tv After Words with Anne- Marie Slaughter CSPAN June 11, 2017 8:54pm-9:56pm EDT
up next on "after words," new america president and ceo an marie slager examines the intersection of technology and foreign affairs the book "the chess board and the web." she is interviewed by dennis mcdonough, former white house chief of staff in the obama administration and visiting senior fellow from the carnegie endowment for international affairs program. >> hello, everybody. i'm dennis mcdonough and i'm your host today. with me is anne-marie slaughter. she is currently the president and ceo of new america. she was formerly the director of policy planning at the state department and formerly dean of the woodrow will son department
of public affairs at -- those are per past assignments. what is important in terms of today riz discussion is that you'll see in her background and you'll see in the book that anne-marie is -- it's an exciting opportunity to discuss her new book, and why don't we just right in. tell us about the thesis of the book and about why you decided to write the book now. >> guest: dennis, it's great to talk to you, and to be able to reflect on both of our experiences actually as foreign policy practitioners. i've been writing about networks since 1994. so as a scholar, i've been looking at how the world was moving increasingly from big,
hierarchical organizations like the united nations or the imf or the world bank and increasingly toward networks of government officials like central bankers or finance ministers, but also big networks of ngo's when there's a humanitarian disaster you see all this nongovernmental organizations playing an increasingly important role. when i was in government and indeed you chaired many of those situation room meetings. what would strike me was that we knew there was a world of states and state reps. if you think about north korea or iran or sometimes china and russia, that world of state to state relations is still very, very important, and i think of it as the chess board world but it's the world of how do we
essentially beat our at vers ears and we think d- -- adversaries and we think about a move and try to anticipate their move. that world there is and it's very important, but equally important is what i call the world of the web. that world of criminal networks, including terrorists, but also arms trackers and drug trackers. the world of business, which increasingly big networks supply chains, global corporations and the world of nongovernmental organizations. i think of all those actors as web actors, as increasingly important actors but we don't have strategies for how to bring them together. so, this book is a book that says, if we are going to have a world of a chessboard and strategies how you dollar -- deal with conflict between states and cooperation between state wes need strategies how to design networks for pick people. who do we connect, how do we connect them, how do we run the
networks, to meet challenges or to advance our goals, and this book is a set of those strategies. >> host: surely timely book, very much, and just building on what you said in your opening remarks, anne-marie, let be no to a quiet that teed up thing ament in the book where you say on pages nine and ten that whatever the future brings we need to able and the tools to operate effectivefully a very different world, where states still excess and exercise power but side-by-side with corporate and sick and criminal actors. this chessboard running up against the web of networks you talk about. a question of either/or and you're a realist and just playing on the chessboard or an idealist and you're just playing in the web and the networks or a
>> longer term and if you think about president obama's speech in 2009 a new beginning with the muslim world to really address the causes of terrorism and indeed lots of other problems coming out of the middle east you need to build networks of entrepreneurs and civil groups and scientists and muslim groups that are pushing back against a radical islamist narrative.
and what fuelled what i would call the election of president trump and agued at candidate and president as a need to return american sovereignty and the ongoing debate we see in the french election where one candidate is arguing back to pull back from the european union. in an argument she made at the tiement to reassert french sovereign sovereignty. what is your sense of kind of where this eb and flow goes since 1994 when you started making the arguments and digging into it.
