Great. Good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us. We're delighted to have you here. Ambassador, I will tell you there were people here at 7.30 waiting to come in to hear you this morning. I questioned their judgment, too, but they're good friends. They're very close, personal friends, so I can say that.  We're delighted you're here. This is going to be a really interesting discussion. I had a chance to, I first met Ambassador Crocker, gosh, back in 2003 when you were at the very early days of the Provisional Authority, and of course his career, the last part of his exceptional career, was interwoven with the trajectory that we've taken as a nation in Iraq. We were very anxious to have him come because this is a topic that is mysteriously dropped off the pages of the newspaper. You're going to fix that, Bob. Here in Washington, we don't talk about Iraq anymore. Here we are seven months into this political trauma in Iraq, and we're just not talking about it. We've made an astounding investment as a nation in the political future of Iraq, and it just does not enjoy the discussion and debate it should have in our policy consciousness. This is a modest effort to try to fix that. We're very lucky to have Ambassador Ryan Crocker with us today. He's probably one of the most gifted ambassadors we've had.  This is the mark of one of the really gifted career ambassadors, and we're very fortunate that he served so ably for the United States, and of course he's now down at the Bush School in Texas, where he is going to do equally wonderful things, and we're very pleased that he was here. Nate is going to be the guy that's going to lead us and do the real introduction, but I wanted to say welcome to all of you, and a special thank you to you, Ambassador, for your remarkable service to America, and now your willingness to help all of us today. Thank you. Nate, why don't you get us started for real? Thank you, Dr. Hamry. Welcome to all. As you all may know, the military strategy forum, this type of event, is graciously sponsored by Rolls Royce North America. Through the forum, CSIS invites a variety of senior defense military and diplomatic leaders to offer their views on key defense-relevant issues impacting the country. These events always generate lively discussion and drawing together very diverse communities of interest and practice. Today's topic, Iraq and America's Future in Iraq, is no exception. As you're well aware, on the 1st of September this year, the United States officially ended its combat mission in Iraq, and is now focused on the more narrow mission of advising and assisting Iraqi security forces, prosecuting partner counterterrorism operations with the Iraqis, and protecting the United States government's ongoing civilian-led capacity building mission. A great many security challenges remain in Iraq, and by December 31st next year, the U.S. military presence will end there. While much has been accomplished in Iraq, those of us who watch it are well aware that the post-election government formation process appears headed for an eighth month of somewhat deadlock. Violence continues there as well. Iraq's political process may be producing also may be producing dangerous zero-sum outcomes, leaving both our commitment there and Iraq's future on uncertain ground. Today we're pleased and honored to have a keynote speaker, Ambassador Ryan Crocker, who is well positioned to provide us all with key insights on Iraq's future stability and security. Take an opportunity to make yourself familiar with Ambassador Crocker's bio. I won't review it all, but let me highlight a few of the highlights for you here. Ambassador Crocker is now Dean and Executive Professor at the George Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University. He is a five-time Ambassador and Chief of Mission serving in Lebanon, Kuwait, Syria, Pakistan, and most recently Iraq. Ambassador Crocker was also dispatched to Afghanistan in January 2002 to reopen the American diplomatic mission there after the fall of the Taliban. In Iraq, Ambassador Crocker is credited with forging alongside senior American military leaders the kind of civil military design that was needed to help the Iraqis reverse their spiral into civil war. Ambassador Crocker's many awards and accolades include the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the Presidential Distinguished Service Award, the Secretary of State's Award for Distinguished Service, the Distinguished Honor Award and Award for Valor as well as DoD's Medal for Distinguished Civilian Service. As a credit to Ambassador Crocker's superb public service, Secretary Hillary Clinton established the Ryan C. Crocker Award for Outstanding Achievement in Expeditionary Diplomacy in 2009. Ambassador Crocker is a superb public servant who has served with great distinction through, as Dr. Hamry said, one of our most difficult periods in history, in our history. And we are very grateful to have him with us today. So please join me in welcoming Ambassador Crocker to the podium. Thank you. Thank you, Nate. Dr. Hamry, it's great to be back at CSIS. All I can say is that if people were here at 7.30 in the morning, it was because rumor had spread that once again CSIS was handing out Bloody Marys. I thank both John and Nate for a generous introduction. The truth is what I actually represent is what I call the doctrine of expendability. You know, if there is a dicey situation out there where it might work or it might not or more to the point that people you send out might come back or might not. This started back in Lebanon in 1990. The embassy had been closed for 18 months when I was asked to go reopen it. And basically what President Bush 41, for whom I am now working again, what he was saying was go give it a shot if it works great and if it doesn't, we won't have lost much. Well, any rock, if it doesn't work, we will have lost a very great deal. I will be, I hope, brief in my remarks, make this a dialogue, not a monologue. There is a lot of talent and expertise in this room. In addition, of course, to Tony Cordesman and others on the panel, we have some other Iraq vets that I was privileged to serve with. Ambassador Charlie Reese, Betsy Phillips, you can contribute at least as much as I can to an assessment of where we are and more importantly, a look at where we might be going. I like the title for this forum, Stability, Security and U.S. Policy, because it's all interconnected. And there is a certain amount of good news. There is a fair bit of security and stability, and that has been connected to, I think, the direction and weight of U.S. policy over the last several years, with some important continuity between administrations from Bush to Obama. But, as I have said in other fora, we need to understand that seven and a half years after the initiation of Operation Iraqi Freedom, we're still very much at the beginning of the story, or more to the point the Iraqis are at the beginning of their new narrative in their history. And for all of the extraordinary achievements that we've seen, the challenges, the list of challenges is even greater. Now, I know Tony Cordesman was there. Who else suffered through my remarks yesterday at lunch at the National Council on U.S. Arab Relations? Oh, thank God. So, Tony can go have a cup of coffee and I'll just give the same remarks again. It is relevant, because what I tried to do at the Council was kind of go through the challenges that are out in front of Iraq. Kurdish Arab tensions, which overlay or underlay unresolved institutional issues. How does