>> samantha is the 19th administrator of the u.s. agency for international development. she was an international fellows here and 2000 -- 2001 working for them unknown or little-known senator named barack obama. her career really in many ways captures the essence of the program. along government academia and journalism samantha was the 28th to the united nations she taught at harvard was a founding member meant she has also authored several books. at least one of which i believe has won a pulitzer. it is a real pleasure for us to welcome her today. as a personal pleasure, samantha and i go back decades we used to be colleagues. presiding today will be margaret is the managing editor for politics it xes also political analyst for cnn. among other things the past she was a senior white house correspondent for bloomberg news. she is the past president of the white house correspondents association. you are in extraordinarily good hands with the administrator and i want to thank them both for today again i want to welcome you all to the symposium at the council on foreign relations. [applause] >> think it richard. >> thank you. no water, so sad. [laughter] welcome everyone and thank you so much for joining us. i will skip the introduction since i can't do better than doctor just did paid the audit said it, our audience today consists of counselors are joining us in washington in this room and also online virtually. in the interest of time i will give you a quick preview of how we are going to do this but will have a conversation. i want to make sure to save enough time for your questions and then we'll go from there. we are gathered here to talk about two different pressing issues. one is the power struggle between democracies and hypocrisies. the other is a massive global food crisis that has been made or spite russia's evasion of ukraine but i want begin our discussion by asking you, these sites seemed like two different things to say they are connected but why are they connected? >> first of all thank you so much for having me. thanks to richard he said we were once colleagues. that is a little bit generous. i was an intern. [laughter] when he was a fancy senior associate long before he went to the council. and i will just say a word about the program? i think to give young people at the chance to dip their toe in. a lot of people are outside thinking could i? will i? what would it be like to? it's almost like what jobs are during the summer of college or something or internships are like before real life begins. iaf creates an opportunity for people to come in it's a very prestigious program obviously for both of us. it kind of gives you a permission structure to leave what you are doing to go and have that experience and figure out if what you think might be a taste for public service is an enduring one. thirdly that is what happened with me. getting to work with barack obama and also have the ability to go to him as a first-term senator, he's on the foreign relations committee but he was the most junior member the second most junior member in the senate so he did not have a lot of staffing. i could go and say i am free. and somebody else's paying for uncommon work in your office but it creates opportunities that just would not exist by. >> it would literally change your life. >> as it happened i was very fortunate where i land it was senator obama given his interest in foreign affairs. and then of course he decided to run for president beside him having promised me, way too soon. i cannot conceive of doing something like that. and the rest is history but i would not have any of the professional opportunities i have had in government, getting to be a ambassador house in great. love the program congrats to those of you who have been part of it. i hope it has had similar catalytic effects lease and affirming or repudiating that his knowledge to, to know where you feel you can make a difference. sometimes there's a thousand ways to do so i hope we talk about those collaborations between the public sector and private sector with our discussion. they are linked in so many ways. for starters just any government right now including here at home who is enduring high fuel prices, higher food prices at large sort of effects of inflation. that is inherently very, very challenging. we are very developed nation. president biden and his team each day thinking through what are the new tools we can bring to bear? well imagine if your toolkit was a little bit more barren than ours is. imagine if you had no physical state. imagine if you are already highly indebted to china. imagine if you had been elected as was the case to give a few examples zambia, moldova, dominican republic, these are real bright spots apart if you are elected on a democratic reformist rule of law anticorruption platform part of what you have said is democracy delivers which is a key message we need to make it such. so democracy delivers and then you find yourself with again of fertilizer prices skyrocketing, food prices skyrocketing. inevitably if you say there's a global phenomenon putin invaded ukraine, climate and the china debt's not doing us any favors were having to pay off that debt every month instead of maybe expanded the social safety net. whatever you say and inevitably if you're a citizen you're looking at your leader saying was my life better off a year ago when i had the corrupt leader who may have been hostile to the rule of law or not at all interested in fighting corruption. for those places that are really trying to buck the anti- trend globally it is just a very, very challenging time. we are doing everything in our power to meet them where they are. really actually incredibly grateful to congress. not only for the ukraine supplemental which is so important which i'm sure we will come to the war in ukraine. it's important for the people in ukraine they've also written the provisions around humanitarian assistance to sufficiently broadly we are able to use some of that assistance to deal with the