Fellow for joining us this afternoon. We will introduce them in just a moment. As a reminder, attendees have their volume and video that we are eager to incorporate the questions to the extent of time allows. You can submit those using the qanda feature on zoom and we will record a session and distribute and post the video afterwards to the benefit of everyone. Stay tuned for upcoming discussions former under secretary of defense will join us next thursday may 28 and the Jackson Institute to introduce the special guest. Thanks and welcome everyone. As we grapple with the ramifications of the pandemic we are grateful to have a Wonderful Group of faculty and senior fellows. One such individual is the jackson senior fellow howard dean who is a former physician, six term governor of vermont, president ial candidate share of the National Governors association and the Democratic National committee. With maybe a little less wellknown governor dean is professor dean and teaches an incredibly popular undergraduate seminar. Our distinguished guest senator chris murphy has represented connecticut in the senate for the past seven years following six years in the house and eight years in the connecticut general assembly. In the Foreign Relations committee hes emerged as the leader of Global Affairs articulating a forward thinking policy for the United States. An outspoken proponent for International Human rights and American Leadership abroad as many of you know the senate has been in session the past two weeks. It is in session i believe as we speak. We are deeply appreciative to senator murphy for taking the time to join us. Now perhaps you can kick off the conversation. Sure. Thank you very much for taking the time. I know that you have votes shortly. We will try to get right down to it. Just to embarrass the senator, he was my candidate for president. He chose not to run for a variety of good reasons, and that i am incredibly glad to have him here and honored and incredibly pleased to be interviewing somebody who is one of the up and coming stars in the democratic party, especially in the area which is what jacksonville is about. This is a person that whatever he chooses to do, will be be leadinleaving the foreignpolicd speaking of the foreignpolicy in a future oriented way and in a way that not many people do. So, chris, thank you so much for coming on the program. And i think the opening question, because i think longterm not just shortterm, we are in the middle of covid19 and weve been to countless seminars on whats going to happen. Im interested in what you are thinking in terms of where the United States may be in terms of our position in the world in the next five years from now after we presumably have a vaccine and this is in the rearview mirror. There will obviously be economic carnage and global displacement, and im wondering what your thoughts are about that the role might be as a country. Well, it is great to be here with all of you and to have this conversation. Its nice that you think of me in those terms, and its possible to lead a fulfilling life without running popular to the contrary belief in the cla class. For inviting me and hoping me to put this together. So obviously it is a big question and the covid19 crisis has both taught us lessons about the importance of cooperation with our allies but also the exposure countries are in a especially for critical supply chains. When we look where we are going to be five years from now but is largely depend on the decisions of voters make in a few months, the future of americas role in the world. It will be fundamentally different if joe biden is president , versus four more years of donald trump. My argument is going to be twofold. First, lets understand that the greatest and most immediate threats are not conventional military threats. They are pandemic. They are stateless actors that with very little effort comes all thousands of americans. And yet we are totally resourced for the world that doesnt exist anymore but not terribly likely. When we look at the federal treasury, 740 billion for military hardware, 12 million for the Global Health you can understand why it feels as if americas influence in the world is moving down and our ability to manage the crisis is less capable than ever before. So we are going to have to have a reckoning about the tools that we deployed overseas to try to win friends and influence and protect with the size and scope of Public Health program that will be part of the conversation. Five years from now, china will be more powerful than they are today. That is inevitable, but we have something to say about that as well. As much as donald trump has waged a war wit the war with eur ability to try to sort of manage, we cannot prevent it, its dependent on the ability in a variety of strategies. But on the flipside, i will say two words about this, we have to understand it is exposing massive vulnerabilities and other players to supply us with what we need in order to meet this virus. China is to stand up very quickly which means we didnt have the medical supplychain crisis in the medicines that we rely on but we were still dealing with the supplychain crisis for other goods like testing equipment. We have to resource the equipment that helps us respond to emergencies whether they be Public Health emergencies or other kind. Its to set up a new set of capacities to deal with the rest of the world, to strengthen the likeminded white values but also to hunker down a little bit and standup or domestic ability to protect ourselves in a way that we did