a regional government relate to a federal government relate to provincial governments? On profound questions, we've seen it with hydrocarbons among the Kurds, but also the right of a regional government to raise and command forces. How do regional forces relate to the role of federal forces, command and control? Can regional forces operate outside their region with what mandate? These are fundamental states' rights issues. Just as they were unresolved in our society for a very long time and precipitated our most catastrophic war from 1861 to 1865, so too they are fundamental challenges to the development of, again, a stable, secure Iraq going forward. Huge issues of economic and social development. Problems with the integration of the Sons of Iraq, in many cases former insurgents. May they not be once and future insurgents, as the New York Times asserted last week. Problems of refugees internally displaced. Problems of a significant imbalance between civilian and military capacity. I noted yesterday the extreme criticism that the Bush administration received for the disbanding of the Iraqi security forces in 2003, and I won't go through the revisionism on that. Except to point out that with Iraq's new security forces, you are already seen as significant imbalance between their abilities, their cohesion, their organization, and those on the civilian side, not in favor of the civilians. So again, you have Iraqi military officers saying, why are we fighting and dying for our country just to let the civilians mess it up? Sentiments that have been heard a time or two in this country. But the principle of civil control over the military in America is beyond question. It is not beyond question in Iraq, and given Iraq's own history with the military and politics, this too, I think, is going to be a challenge of some significance going forward. And as one looks at what Prime Minister Maliki has done over the last few years, I think it puts a somewhat different light on some of his actions. He has been criticized for being overly dictatorial and in particular for establishing operational commands that report directly to him and not through the, excuse me, the chief of military staff or the minister of defense. Maliki's argument is that if civil control over the military is to have a chance in the new Iraq, the prime minister has got to find every way he can to ensure that he is in fact commanding Iraq's military forces, because the weight of Iraqi history is in the other direction. Now, the reason I give you this laundry list of challenges out there, and these are just the internal challenges, these are just some of the internal challenges. Another, for example, is the issue of disputed internal borders, the gerrymandering of Iraq that Saddam practiced to redraw provincial lines to reward allies and punish enemies. Kirkuk, of course, is the one that's best known, but it's not the only one. There is an issue, for example, between Anbar and Karbala. Saddam removed basically two-thirds of the province of Karbala and handed it to Anbar so that those rebellious shia would no longer be sitting astride the primary land pilgrimage route to Mecca. That's the district of Nuhayb in what is now eastern Anbar. The Karbalawees want it back. For Anbaris, them would be fighting words. Tell audiences in Texas that it'd be kind of like somebody saying that North Texas is now going to revert to Oklahoma, which actually in some quarters would be taken as a good idea. But these are existential issues in an Iraqi context, and they are unresolved. And overlaying all of this is a profound trust deficit. You see it in the negotiations for a new government. I've said on many occasions that if I were compelled to resort to only one word to describe Iraq, that word would be fear. As in Kananma Kiya's great book written before 2003, The Republic of Fear, Saddam used fear to dominate society at every level, down to within families where family members would fear being informed on by other family members. Iraq wrestles with that legacy today, compounded, of course, by the events and actions of 2003 and on. So they are wrestling with profoundly existential issues, and doing so in a climate that does not easily engender compromise or brokered solutions. It's all or nothing. It's you or me. There's a pithy little phrase out in that region. Two men, one grave. You or me. Where compromise can not only have negative political consequences, they can cause somebody to collect early on your insurance policy. So my mantra has been for quite a while. Iraq's hard. It's hard all the time. It's going to go on being hard. Well, that's kind of why. And you see this play out in the negotiations for the formation of a government. When the elections took place, I was asked in a TV interview the day after when I thought a government would be formed. You know, this was second week of March. I said maybe by the beginning of Ramadan, the reviewer was horrified. It would take five months. I was horrified too because I knew I'd been guilty of irrational exuberance. And so it plays out. You know, the 9189 Alawi-Maliki outcome virtually guaranteed the intense deadlock we've seen. I do think they will get there. My prediction is the next prime minister of Iraq is going to be the last prime minister of Iraq, Nurel Maliki. The question will be with what breadth of coalition against which set of concessions and political arrangements. Something we can talk about if you're interested. We should also talk about the region. I won't go around the horn on this, except to say that while Iraq's problems are profound in and of themselves, they are not left to be worked out of and by themselves. Iraq exists in a very tough region, a region that it did its best to make tough for so many years. Some of its neighbors see it as payback time. Iran is particularly problematic, and we can talk about that. Turkey has played a significant and broadly speaking positive role, but there are questions in Ankara and questions around Ankara about what Turkey's strategic orientation should be going forward. Is this the time Turks asked themselves to question Ataturk's strategic reorientation of Turkey when the state was created in the 1920s toward the west? I don't know how that will be answered, but it could have the most profound implications for NATO, for the United States, for Iraq, and for the region. Syria, again, a very interesting relationship with Iraq, almost to the point of hostility a year ago. They've walked back a bit, but the implications of the Iraq-Syrian relationship going forward also carry great weight. But let me turn to, I think, what the heart of our consideration is today, the U.S. and Iraq. I never spent a lot of time debating about or even thinking about should we or shouldn't we in 2003. We did. And PhD theses will be written for generations on the should we or shouldn't we. That's why you have PhD theses. I'm a newcomer to academia, and I'm groping for some logical reason to have PhDs at all. So maybe that's one. But in my work in Iraq and my consideration of Iraq subsequently, that isn't the question vis-a-vis Iraq. It's where do we go from here, and from here, of course, is a constantly moving point. As you know, we negotiated two agreements on my watch, the security agreement, and the strategic framework agreement. What that did was put in place an architecture for U.S.