cascading effects of the war in ukraine and beyond. and additionally their resources nearly food security resources that allow us to try again to make structural adjustments in our programming preacher try to help countries meet this very difficult moment. bottom line is when economic challenges proliferate as is happening now leaders are often held accountable. when your progressive leader trying to reform again trying to buck these trends that is going to make your life more challenging. but the truth is there's 20 of leaders out there right now as well who are struggling. and i think what we worry about is social unrest which of course accompanied the last food crisis we sell a proliferation of protests which gave rise. really radical change people had forgotten the links with food insecurity in the economic grievances people had with the mass approaches. many again coming from a place of being fed up with leaders who were not responsive to the needs of their people. there will be that effect as well and places where authorities try to centralize power which is more countries than not. raise their voices in a democratic way of going to demand some form of accountability. ask for good or for bad. yet with china and russia backing pretty brutal responses domestically in their own countries but also globally, it is a different situation from 14 years ago with the tools of surveillance, the tools of repression have really again proliferated. you could see pretty significant brutality in response to those efforts to demand greater support for government in light of the food crisis. it's a very, very volatile time. >> ask you click about south sudan. it's going to have to suspend 1.7 million people. this is the greatest time of hunger and 11 years of independence. i am wondering how you look at that in the context, sorry to drag into domestic politics so soon with a change of regard and control of congress and control of the house there are number of politicians particular in the republican party in the u.s. who say the u.s. should be spending less on foreign age be doing less in foreign intervention because there's so many problems at home. can the u.s. step in where the world food program camped? and how do you think about the challenges change in political control in washington? >> i would say first of all the world food program money, the majority of it comes from the united states. that is actually prime partner. i think the world food program is a same challenge we the united states say switches in a sea of need. what is the right allocation? yes we have this infusion of resources from congress for which again cannot stress how grateful we are and bipartisan i will come to that in the context of your political question. how do you also pace yourself knowing the needs now are going to be dramatically greater even just by september to divert for a second to give you one example of that kenya, somalia, ethiopia their 16.7 million people today dependent on food assistance along lines of that that's provided. thanks again to american funding. that number is likely to increase by 20 million people by september and those three countries ethiopia, somalia, kenya at sunday to south sudan, sudan and so many other parts of africa and beyond. i think pacing, looking at a universe of need we just announced $331 million at the summit of the americas last week in food assistance and food security and money for the americas. that is in our own hemisphere. associate the images of severe hunger and malnutrition with the ethiopia famine back of the day or was somalia those places have great needs so to do guatemala, honduras places with a combination of climate shock and no high fertilizer prices has really settled the populations with significant hunger. and food needs. so again, we have additional resources to bring to bear. talk to david beasley this week about the situation in south sudan. what more we can do to try to save off that risk of having to cut people off of food assistance. we need other donors to do more. that actually helps us out upon the hill as well. i'll talk to mcconnell not that long ago. i was in the context of this huge is supplemental which we know were going to burn through very quickly knowing the scale of need. that was one of the main messages as help us tell the story and our carcass but help us tell the story back in our district about how we leverage our resources to do more. and unfortunately right now one that is probably less with the flow of refugees the funding for ukrainians as europe is so generously done is actually coming out of overseas development assistance and humanitarian budget. so every dollar spent in europe, they could have arguably done it either way. could've come out of domestic spending debt would have its own trade up and be difficult as we know firsthand here. but what it means is the time of this argument unprecedented sing a lot of the key donors scaling back if you can believe it development humanitarian assistance and places like africa that comes on the heels of the british government making signet significant cuts from their traditional very substantial commitments. >> your part about flipping again it's not for me too weigh in on politics. of course we watch carefully i will say thanks in part to david beasley former republican governor of south carolina, thanks to senders like lindsey graham. i was with rob portman taking talk about the issues yesterday. there is a core gop senators pretty specially on the house side with congressman mccall and others who feel both compassion towards people who are hungry and faced food needs and also see this is a critical sort of tool in the toolbox of american foreign policy. and america's show of generosity and ingenuity as we have uncovered vaccinations which has become more complicated. but we had a year of winning hearts and minds as well as investing and our citizens own health by getting shots into arms and doing so with the state-of-the-art vaccine. so when you hear people face these needs