ethiopia and Eritrea might create a positive side effect of an improved Eritrean US relationship. That's what we desired. Washington supported the lifting of sanctions that had been posed on Eritrea by the UN Security Council in hopes of turning a new page. Unfortunately, Eritrea did not reciprocate and continues to this day to play a destructive, destabilizing role in the region, including its deadly role inside Ethiopia. Few countries in the world have a worse human rights record than Eritrea. But proud of the connections between Washington and Addis under Prime Minister Abiy, we firmly believed that the growing partnership benefited both countries. We wanted to continue to travel this promising path together and saw even greater potential for the bilateral relationship. The Prime Minister has assured me on several occasions of the importance he places on the Ethiopian US ties and told me of his affectionate memories of and his connections with the United States. But starting in 2020, solidarity between our two governments started to crack. To Ethiopia's understandable annoyance, the previous administration halted some US assistance programs in the misguided belief that Ethiopia might then reconsider its rejection of a draft tripartite agreement tabled by the Trump administration and the World Bank regarding the grand Ethiopian renaissance dam, which is a symbol of national pride for all Ethiopians. Soon after taking office, the Biden-Harris administration recognized the urgent need for meaningful Egyptian, Ethiopian, Sudanese negotiations leading to a mutually acceptable agreement on the filling and the operation of the GER, the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam. And to that end, the new administration quickly lifted the previous administration's punitive restrictions on US assistance to Ethiopia. We believe that Egypt's need for water security, Sudan's safety concerns, and Ethiopia's development rights can be reconciled through good faith negotiations on the GERD, and the United States will continue to be actively involved with all parties to this end. But at the same time, the incoming administration was alarmed by the growing crisis in Ethiopia's northern state of Tigray and worried that would have disastrous consequences for the stability and people of Ethiopia. The Biden-Harris transition team called for the Ethiopian authorities and the Tigrayan People's Liberation Front, the TPLF, to quote, take urgent steps to end the conflict, enable humanitarian access, and protect civilians, end quote. Since taking office, the administration has consistently sought to engage the government of Ethiopia and encourage a different path. As true partners should, we've tried to be candid in sharing our best advice, namely that this military conflict, if it continues, will have disastrous consequences for Ethiopia's unity, territorial integrity, and stability, and also for Ethiopia's relations with the United States and the international community. We've repeatedly offered to help Ethiopia's leaders pursue a different path. And as we've engaged, we've been transparent in sharing our analysis of the situation in northern Ethiopia. We believe that the parties to the conflict have committed rampant human rights abuses and atrocities. There have been credible, documented, persistent reports by a wide range of sources about these abuses and atrocities.  We continue to carefully monitor and assess the human rights situation and will carefully consider in our own review the upcoming joint report by the United Nations and Ethiopian human rights officials. The conflict, of course, has not been static. And we've adopted our message accordingly. There's been a major shift since late June when the TPLF forces seized control of Mecca, the regional capital of Tigray. And alarmingly, since July, the TPLF has widened the conflict and misery into the neighboring states of Afar and Amhara, displacing hundreds of thousands of additional victims of this needless war. Ambassador Pasi and Addis and USAIDs, head of humanitarian assistance, recently visited Bahadar, the regional capital of Amhara, as we accelerate our efforts to reach those displaced by the TPLF. The stories they relayed back to us are heartbreaking. We watched the fighting around the cities of Dessie and Kompacha in horror as thousands more civilians were forced to leave their homes. Some critics of US policy claim the United States has inherent bias in favor of the TPLF. This could not be further from the truth. We have consistently condemned the TPLF's expansion of the war outside Tigray and we continue to call on the TPLF to withdraw from Afar and Amhara. That expansion of the war, however, is as predictable as it is unacceptable, given that the Ethiopian government began cutting off humanitarian relief and commercial access to Tigray in June, which continues to this day, despite horrifying conditions of reporting widespread famine and near-famine conditions that have shocked the world. In Tigray, 90% of the population requires aid and up to 90,000 people, 900,000 people, are facing famine-like conditions. This is happening in a country that has the expertise and the experience to address famine if the will were there. To meet the basic needs of Tigray's population of seven million, the UN has been clear. At least 2,000 trucks of supplies are needed per month. Since the beginning of July, only 1,100 trucks in total have entered Tigray, which is just 13% of what's required. Now there was a welcome increase of food deliveries in September and early October, but this still fell short of the needs. No new convoys of humanitarian assistance have been able to enter Tigray due to lack of approval since October 18. Fighting and insecurity have disrupted some convoys and flights, and there have been occasional shortages of trucks due to some very complicated issues. But without question, the most serious obstacles are intentional government delays and denials. Moreover, the government has rejected the delivery of almost all medical supplies to Tigray since July. In practice, this means that those suffering from malnutrition or routine or long-term illnesses cannot be effectively treated. Food alone does not save those whose bodies are already consuming themselves because of famine. The government has also not allowed the importation of fuel into Tigray since early August. Humanitarian agencies need fuel inside the region to be able to distribute aid outside the capital. Three of the seven main food delivery partners had to suspend activities because of fuel shortages. The UN World Food Program suspended its operations in Tigray. The remaining food delivery partners feared that leaving fear that fuel shortages will prevent them from continuing any deliveries outside of Mecoli, leaving millions more vulnerable to food insecurity. Disruptions to banking services and the prohibition by the government of Ethiopia on cash entering Tigray also hinder aid delivery. And the government's unprecedented expulsion of key UN officials, more UN humanitarian staff expelled in a single day by the Ethiopian government than Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria has expelled in 10 years of civil war. And the investigation and in some cases closure of internationally renowned humanitarian organizations further erodes the ability of the international community to reach those in need and not only in Tigray but also those victims of the TPLF incursions in the Far and Amhar who we are committed to help. This unfortunately suggests an intentional effort by the authorities to deprive Ethiopians who are suffering of receiving lifesaving assistance. Now I'm familiar with the arguments that food, fuel, and trucks can be diverted to TPLF war efforts. But my experience proved that such concerns can be satisfactorily addressed. For example, after initial delays and problems the Israelis who have genuine security concerns with the Gaza Strip and the Saudis who have legitimate security concerns about attacks on their territory originating in Yemen have signed off on creative procedures for screening cargo headed to Gaza in certain areas of Yemen that address security concerns but also permit food, fuel, and medicine to reach needy populations in Gaza and Yemen. The United States and the UN