-Iraqi relations and also for transition from the Bush to the Obama administrations. Both agreements were publicly embraced by the Obama administration in its first months, and the Obama administration has followed those two roadmaps. The drawdown to 50,000 troops, of course, was not part of the security agreement. That was an Obama unilateral initiative reached by the end of August, at which point the president said, we are turning the page in Iraq. Well, I think most Americans saw that as closing the book on Iraq. As we noted at the outset, Iraq has kind of dropped off the screen, but it's still very much there. There were two polls conducted at the end of August, a CBS poll in the U.S. that found that 70% of Americans didn't want to hear about Iraq anymore, wanted to pull forces out, just wanted to be done. A poll conducted in Iraq came up with the same percentage, 70%, but 70% of Iraqis felt it would be a cataclysmic mistake for the U.S. to withdraw from Iraq. So where are we today? We're in a period of transition from a military lead to a civilian lead. I worry a great deal about that transition. I worry that what we're seeing is a transition from a military lead to no lead or military engagement to a tiny fraction of that engagement. Simply put, the capacity does not exist on the civilian side to take on the vast array of roles and missions that the military has so able performed in Iraq. Iraq was remissioned at the end of August from a combat to an advise and assist mission. In effect, there was nothing magic about August 31st, as you all know. That transition had been underway for a long time. It was underway before I ever left Iraq, as combat dropped to marginal levels. What our military was doing was very much on the advise and assist and not just in a technical military sense. U.S. Division North has been profoundly engaged in managing Arab Kurdish federal regional disputes. The whole notion of joint patrols was of course the U.S. initiative. I worry enormously about our capacity to carry on with these kinds of critical roles at a time when the Iraqis simply are not in a position to work these things out for themselves. They are moving in that direction but once again I think we see Washington clocks and Iraq clocks diverging. What do I think is likely to happen when there is an Iraqi government formed?  Let's re-look that. Let's look at a longer horizon and we'll have to figure out how to style it but basically we Iraq will need U.S. forces in country for a significant period of time not in a combat role but to give us two sets of assurances. Assurances among ourselves that you stand there as a guarantee that it isn't going to be one grave for two men, that no community, no party can be oppressed or worse for political reasons. You're our psychological guarantee that will allow us to go forward and develop the means and abilities to work out these profound political and social problems. The other is the guarantee in the neighborhood. Again, a rough neighborhood and a neighborhood in which by the end of 2011 Iraq will not have combat air power, will not have working air defense systems, will not have main battle tanks, will not have significant artillery, not a good situation to be in. We're moving ahead now with the procurement process but these are huge systems and as we all know you're talking about what 2013-2014 before they're fielded. So this is what I would anticipate that the Iraqis will come to us and ask for an extended U.S. deployed presence. I hope very much that when and if they do we will respond positively. Again, Washington clocks and regional clocks. When you look at the Iraqi region, particularly two of its more problematic neighbors, Syria and Iran, what you see is a situation in which both countries have not had a great couple of years in Iraq, particularly the Iranians. The decision of the Maliki government to stand up against the Iranian-backed Jai Shalmahti in 2008 was a game changer. The conclusion of our two agreements was done in the face of bitter Iranian opposition. The Iraqis, she as well as Sunni, said you know the more they don't like it the more we do. I mean it is a reminder that Iraq and Iran fought a bitter eight-year ground war and that Shia in this context manifestly does not equal Persian. So those fault lines of empire, of civilizations, of ethnicity, of history and language remain very profound. But the Iranians play a long game and part of the discourse now between Baghdad and Tehran is along the lines of the Iranians saying well looks like the Americans are leaving you know and guess what flash news we're staying. We've always been here we're always going to be here.  Our adversaries count on our strategic impatience count on us closing books while the story still goes on and that's what we see in Iraq to do so again I would suggest will be profoundly to our disadvantage as well as to the disadvantages of the Iraqis themselves. So I hope we will muster that patience. The administration has to set the course in the direction. Congress has to back it with necessary resources and frankly I'm not sure I see either of those things happening. So on that optimistic note we will now turn this into a dialogue.  Great what I just like to make a couple of points. Thank you very much Ambassador Crocker for the for your upfront remarks. There will be microphones back there if you could please raise your hand if you want ambassador if it's okay with you you can identify the the the questioner and we'll get a microphone up to you if you could clearly identify yourself upfront and keep your question very brief. Thank you. Michael Gordon New York Times Ambassador Crocker one of the probably the primary sectarian fault line in Iraq today is the Kurdish Arab set of issues that you alluded to. I'd like to get you your views on what you really think how involved the United States ought to be in trying to broker these a solution to these set of issues. There's an argument that the issues are not right for solution that nothing can be done until there's a new government that there has to be some will on those two sides on the other hand is we're providing weapons to the Iraqi army which could be weapons of instruments of intimidation vis-a-vis the Kurds main battle tanks and the like and it doesn't seem like American influence to address this conflict will be greater in the future as American forces leave and the checkpoints have been set up to deconflict conflicts are removed so we have ambassadors for the Middle East roving ambassadors for AFPAC there's no real equivalent for this set of issues even though it's a special representative what should the American policy be and how proactive should it should we be I think again that's why I led with it it's a clear example as to why our ongoing engagement is is essential you know I think increasingly we have to shift our engagement to the back room and we have that happened while I was there that doesn't mean we're less engaged it means we're less visibly engaged and we're not holding press conferences about our engagement but I have lost track long ago of how many discussions I had over the two-year period I was there aimed at trying to find ways forward between Arabs and Kurds between again regional and federal issues or at least trying to prevent things from getting worse you know and we had kind of many crisis after many crisis and were engaged in you know a huge majority of them I think we are an indispensable player on the Iraqi stage at this point Iraqis must take responsibility for their own actions and their own future yeah we all know that I got it but for some period of years that really isn't likely to happen without our engagement and sometimes it can be as simple as conversations I would have with