not in leading up to this crisis. Im very interested in discussing china a little bit more. I teach basically foreignpolicy and my experience has been on the part of the National Democratic institute which i spent most of my time at Eastern Europe where we spend a lot of time dealing with. We are not going to get in a cold war with china. Russia has been a destructive influence. The chinese are not a indestructible they are a difficult group of people to deal with and the business that have political ramifications and they are iif they are in a realc power which russia is not. How do we work with the chinese . I consider them vigorous competitors. I would love to know what you think in the next few years whether trump is reelected and if he is i propose it is at a standstill but if he is not, where do you see joe biden and what is your own belief because you will be an influential member of the senate as we proceed here in terms of how to build a relationship with china knowing that they are an important economic power but also they are authoritarian and will use things like interference for free speech in the United States and elsewhere to gain an advantage. Great question. So, mitt romney had an interesting editorial couple of weeks ago in which he proposed a coalition democracy that would organize himself to block any imports from china that were connected to National Security and this is pretty broad. Youve packaged together. China of course its a prophylactic against the war and we should understand keeping those connections is probably part of. It doesnt happen normally on purpose, they have been by accident so you have to take a step to make sure that if you fall into the conflict with china they havent been able to build up a set of advantages so thats why youve got to Pay Attention to what they are doing for instance in the South China Sea as they try to cut off the roots of navigation for the commercial vessels. But i think that you are also right. Ultimately chinas goal is to share the world with the United States. They sort of envision us a bipolar universe in which they have these two predominant seats at the world table. My take on this is why we dont want to copy what china is doing, we do have to learn from the model that has allowed them to capture big markets overseas and technologies like five g. China had an industrial policy and it allows them the technologies inside of their own domestic market at a price that the private market cant compete with and so the United States and our partners after the impact of space as well. We have to have a much closer relationship between the public and private sector so when we talk about Artificial Intelligence or advanced technology, that we have products that have been developed in the partnership that can compete and this has been my argument about what to do with russia as well. We cannot be in the business of just perpetually sanctioning the russians and chinese for their behavior. We have to be able to compete with them and with the Technology Space so that requires a pretty massive rewrite of the ways in which the government and private sector Work Together on the development of these new technologies. At some point, President Trump will not be president anymore. I hope that is in january but he will still be there for another four years. How do you see whether we wait or surface in january how do you see the actual effect of trying to create what you just talked about . One of the things trump has has given a greater status and they dont know what to do with it yet. As being a leader of the free world. With president obama, one of the central parts as i can tell is we should live in a multipolar world where i dont have to check in with the United States where they participate in a policy that is so important to them that they should be reading. They are now in the position because of trump hes no longer a reliable ally. They have defined themselves and figure out how they are going to make this work. So we get to where they need to be with china and where the europeans then in any scenario that you can think of over the next five years. What is so dangerous that i mentioned earlier about the three years is this fissure between the United States and europe because there is no way to confront chinas growing power without the United States and europe being bound together as closely as possible. After weve lost 300,000 in the backward series if we are going to go into that over the trade policy we have to do it with the europeans by your side. Its better off done jointly between the United States and europe. I think we do need to modernize our partnership. Its also true that our Security Partnership which historically is left only to the east to the russian threats now needs to be oriented to meet the chinese threat as well that exists in this Technology Space as much as anywhere else. I think for us we are modernizing our relationship with europe as a big part of that conversation and then recognizing if you engage in this withdrawal in these International Forum that are essential like the who, china will gladly step into that and president played in will have a big job ahead to stick his foot back in the door in the forms like those at the un or the who to gain a position of prominence over the course of the last three and a half years. With these which geography to a difficult world which has been difficult since the postwar and that is the middle east. [inaudible] there are some even in our party that believe we should be doing what they are doing or Something