agencies and NGOs to which we provide funding all have stringent monitoring requirements to mitigate diversion, which is illegal under US law. The humanitarian conditions in Tigray are unacceptable. No government can tolerate an armed insurgency. We get that. But no government should be adopting policies or allowing practices that result in mass starvation of its own citizens. The United States has not been alone in articulating these concerns. Back in June, leaders of the G7 expressed alarm at the worsting situation and called for an end to the fighting and to allow unimpeded humanitarian access. The UN Secretary General has been increasingly outspoken about his concerns saying a humanitarian catastrophe is unfolding before our eyes. He has urged an immediate cessation of hostilities unrestricted humanitarian access and dialogue among all parties to resolve the crisis. The European Union and European leaders have spoken out. African leaders have also become increasingly concerned. Last month, President Kenyatta told the UN Security Council there must be action toward negotiated ceasefire and ending the humanitarian crisis. The African Union appointed former Nigerian President Obasanjo as high representative to help the parties to the conflict reach a negotiated settlement. As the war approaches its one year anniversary, the United States and others cannot continue business as usual relations with the governor of Ethiopia. The extraordinary partnership we have enjoyed is not sustainable while the military conflict continues to expand, threatening the stability and the unity of one of Africa's most influential countries, threatening and the fundamental well-being of its people. The United States and other donors have already limited significant amounts of development assistance in Ethiopia in an effort to dissuade the government from this harmful path. We have conveyed to Ethiopia that it is at risk of losing important benefits under the African Growth and Opportunity Act, AGOA, if human rights violations are not addressed. This is due to the stringent human rights criteria for AGOA eligibility required by Congress under U.S. law. The United States is prepared to pursue the first sanctions under the executive order President Biden signed in September against those fueling this crisis and obstructing humanitarian operations. And we will be targeting all parties implicated. While Ethiopian officials have attempted to separate the conduct of the war from the Ethiopian U.S.-Bailah relationship, there is a direct causal relationship between what is happening on the ground as a result of the policies of the Ethiopian government and the actions of the other belligerents and the subsequent decisions that have been taken or are being contemplated by the U.S. Administration. It gives us no pleasure to think about visa restrictions or sanctions or having Ethiopia lose trade benefits and preferences. The historically strong Ethiopian U.S. relationship grew under Prime Minister Abbey with new programs and new hopes that I described. The unfortunate deterioration in our relationship derives from the atrocities of the conflict in Northern Ethiopia and the reports of the use of food as a weapon of war, which is UN Security Council Resolution 2417 reiterates may constitute a war crime. We are reacting to behavior no person of conscious can accept and in the manner which should come as no surprise to any party to the conflict. We've attempted to maintain a frank and open dialogue with the government. Instead of responding to our concerns and our offer to support mediation of the conflict, many in the government falsely assert that the United States seeks to replace the Abbey government with another TPLF dominated regime. This is just not true. We know full well and respect the views of the overwhelming majority of Ethiopian public who oppose a return to a Melis-style rule. This is not 1991 when the TPLF led the forces that discharged the hated Mangesco regime. And let me be clear. We oppose any TPLF move to Addis or any attempt by the TPLF to besiege Addis. This is a message we have also underscored in our engagement with TPLF leaders. The United States seeks a relationship with all peoples in Ethiopia. We want to see stability and prosperity restored to the entire country and for Ethiopia to regain its position as a regional and global leader. Such an outcome requires Ethiopia's leaders to put down their guns and find a formula for peaceful coexistence. We had hoped that the recent political events inside Ethiopia would have led the prime minister to pivot from war to peace. Elections in June and September produced a super-parliamentary majority for prime minister's prosperity party. As the former UN focal point for election assistance, which is one of the responsibilities I had as undersecretary general for political affairs, I have some concerns about elections when key opposition figures are imprisoned and restrictions on the media are imposed, but I also believe that the prosperity party has significant support across Ethiopia as reflected in those election results. This means the prime minister indeed has a mandate he can draw on in a new cabinet composed of hand-picked trusted allies and partners. He was sworn in for a full five-year term. But as Kenyan President Kenyatta said at that very swearing in, the mandate obligates the prime minister to govern for those who supported him and for those who did not. Legitimacy can never be sustained through force or proclaimed by Ethiopia. The prime minister now has the power and the opportunity to embrace peace. Instead, we see the situation getting worse, not better. The government has exploited long-standing ethnic grievances with divisive rhetoric. It has launched a bombing campaign while using drones from questionable sources, including reportedly from U.S. adversaries and promoted mass mobilization of militia doing grave damage to Ethiopia's security institutions. Scares foreign currency reserves have diverted to arms purchases and lobbyists rather than development. The TPLF, meanwhile, pushes ahead and Amhar and forges alliance with disaffected groups, with disaffected armed groups elsewhere in the country. This is dangerous. The situation on the ground today is even more alarming than it was a few months ago. And that whispering phenomenon in the Addis that I found so indicative back on the margins of Melis's funeral in 2012, oh, it's back. And the democratic opening that was so inspiring when Abiy Ahmed became prime minister appears to be at risk of being another victim of this war. Studies show that the average modern civil war now lasts 20 years. I repeat, 20 years. A multi-decade civil war in Ethiopia would be disastrous for its future and for its people. We urge the government of Ethiopia, the TPLF, the other belligerents, to give peace a chance, to choose a different path and engage in dialogue without preconditions, whether through direct contact or via an intermediary such as former Nigerian president Obasanjo and his role as African Union high representative. The government of Ethiopia and the TPLF should commence at once with negotiating and implementing a series of parallel steps that will stop the violence, allow lifesaving access to Tigray, lead the TPLF to withdraw from Afar and Amhar and the air train forces from Ethiopia, result in a durable ceasefire perhaps with the rules understood and perhaps with third party monitors and initiate accountability for human rights abuses and any war crimes. Ethiopians can set an agenda for talks on issues including internal border disputes and the role of the central government versus the federal states that must be resolved peacefully and constitutionally between Ethiopians rather than through violence. There are many reciprocal steps the parties could take now to move toward a negotiated ceasefire. The first step though is demonstrating an openness to try. As I told a group of Ethiopian officials during a private retreat we hosted in June in Washington the Ethiopian-U.S. relationship was then at a crossroads. I think the same is true for Ethiopia's broader relations with an important cross-section to international community. We could proceed down one path that would inevitably lead to sanctions and other measures or we go down another