we have drought resistant seeds or precision fertilizer expertise where people can get more yield using less fertilizer to be able to conserve in light of the high prices. fourth humanitarian assistance of this nature. that's a really, really powerful show of what america is in the world at a time when back to your point the connection with democracy and authoritarianism where china is coming in often is still writing big checks also saddling countries with debt in which it takes generations to recover. >> with its own terms but. >> what i am saying is that a think there's an argument to be made no matter who is in power or who is upper who is down in washington. and i think it is a one as you see from the administration that preceded ours, where everybody expected and i think the trump administration owner budget request would have slashed usa budgets by huge amounts and forced us to lay off our local staff around the world and cut programming across sectors. wish republicans up on the hill protect that budget. marguerite and my was able to expanded areas. >> if i could ask that the administration for second how you feel about that u.s. using cap some of the afghan funds for 911 families in the middle of the mentoring crisis? and, do you feel it is appropriate for president biden to meet with saudi given the human rights record? >> so i would say on the first question a biden administration's executive order has made $3.5 billion in reserves available of the 7 billion. that is the minimum that will go back to afghanistan for think the core challenge is that there is a liquidity crisis, and economic crisis, and unwillingness on the part of the taliban to do even the basic things one would need to do to ensure an independent, technocratic governance of the central bank there. until the steps taken on the outside show way too little urgency. no urgency in almost a coldness to the effects of surprise, i know. to the effects on the afghan people. so might focus on that of my team is there is a lot of money there to work with. to try to support the afghan people. but in the end it is going to take pressure from all of us pretty specially those who have inroads with the taliban regime, the guitars, the turks and others to see some basic adjustments and economic governance such that those resources can be brought to bear. look, on the saudi trip we have significant concerns about human rights. president biden has been clear about that. we will be clear about that. we all know what happened before. we also have significant issues to raise in the foreign policy domains with saudi arabia. yemen, everyone is focused on the war and ukraine, is experiencing its first extended period of relative calm and it really long period of time. if that is to be extended, sustained, locked into some lasting peace it is going to require in gauge not with nbs who orchestrated the coalition response to the takeover and so forth. there is lot of human rights business to be done or business in the human rights and humanitarian realm that will be a key part of dialogue there. >> thank you. quick someone to ask about a striking doctrine that is closely associated with you. the responsibility to protect. i want to ask you at this moment in 2022, what does it mean in today's terms? and how healthy is it on a scale of one to ten? >> well, i feel a little bit like a broken record on this insofar as sitting at 1000 times does not make anybody -- it has just make people understand it in a way no amount of words seems to change that. [laughter] are 2p such as it is called which was the product of think it was lloyd axel were the lead the effort out of canada, others were involved. i was not involved. of rtp. what by then was in intuition and american foreign policy circles and also among democracies which is when people are murdered on grounds of ethnicity, religion, political affiliation, responsibility for war going to do about it. and then you have a toolkit that you look into and what is the appropriate tool in a given context for the reason i say there's a lot of misunderstanding is because people associated the invocation of art to pete with the intervention in libya. there is a sense use military force when people are dying. but you could argue as part of what explains the massive amounts of security assistance being provided today to ukrainian security forces. people being murdered by the russian federation for no reason the militia for no reason way the nine states look into the toolkit is a european allies and other democracies say what we do? we can't expel russia from the human rights council. we can generate a very lopsided vote in the un general assembly to condemn what they are doing. we can try to increase diplomatic pressure. so too and this is outside of the united states jurisdiction want to give ukrainian brave fighters of ukraine the memes to defend themselves. which, by the way when i started my career when i worked as an intern that was the tool in the toolbox bosnians most wanted as well per they wanted the memes to defend themselves. i shouldn't say just. that is always asking a lot of the international system. so, i think a president biden in the ukraine context has made clear we are not going to go to battle end up in a war with russia notwithstanding how dedicated we are with ensuring again the survival and health of the ukrainian state spray think that is an example of that doctrine kind being put to use. i think when sudan, which is a real bright spot because of the transition that occurred this year the genocidal leader being put into jail, young people -- 70% of whom were women leading the protest bringing down the government. that is a move away from leadership by the purveyors of atrocities. they are again we had a responsibility come in, one of the tools we employ to try to lock down again with other donors, to help try to solidify. with the coup and throwback now to shooting at protesters, locking up young people, now we have to look at what are the new set of tools? is it