Has profoundly impacted Public Policy initiatives around the world. These policy briefings provide an opportunity for you to hear from our nations top scholars on the pressing issues facing the world during this time. As we all unite to confront the challenges of the pandemic, conversations like this have never been more important. We will be taking audience questions, so i encourage you to submit yours using the button at the bottom of your screen. Todays briefing is from condoleezza rice, the senior fellow on Public Policy at the Hoover Institution. Staterved as secretary of , the second woman and first africanamerican woman to hold this post. Also president george w. Bush is National Security advisor. Look forward to dr. Rice being the next director of the Hoover Institution this fall. Sec. Rice good morning. Dir. Gilligan you are an expert in the International System. How do you think the International System is responding to this pandemic . Sec. Rice welcome to everyone here. I think the real story is that the International System is not responding. It is individual countries responding. If ever we have seen the triumph of sovereignty, we have seen it now. When people are frightened or there is something unusual or we dont have any experience, people tend to go back to what they know best. Leaders thatcted they can hold accountable, so the response has been country by country. We see it in things like travel bans. We see it in the fact that individual come countries decide the pace and rate at which they are going to tell people to shelter and place shelter in place. The National Healthcare person or expert that is there next to the Prime Minister or the president. International system really hasnt been on point. It has been individual countries. That cuts against the grain of the way that we thought about globalization and particularly a cuts against the grain where they have tried for decades to create a borderless territory in europe, where there is one path forward, people move easily from country to country. Now we see that when it starts in italy, it spreads quite quickly. You see individual countries trying to clampdown. Dir. Gilligan lets stay with this topic for a little bit. Thele have commented that on the role bun is playing, the World Health Organization. We have a question here, should the u. N. Be doing more . Is that a realistic expectation . Thats ok. Right now the responses that countries are trying to take care of their own. They are doing so by making sure that they get their citizens back home. It is one interesting response. Lets get out get all of our citizens back home. There responding with travel bans and airlines are a sickly not flying between countries. I do think the time should come relatively soon when we see, i would hope, International Institutions playing a bigger role, particularly the g20, which is the 20 largest economies. Take a role in helping to coordinate an economic response in the way they did after the financial crisis of 2008 2009. Certainly when we think about the effect of this pandemic on developing countries, it is going to be important to leverage some of the work we have done over the last couple of decades to improve the Health Care Outcomes in those countries. One interesting approach the United States can use is, we have a huge network builtup because of the president s emergency plan for relief, starting with president bush, going to president trump. We help developing countries build Healthcare Systems and Distribution Networks to be able to distribute antiretrovirals even out in the countryside. Those of the kinds of things i hope countries will aband together. 9 11 countries realized that terrorism was a borderless threat. That you had to share information, you have to share intelligence information, we had within a very short. Of short period of time financing across borders. Hopefully when we are through the really frightening part of this, countries will start to band together to think about how to get a response and also how not to let it happen again. Dir. Gilligan timing is important . Sec. Rice timing is important. It is understandable that Prime Ministers, residents are going to concentrate on what is happening at home. Dir. Gilligan lets talk about the role of the u. S. Response in the world right now. [indiscernible] should be doing more to lead the global response. What do you think of the United Statess response . Sec. Rice the United States is trying to save new york. It is worrying about what is going on internally. That is understandable. It is not as if we have done nothing. The administration has made available several hundred Million Dollars for covid19 response in developing countries. I am quite certain that out at our embassies and places like that we are trying to help other countries with their response. We also, as i mentioned, we have Emergency Aid Network that helps developing countries. In time i think the United States will take a bigger leadership role. For now the foreign assistance should be welcomed and it is not going to help right now to call together a big conference to talk about response to the virus. It is not going to be helpful. It will be helpful in a few months to do that and also to try to help the world planned better for the neck plan better for the next time around. Dir. Gilligan i am tom gilligan and this is the Hoover Institutions briefing with condoleezza rice. You are National Security advisor during the sars outbreak. What are the similarities or differences . Of thece one unfortunate similarities was also hard to get information out of china during the sars outbreak. We knew that something had happened. It