path on which we could revitalize the positive, promising bilateral relationship that was expanding to new heights when Prime Minister Abi took office. The United States wants the latter. We sincerely want to chart a more productive path out of the current crisis. We do not want Ethiopia to lose its ago trade benefits or its international assistance. We are prepared to exercise leadership in the international community to energize the support needed for Ethiopia's recovery from war and to realize the Prime Minister's ambitious economic and job creation agenda. That remains our desire destination. But I emphasize to the June delegation as I have repeatedly conveyed to the Prime Minister and other senior officials before and since Ethiopia, not the United States, is in the driver's seat. Prolonging the war, dodging genuine negotiations to lead to de-escalation negotiated ceasefire and refusing to allow unhindered humanitarian access to avert catastrophe are actions that are taking Ethiopia to a dangerous direction. Unfortunately now at the beginning of November that crossroads that I described back in June is now behind us. It's not too late to retrace our steps toward the path not taken but the change in direction must occur in days not weeks. It requires the Ethiopian government to address concerns that we've been raising for months and we're also insisting that the TPLF stop its military advance, refrain from threatening Addis and prepare for talks. Eritrea must cease its destructive interference and withdraw its troops entirely from Ethiopia. I am prepared to travel to Addis at any time to resume dialogue and assist working alongside African Union High Representative Obasanjo and other international leaders. Our priority is the unity and integrity of the Ethiopian state and our commitments to the Ethiopian people and consistent with that commitment we will continue to try to provide extensive humanitarian assistance across Ethiopia. Despite the circumstances I'm proud that the United States currently provides more humanitarian assistance to Ethiopia than does any other country in the world and our significant development assistance package makes long-term investments in key areas such as public health, education, agriculture and democracy and human rights. The United States was the largest bilateral donor to Ethiopia before November 2020 and even now with all the difficulties and restrictions I've described we remain so. In closing I want to note that my remarks have concentrated primarily on the war in northern Ethiopia since the violence, humanitarian catastrophe and atrocities in northern Ethiopia that is Tigray, Amhara, Afar are the issues that are prompting U.S. considerations of new measures including sanctions under the new executive order and the question of Egoa eligibility but we are also deeply concerned with violence intentions elsewhere in Ethiopia. If not addressed through dialogue and consensus these problems can contribute to the deterioration of the integrity of the state. Ending the war in northern Ethiopia will allow government officials and others to concentrate on the processes necessary to address tensions elsewhere and to rebuild an Ethiopian national consensus on the country's future that includes enduring protection of the rights of members of minority groups. Such a process is necessary to restore Ethiopia's role as a cornerstone of stability in the Horn of Africa and that Ethiopian leadership that is so familiar to me from my UN tenure. Ending the war is the best path to a more stable more prosperous country and ending the war will also enable us to renew a more affirmative Ethiopian U.S. bilateral relationship a partnership that benefits both countries. We urge Ethiopian leaders from all parties to take the steps necessary to arrest the current trajectory and permit its peoples and its partners to restore the promise that Prime Minister Abbey so compellingly outlined at the start of his premiership. Ambassador thank you for your deeply thoughtful impressive and wholly important comments and observations on the Horn of Africa and very particularly on Ethiopia. With your permission we've collected a number of questions that have come from across the U.S. government from many stakeholders in the Horn of Africa from people who have lived there people who are in the diaspora and from the media. We'd like to start our first question with one about Sudan. Though of course the I think we're joined by Ambassador Sati. Ambassador warmly welcome. All of the countries in the Horn of Africa are linked politically economically socially culturally. What happens in one impacts what happens everywhere else. I think all of us have watched with deep worry what's happened in Sudan with the military coup the detention of activists people who have been killed in the protests. We I know share with everyone our condolences for the people who have lost ones who have loved. We recognize the many efforts that are underway by civic and security actors who are trying to forge a way forward in the country. How do you see the events in Sudan and what do you think the events in Sudan what's the impact of them on Ethiopia. Well these thanks for the question. Of course I also want to acknowledge that you yourself have extensive experience in Sudan and South Sudan during your United Nations career. Let me step back a bit and look at the region as a whole. Of course this is what this is what the Red Sea Study Group that USIP hosted was trying was trying to do is I think very successfully as well. What's the United States overriding interest. We have lots of interest around the world but our overriding interest in the Horn of Africa is stability. Ethiopia is a country of a hundred and fifteen million people. Sudan is as forty some million forty some million people approaching fifty million people. These are countries located in a strategic part of the world. The Red Sea Basin our interest is stability. And our concern on Ethiopia again derives from a number of factors that I said today but our goal is to see a stable Horn of Africa where Ethiopia is playing its traditional leadership role and where the Sudanese people are able to achieve their aspirations for democratic transition that we believe is a cornerstone of stability in Sudan at this point. So we're obviously alarmed by what took place on October 25th by the hijacking of the democratic transition by the military authorities. And we've been public in our call for the release of all detainees. The ability of the prime minister to get out from under house arrest and resume his leadership role. But what motivates us in Sudan are the aspirations of the Sudanese people with a peaceful transition but again our interest in stability that we think only comes about if you have a successful democratic democratic transition. And Balsett, I know that when you took up your role the conflict in Tigray had already started. We also know that you have made major efforts to help the authorities on the ground activists across the country in Ethiopia to find ways to resolve the conflict to get out of it if possible. Some of those efforts have worked to some degree but perhaps not in the way that all of us had to expect. What's blocking a solution right now? I mean at least what we need is we need the will of those that are fighting to be on the side of talks to be on the side of trying to address their their grievances their concerns through non-military means. We have said since the beginning of this administration that there is no military there is no military solution to this conflict. Even with the alarming developments of the recent of the recent days around around Desion and Kolobotka we do not believe that either side it will be able to assert themselves militarily over the over the entire country will not be able to win militarily. So we've been we've been saying that that one needs to look at other means. We're not getting much response. That the military logic is still is still prevailing and it's you know and it is worrisome to see a continuation of military of military advances by the TPLF airstrikes by the by the government against targets in Tigray that will only increase the human suffering when in the end there's going to have to be talks. So the sooner we get to talks the