Little did we realize that our panelists would be addressing president elect trump. We are fortunate that we have five historians that who have a sense of public purpose. They would like to reflect on some of the Public Policy imperatives and context that the new administration that will be faced with. As laid out in the program, we are going to follow the order alphabetical order. First up is nathan citino. Of rice university. A scholar of the middle east. Saudi written about u. S. And u. S. Arab relations. Khalil gibran muhammad, of Harvard UniversitysKennedy School whose work explores the , intersection between race, ethnicity, and Public Policy will be next. His research polices criminality in the United States. Our third speaker is my colleague margaret omara. I always want to say like maureen ohara, and she corrects me. She is currently focusing on the relationship between hightech and american politics. She has recently published a book on pivotal tuesdays, four elections that shaped the 20th century. Ken pomeranz, from the university of chicago. A former aha president and author of the much acclaimed book entitled the great divergence china, europe, the making of the modern world economy, will be next. Last but not least is sean wilentz. He has written extensively about american history. And a number of other topics, including in the popular media. I think if you are a bob dylan fan, you know he authored one of those texts. Each of them will be speaking for about 10 to 12 minutes. At the end of that we will have , a q a session. If you can come up to the mic, we are not going to be passing the mics around. Nathan . Professor citino thank you. Thank you to the Program Committee for inviting me to take part in this plenary. I feel especially honored to be in such distinguished company tonight. Thank you all for coming out to a warm room on a cold night. In trying to anticipate the Trump Administration foreignpolicy, it makes sense to compare 2017 to 1953 and 1981. Both of those years saw the advent of republican administrations that promised tougher and more confrontational foreign policies against american enemies than the democratic administrations they replaced. During the campaign, trump compared himself to Dwight Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan. In the case of ike, in the face on the basis of his commitment to deporting undocumented immigrants. In thinking about the middle east, i would like to propose another year. 1973, it may help us to understand what lies ahead. That year marked a Richard Nixons second term. It was dominated early on by the watergate scandal. Watergate constrained nixons participation in Foreign Policymaking in the middle east and elsewhere. Watergate contributed to and helped to shape the consequences to the arabisraeli war. With the nixon sidelined, his secretary of state and National Security advisor Henry Kissinger offered a Peace Process that for the for the foreseeable future. , all the clothes off the possibility for a comprehensive peace. In the case of President Trump, his first 100 days will be in dominated by his relationship with vladimir putin. And the role of russian computer hacking and influencing the outcome of the 2016 election. This controversy is already playing out before investigative johnngs, promoted by mccain and lindsey graham, and it has also come up in confirmation hearings for trumps cabinet nominees in , particular, the secretary of state designation for Rex Tillerson. No one can predict where the russian affair will lead, though it will probably not rise to the level of the watergate. Consequence,nate u. S. Country region to solving International Crises that require cooperation with russia, such as the Syrian Civil War, will likely be held hostage in the first 100 days to the domestic policies and the russian hacking scandal. Democrats, smarting over Hillary Clintons lost, divided and in the minority of both houses of congress will tried it for prudencertray trump as putins client. They will try to associate him with foreign subversion by the kremlin. This political strategy is a mistake. It ignores the american genealogy of trumps Foreign Policy. And the reason behind its appeal now. In thinking about trumps Foreign Policy genealogy, for instance, in a democrat from 1934, texas, the state where i live, says we must ignore the tears of solving sentimentalist and internationalists, and we must permanently close, lock the gates of our country to new immigration waves and throw the keys away. This was in the context of a new and earlier refugee crisis. The debate over whether or not to admit jews fleeing nazi germany. Taft,1, senator robert republican from my home state of ohio, wrote u. S. Contributions to the nato, or nato. Taft wrote i am quite willing to support arms aged Great Britain and france to the extent that they are not able to arm them else, although arm themselves, though the providing of their arms should be in their own budget and arms should not be provided to prevent a reduction in their civilian standard of living. I see no reason why the other nations should not be prepared to make the same sacrifice. Populist nativism and strategic unilateralism both have long unilateralism both have long pedigrees in the u. S. As trumps America FirstCampaign Slogan reminds us. Neither is the exclusive property of democrats or republicans. It is impossible to say how the challenges of the legitimacy of trumps election will constrain his Foreign Policy in the middle east. His most controversial proposal is to move the u. S. Embassy in israel from tel aviv to jerusalem. Trump already designated as his ambassador to israel, a