[inaudible conversations] good evening of with like to welcome you to tonight its on the record maya Senior Vice President and director of studies europe the council, it is my great honor and pleasure to introduce our guest of honor, it is now safe to say eliot is the epitome of the scholar practitioner blocker to the council on foreign relations. And that only begins to explain the great range and depth of Foreign Policy and over the course of his career running as part of the discussion tonight hume to a pod interamerican affairs. You served as Deputy Assistant to their president and National Security advisor . Say you might gather some new and this is a a single fellow in north africa furrow but with that issue of human rights he has worked on over the course so he has written widely and well on a wide range of topics in books and articles and bob post. I will not go into this most prolific end of the spectrum and the most recent book so his next two most recent book from the of Bush Administration and writes his flawed pressure points you can find it here and i am contractually obligated. [laughter] but tonight were not here to talk about the last but but the of log and his new book american Foreign Policy after the irish bring. [applause] congratulations i know how difficult it is to write a book in end a bit of work to conceiving and market and a lot of work in between the you have done quite well it reflects a tremendous amount of labor and a fair amount of reflection and critical thought certainly thought provoking her gore want to begin our conversation that your book is titled realist in democracy and went to college and was told that realism in democracy those who believed in realism it matters what countries do abroad not how they behave at home so why are you joining these two together we have been told to should be kept apart . Thanks for the introduction. A couple of reasons. First one of the great weaknesses of realism as that Academic Movement is that and it takes steps read dont look can those black boxes. Civic states court of the internal policy affecting their Foreign Policy. So with that criticism second, relieve the book is the argument that to forget about democracy and human rights is one way to think about though growth and american interests. And to see if we want to be friends and allies of maybe interesting with american politics, and then need to get published supporters period they say in writing the book timing is everything. If you are making the argument the yen states should be a core part of americas Foreign Policy and that President Trump doesnt share that point of view going to his speech to the end of august laying out his policy on of afghanistan you along for use American Military might to construct democracies in faraway lands to try to read goal other countries in our one image and was fairly consistent before coming to the white house United States should not be going in search of democracy to approve to paraphrase. You think the president is wrong . Why . First of all, the book started a couple years ago in the waning phase of the Obama Administration so i think the president is wrong in a number of ways. First of all, we never have invaded countries to create a democracy. That is not why we went to war with germany or japan or invaded afghanistan having to do with the television harboring a al qaeda and not iraq but if we have invaded a country that happens is a separate question but the history is wrong. Secondly, in that speech he said no more nationbuilding. But then he said of course, we demand the afghan undertake a series of reforms including political reforms to govern better. So it eat even in the afghan speech you come across a problem that the internal situation cannot be overlooked. And finally it may be okay for some countries to have the amoral Foreign Policy it isnt okay for the United States. While it is true that may be popular right now and in the sense that this nation building stuff thinking bader will get this into more wars but there have been policies like this before like kissinger. But then americans begin to wonder why we are allied with these terrible regimes. I have been in juicy really been that this for a while. Can to my was younger and it went up now but my favorite tv show was called the you for there. I thought it was very richen because you take people back and were rather what has the he returned to and the a attrition policies have a ball in the american political debate and going to washingtwashingt on in 1975 of a cave in to work for jackson who engaged in a big debate with the Nixon Administration and the ford administration. And the Carter Administration with the argument with kissinger was in his view essentials the they have a moral force policy but talking to students that are amazed that this. Alexander soldier needs him and put the president will munsey hamper their but that was difficult for the soviets to remove. What is identical to the next stage is that jacqueline and moynihan of those human rights so there is no tension. But studying human rights as a gift. And we give it to some countries and not others but we were beating up those like a dictator is dead carter didnt have much to say then reagan end in the beginning that i went through that with that in that it was democratic staff and were not falling into that trap again. But then that conservative human rights policy from the second term to be extremely active and one of the things that is very important is the criticism of carter was in part of a democracy policy. When is good to get people bader jail they can lock them up then we get them out. The solution can beat england American Intervention for humanrights intervention it is the development where Political Prisoners are not taken. That is what we started to do in the Reagan Administration to concentrate less on those case interventions but more on the question of democratic systems so rate increase the National Endowment for democracy to promote that practice and i try to go through gritted reagan and through prison through the first bush to read the been the Obama Administration. If you read the pieces seem the door. One criticism is if you think of china. Secretary of state made it clear from the first day she was interested in human rights in china. And egypt to establish human rights policy. And the budgets he rights and democracy budget the ec in the case of cuba and iran apology for american crimes of the past largely ignoring the of Human Rights Violations that is the reaction. Talk to bob democracy with the of Obama Administration it is one thing to say to promote democracy or how to do so effectively. And in that context and it is the only priority to occupy this Decision Making decisions you cannot wish away like you are on the podium like this. And those to be balancing with human rights. And this is the problems. Reagan did that. And those that were democratized there were a few things to say about it. First i have a wonderful quotation from Justice Holmes in his book the common law. Those that can distinguish between being kicked or stumbled over. So can a dictator or a general we dont say to people you are no damn good get out but what we say ideally we are concerned about longterm stability as you are. What do want most . You want your son to follow you and his son to follow him. That requires long term stability and we are worried about that. Of course, sometimes it doesnt work sometimes they say i know the country better than you do but there are ways of talking to non Democratic Leaders lets call them that can work as an example was reagan said to the general runnings of correa were very concerned about longterm stability he had credibility. But there are some things we can do in the last chapter for example, it all starts at the top isnt a matter if you spend 3 million or for a million on programming the weather president gore secretary of state or they make it clear that you care about this also it is important that we try to help people engaged in politics and by that i mean to much concentration in the last 10 years on Civil Society not permitted zero politics so you work with the ngos and Civil Society but there are other nondemocratic countries there are all Political Parties the ngos to often have their roots in washington and london and new york it is one type of the ngo with the trade unions but when the new fragile government has day break down but it is who gets the Party Together that we will work this out. So that concentration of politics i tell this is in the book princeton is a wonderful man and diplomat and secretary of state for africa he tells the story of a group of nigerians under the military dictatorship