better the the fewer people will will suffer in Tigray and Amhara the closer we get to talks. And as I said in the remarks it doesn't give us any pleasure to move in the direction of punitive measures toward those that are involved in the conflict. You know it's unusual to have an executive order that that authorizes sanctions announced with no targets. That's what happened in September. And the reason why is because the reason why the president signed the executive order but didn't agree to to target any any individual or entity under the sanctions is because we wanted to give a chance to pivot into talks rather than rather than continuation of the middle of the military logic that hasn't happened. And so I think you're going to you're going to see us try to use other other measures. In the end there will be there will be talks because neither side's going to win but the sooner that the sooner that happens the better for the for the people of Ethiopia. I mean our commitments to the people of Ethiopia. Ambassador you said something very interesting when you talked about the logic of war continuing to drive the calculations of all the parties. You held a very unique position in the world. You were the chief political advisor and negotiator for the United Nations with the remit across the globe. How do you switch that logic? How do you get belligerence to a conflict to change their calculations from being purely military to including a set of political options? Well the you know you look at you look at the the courageous decisions that were taken for example by by former Colombian president Juan Manuel Santos.  This was not a popular move in Colombia. The FARC was a hated group with there were lots of victims of the FARC. But yet he saw that for the for the good of his country military action alone would not wipe out the insurgency and would not lead to the type of of sort of non-violent atmosphere that he needed for economic development and job creation and in rural parts of the country. So he took the courageous he took a very courageous step in moving forward. And one of the things that we've talked about with the with the Ethiopian leaders be they government be they not be they non-government is that there's different ways that one can do this. I understand why Prime Minister Abbey would not wish to sit down across the table from a TPLF official giving the sort of status of equals. I understand that. But you know from your own own you and career lease that there are many many ways that one can initiate discrete talks. You go through third party. You have the sorts of what they call them track one point five that allows you to think think creatively. One doesn't have to have go to the the UN headquarters in Geneva in these grand rooms with lots of cameras and lots of media. One can design a process that fits the needs and that's what that's what Prime President Santos did with the Colombians with very very quiet talks to start. We would our message to the Ethiopian leaders is that we can we I'm saying I say we but it doesn't have to be the United States but we can design a process that allows you to start moving toward reciprocal parallel steps that de-escalate the situation prevents more suffering of the Ethiopian people and can lead to a negotiated ceasefire. The trouble with the you know the Prime Minister I think is very impatient with us that we that we didn't give proper credit to the June 28th ceasefire announcement that he made. The problem with that ceasefire was twofold. First it was combined with a what's a de facto humanitarian siege of Tigray you know that that was basically when the when the access problems really really started in earnest was after the June 28th but the second was the ceasefire rules were not understood. The ceasefires that work and that are durable and that can create the atmosphere for broader political talks need to have need to have the rules understood by all parties and I would imagine that you're going to need some kind of third party to help work on those rules but the two sides need to agree that they need a ceasefire that they need the rules that they're prepared to move it to move in in that direction. You know over the long term the the Ethiopians need to have a type of national conversation among themselves. You know the outsiders can provide support if they want it but it's basically an Ethiopian conversation. What's the relationship of the federal states versus the central government? You know how do you have durable protection for minorities? These are not things the international community is going to decide but to have this kind and the prime minister has said he wants a national dialogue. He has he's talked about that. Our our advice is your national dialogue will be more productive more constructive if the atmosphere isn't marred by ongoing fighting. Let's find a way now to de-escalate stop the fighting have a negotiated ceasefire lift the humanitarian siege and commercial siege of Tigray get the TPLF out of Amhara so that you you've basically addressed the immediate conflict to create the atmosphere that will allow the type of national dialogue on larger political issues that prime minister Abbey has has said publicly he wants to see happen. And also we have a question from the media about weapons in Ethiopia. We understand that there are weapons from Turkey from Iran from other forces. This is fueling the conflict deeper. What is your view on this question and what can be done about it if anything. Well I think it's very sad that that resources that could be used for development for job creation for for helping Ethiopian people are ending up being used for arms instead. You know that again it's another reason why we should get to some kind of understanding that leads to negotiated ceasefires so that so that the government doesn't feel the need to be purchasing arms from a variety of from a variety of sources. You know that there's other ways to address the concerns other than than just military force. And of course we're also bothered by the fact that there are reports that some that some of these arms are being acquired from some of our adversaries. And there there will there are consequences for you know supporting some of these some of these adversaries. But the the the primary way to stop the arms purchases is to stop the war. And Melsinger you spoke very movingly in your speech today about the humanitarian crisis about the 20 million people who are facing famine because of 20 million people need humanitarian assistance across Ethiopia. It's not all that the famine is confined in the in the north. The 20 million people need help across Ethiopia. You talked about the restrictions in aid reaching the people who need help. Has the international response been effective? What more can be done? Are there things that the U.S. government can do differently that will help to improve the humanitarian situation? I mean we're having tough conversations with with both the government and the and the TPLF to make sure that we have that that the international community can have access to those who need humanitarian assistance wherever they are. Whether they're in Amhar whether they're in Afar whether they're in in Tigray. And and I would argue that both sides have not have not fully lived up to their responsibilities. The TPLF says that that aid has to aid to their to the parts of Amhar that they control have to go up via up via Mechalay which is just not realistic. It complicates matters and the government continues to find you know put bureaucratic obstacles in a you know in the way. Fighting that fighting has disrupted some some humanitarian assistance without question. You can't but the most most of the restrictions have been imposed by the government via bureaucratic delays. The international community has spoken with one voice including through joint approaches to the to the government of Ethiopia on these on these matters and we have to continue to push. The Secretary Jones has been outspoken your former Yemen colleague Martin Griffiths in his role as UN emergency humanitarian coordinator has also it's also been quite active in trying to broker some understandings. What ends up happening is we spend a lot of time on this or that delivery while the overall problem remains. That's right. And I would hope that if if the if the parties recognize in the fact that there's no military solution would move into some kind of proximity third party mediation to stop the fighting that that's how we resolve ultimately the humanitarian access. But it's a really really tough and it's unconscionable that the assistance is available and it's not getting to those who are in need. Ambassador when we were soliciting questions for this session a number of people who have family in Ethiopia asked about the possibility that the U.S. would declare what's happening in the country of genocide and they pointed to the extremely high levels of violence including sexual and gender based violence. Can you comment on that? This war has been going on now for almost a year. This conflict this conflict broke out after sort of a period of brinkmanship between the government and the regional government of Tigray Conflicts been going on for about a year and people have suffered tremendously.  