diplomatic pressure? is it going back to world of economic isolation, it is been an incredibly sad especially the time of the food crisis not to be able to move forward with the kind of programs we are planning to doing with the transition civilian government. becomes even more painful knowing again how many people are suffering the effects of this food crisis. in terms of its help as a formal r2p doctrine, it's not something people are invoking, notwithstanding collectively the desire atrocities are happening or when civilians are suffering needlessly, the desire of countries to come together and look at that toolkit. do the cost benefit. and go from there breed the last thing i would say is probably the principal means of offering military civilian protection which is probably the heart of your question usually what people mean again, as un peacekeeping. it is un peacekeepers who are on the front lines of providing civilian protection and conflict circumstances. very substantial cuts made in the previous administration that do mean there are fewer peacekeepers facing i think more challenging circumstances now, even then the ones we dealt with in the obama administration just in terms of proliferation of conflict. the militia new atrocities being carried out grotesque ways like a democratic republic of congo. we made a lot of investments in the obama years. not formerly because of r2p but because i want to see more civilian protection in getting european militaries involved in peacekeeping again. hitting female police officers and peacekeepers involved given the prevalence of sexual violence even carried out by peacekeepers on civilians which is so horrifying. i think this administration the biden in ministration is trying to re- up that kind of effort to ensure the peacekeepers who are out there actually trying to prevent atrocities, have the tools they need to protect civilians but challenging because a lot of time and momentum is lost unfortunately. >> thank you pretty want to turn the second to member questions to fellow questions. i think i would be remiss if we did not put a pin and the last week. do you think the average american set at home has an impact on how other countries butte democracy both in your role now on as a long-time humanitarian. how concerned are you about elections in which candidates are not only running but winning contests based on a promise to to propagate what's commonly known as the big lie. about the threats of future legislatures or state secretaries of state for potentially overturn the will of others. how much she think about this in your role now? >> first her question was events, trends, actions at home matter affects kind of the -- our impact abroad or how our message is heard, yes they do. they do of course profoundly. and in the positive two. i remember in the obama years, i was in the first term human rights advisor almost the un advisor. i was in new york as un ambassador. i remember talking with her a lot about just how closely un ambassadors from other countries are watching or healthcare deliberation. that is partially the u.s.'s traditionally been a little bit of arms length about economic rights he with the president coming along and declaring americans right to healthcare and working problematically to secure that. it was like every back deal, backdoor negotiation the ebb and the flow, just the extent to which ambassadors were tracking all of that. so to i think in new york as an ambassador most example among the ambassadors 11 was traveling too. out always make it a point of course, first a meeting with society of human rights activists in africa and elsewhere often living in very difficult circumstances. and facing an awful lot of demagoguery and outright harassment and even violence. what the same marriage and the cascading in the state of the state courts. ml legislature enshrinement of that. what has meant two people living, often with fear of being themselves. and so it all matters. it is all part of what people believe is their fate and their future in the case of the gay marriage example. it is what people believe the united states will be and stand for in the foreign policy. i made a huge investment we haven't a chance to talk about it. maybe we will and the questions. andrew toynbee democracy promotion toolkit for usa, secretary blinken. and we have a really fresh and i think cutting-edge toolbox now. again we can talk about it. but that is going to be when any of those tools are employed protecting journalists who are uncovering corruption in the countries they are in. any of these tools that are meant to be responsive of this a moment. it would be really hard to be effective with all of that if we are in a world where countries question whether the united states the peaceful transition of power. when you, i, secretary blinken or anyone goes to another country after an election and say to the income but you lost, you've got to respect the results. that is going to be heard by the world leading democracy promoter is going to be affected by whether or not we at the national level, state level and secretary of state level are respecting results of elections. so everything is connected to everything else. and any disconnect there is going to be very, very damaging for the broader struggle between democracy and authoritarianism we are most certainly in the midst of right now. >> at this time i would like to invite members to join our conversation with your questions. someone got a microphone. if you are willing to, could you tell see you are, ask your question will do a mix from this room and virtually. >> thanks let's start right here. >> hyatt conservation usa alone. they like 50 or 60 years for a longtime of successes of democracy. the last 20 years we've seen that reverse receive the rise of hypocrisy. what is driving that reversal? what do we do to stop it? what role does technology play or stop playing in every aspect of that? >> the plan for saving democracy at. [laughter] , first we could crowd sourced the answer to