supporter of the settlement enterprise who strongly endorsed moving the embassy and annexing the west bank to israel. Trump condemned the Obama Administration for not vetoing councilhe u. N. Security as well as secretary kerrys speech defending the u. S. Abstention. Trump has raised expectations. Of moving the embassy soon after taking office. If he does, there will be a range of immediate or shortterm consequences. He would further isolate the u. S. International in ways that would undermine the stated goal. Such as fighting the Islamic State and opposing new sanctions imposing new sanctions on iran. Moving the embassy would precipitate a crisis and alienate muslim majority countries already offended by his vow to bar muslim immigrants. And by his appointment of certain advisor such as Michael Flynn and frank gassman. The Palestinian Authority said it would rescind its recognition of israel and the authorities already compromised legitimacy would be further degraded at a time when demonstration of violence seem possible. The politics term, of the conflict would shift away. From what has been the stasis of pursuing an increasingly illusory two state solution toward the eventual consolidation of a binational state. With the focus being on the democratic or nondemocratic character of that state. Practically speaking, there would be legal challenges to moving the embassy to a proposed site in jerusalem. There were properties seized and claimed as palestinian in 1948. The move would provide new problemsties and legal union,u. S. And european that people that were confined to the past. Given the negative implications , he made postpone. He could blame other actors for blocking the move. Some of his advisers, like the secretary of defense nominee general james mattis, appeared to oppose policies backed by trump, and trump has prevent proven receptive to his views on other issues such as the use of torture. This is the sort of bold step that would distract from the circumstances and strengthen his political decorum. Support. Presents acivil war special challenge. In the first 100 days, addressing it requires working directly with russia. Russia has supported the government of bashar alassad, and putin has organized the latest ceasefire after regime gains in aleppo. Trump has repeatedly said he wants to partner with russia to fight the Islamic State, although its not clear that russia prioritizes that fight over preserving a client regime in damascus. The proposed venue for forthcoming peace talks, kazakhstan, reflects russias authority over this later attempt to broker named to the war. War. Oker and and to the putin is widely thought to have facilitated the participation of turkey. These are some of the most important u. S. Partners in the fight against the islamic. The Islamic State. The question now becomes what sort of deal will put an attempt putin attempt to make with the u. S. Over syria . What domestic political implications for President Trump . ,ith the u. S. Have to accept for example, a russian role in Eastern Europe or the annexation of crimea . Sanctions. S. Rollback against russia imposed by the Obama Administration . Will the removal of those sanctions and directly benefit the secretary of state Rex Tillerson ahead of exxon mobil. Will the Senate Confirm tillerson before or after the u. S. Commits to joining russia in peace talks before they return to geneva . Will Senate Republicans ultimately go along with morsi to challenge trumps cooperation with putin . How far will democrats go to undermine the new president by associating him with moscow. Will trump feel obligated at some point to make a show of utin on syria or some other issue to prove that he is not beholden to him . These questions will have to be sorted out in the first 100 days. My point in the comparison to 1973 is that they will prove to be a distraction from the hard truth that no syrian peace talks can succeed unless they involve regime and its opponents, while providing for the cessation of fighters, weapons and money furnished by their respective external sponsors. Stated priorities and his domestic political liabilities it seems unlikely president elect will be able to contribute to such a broad based effort. To conclude my remarks with a final point about the election and the ongoing crisis in the middle east Media Coverage of often portrays the middle east as a role apart. Operating according to a different scale of historical times from our own. Many accounts suggest that the serial civil war and other regional Syrian Civil War and other regional conflicts have an underlying sectarian logic. They reenact ancient entities. Entities. The appalling magnitude of the violence in syria can be explained only in terms of staggering inequalities within and between middle eastern states. Wealthy governments and sponsors in saudi arabia, gulf states, and have poured money resources, weapons, fighters into syrian battlefield and stoke sectarian conflict for strategic reasons. At relatively low cost to themselves. At the beginning of 2017, we all shared the same world historical moments whether in north america , or the middle east, our however,reflect racial, religious, other kinds of identitybased conflicts can flourish in circumstances of great economic inequality. Thank you. [applause] professor muhammad good evening , everyone. I want to thank you James Grossman for inviting me to be on the panel today. I hope we settle some debts. [laughter] i want tomuhammad thank my fellow panelists for the contribution to this moment. And all of you for sticking around in a hot room on a cold, wintry day in denver. For you star wars fans, today s plenary feels