It's not that this is all in the past and we have to only talk about accountability. We have to make sure that that there aren't future crimes happening and we're looking we're reviewing all this very very closely. We I note that this week is when the United Nations offers the High Commission for Human Rights Ethiopian Human Rights Commission Joint Report a U.N. Ethiopian Joint Report on Human Rights is supposed is supposed to be released this week. I understand I haven't I haven't obviously haven't seen it yet. I understand there'll be recommendations and all parties to this conflict need to be showing demonstrating that they're implementing those recommendations right away. And we ourselves will take into account as we make our own determinations of how to describe what's happened the horrors that have happened to the Ethiopian people will take into account account this Joint Report. You know the Ethiopian people who have suffered are going to want to see are going to want to see some kind of of justice some kind of reckoning for the horrors that they've that they've been through because of this needless conflict and we will be looking to encourage the type of of accountability and justice that would that the Ethiopian people have every right to expect. Ambassador, you talked about the role of the African Union cyber representative Obasanjo and the efforts that he's making and you talked about the support in your role as the U.S. Special Envoy that you're providing. How is the collaboration going and allow us the question that came to us had a point to it there was a sharp end to it and allow us to share that very often in the past the U.S. has often said in conflicts we're the leader in this we're going to resolve this and we want others to follow the efforts that we're going to make how is this playing out in the case of Ethiopia? I think the African Union having a high representative I think that was an important initiative that the Ethiopia is is a leading influential country in Africa of course it's the host of the African Union and for the African Union to be expressing its concern about the conflict in Ethiopia to be looking for ways to address the grievances in the conflict I think is good it's positive you know there's the state there's the saying that the African leaders like to repeat which is African solutions for African problems you know the Africans Africans know Ethiopia better than we know Ethiopia without question and we've I've had several conversations with President with President Obasanjo in his high representative role Secretary Blinken met with him here in Washington we had a a virtual meeting with Secretary Blinken President Obasanjo with some other some other leaders including EU High Representative Vice President Burrell and we've all pledged their support for for Obasanjo's President Obasanjo's mission but I the way I describe the way I sort of said to President Obasanjo is look we can we can play a backstage role to your efforts we don't we're not looking for the spotlight on the United States what we're looking for is what's the most effective way to end this conflict what's the what's the most constructive role that the United States can play completely behind the scenes if that's if that's most appropriate to support President Obasanjo's President Obasanjo's efforts I'm repeating myself, Lee's but you know this so well from your from your UN tenure the process of getting to a negotiated ceasefire can be developed in a way that takes into account the political concerns of the two sides that I'm talking about the government the TPLF in this case may have about dealing with the other that deal with that can try to deal with the distrust and President Obasanjo as a respected African leader can play an important role in helping to put together a process that's acceptable for both sides Hey, Mouseter we all know that relations between Ethiopia and Eritrea have gone through periods of great difficulty there have been some improvements many problems remain how do you see Eritrea's role in the current conflict in Ethiopia extremely damaged and destructive role and it's interesting I was in Asmara in May and was able to was able to have a long conversation with President Osayas mostly him giving his perspective to me but what was interesting was that he shared his concerns his concerns about the overall stability of the Ethiopian state which is a concern we had I mentioned at the end of our end of our statement it's not just that Northern Tigray it's that there's a lot of tensions that the Prime Minister needs to manage throughout Ethiopia but the role that President Osayas Fwerke and Eritrea are playing in Ethiopia exacerbates the insecurity exacerbates the tensions exacerbates the risks to the integrity of the Ethiopian state and some of the according to the documentation that we have some of the absolute worst most horrifying human rights violations were committed by the Eritrean Defense Forces during the during the period between the start of this conflict back in November 2020 and June when the when the ENDF pulled out of of most of the Ethiopian National Defense Forces pulled out of most of of Northern Ethiopia so you know we will continue to call for the Eritrean forces to withdraw entirely from Ethiopia because they are their role is destructive making things worse and also you're finally in conclusion in your very powerful comments and speech there was one statement that I think many of us immediately woke up to and you said that on average every civil war takes 20 years to resolve yes and the the Ethiopian people do not deserve after you know they've had again they've had some dark days in their in their 20th century history they do not they do not deserve spending the next 19 years trying to address a conflict trying to address a conflict through military means that undermines the integrity of the state you look at you look at what a rich mosaic of people's Ethiopia Ethiopia is you could very well imagine that a that the tensions that are here and there throughout the country you know violence in Benishango Gummu some problems in Aromia that these that these problems if they left if they're left unaddressed because there's such focus on Northern Ethiopia could evolve into a widespread civil war and imagine the ramifications beyond Ethiopia not only for the Ethiopian people but even beyond Ethiopia as you know across the Red Sea as you would have people people trying to find you know get out of of a situation of 20 years civil war there are again there are ways to address the prime minister's concerns there are ways to address the TPL of concerns I don't you know that the prime minister I believe thinks that or thinks that the TPLF wants to wants to replace him TPLF thinks that the prime minister wants to probably exterminate them I don't think either is true so you can you can find a way with the with the the you could meet the needs of the government as the national government of Ethiopia and the TPLF in its regional government role that aren't mutually exclusive it's just that you have to have the will of the parties in order to start Ambassador we're at the end of our discussion today I hope you will allow a very personal comment you are one of the most exceptional under secretary general of political affairs that the UN has had in its 75-year history we could not be in better hands to have someone of your exceptional capability as the US special law envoy to the Horn of Africa I hope everyone joins me in thanking the ambassador for his very important comments today Jeff thank you