the first part of your question here. there are so many factors that we can look back on. the complacency and still do a set of things with complacency that led to let's say taking our eye off of some of the vulnerability with the democratization. so in the belief having more golden arches ultimately would mean more democratization and more peace. and the idea history is on this march had policy consequences. we can enumerate them. there is just a question. i think part of that also taking our collective -- all of us have to look back and ask what more we could have done at different times for taking our eye off were not benefiting the form of globalization that we pursued. it is not a passive thing. a set of policy choices. the distribution of benefits which left large numbers of people may be about globalization. just as we are talking about earlier that is not really how you experience it. you are not a citizen who cannot afford to feed your family. a really living just by working two jobs. you don't think yourself i'm going to blame globalization. you think i'm going to blame a leader if someone comes along and says it's democracy's fault. it is just too messy and democracy is truly messy, as we know firsthand here. someone comes along as a strong man promising order or promising the spoils of patronage or whatever. again, let's ask ourselves where would be on that question if we weren't living with significant vulnerability? and let's be clear it's not even especially vulnerable people who are paving the way for opportunists to take advantage of that. i do think there is a fertile soil there as well. there's so much more one could say. china's rise at the last decade hundred minds of people out of poverty as an authoritarian system. seem to expose a prior theory of the case you could not have this kind of economic returns without economic governance. and then china's own activism and rashes but beyond their borders and supporting really repressive tactics and not being a friend of pluralism in supplying those tools as i alluded to earlier that actually allowed training that allowed governments to crackdown. that is a factor. and in all of us the role of social media and perpetuating lies and allowing the consolidation of extremist views. people might say how that relate to democracy question what is the causality of all this is very complex. it is absolutely the case that extremist, whether isis or white supremacist, murderous groups or other kind of actors of that nature abroad who are actually bringing violence to bear. when you have organizations that believe violence is a tool of pursuing their objectives. again isis is in another order of murderous nihilism or whatever. but the social media and the echo chambers have provided a place were alienated people go. that is both terrible in terms of all of the harm and heartbreak that terrorist groups can bring about. but it also is a justification when there is a proliferation of those groups it becomes a justification for crackdowns and for centralization of power and an abridgment of human rights. and so the fact that you seen out more conflicts happening that any point since the end of the cold war, that you see not only terrorist groups of the kind that strike at american citizens and american institutions. but others to employ the tactics paid whether al-shibaab, or really murderous groups. then you start to see government saying this is not the time for democracy. or this is not the time for respecting human rights. we have to deal with these movements. there is a lot of popular support for that given the horrors that those very extreme terrorist groups. a lot of different factors i don't know what to do about it. early answering to great at length your first question but there has to be more of an economic dividends when you have a reformer bucking the trend is 16 years 16 years. off the names of a few countries in that category but cannot make public sector financing alone. many of the private sector to actually care there's a democratic opening someplace. there's plenty of money to be made. so it is not charity. but it does require potentially thinking about countries in the queue and where you want to look at making investments. we are trying to work more closely with the world bank and other international financial institutions with the development finance corporation that can bring far greater resources with the mcc of course which has been doing this for some time trying to leverage its assistance to move countries and a better direction in terms of governance by there's a lot of tools there but that connection between democracy and development. in a way it's could not develop economically without democracy. china said yes we can. when you have a democratic government or particularly moves liberalizing direction economic development really needs an economic dividend really need to follow. that emphasis can be important. at least being the first couple causes. sorry margaret, but the meme does not do anyone any favors. and one of the things, why the recency stakes of the ukraine war are incredibly high is not only these innocent people minding their own business that rains down on them gratuitous brutality. the party a democratic world has rallied and unprecedented ways. there's not been any kind of galvanizing moment or phenomenon like this. you sought especially when the battle of uvalde was won by ukrainian forces and the rejuvenation that also gives the idea of democracy. ukraine sovereignty and freedom. that is because enough. effects are very real and it only deepens the importance of us meaning and ensuring others do the same. >> thank you for the question. we have got ten minutes. we have extra time will try to take at least three more questions may be for if could do a speed round. let's do one virtually them will come back. >> will take the next question from. >> thank you i am mark the jewish communities refugee agency. a report released earlier this month waiting for sky to close before the regional