>> that is a great question. it goes back to both and. in the book, i reprint that famous picture and do you see an old woman or men and people say it is an old lady. see the big nose and wart. >> i saw the young lady. i didn't know if that said something about me or what. my point is you have to see both. if we are under attack, that is no time for different government agencies and citizens and
corporations to be networking around the world. those situations, you know, that the president is the commander is chief and the secretary of state and secretary of treasury, everybody has got to be on the same page. when we are really under threat and again, i would say dealing with north korea, right now, or when you were working with iran, the state of emergency and department of defense played an important role. at the same time, we in a -- in a globalized world our networks are a great advantage for the united states and the facts corporation said and movies and
entertainment are seen around the world. the fact our universities are attracting and linking up to facilities broadband we have to do both. it means our cities and states are able to do more. chicago and los angeles are actively working with their partners broadband to fight climate change because they can do things on the ground or similarly if you are fighting terrorism you wabt want -- want the ability to fight the causes
of terrorism. you have to toggle back and forth. sometimes you need all hands on deck and in other cases it is critically important we stay open to the world and able to participate in networks. >> host: it is remarkable and great you brought up the case of california and time change. i thought the times reporting this week and yesterday on the things the state of california and governor brown are doing as it relates to work on climate and convening a meeting of m minist ministers of the government of mexico or the state of mexico. the question is do you see risk? what is the risk in that for if
california were an independent state or country we would be the economy of the world. do you see risk said in the case of california? >> earlier on the supreme court shutdo issued a ruling saying states can't engage in treaties with other states. they cannot create a nafta formally with the governments of
canada and mexico. on the other hand and again this was happening in the 199 # where there was trade delegat n delegations being led. california intervened in the issues in the eu. there was issues about california's ability to tax. this is back to seeing the united states as both a unitary country but a country of 50 states at the same time. we benefit as a nation having our states be able to forge relationships with other countries or states around the world. i think chicago has more sister
states and that is a form of social power. it helps with the culture and flow of ideas. what you have to make sure is a state or city can't get you n trouble. the reason the founders insisted the foreign affairs powers be listed with the states is they didn't want them to refuse. that could get us into war with britain. it is a balance. i tend to favor more autonomy for states and cities because again in the web world you simply have to allow more
independenc independence. but you wouldn't want california making a deal with china that might imperil our defense capacity other undercutting other states economically. >> it is a diverse system as we diagnose in. i want to dig in for a couple more questions on networks thep selves. the fitting has been looking at this and i noticed mark zuckerberg talked about this yesterday in his commencement speech and i guess he knows something about it creating a
powerful network himself. you break down different kinds of networks and i think the rear will be engaged. i just want to pull out one example. you talk about tax networks. you hint at the remarks so far and the network state is diverse and there is strength in that diversity. that prosides multiple talents andt that provides trust to the
group. i am interested in the concept of diversity because one could argue the debate in this country and those who want to stay in the european union and those who were evident in the brexit vote who want to get out of the european union there is a debate about diversity threatening something particular about them
the question i have is about sovereignty. you argue to say it is both. both the networks in the web. but is there a push back on this trend because people are dealing sovereignty slide away and are they retrenching against that. >> let me start at the end and work backwards. to over simplify you have states that are more closed and
homogenius at least over 10-50 years. you sort of think about this great wave of globalization we have been through that starts in the '70s and '80s and takes off in the '80 said and '90s and suddenly the world is a web. you look at a map of the internet. we are all connected and you cannot see national boundaries because the internet doesn't recognize them. that process brings all sorts of benefits but it brought lots of immigrants and changing cultures and lots of suddenly kind of new ways of working and being that many people find quite frightening. and one of the ways of understanding our politics and european politics is exactly
this desire in my vocabulary this is our culture and here we are on the world stage. again, you do have to pay attention to that. part of that is real anxiety at a way of live that was familiar and comforting and you could be prout of that many people feel is slipping away. you have to pay attention to that just like the about to defend ourselves as a state. it is the ones most open to
those abroad that the flourish the most. some say being connected to countries with criminals like drug runners or armed traffics or terrorists. we don't want to be open to those countries. those contacts, networks bring danger. fair enough and you have to protect against that. those connections also bring us exports and all the people that study collision. if we grew up in the same place we are much less likey to come up with something new than when