Hello in this video. I'm quickly going to show you or demonstrate you the tool that we're going to build in the lesson walk through The tool for querying different services on the web to create Point features and then add them either to an open layer in ArcGIS to a shape file on disk or just to a CSV text file and Well, you can see the tool here on the right on the screen I'm currently running it inside of ArcGIS Pro and I've already used it to add a few places for different attractions in Paris and Well, the GUI has Structured into four different parts. We have a part at the top where the user can enter a query Turn the name of the place Then we have an area where he can choose between different web services to query Then an area where he will see the result of this query and then an area where he can add the features he wants to some data source so let's demonstrate this by querying for Eiffel Tower and I'm going to use the Nominatum query interface to open street map I'm not going to use any of the options for this first query. Just click the run query button and You see that then the result list here is updated based on what we get back from this Nominatum web service and we have this nice little web map Widget here on the right that shows us the different results on a map Which can also be very and we obviously we are interested in the one here that is located in Paris So we can actually click on that one and then see okay. This is the one called Eiffel Tower So basically the third one here from from our list So what I can do is use the buttons below the results to clear the selection then say I just want this entry here and Here at the bottom. You can see that I'm currently on the tab for adding the features to a layer in ArcGIS Pro and I've Selected the Paris example layer that I set up for this project and the names of the features should be stored in the field called name of that layer So I would just click the add button now to add this one feature for the Eiffel Tower to this data set Actually for having it show up on the map I need to zoom in and out a bit so that the map gets updated and then you see here now that this new point has been added and Well, just to show you the rest of the interface We have another tab here for instead of Nominatum querying the GeoNames web service with different options for that and we have also the tab that allows us for Directly entering features with name latitude and longitude. So let's say I have created this map for a friend and now I also want to Add My home as a place to that map. I could enter it here my home and then I would have to enter some Ordnance, so let's hope that I'm Going to find something that is at least somehow in the area of Paris Okay, it's still the button is to run quad run query, but in principle, it just creates a single point feature from From what I entered here that is shown here in the list Looks like I actually at least it's placed somewhere in Paris and I can now also add that one to Layer here So I'm sure which one is the new place. I think it's the one up here That one here. So that's now I can click on it. Yes, it's a place my home So you see now that the result has indeed been added to the layer and just to look at the last Tabs here. So the shape file tab would allow us to instead add the features to a shape file on disk and There is also The option to create a new shape file for that purpose that opens a separate dialog box for which you also will have to create the graphically use interface and The last one is the CSV tab where we just can select a file to which the features will be added as basically name latitude longitude columns and The buttons with the three dots on it are always for opening a file dialog for selecting a particular shape file or CSV file Okay, so much For this overview and now we move on actually create the graphical user interface for this tool You


set the stage for SoCAP 18. This next speaker is equally part of setting the stage for the amazing week that we have ahead. Ben Hect is the president and CEO of Living Cities, which is a collaborative of 18 of the world's leading foundations and financial institutions that are all working together to address economic and racial issues in American cities. Ben has a new book, Reclaiming the American Dream, which focuses on some of the known solutions to these recurring and very systemic issues. And I think his message is an amazing one to kick us off because it's equally one of hope and one of hard work that all of us will enjoy. So please welcome to the stage Ben Hect. Thank you, Lindsay. Everybody hear me okay? Great. Thank you for having me and thank you for that introduction. I wanna tell you a little bit more about myself. I've actually lived the American dream. My grandparents were immigrants. My father fought in World War II and when he came back, he went to college on the GI Bill. He bought a small home in suburban New Jersey with FHA financing and he put all three of his children through college. Growing up, I actually thought that everyone had a chance to claim the American dream, to have a life that was better, fuller, richer, regardless of birth or position. In fact, oops, I actually believed what it said in the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal, endowed with certain unalienable rights of including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. However, when I was about eight years old, I had an inkling that this was not universally true. I lived a few miles from Newark and in the summer of July of 1967, every time we'd go out and play in the streets, black smoke would bellow down Bloomfield Avenue from the riots that were happening in Newark. But I believe that President Obama said that we were actually committed to creating a more perfect union. However, if we're honest with ourselves and we really look at the data, we know that that just is not the case in America today. That over the past 40 years, the disparities in our country have gotten worse, not better, and they've become more extreme for people of color. So today, blacks make 59 cents every dollar that a white family makes, Latinos 72 cents. Education, which we know is critical to long-time, lifetime earnings. Whites have less than 40% of whites have a college degree, but the college degrees of Latinos and blacks remain stubbornly stuck in the teens. And even worse are the wealth disparities. Today, whites have a dollar to almost only a dime of wealth that whites, that black and brown people have, and if black and brown people have wealth at all, it's from equity in their homes. Looking back over the last 40 years, I really have to realize that I've looked at America through rose-colored glasses. And those of you who are young, that's the beavers and cleavers in looking through those glasses. That looking through those glasses and that vision actually kept me from coming to terms with harsh realities, that the stain of racism and slavery from the days of our founding and the writing of the Declaration of Independence actually continued to pollute our groundwater and remain the root cause of the disparities that we face in our country. Well, I believe that addressing these disparities is a moral imperative and actually threatens our very democracy. It's also a fundamental economic imperative. We, like most Western democracies, are reliant on consumer spending to drive our economy. And in fact, more than 70% of our GDP is driven by domestic consumer spending. And unlike other Western democracies, we actually have the opportunity to have our population growing as this data from Brookings shows you that by 2050, we'll have almost 225 million Americans. And that growth is coming from people of color, a new majority. But that growing population won't be able to sustain our consumptive economy because our current systems simply don't work to produce the income and wealth for them that our economy needs. This isn't about tweaking the current systems that we have or building a new program that might work