Like it which is obviously backing. How do you take into consideration the genuine threat how do you see that fitting together and cannot be a player any more . I think we have to understand the minimal return that we get on our political and military investment in the middle east. We have to spend an enormous amount of capital and enormous amount of Financial Investment in order to move the needle and inch. It comes from iran and we have no interest in iran continuing to feed the terrorist groups in the region before a threat. We should step back and question whether we actually have a dog in the fight in this defining set of proxy wars between the saudis and the iranians. There is just enough support to keep them running but never enough to actually be dispositive. So its just openly imposed the u. S. Involvement because i think weve ended up getting more people, not less people killed, because we have been halfway involved for going on a decade now. If you didnt have the United States to lean on internationally. Its been proven over and over again to hurt the interests more than they harm them. To understand the military adventurers ultimately get more of our people and their people killed. I read Samantha Powers biography or autobiography and also then rhodes book was pretty clear the Obama Administration wanted this as well and got sucked back in principally because they believed partly they decided they had to do something about the tear gassing, the nerve gas and they believed isis was a destabilizing force. I am sympathetic with your position what would you do about a friend like this and do you believe it would have been a threat to the United States or our interests have we not been there because if we hadnt been for years i dont believe for a second they would have been there. We need to be fighting them over there so that we are not fighting them here. Someone who has been a critic of u. S. Military development in the middle east can i do think i have an obligation to oppose and all terrier policy and i think whats important is youve referenced earlier the predominant extremist threats to the United States while there are plenty of terrible extremist groups they do not tend to be the ones with the most dangerous plan to attack the United States. Those are the citigroups theme isis and al qaeda so its important to trade the roots of those groups. It is funded largely out of the gulf in the speech four years ago to open up this conversation it is too late to be running a military campaign against the ones that are already marching out of the foreign capitals but if you cut off the source of funding and address the strain of islam that forms the Building Blocks of the movement you are much better off and much more likely to beat them. Thats why i think the number one issue right now needs to be the continued backdoor support for this version of islam that ends up becoming a foundation of groups and instead even under the Obama Administration youve got to get to the roots if you have any longterm hope of combating the rise and fall of the organizations. When you are campaigning particularly why do we spend so much time and money on Foreign Policy, and this isnt my question, this is from the audience members, why is this important to the person terrified and whos lost their job because of covid19 and who isnt getting any relief from the packages that are so badly skewed towards Corporate America why does this matter. Why would we be in a situation we are today if we had a smarter Foreign Policy and the answer is we likely would not have been in the position that we are today. There would be millions of people still in jobs and tens of thousands dead. 100 billion rather than 10 million what if trump hadnt pulled off two thirds of the scientists from china and what if he had shuttered the program that sent scientists and experts all around the world to those like covid19 early on a bed had been the case for the last three years and its the International Vaccine coalition estimates big enough so that they could have gotten a head start on the vaccine rather than trying to rally the nations of good virus already swept through to raise money. It matters not just because they are so responsible for preventing the attacks against the United States but also the smarter Foreign Policy before he became the de facto nominee there was the nature of Health Care Reform and one of the questioners pointed out that had we had a more vigorous healthcare plan, the outcomes might have been better particularly for the minority groups that are less likely to have Financial Support and the financial wherewithal to get the kind of hope. Particularly early healthcare that could at least mitigate. [inaudible] on what we should be doing. Its very interesting if you look at the elections. The other 35 people came from pennsylvania and oklahoma and texas and kansas and Orange County california and the party is moving towards the center of the country is moving towards the left. How do you think that we can get to the position where those that survive either on no healthcare or government programs. The way you framed the question at the beginning is an interesting one. Would we be in a different position today they would have a singlepayer like Healthcare System and i am as i will tell you in a minute a supporter of the singlepayer Healthcare System they have singlepayer systems and ones that look like them suffer pretty greatly from this virus has while. This is one that preys upon the weak Public Health infrastructure that doesnt necessarily matter