impact of the korean war on women and girls. who as you know make up the vast majority of forcibly displaced persons. my first question is how do you see the role in supporting the agency of women and girls in recovery and rebuilding. and my second question, prioritize funding of local organizations paper generally women led organizations in the region. our sister organization and ukraine which is named r2p. can you share plans of ukraine response including your plans for contortion agreement with an entity of serving as an umbrella for funding to local partners? >> thank you. first, thanks for your great work. not only in the ukrainian context but also in helping afghans and others resettle in this country as we get a refugee numbers up in keeping with the great american tradition of welcoming people who are fleeing persecution. and thanks also to what you're doing in europe and supporting european countries that are, as you say, dealing with not only unprecedented numbers of incoming vulnerable people, but unprecedented demographic. the fact that it is more than 90% women and kids, that the women have left behind men of fighting age. i think just above all the shock and the trauma they are carrying for this also grave protection risk to those people coming across. and we have seen a dramatic increase in the protection infrastructure to try to prevent trafficking, you come across the border and have just come out of some horse show. maybe have gotten out and have come across some of their the train station saying i'm here to help you. how do you know whether to trust? and again, an increase in presence and alertness to this risk. but it took some time to scale up. in terms of the agency of women and girls i think it has to be a filter through which not just our humanitarian programming or recovery program is process, but all of our programming. and i think what the way of's assistance generally flows as you tend to have your assistance at large of any have your programs to empower girls. when you have a humanitarian program working with the world food program or working on ukrainian red cross engagement entails is in the leverage of having that program is women are involved in identifying those. this places like afghanistan that you don't get pushback and you create it indeed ukraine women and girls are really are finding themselves internally displaced people running, trafficking, or sexual violence in the ways in which rape and sexual violence has been used as a weapon of war by so many russian forces. i think to fecteau anyway i think for us it needs to be again kind of fundamental to our programming and be able to ensure their voices are central to even program design as we go forward. terms briefly of localization, this is a big priority of mine. it will surprise people who do not track perhaps foreign assistance but a very tiny% under 10% of foreign assistance goes to local organizations. too really, really surprising. and something we absolutely have to fix. we won't be able to fix it quickly, i wish it were otherwise spread there is no magic wand here working with an agency is really hard. there are tons of safeguards to guard against fraud, waste and abuse that have grown up over a long period of time. so if you are local ngo in the accounting firm in the rules we have in place and not meant to penalize local organizations but of course are going to have an impact on this organization. i didn't say how far under, it's even stunning. but anyway we set a goal of getting that number up to at least 25%. but one thing we can do it much more quickly is we have a goal of 50% of at least overdoing in other countries being codesigned, co- evaluated with local actors at the table. essentially involved in deciding over trying to actually happening? do we need to adjust et cetera. hopefully we can move more quickly to get toward that integration as we try to cut down the sludge inherent in working. and then on the consortium and ukraine specifically it's 100 million-dollar consortium. the first would anyway where we are encouraging it to seek out relationships with local organizations. what were joe with usa on the development side we work with local organizations and a very significant way. and have the more than 20 years we have been active in ukraine but especially in the very intense last eight years. so we know the local development partners locally creating organizations will be great to work with the humanitarian space, that isn't necessarily done but we don't to convert them from the corruption work supporting women and girls for displaced people and other longer-term waves. but i think steering international we are partnering with toward that universe we have traditions of working with, if that is a pivot they want to make it. so many organizations and ukraine are pivoting it was not a war circumstance like this anytime before. that is the kind of thing the mercy corps consortium allows us that flexibility to bring the local partners in. why does local matter? want to work yourselves out of jobs. no country wants to be dependent on systems. and yet if we work primarily through us-based or large public international organizations, when they leave the institutional knowledge and know-how if we make the investments to begin with and ukraine and well beyond pay that is a much more enduring contribution to a country's development too. >> going to do at least one more per. >> that's okay. >> you're wearing a mask yes thank you for. >> while you take three i will try to do it. >> will do three questions. i am the deputy director for technology and innovation technology research hub at usaid. my question is how do you respond when bilateral, what that little partners express discomfort when we call specific countries by name as being undemocratic or authoritarian? >> great question. one question, too. ks. cooks food security question. you quickly mention some parts of the toolkit for increasing domestic production. you talk about seeds come he talked about fertilizer but you