Kurdish leaders particularly in the KDP when tempers were running high I'd say something like you know I'm trying to figure it out what were the very worst of times in modern Kurdish history in Iraq and you'd get a lively debate because there are lots of bad times to choose from generally it'd be a consensus around the on-fall campaign halabcha then I'd ask what are the best of times and no debate there right now baby today never had it so good you know security is excellent the economy is booming everybody's making money some of it legit but today's as good as it's ever been and then I'd say yeah you're right now don't blow it you know take a deep breath go sit under a tree look at at the sweep of your history and figure out a way to make this nascent federal process work for you and we're gonna have to keep on doing that you know we're not the only actor obviously the UN has played a very prominent role in the last couple of years trying to come up for example with some initiatives on disputed internal boundaries Stefan de Mistura and I both knew it wasn't gonna work but it it almost doesn't matter it's a process some problems just have to be managed until you can get to the point where solutions are possible but to keep problems from becoming crises management isn't just possible it's essential and I see us as again the indispensable crisis managers in this whole panoply of Kurdish Arab tensions and hope very much that we will continue to be both engaged and resourced for that engagement on down the line yeah said my name is Sayyed Ericat I'm with Al-Quds daily newspaper but until last May and for five years I was the United Nations spokesman in Iraq good CEO again sir and I remember we worked very hard on that 500 page report on the disputed territory you know I'm really quite distressed in this town ever since I came back because Iraq is really off the radar screen there's absolutely no serious discussion and if it wasn't for the diligence of someone like Tony Courtman there'd be actually nothing going on around town and I think there is with Iraq there's a great deal of disconnect between the current government and the Iraqi people there's been a great deal of failure by the United Nations in terms of getting programs out and affecting them and really implementing these programs it's a lengthy topic my question to you sir you said that the new Iraqi government would come to you and say we want to renegotiate the Soviet agreement and the agreement how do you revamp the presence how intrusive this presence should be how influential it ought to be to bring back some sort of a semblance of order to Iraq thank you very much and great to see you again good to see you and thank you for your service out there and some challenging times well again I mean if you're you know how do you bring order to Iraq you buy time I mean seven and a half years for America is an infinity in the development of a complex political order under conditions of great strain and violence it didn't very much at all so again we got agreements that gave structure to our relationship I'd like to see much more done on the strategic framework agreement for example you know that sets out the determination of both countries to develop relationships in the security in the non-security fields I'd like to see us both bear down with more diligence after the formation of an Iraqi government to make that meaningful trade in commerce education this is a tremendous opportunity I'll uh Eljubar said yesterday that there are 30,000 Saudi students in US universities by what I like to see 30,000 Iraqi students in US universities one thing that has hurt both countries over the years is there are relatively few very few Iraqi graduates of US universities in Iraq I think that hurts both the ability of both nations to understand each others it also has dampened Iraq's ability to pursue its own development so there are lots more things we can do to strengthen and deepen a US Iraqi ties outside of security but security will remain profoundly important for them and for us and you know the reason I expect they're gonna come and ask us for an extension of the agreement is because when we negotiated the damn thing in 2008 and I was pressing for conditionality that full withdrawal subject to conditions subject to review by both parties subject to a six-month assessment yada yada yada Maliki's position was this has to be absolute and unconditioned because that is the only way you take the occupation assertion out of Iraqi politics you know no Americans have never heard of the Treaty of Portsmouth 1948 between the UK and Iraq Iraqis know all about the Treaty of Portsmouth certainly Nuri Omaliki did because popular protests over the perception of Iraqi capitulations to the British in the security realm led to the downfall of Iraq's first Shia Prime Minister Nuri Omaliki didn't want to be the second Shia Prime Minister to be brought down over controversy over a security agreement with the Western power and he was right the security agreement passed with overwhelming support in the Iraqi parliament only the solder is supposed and even the solder has stopped talking about occupation but what Maliki said at the time was we're going to need you here for 10 or 20 more years and what we're going to do is come back to you about a year out and in a very different climate a very different political climate say let's relook at this that's why I think that's going to happen and as I said I think it is profoundly important that it does happen because that's what buys you I think the fundamental sense of internal and regional security that allows this difficult process of political compromise to move forward. John Alderman from CSIS it's good to see you again I wanted to draw on your experience both directly and directly with the Iranians it seems to me that one of the game changers for Iran is Iraqi oil production getting to really substantial levels that affects global oil markets and draws down the amount of money the government of Iran has at its disposal with its quite weak economy that gives the Iranians a tremendous incentive to disrupt Iraqi oil production before it really gets going to 6 million barrels a day 7 million barrels a day and on the one hand we in the Iraqis are trying to build something and the Iranians have a tremendous incentive to destroy something it's hard to for us to cooperate with the Iranians because we're trying to do all sorts of things to punish the Iranians from all directions so as you think through how we game dealing with the Iranian incentive to make trouble in Iraq in the context that it's hard for us to cut a deal with the Iranians because we're trying to pressure them on all sorts of non-Iraq related issues how do we approach that diplomacy? Yeah that's a it's a great question and very thoughtfully put underscores just how complex this particular dynamic is you know Maliki had part of the answer for that when we were doing the first round of negotiations on the PSAs the production sharing agreements his comment to me was we really want you guys over on our eastern border because if it's a US major the Iranians aren't going to mess aren't going to mess with you you know kind of an interesting observation and of course ExxonMobil is out there doing just that we'll see whether the Iranians mess with them or not you know the Iraqi philosophy for dealing with Iran by and large is kind of like the Iraqi philosophy for dealing with everything show strength first and then mop up the survivors so I think that that would be their answer be very