like the beginning of the jedi council to discuss priorities with the chancellor insidious as he sets out to destroy the republic as we know it. [laughter] [laughter] professor muhammad youll have to pardon my american studies proclivities. When i watched episode three return of the jedi over the holidays, i couldnt help but explain the antifascist message of the saga. I have struggled to make sense of what happened but the visit of what happened, what the Election Results mean for the death of division in our nature. In our nation. What the future holds. I thought he might be a disguise, doubly deceitful in a good way. I thought president elect trump might be able to transform himself into a statesman by virtue of the office he now holds. Then he began to tweet about the millions of illegal voters. He began making cabinet appointments from the land of rejects in the island of doom. One ounce of optimism i maintained before thanksgiving gave way to fatigue. I have long realized how recognizable trump was in everyday life. Some strain or variation of his many isms coursing through the veins of people i know well. Muslims even. His misogyny plays well to liberal and left readers of the new yorker and the nation, but i always suspected that trump and billy bush were more familiar to included, thann the editors of either magazine was willing to admit. For these familiar observers the , locker room talk sounded about right. Rape culture is real, it is everywhere. The election will and culturally intellectual and cultural elite kept insisting trump was the outlier, not the norm. My critique has given way to uncertainty. Now is a time for civil disobedience to the inevitable onslaught of obama era reversals. The Affordable Care act for starters. Many of which, by my standards were too centrist. ,and to market friendly to begin with. Too many opening bid concessions to the unreasonables across the aisle. Too many initiatives and philanthropy inspired bootstrapping modeled on millionaire Michael Bloombergs style of governance, and not enough on Public Policy. The obama era is behind us now. The truth is none of us in this , room know what is in store for the age of trump. Im not talking about the dodge historians deploy for the media that we are bad religion the future. Hasne is always wrong a bit hollow for me. Its not that we get search for clues in the past that might help us anticipate the future. It is that nothing quite fits. Most every republican candidate for president since reagan has tried to outreagan reagan. Not trump. Throughout all the demagogues in our history, none have been elected to the presidency. Precedents for nativism and xenophobia . The call for a police state in pockets of america. The flirtations with the klan. The appeals for loyalty tests. All will sony and wilsonian to be sure. Wilson purged the federal government of black people. Unleash the full power of the fed to protect free speech and destroy the left. But Woodrow Wilson was a man of great intellect. Internationalism and introspection. And despite his many flaws, he earned them and honed his flaws within the boundaries of democratic institutions. And indeed, helped to extend such an institution globally. Trump has no such pedigree. If anything, he behaves like a petulant child. He is antistatesman, and antiintellectual. An isolationist. No one knows how to advise such a person to lead this nation. I suppose Richard Nixon behaves petulantly too. \ look how that turned out. Is a man whose most wellknown especially leadership is saying youre fired as host of his own Reality Television show. At least the celebrity turned president Ronald Reagan was a charming and decent person. At least the cowboy actor turned politician had been governor of the largest state in the union. The challenge before us today is not simply because we only study the past, it is that the past is missing a whole chapter in this american journey. The robber barons bent the public good to serve their interests. The billionaire plutocrats, of which trump is only one, want their cake and eat it too. They want the procedure running the state as well. The prestige of running the state as well. Trumps election is the most grievous blow that the american idea has suffered in my lifetime. The kennedy and king assassinations and the 9 11 attacks were crimes and tragedies. The wars in vietnam and iraq were disastrous mistakes. But the country recovered. For democratic process to elevate a man expressing total disregard for democratic norms and institutions is worse. The American Republic is based on rules, but has depended on its survival on norms. Standards of behavior, conduct toward fellow citizens. Especially, critics and opponents. That is decent beyond what the letter of the law dictates. Trump is saying them all. Given these uncertainties and trying to wear my big boy pants, here is a sketch of what i think should happen with President Trump. This is not about specific policy proposals. More about a way of opening communication and creating the possibilities for impacting his choices. In many ways, i am less worried about him in particular than his combination of cabinet choices and empowered far right republican majority. On climate change, i would ask the president and his first 100 days to sit down with leading scientists. There may be no more urgent the need for open lines of dialogue than that. He has never had reason to listen to environmentalists. He needs to hear their side of the story, to let them make mayr case that fossil fuels still be a necessary evil, and most certainly, a profitable one, but investments in alternative energy are not an option. Time is tic