around the edges. This is actually about building a new normal, a new way that we work to educate this new majority, to get capital to this new majority to build companies and the like. What's promising and little understood is that we've actually been building these new normals for the past decade. Local leaders, public, private, philanthropic, nonprofit, frustrated with the dysfunction in Washington and also sometimes in their state capitals have actually been innovating, often with seed money from philanthropy to build new systems that work and that work for this new majority that it turns out work for white people too. And with technology, many of them have been able to take these ideas, spread them, adopt and adapt them to their own communities. So I wrote this book, Reclaiming the American Dreams so people could see what I've seen. That over the past 10 years, we already have many of the solutions that could bring economic mobility to literally millions of Americans right now and to show people how to do it. The book is a blueprint for overcoming barriers to doing just that, to addressing the mutually reinforcing issues that we have to address in places. How do we ensure people have the education for today's economy? That they increase their income, that they build wealth, that they're actually able to connect to opportunities wherever they exist. And maybe more importantly than all of those is that they are part of re-knitting our social fabric so we make a commitment to the greater good so we see these improvements consistently year in and year out. These solutions are not just one offs. They've literally landed in tens or hundreds of places already impacting hundreds of thousands of people. They've all been done and they can be done together without any changes to law or regulations. Let me say it again. All of the things in the book and the few I talk about here can all be done by us without any change in law or regulations. They simply require us to change our behavior, whether we're an executive, an elected official, an investor, a grant maker, or a citizen. So let me give you a few examples of what I'm talking about. And when I go through them, I wanna show you the low hanging fruit we're talking about, the millions of Americans right now who we're talking about. So we all know that every year of education beyond high school adds $250,000 to a person's lifetime earnings every year. So if we had proven solutions that we knew would give people a year or more, you'd think that they would be everywhere. Well, there are. In fact, different decisions made by many more superintendents and university presidents today could be helping 15 million kids to be able to get college degrees while they're in high school. In the early 2000s, the Gates Foundation funded a bunch of schools who were trying to solve the problems of high school, where you had huge number of dropouts, most of them black and brown kids. And what came out of that were early college high schools. So now superintendents and college presidents work together to ensure that when a kid graduates, they graduate not just with a high school degree, but college credits and often an associate's degree. 260 high schools in 23 states already serving 100,000 kids have done that, but there's 26,000 high schools in America and 15 million kids who could benefit from it. Let me give you another example. Different decisions made today by many more private investors could be getting capital to entrepreneurs of color to grow their businesses and increase the jobs and increase jobs, but we're not doing it enough. So much of the conversation around the country is about job destruction from artificial intelligence and from robots. We've always had job destruction in our country. Our real challenge in America is about job creation. So many of you may know that more than 90% of all new jobs in America come from companies less than five years old, which means that we need to be building a lot of new companies that are less than five years old, but our data shows us that in fact, the number of startups has been steadily going down for the last 40 years and that a couple of years ago, the number of startups was actually exceeded by the number of companies that failed. There's a number of reasons for that, but one big reason is who starts those startups historically in America. So in 1996, more than 75%, three quarters of all jobs, all companies created were created by white folks. A few years ago in 2015, that was down to 60%, and now it's down into the 50s, which pretty much is following the demographic change of America. The challenge is the number of companies started by people of color while it's increased. The sheer number doesn't come close to the number that we used to get. So what we need to ensure of is that we have new ways of getting capital and revenue to entrepreneurs of our fastest growing population, the new majority, so they can grow their companies and jobs when they don't have friends and family, which is how we've historically relied on companies to be started. Again, if the disparities are a dime to a dollar, 59 cents to a dollar, it's no wonder that people of color don't have the resources to start up companies at the rates that white folks did. And in fact, we've worked with Gallup and others who've actually looked at the science of what it takes the entrepreneurial characteristics and in fact, what they found, which is no surprise, there's no correlation between the characteristics of a successful entrepreneur and race, income, geography, gender, and the like. In fact, studies show that if we had filled those startup holes from blacks to people of color, we'd have a million more jobs a year. And so what's promising is that there are already private investors who have invested more than $300 million into 30 venture capital and private equity firms that are owned by black and brown venture capitalists and private equity folks, including Keisha Cash's Impact America Fund, who I talk about in the book. And they're intentionally investing in the kinds of people and looking at how do you underwrite the kind of people we know need to be able to grow and create these companies and jobs. But 30 firms out of the now 800 venture capital firms, it's clearly we have a long way to go. We need a new normal for how capital can fuel American capitalism for this new majority. And finally, different decisions by many more mayors and many more philanthropists can strengthen our civic fabric and commitment to the greater good that we need by attacking the groundwater that's polluted by racism and by building a new generation of leaders of color. So more than 100 leaders around the country have already put a racial equity lens on their government operations to identify the structural and institutional racism and begin to take it down. And in more than a dozen cities around the country, mayors and philanthropists have built boards and commissions leadership institutes where they've able to find community leaders of multiple colors and races, train them, and then mayors place them on boards and commissions. There's been more than 1,000 leaders who've been able to experience that, including Elon Omar, who is about to be the first Muslim member of Congress. Yes. And she was one of the first graduates of the class of this boards and commissions leadership institute in Minneapolis and St. Paul. With only 3,500 local government units in America with more than 10,000 people, we actually can transform these places. They can become and should become a pillar of how we strengthen our civic fabric commitment to a greater good, but we have to make very different choices. It turns out that Margaret Mead's quote is right. Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has. We only need us to make this real. You, me, elected officials, CEOs, et cetera, to change our own behaviors and finish what our nation's founders never really started. We can reclaim the American dream, this time very intentionally for all, but we need to lean into our own power, into our own agency. But what's clear is we need to just do it. If you're interested in getting into a raffle for a free copy of my book, please text Reclaim to 474747, and we're picking winners later this week. Thank you very much for having me.