assertive very direct in asserting the Iraqi interest in the full development of its oil sector you know they're highly ambitious goals to be up over 10 million barrels and show that you've got the the backbone the strength and the friends to get that done and then once that you've established that fact look for other ways and avenues you can signal that this isn't full jacket confrontation and you know Maliki does a I think a pretty fair job on that he has asserted himself against the Iranians but then as part of his regional swing he's in Tehran sees the leadership talked to Moqtada Sader and I don't know if anybody wants to take bets on what the half life of the endurance of that political alliance will be you move ahead because it is a complex relationship you know I think for Iraq the development of its oil sector has to be a non-negotiable imperative and I think they will look to us to to help back that up but then to signal there are other things that are negotiable there are other good subjects for dialogue and and let's have them in terms of our own relationship with Iran I think Iraq is not that subject at least not now I think Afghanistan is so it was encouraging for me to see the Iranians join the talks at the level of an MFA director general and I think as we take on the huge agenda we've got with the Iranians much of which is is highly confrontational we also want to continue to look for areas where we may be able to have a discussion that's conducted in lower decibels that subject in my view would be as it has been in the past Afghanistan Ambassador Viola Ganger from Bloomberg News what do you think it takes it would take in terms of U.S. political leadership either on the administration side or in terms of Congress to sell the idea of a more long-term robust U.S. presence in Iraq and how feasible do you think that is under the current political in the current political climate I think the administration primarily through the the vice president has sent that signal you know the vice president's personal engagement his multiple trips his regular phone calls the stream of Iraqi visitors through his office I think have all sent a very visible signal of high-level U.S. engagement and it's going to be important to sustain that moving forward to me it was it was quite interesting there were two major administration speeches in two days on Iraq the president's overall office speech and then vice president Biden's change of command speech the following day in Baghdad obviously carefully calibrated but strikingly different thrusts because the vice president's speech was all about engagement going forward I think that speech needs to be given again and again and again that's the administration's responsibility the the congressional responsibility is again to provide some focus you know I would like to see more committee hearings on Iraq but fundamentally resources for well articulated well defended administration requests and I really worry about the congressional will to do just that I worry a little bit about the way the administration structure its requests mercifully I'm not in that business anymore so nice to be in Washington as a visitor with no responsibilities but as we look at this transition there are elements of it that really concern me you know as you move from as you move to totally civilian security for example well masses of American contractors truly stunning security budget I would rather have seen the State Department do what it has done so well and so deftly almost everywhere else in the world which is present a proposal for the gradual erochization of security you know look I spent six years in Lebanon during a pretty tough time like a civil war our security both in movements and perimeter was always all Lebanese we never had incidents of guards turning on us absolutely loyal carefully vetted well trained and the benefit we got in situational awareness I mean these guys lived in that city they could tell you what was going on in the neighborhood and when you got to checkpoints how valuable is it to have people in your lead vehicle speaking the same language as the guys with the guns at the checkpoints so you know I think again it's just a small example except it's a small example that's got about a hundred and seventy five million dollar price tag attached to it for the first year we need some again creative imaginative well focused thinking on the part of the administration combined with a solid sustained public message close engagement with congress and for congress I think to take again a responsible attitude to support our long-term interests in Iraq which I would suggest are profound I think we have time for one more question okay hi Jennifer so from CNN the Pentagon's bracing for wiki leaks to release hundreds and hundreds of thousands of documents pertaining to the Iraq war what do you think we'll see out of those documents and are you concerned well you know I yeah I'm concerned about the whole wiki leak phenomenon you know I don't know what this stuff is going to say you know could I make the point for the record I was never there it wasn't me it's what I'd really be worried about in in this context where we're not fighting a hot war it's it's not the same set of issues in Afghanistan although there may be some carry over I'd really be worried if as looks to be the case you have Iraqi political figures named in a context or a connection that can make them politically and physically vulnerable to their adversaries you know that just has a utterly chilling effect on the willingness of political figures to talk to us not just in Iraq anywhere in the world and I think a hugely irresponsible step on the part of wiki leaks so just in a different sense than we saw in Afghanistan this too is going to put lives at risk needlessly and irresponsibly okay sir on behalf of all of us here at CSIS as well as Rolls Royce North America thank you very much for your thoughtful remarks today thank you


Okay, it's 5 o'clock on a given Thursday here at Think Tech. I'm Jay Fidel. We're doing Global Connections today with our friend in Varanasi, India, Karnaki Mishra. Welcome to the show, Karnaki. Hi, dear. I'm fine. I'm good. It's lovely. Yeah. Well, I'm glad we got connected. It's just sometimes it's a long way from here to India. We can see you fine. I'm going to hear you reasonably well. I think the big news, and you mentioned this to me before, the big news in India is COVID, that is coronavirus. And I wonder if you could give us an idea about what that news is and how COVID is affecting India these days. Yeah, it's quite now the strength of patients is increasing day by day, and the count is around the total number of people who are infected now is around 50,000. What do you wish I found in the 40,000 cases are active? There are 1,700 deaths around, and 15,000 people have recovered as well. So there is a constant rise in number of patients every day around 1,000 or 1,500 patients every day are emerging after being tested in India, going testing rapidly. And we are trying to increase our testing phase so that we can improve our data on this because if we don't test properly, we don't get proper information how many people are being affected due to that coronavirus. In Varanasi itself, I guess around 77 people are infected by the coronavirus. There is one casualty and 10 people have recovered in Varanasi. So it's a pandemic throughout India. All of India, it is a complete lockdown in India. So it's been much, and it's raining now, and I think this lockdown will continue at the end of