was very hard to get answers out of china of what had happened. That is unfortunately a recurring pattern this time around. It is probably the most troubling aspect of this crisis. It is in the nature of the chinese system, an authoritarian system that controls information. Control of the narrative is power. We shouldnt be surprised that when this outbreak happened in wuhan, they silenced the young and medical students who were trying to sound the alarm. Could you imagine those people being silenced in the United States or any country, in germany or brazil . Somebody would have picked up the story. It would have been known. The chinese did what authoritarians do, they gathered , they silenced those who were trying to sound the alarm and they wanted to have time to develop the narrative that would be blessed by the communist party of china, which means they probably had to go all the way to beijing before you could say anything. It is in the nature of the system, but it was a real problem. They are due for a reckoning. The population which was angered by a lack of communication, and certainly the international community. Dir. Gilligan let me push you on that. All of the questions are about china. Asks, what sanctions and how should china be held to account . Roger says, in your opinion what is the measured response to china and the leadership who clearly held information . Sec. Rice there is both a public part of this and there is a private part of this. The public part of this i think over the next month is just to let it be known that china responded in the way that did. Or didnt respond, let me put it that way. The chinese are going to try to create, they are going to try to do a counter narrative. We got on top of it, look at how quickly, through social distancing and quarantine, look how quickly we recovered. By the way, weve been helping the rest of the world by sending ppe and by sending help and aid to all of the world. Theyre going to try to shift the narrative from their initial responsibility for not messing up to, we gotng on top of it and then we helped the rest of you. We have to have an honest assessment of how this happened, where it started, when it started, when the communist party new, and why they did not get out there. The private part is, you have to go to the chinese and say, you cant keep doing this. You have to be a more responsible partner, a more responsible power given your weight now. Your people travel. Your people work in other countries. There are a lot of Chinese Workers in italy at the time. Was that the transmission . We dont know for sure. If we are going to get a handle on how this thing moved, the fact that china is such a big player and as people travel, is a big part of the story. I think there is both a public acknowledgment of what happened, and also some private conversations with the chinese about how dont let this happen again. Dir. Gilligan interesting. A natural question that arises, is jawboning enough to get them to have a more correct attitude toward the World Health Organization . Sharing Scientific Data that has an impact on the rest of the world, or do you have to couple it with sanctions or tariffs or limiting trade . How do you as former secretary of state think about Something Like that . Sec. Rice i would certainly try to be persuasive first. If you keep the focus on how this started and chinas role in it, they will actually be embarrassed by that. If you let them shift their narrative to all they have done with sending out the ppes, you probably are not going to good progress. Call a meeting and dont try to veto anything that comes out of it. Eisai the United States will share the information. Maybe this is where you can bring the europeans and other along. We have to share the information on how this started. I would try that campaign first. I dont really think the u. S. Economy, everybodys economy will be trying to recover. Dont think we want to shock the system more with more sanctions, more trade wars, and the like when it is time to recover. I would certainly try that method first. Namesjust call it calling and sending a message that what they did was an acceptable. Dir. Gilligan yes. Here is an interesting question that i think is about deterrence and how our adversaries use the circumstance. She says, i am a government student at the university of texas at austin. What do you think russia is learning about how the u. S. Handles this kind of crisis . Sec. Rice very good question. Early on, the russians were saying, we have done this so much better because initially the numbers were apparently relatively low. The numbers have started to go up. You are not hearing that so much anymore. Starting toy are get stayathome orders and all the things you are seeing in the rest of the countries. I am told they are being assured by the mayor of moscow and the Prime Minister. President putin has decided to take himself out of the bad News Business of this. And that eventually come of course i can tell you when it is over, he will take credit for whatever happens. But i think the russians, who initially said our system is better, that their system is not that much better. Russiase two different of course. One rush out of city goers to circulate, travel. Isre is also a russia that in villages that will probably see none of this because people do not circulate. It has to be a little bit also which russia you are talking about. Are are you talking about . Dir. Gilligan this pandemic is bound to have a lot of longrun impacts. Tell us what you think will be the impact on globalization, Global Supply chains, the Free Movement of people around the world, and just the trust that is