Hello everybody. Welcome back to another AI video. In this one we're in chat GPT and I'm going to give you a one-click personal trainer prompt. This is a detailed prompt that considers a quite a few factors but it's very easy to implement and I'm going to give you the whole prompt. The link is in the description below. That said, this prompt or this link here is going to ask you the following information. It's going to consider your specific needs and what you're looking to do and in particular it's going to factor in your age, your gender, your height, your weight, any medical conditions you have, any food allergies, your specific fitness goals, the workout frequency, the number of days you can commit per week to working out, your workout preferences, your diet preferences, the number of meals and snacks per day, and even foods that you dislike. Once it's done that it's going to create a summary of the diet and exercise plan. It's also going to create you a detailed workout program for the exercise plan. It's going to give you a basic summary and then it's going to give you very detailed, both an exercise plan part of me and it's also going to create a detailed meal plan including what foods to eat. You're going to get a grocery list out of this and it's going to include all of the different quantities of things you need to buy at the store. Pretty much everything you could get inside of AI Prompt. It's all here if you're looking for a personal trainer. That said, before we go any further, keep in mind that this does not replace a personal trainer because as much as AI is great, it's not in the gym with you. It's not teaching you how to do proper form. It's not monitoring you and I also ask you to consult your doctor if you're thinking about starting a training program. It's just good practice. With all of that preamble out of the way, let's get right into it. I've got a new chat here. I am in chat GPT. I'm just going to click on new chat. I'm going to select GPT-4 but you can also, because I have the paid program, but GPT-3.5 is the default and that works just as fine. Now, we're going to copy in the prompt. Here it is. I'm going to copy and paste this and here's the prompt and then we're going to fill in the blanks as I go. Copy and paste. Here we go. You are a highly renowned health and nutrition expert fitness GPT. What I've done here is I've assigned the chat GPT a role.  Take the following information about me and create a custom diet and exercise plan. I am hashtag years old or pound sign.  I am pound sign gender. It is now I am male. I'm going to delete that and then I am X number of inches tall. I'm going to go with 68 inches tall. I'm only five foot eight. I'm not that tall. My current weight is 250 pounds. I'm not slim guys. Sorry. I'm going to get there though. You guys just wait. I'm just basically removing those variables or those hashtags or those pound signs and putting in my specifics. Again, a link to this will be in the description below so you guys can customize it to your needs. My current metal conditions are I have none. I have food allergies to none. My primary fitness and health goals are and this is where you want to be specific. I are to lose weight and build muscle. Yeah. How easy is that to do? I know crazy but whatever that's what I want to do. Let's see what GPT can come up with. I can commit to working out X number of days per week. I'm going to go with five because I'm a YouTuber. I got time and I prefer and enjoy this type of workout. Now you could enter in one type or more than one type. I'm going to go with I like hiking and I like strength training. Those are mine. You could put in body weight training. You could put in Pilates. You can even put in Taibo. Whatever works for you. Okay. I have a diet preference of this. So I'm going to go with low carbohydrate although I don't know if that's the right way to go anymore. But again, this is just an example. You can customize it or I can change my mind in the future and rerun it. I want to have three meals and two snacks per day. That's enough for me. And I dislike and cannot eat under any circumstances. Mushrooms and seafood. I capitalize mushrooms because they're just wrong. And if that gets me a dislike, I'm sorry. Now. All right. That fun part out of the way. Here's where we hit the pay dirt here. This is where the money shot is. Create a summary of my diet and exercise plan. Create a detailed workout program for my exercise plan. So I'm asking for a summary and a detailed version. Create a detailed meal plan for my diet and create a detailed grocery list for my diet that includes quantity of each item. Avoid any superfluous pre and post descriptive text and don't break character under any circumstance. I'm going to hit enter and let's see what we get. Okay. So we get the summary up first here. Low carbohydrate diet with three meals and two snacks per day. That's all correct. Avoid mushrooms and seafood. Yeah. Exercise five days a week. Focusing on hiking and training. So it's basically kind of telling me what I already told it, but it's about to give us some detailed work. Here we go. Here's where the money is. Detailed workout programs. Day one. Strength training upper body. And then it says bench press bent over rows. So it's kind of like a full body upper body. Strength training. Day two is hiking. Makes a lot of sense. Day three is lower body. Build your legs up. Day four. Active rest. Day five. Strength training. Full body. So this is actually quite intelligent. So it's gone. Upper body hiking. Lower body. Day off. Day five. Full body. So all of the different muscles. Day six and seven rest. So this is actually quite well thought out. And then now it gives us a meal plan. Again, I'm just watching it printed out in front of me. Meal one for breakfast. Scrambled eggs. Avocado. Spinach. Shredded cheese. Cup of coffee. Okay. That sounds really good. Low carb. Also noticed there's no mushrooms in there. So it did its job. Okay. So this is pretty much how it works. Now this is just examples. Now look at this. The grocery list. How good is this? 21 eggs. Two avocados. One bag of spinach. One bag of shredded cheese.  Like it's going right down to like right down to the details. This is fantastic. This is your one click personal trainer in a bag. That's it guys. Thanks for watching.


So we saw that a state of a thermodynamic system can be represented by a point in the so called thermodynamic state space. The question which arises is this, is it always possible to represent a state, by state we mean the thermodynamic state of a thermodynamic system by a point in the thermodynamic state space. Now remember that if you have to define a point in the geometric space, all the required coordinates have to be precisely defined. You cannot have any confusion in any of the coordinates, x has to be some precise value, y has to be some precise value, z has to have its precise value. Suppose this is true, if the answer is yes, then we have a depiction something like this, this is the state, this point and we could have the three coordinates say for example, pressure, mass, temperature. This is only for illustration depending on the system and the type of relevant properties, the coordinates will change. They could be 2, they could be 3, they could be more. But sometimes it is possible that when we do the measurement, we find that the pressure perhaps is not uniform. If we stir the gas, if the gas is fluid, reasonably dense and it is being stirred, pressure may not be uniform. If the cylinder is exposed to the sun on one side, it is possible that part of the gas is warmer than the other part. In which case one or more coordinates may not be uniquely defined and if they are not uniquely defined, it may not be possible for us to represent that so called state by a point. We will get some sort of a nebulosity, we do not know what the state is. So remember that if the answer to this question is yes, we have a state represented by a point in the thermodynamic state space and our definition is that this state is in thermodynamic equilibrium. We say that the state is in thermodynamic equilibrium when all the relevant properties are uniquely defined and hence the state can be represented precisely by a point in the thermodynamic state space. If the answer is no, then here we have a crude depiction of a state not in thermodynamic equilibrium. The idea of equilibrium is important in thermodynamics, the idea of thermodynamic equilibrium because when we say that a state is in thermodynamic equilibrium, we have unique and known values of its properties so we can proceed with appropriate calculations and further study of thermodynamics. We cannot do much when the depiction is that of non-equilibrium because we do not have a point which we can precisely locate in space. The idea of equilibrium is not unique to thermodynamics, we have just now defined thermodynamic equilibrium. But there are other equilibria, for example we have mechanical equilibrium, from mechanics, from chemistry we have chemical equilibrium. The definitions of these equilibria are different and we pick up no fight with them. Our definition of thermodynamic equilibrium is as explained that a state in thermodynamic equilibrium has all its properties uniquely defined and hence is represented or representable on an appropriate thermodynamic state space by a unique point. Even in thermodynamics we will later consider when we look at zeroth law another equilibrium known as thermal equilibrium. So this is just to make ourselves clear that the idea of equilibrium is not unique to thermodynamics. We have defined thermodynamic equilibrium in one particular way. There are other equilibria in other branches of physics. Even in thermodynamics we will have another idea of an equilibrium known as thermal equilibrium which we will come across when we study the zeroth law of thermodynamics. Thank you.