the night at least, but there are plenty of time to move back and on for the coronavirus because it's not a family to be coming. Well, India is pretty advanced on medicine, and this is a challenge. So far, India has done pretty well, but it could take off any time, as you say. And I wonder, what about the social distancing? Are people staying at a distance? Are they wearing face masks? Yes, masks are now completely available. Everyone who is going outside should wear masks and gloves. It's pretty negative right now. It's not time to follow, but the problem is sometimes people are neglected also and they are too busy or they need something. Please don't think about that. But now, the government is increasingly aware about social distancing and already people are getting much more aware these days and are now following. I think it will take some time to express that social distancing because it's totally something new that people are facing prior to this challenge in the world. So I believe the social distancing in one mask will take some time, but after this coronavirus pandemic, it will be a permanent treatment. You know, I read that you have some very interesting initiatives going on. One, for example, is you put a bunch of doctors or medical students on an airplane and you fly them from one part of India to another in order to deal with any outbreaks. That's very impressive. Is that happening as a regular matter? Yes, the government is trying to take that initiative and our medical students and doctors were responding quite well. And certainly, I believe that this pandemic has led to us in a state that we should improve our medical infrastructure between the pandemic and the corona right now. We are trying to expand that. We are trying to improve our medical staff planning, we are trying to provide PPE kits for everything, everything possible to our work staff. People are being taken care of and the medical staff is working quite hard on this situation. And we are calling them coronavirus our work staff, our medical staff. We are working on the front line and the government is trying to appreciate the efforts of people. Thank you. I read also that you have trains. India has a very well-developed train system and the trains cross India back and forth and you are also using the train system to deliver doctors and medical professionals from one part of India to another and to deal with any outbreak. Is that happening as a regular matter? Yes, it's happening. And India talks about trains. I read also that the government is trying to use those trains also as quarantine centres for people. So the trains are also being distributed. For this transportation, it's completely left in India that there is no train traveling for the rest of the states. Some literary locations are there for research or they are working in various parts of India. These people are in trouble because they need to travel to their homes for whatever benefit they need or whatever situation they have to control because they are putting jobs there now, money becoming an issue. How does it work to control this pandemic and improve the economic situation as well? I think the government has shared pretty well in the now, but we have to improve its pace because now things take place according to India's value. The rest of the country expects the peak of coronavirus may be in July or June so things are disappearing ahead also. Yeah, I read that I'm not sure how far it's going to go, but in the near term the government has decided to try to reopen parts of the economy. That's the same phenomenon that's happening in the US where the government wants to reopen parts of the economy. And it's not clear that we're ready in the US. We don't have sufficient masks. We don't have a developed testing system. We don't have ventilators for hospitals in the ICU part of the hospital. And I wonder if it's the same thing in India. I mean, do you feel that India is ready to go back and start up its economy again now? No, it's not possible. Both means for the government is that people are struggling. The people who are working are in construction sites. People are working in the informal sector. This has to be very much done with lockdown. So for them, the government is taking some initiative that is now in lockdown for elections for the government. It's following those particular industries. If people take care of some rules and regulations for the government then you can provide some industries to work on because poverty is very big here. The people who are working are the people who are struggling with coronavirus. And it's a challenge. If you think about coronavirus, the question arises sometimes, poverty needs to be a situation that we can't close the economy for a long time. Some small steps are being taken that a complete shutdown is not now possible. But some people are working that means they want to keep going. It's not the last two, but very few.  You have 1.3 billion. We have 300 million. And it's traumatic to shut down an economy that big. And it's going to take some time to bring it back up again.   Let me repeat the question.  You are 1.3 billion. We are only 300 million in change. If we shut the economy down, it's complicated.  And I wonder how you feel as a business student, how you feel about trying to bring it back up again. It's not going to be easy, is it? It's not going to be definitely easy because 1.3 billion people, as you said. It's quite much in numbers as well as in strength. So the problem is in more of the population, we have the more number of chances of people being unemployed, more chances of getting people in poverty. If things don't improve in the future. So government is trying to take steps. That fund sector will be open to the IT sector because the software will open up. Some industries will open up. But the companies, overall improvement of the economy is not possible in today's scenario. It will be happening somewhere in the future. I see around December or January. Of course this coronavirus pandemic will stay with us for a very long time. Not just in India, but in the rest of the world as well. I think the number of positions are increasing in the United States as well. 1 million people are affected in the United States. So 70,000 casualties. It's the emerging newer tragedy. Global economy is in trouble right now. Oh sure, absolutely right. And likely to get worse, I would say. So what about the people in India who don't have reserve funds? What about the people in India who could be hungry? They don't have a job, they don't have any income, they don't have anything to fall back on. Is the government of India able to help them and to pass out food, to pass out money so they don't starve? What's being done about that? It's trying to do that. That no people should get hungry or get into poverty so some efforts are being taken by the government to improve. People not just in government who are trying to send rations and food to people who are living around the city. If you lock down, no one can travel. So the government is delivering food from door to door. It's government initiative. And second thing is that medicines are also there. The government is also providing medicines home to home. And people, I think the most important thing is that it's not about the government helping, it's about people taking medication. That's one thing happening in India. But people from all the walks of life are now coming together to help people who are in our society. It's more happening in the world. If someone is coming to my door, I