cannot say think about the toolkit for increasing regional and global trade? and my question is, how we learn some things of the 2000/2008 food crisis to balance those toolkits? >> great and yes. >> thanks. next on the auditor comes and can i say you called it sludge? [laughter] might question us to pick up on the other thing is that as a journalist we all felt getting the information out was a thing that would make the difference in a world of social media but disinformation. you guys are doing a lot we're working with you to do more and how we can help journalism part is journalism enough to make a difference especially in ukraine and elsewhere what a challenge globally disinformation is? >> thank you. >> thank you. so, in order -- mcpherson bilateral partners who are not crazy about democracy generally or accountability to democratic standards are being called out as she put it. i guess what i would say first thank you for your work at usa. but i think that we have facts structurally on our side. those leaders who might be disgruntled believe is that usa sort of menu of programs the program should be a menu. we really love this economic competitiveness program part yes we would like 20 million vaccines and are grateful for the work. none of this anticorruption work, we don't want that we didn't sign up for that. the cafeteria we get to pull this item in that item, it's just not going to work. we are not going to be able to attract the private sector and grow your economy if you're attacking the supreme court judges or firing people who are getting too close to individuals within her own circle who are pilfering resources from the state. our case, our structural case is development is three legs on the stool. security, economic, growth and opportunity of course. again, every leader is focused on. and then it governance, human rights, the rule of law. we have to keep showing and not just telling that. give examples of where we again cannot actually support governments and delivering the social services they want. because when citizens can't complain both the people out who have been either incompetent or corrupt again in the dispensation of those services you just cannot get that economic and social dividend that you are seeking. so we just keep coming back with that. almost like a practical case. rather than getting caught up into name-calling or not. just not going to work. you are not going to be able to see these other objectives in the either more could if terrorist groups are running rampant. you understand that you have to physical security and human security the rule of law for human security. second on the expansion of the toolkit if i understand the question correctly i think the administration as a whole is very, very focused on export bands. export controls that very human -- like there's a great book not long ago called animal spirits. this impulse to just lock things down, close one's border. keep the food, keep the fertilizer, keep whatever you can in-house. the tragedy means it means far less on the global market. suppresses go further up. : : : calories in the global market so we hope these can be walked back and in some cases they have been more exemptions have been carved out and of course the wto and others but this is i agree very much i didn't go into a lot of what we were doing and certainly we agree with the promise these kind of policy restrictions can be every bit as damaging as some of the other obstructions to food circulation and as we've seen elsewhere. finally, is journalism enough, journalism has never been enough. it's necessary but it's not a sufficient. even when we cut our teeth together in the balkans you needed the reporters to go in and uncover the death camps and the policymakers to do something about it. i think you're pointing to something different which is how can truth and facts prevail or breakthrough and that's where the responsibility not only of government but now countries that account for the global gdp or have the equivalent of more gdp than 70% of the countries in the united nations which for my class at the kennedy school i would show all the flags of all the countries at the un and rank them by gdp and i would put facebook's flag among them and it was between sweden and someone else in terms of the equivalent of gdp and yet none of the checks and balances that sweden has in its democracy and its system and rule of law are present and yet the impacts of what facebook or meta or whatever these companies do or don't do can be life and death impacts. certainly climate denial will have life and death impact. the covid misinformation which they crackdown on but nonetheless when it comes to the big lie is globally of which there are many, you know, this has existential impact often for the future of humane governance in these countries and questions a part of what we have to do is engage those companies as we might governments from other countries to also try to ensure a commitment to implementation and a sense of urgency around the stakes of what is done and not done in the information space. >> thank you so much and all of you for joining today's meeting and the usaid administrator for being with us today and all of your information, the video and the transcript will be posted later today on the site. thank you very much. [applause] [inaudible conversations] anywh. >> now the confirmation for steven dettelbach has been nominated to lead the bureau for alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives. the hearing also included testimony from two u.s
Related Keywords
New York , United States , Honduras , Afghanistan , United Kingdom , Washington , Moldova , Congo , China , Guatemala , Canada , Russia , Zambia , Somalia , Ethiopia , Ukraine , Bosnia Herzegovina , Kenya , South Carolina , Sudan , Dominican Republic , Sweden , Saudi Arabia , Libya , Turkey , Turks , Bosnians , America , Saudi , Afghan , Ukrainian , British , American , Lloyd Axel , David Beasley ,
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.