necessary to sustain a system like that. Sec. Rice you just said the essential word, which is trust. Are people going to trust that it is safe to circulate again . And that may take some time. It may take some time before people want to travel outside of their own country. We are learning we can do an awful lot through virtual means. We can do a lot online. You might see for a while that all of those conferences we are used to going with huge numbers of people, that does not take place for a while. But i certainly hope that in time what we have built over decades and decades and decades that people do travel, that they do circulate, that they do study together, as we see in universities. That we are not going to see the putting up of walls because we had this particular experience. That may be an initial response, but here is where leadership by the United States and leadership by the other Major Economies through Something Like the g20 could start to send signals that despite what we have had to do in this initial phase, where we had to shut down for very good reason, we dont want to stay this way. We want to see the opening up of andle doing Business Congress across boards. We do want to see the students studying in Different Countries so that we keep continuing to get to know each other better. Those messages are going to be important. Im concerned about what the United States will experience in terms of foreign students. It is not just stanford and harvard that have foreign students. If you go to small liberal arts colleges in the midwest, you have big state universities. There are a lot of foreign students. We will have to send out a message that we want them to come back, even if they have gone home. That we want them to come back. Those are the places the messages will be extremely important. I think you will see an impact. Congress already in several bills about china and the supply chain. The first is going to be about china indent we are on the pharmaceutical space. What are the ingredients for the fact that a lot of generics are made there because of cheaper conditions, or how dependent Major Pharmaceutical Companies are on assembly and manufacture in china . There are those who think we need to bring that capacity back to the United States because it has been shown to be strategic now. It has been shown to be a matter of National Security that we control our own supply chain on the pharmaceutical and medical side. That will be difficult to do, but i think you will get a lot of pressure. On broader supply chains, that has been going on for some time anyway because of the extended trade war. Companies have been reevaluating their supply chains. I saw that peter navarro, the president s advisor, said the other day we may even give Companies Huge benefits to be able to bring their manufacturing supply chains back home. Stay iney may not china. The likelihood is they will go to other places. Maybe vietnam. India has been a beneficiary. I think we will see some major reordering of how Companies Think about supply chains. This will have to turn out to be very secure and they will have to take that message. ,ir. Gilligan david asks taking a minute of the covid19 crisis to a advance their own interests. If so, what are the dangerous threats to consider . Sec. Rice one of the things you worry about his bad actors will try to take advantage of a distraction. All major leaders are now focused on covid19 crisis. Or maybe just not paying attention. I will tell you that after 9 11, the very first thing that i did when i got to the bunker was to get the state department to send out a table to every host in the world and say the United States of america is functioning. That is a message to your friends but also a message to your foe, dont try anything. It is a different situation, but i am quite certain that our r defensence agency, ou agency, the pentagon, they may not be on high stages of other, but they are on higher stages of vigilance to make sure nobody will try to take advantage. Watching the North Koreans like a hawk. I am sure they are watching the iranians like a hawk. Because you dont want anyone to take advantage. While others are worried about this crisis, we certainly have people who are trying to make sure that no bad actor takes advantage of us. Dir. Gilligan tell us a little bit about the developing world. What is going on there . How was the pandemic going to affect them and our relationships with them over the years to come . Sec. Rice the biggest impact has been in big cities, again, where people circulate. Places like in south africa, which is an economy that is very integrated into the International System and where people move around a lot. But i think people get a little surprised at the fact that you have not had an explosion of this virus in a lot of the developing world. Now, it may well be that it is the lack of testing or the lack of reporting that is the reason for that. But there are some other theories, and i caution that they already was brewed for instance, is it because the populations in the developing world are typically younger . So youy be asymptomatic, dont have a catastrophic effect of the virus because we know it affects older people more than it does very young people. These are very young populations. They have been through a lot of pandemics. Is there some kind of something building up there in terms of their system, maybe in terms of immunity, that we do not fully understand . Another theory. I really do think that the one thing we should be focused on is through the president s emergency plan that president bush started and other administrations have continued, we really helped a lot