am trying to help. People are now taking medication. And it's happening. Well, you've had issues with Kashmir. In fact, last time, a couple of times ago when we spoke or issues with Kashmir, of course there's always issues with Pakistan. And I'm wondering how those countries are doing and how the relationship of India with Kashmir and Pakistan they have changed because of the epidemic. Can you talk about that? Look, now we have a lot of Kashmir and Pakistan. So our time minister took an initiative in the early early stages to set up a meeting with the Pakistani counter leadership in Pakistan as well. But the start summit was taking place. We seven neighboring countries went via basically like we are talking. And we discussed about how can we face that challenge of the coronavirus pandemic. Kashmir will remain an issue, I think, politically, but we must also believe that it's not the time to discuss about politics. It's time to face the reality. Pakistan will be facing the same thing if they don't take the right steps and if we don't cooperate together at least not right now. But even after that time some terrorist attacks or activities are being taken place in Kashmir and the government is trying to stop that as well on border. The pandemic has a very great impact on that and I think Kashmir issue will be left for a long time if we look at that. But right now politics on international scale is not necessary between any nation, I believe. Good. So I wanted to ask you about Varanasi. I wanted to ask you about your school. I wanted to ask you about your own lifestyle. Can you talk about how things are doing in Varanasi? Are you locked in right now? Have you been spending time only at home? Are you getting out much? As you go to the market? How do you spend your time? Because everybody that I know is staying home and doing Zoom communications like this and I wonder if it's the same for you? Yeah, it's a lockdown in India and it will remain till 17th of May at least right now. That's from my country. But I am working. I think college is working to Zoom mode only. The assignments are being provided online. We are submitting assignments online. The tests are being taken online. So everything is now Zoom. And I think that this thing, parking time has become a hard activity because now I am at home so I have not a free time. So I can read a book, watch a movie, watch a TV after assignments and all the work is writing about the test. I am getting a lot of time and a lot of activities are there so I am enjoying it as well. Yeah, I have the same experience. There is a benefit of being able to catch up on things and read and watch entertainment and documentaries. There is a benefit of being home. Although some people feel cooped up and some people do not provide by the lockdown and they violate that, go out on the street and take a risk and risk other people that way. Now, if you did that or somebody that you know did that went out on the street, violated the lockdown what would happen? Would the police do something about it? Yeah, the government is quite strict about that. So you are breaking your ground with considered criminals and non-native criminals. They will not get paid at you Government is quite strict about this lockdown if you are not following it you will end up in jail and it is quite possible. And strict measures are being taken because it is on the ground that if someone breaks that lockdown in a very non-serious manner if we or she takes it very casually the government will take action but people are people who take it better between like it is here. Some people take it casually but the rest of them are very serious and people have seen that too. I know you from our discussions well enough that you follow international events and that you are following this as we are as an extraordinary turn of history and I wonder what your thought is about where it is all going how it is going to affect the planet how it is going to affect global relations and what do you want to call it, humanity and civilization because we don't see the light at the end of the tunnel yet people can talk about you know the end of the lockdown and the resurrection of the economy but there is no certainty about that where or when or how and I wonder what your thinking is because I would really appreciate knowing how you feel about this and what your own personal philosophy is about it and I think this coronavirus has to change in the world and the world will not remain the same even after this coronavirus finally political relations between countries will change the style of trade which we are doing which will, the battery life will change the lifestyle which we are currently living right now battery life will change we are changing the global world order countries becoming more protectionist in globalization being coming down because as this has led to that more homegrown industries might be possible in future as we can say that the US is that whole world with China due to that but President Trump is blaming China that they have made such thing but he is calling that Chinese virus President Trump said that, I heard that so I think China will be drastically affected industries will, I could move from out of China and this will affect the whole world in such a manner that I see that next five to ten years I think economies will be close, it will be more protectionist and it will take some time to recover and to go on the track which we were on in 2019 it's very possible, it's very possible yeah, let's talk about China for a minute and I always always ask you what you think about what Trump is doing I mean right now he's into name calling with Xi Jinping and Xi Jinping is responding and the two of them they may at some level claim that they're friendly but it doesn't seem that way and I'm wondering if you see this as a threat to global relationships and I'm also interested in knowing how India might be affected by an argument between the U.S. and China the way it seems to be evolving China is already in this column a lot of time because the whole origin of corona virus was China and they tried to cover it up, the information was consumed revealing the fact that we are facing the threat of this level, China did not reveal that information so not only the United States, Italy Australia and all the nations of Europe are now blaming China or showing China for that pandemic from the tragedies and the damages China has made so keeping that in mind I believe that in future the tensions may increase between the United States and China and this tension has led to a situation that these companies which are leaving China may end up in India it's a very possibility that the low labor costs which you are getting in China you might get in India but India is also trying to balance that fact that if we get into trouble between the United States and China we might face some issues because China is the third largest trading part of India and I think this has led to a situation of balancing that India will try to balance between the United States and China but things get managed somehow and we move on to with this balanced policy So you are not too far from the northern border of India I wonder is the northern border closed? Are the borders of India closed right now? Is it porous between India and the surrounding countries including China? Yes, the borders are closed there is no travel between countries and neighboring countries even flights are being stopped there is no travel between nations any kind of travel is not possible in such scenario even state to state cities are not possible so I can't imagine a travel between nations will be possible and I am not seeing that in future but it will be very possible as well I am not seeing that flights will take place in future as well in months coming in July June I believe that international flights and travel will somehow will begin after July or other if possible Yes, we say, knock wood knock wood So Mr. Modi, how is he doing? Is he popular? Is he popular with you? Is he popular with the people that you talk to? Is the country behind him? Does the country believe he is doing the right thing? Yes, I think as the Prime Minister it's now a global threat So as the Prime Minister every single Chief Minister or Government what we call in America is also called Chief Minister India Every Chief Minister every federal level Government in India is now trying to work with the Central Government with the Modi Government so that, so we can deal with this pandemic because it's not now about politics it's now about handling the issue I am very very happy that politics is being correctly in India that we are not looking at politics right now I think people are also political parties are not seeing politics but people are not seeing politics right now the only issue we have to be with you is coronavirus and that's the only thing that Government is doing mind right now politics will begin after this but not right now right now Well I know that you have a lot of access to American news and you know that in America a good percentage of the people feel that Trump has been very unsuccessful very misguided in his actions and policies around coronavirus and he's motivated in large part by his political aspirations to win the election in November but I wonder how, you know I've asked you this question before I wonder how you and the people you know in India how you feel about the effectiveness of Trump's policies and actions on the coronavirus I just, one thing which I can say that the President did not put a lot of feelings in the beginning when the Secretary of State and the Government of the United States put action to curb that and even right now I think Trump is eager to open up the lockdown I am seeing that, but we are quite excited how I can end that lockdown and get the economy back on track but at least from my point of view the United States is not in a position right now to end the lockdown and to bring back the economy and talking about the United States election in November I don't think that elections will happen like that in future you may have to postpone the election it's quite possible Olympics can be postponed so can the US elections so that there is a possibility that elections will fail Trump might face a very great threat in elections because he is not handling that situation for him President Trump should improve his way of dealing with coronavirus and be more sensitive towards people of the United States and I think he can do that but it will need some time he is not right now with coronavirus, he is not political mode of winning the US elections Joe Biden is in competition he is closing in Joe Biden is closing in with his President so I think that US elections will face challenges this time now who do you support look this is my big question actually because I will say that any President who is beneficial for India will be good for me as well because I don't have time until I do let me ask you another another question would you support Joe Biden yes he was white President during Barack Obama we have good relations what about his Vice President that issue is not yet resolved and every day we wonder are you there so Carnegie you might support Biden but my question is what about his Vice President everybody is waiting for Biden to make a decision about his Vice President who already said he is going to select a woman as his Vice President you have any thoughts about who should be his Vice President I think he can be Vice President which part is he he was in election he might become Vice President and I think Joe Biden will give a little competition to Donald Trump this time because this 2020 will be a very challenging for President Trump as well and your elections will get interesting this time quite interesting that we might win because prior to this pandemic and the situation being serious I was thinking that Trump might have a Trump as winning election but right now I think President Trump is quite poorly handling this situation this might affect your election I think this new election will be one of the most interesting feelings in Biden's view what we have seen as you know many people in the United States see Trump as dismantling democracy as dismantling our democratic government balance with power between the branches of government very concerned that if he wins another term he will become a dictator he will dismiss Congress and he will elude the courts and he will, the law will be with him only a very great concern India is a great democracy a fabulous democracy and I wonder how people in India feel about the decline of American democracy in this administration one writer in Ireland wrote a piece which was very resonant and he said in the past the people in Europe and the EU felt that the United States was a world leader now they feel pity for what is happening pity he said and I wonder how the people in India feel about this decline of democracy democracy I think democracy is all about people constructing democracy how much people trust government in democracy I can tell you that it's not about the president of the country it's about people it's about someone who lives alone in the country which is very sensitive and when talking about democracy sometimes one thing which I have observed that one Chinese wants two elections and that also which are very landslides between people saw him as a kind of dictator who can understand that it's with the perception that when you win in a drastic manner in a landslide that people say that you become itself and I'm not saying that it's very possible that sometimes governments approach might become quite hard but democracy is the question that I can say that collective intellectual of people is much more powerful than the government people always choose what is right for them and I think we are very biased against the democratic nations in the United States and India I think that people of the United States are changing their backwards in their time at that point of time who was right for us and this will happen in future democracy will not change the governments which are functioning really well we can change the mindset how people are approaching the democracy Carnegie you know I feel we've talked about this before that you're an up and coming you look more than a student you have a global awareness about you I've always thought that it would be nice for us to meet in public in person I've always thought it would be nice to meet in person but it seems like the coronavirus is just another obstacle to that meeting but I continue to hold on to the thought that one day we'll get to meet in person short of that maybe in a few weeks we can get back together or get on the phone here and explore the changes the changes in India and other countries as this virus goes on some people say of course it's changing the world and the question is in what direction is the world changing so keep watching we'll keep watching and we'll compare notes the next time you thank you Carnegie very nice you joined him from time to time and learned so much thank you so much welcome