you reach out to the people you don't know well and expose yoursself to new experiences and ideas. that is a magic of the spark of creativity and when you look at that from this perspective of a country. a country that has connections all-around the world through our culture, business, through our people, our educational system, in the world of the web, that opennesser -- openness is our greatest asset. i think one of the most purfle things in the book is the argument you are not talking on
a broad geographic revolution although he is leading remarkable movements but it seems to me as reading the book the general would argue on the individual tactical level what you just argued on the interstate strategic level. is that a fair reading of his experience? >> yes, and it is great example. i have to say i have been bright writing about this for decades and wrote a book about family and while i was working on
issues of women, men and work there game the book team of teams and i was thrilled was he described being in charge of special forces in iraq and he opens with this description of repairing their damage to their intercept work. and you read it and think he is describing our special forces. he is not. he is describing al-qaeda in iraq and that kind of flexibility and adaptability and numbness was rick the iraq network. our special forces is the most
n nimble part of the military we were too hierarchical. he said we had a command of teams and he was on top and there was the intelligence group and logisictics and communication group. he figures out how to make the command into a team of team. each one is connected to those who are a place where the network can beer come one entty and everyone has to know what everyone else knows but it comes together in a team of teams that
act independly and it is talking about the network you need for the task. i talk about resilience and scale networks but his is a compelling con kree example of this idea of a strategy of connection. >> what struck me as an aside in terms of our time together if the government is in the military it seems fee the experience that you justed talked through of general mccrystal was not sengsz put
rather the rule. the milltrary had a remarkable way of capture actioning each of their under waking so they are ensuring the best lesson and making themselves that more more nim billion -- nimble. you say we have strategists stuck on one side of the chess board and the other side the web. maybe sometimes the public perception and our armed porchs are board actors when they are precisely and maintained as
being so beneficial. agile, open to rethinking, diverse, task oriented put ea learning from each one of them. that is what came to me with the portion of the book and see saw that from the colleagues. >> from the chess board world of the state to state battles and the conflicts between terrorists groups on the ground where if you think about afghanistan or
iraq they were never fighting at state. they were fighting the taliban government of afghanistan and once that fell they were fighting remnants of the taliban on the dpround and parts of al-qaeda. the during the coraled war it was wus against the russia and union and you are stillpageeninging national armies with and now it started in vietnam with gorilla forces put unemployedern warfare in the military now calls it hybrid warfare is much or your runot quite sure tay are fighting. ia must be networked to rerespond put at the same you to to be repaired to fight an interstate war.
i found myself in the state department frustrated at thauz it such a highe arby within the gument was to pull together export sa and what you need ed know. that is a special representation to women and it is ferociously difficult government. >> it seemed there were embas embassiembassy embassies where certain
ambassadored did a good job of their country team trying to make the team of team and you see those embassies working well where they are fougnot only hav political counselors about reporting back but you have the commercial service and all of the other services working together as a team so you get a comprehensive picture of this. if you go back to 2010-2011,
maybe we were one of those places where ewere not as effective on that front is underarab world where across the bord in aggressively into egypt and eventually foo syria, we were kwng, analytically as a government surprised by the depthf and pervasiveness that led to the arab spring as we called it at the time. maybe a more effective team of teams where we are trauing on the fedworks on the grund. pin those countries where they had us a lial more ahead of the curve on what ends up being one of the most unffunda fun pental.
we have hispanics with the aaikz gm and they didn't wnt us to cufecking pharmaceutical. if knows back about sovereignty. we are sovereignty. we have very formal relagtiorel and try to reach out to society. we loont had the havesurge rage as yearnple ist and we need peter information and better ability to if gij with tees tip inentss fum >> host: so from that end, another example weare beth involve in.
elynnian elections in 2020 #. i think the green movement rose up crittedicizing the con doth of the fwment. -- criticizet when at the time reflected the president there was a debate public dwms there was a possession fblgs hufuch headache the relationships between the united states and iran which was covered by the experience since the revolution there in 19969 and the on' feg
and we can't get anywhere if we don't talk to people. he was building relationships with the government and in the end it would be the foundation for the iranian nuclear agreement which i considered to be one of the achievements of the obama administration. he is reaching out to a government that is shooting its own citizens in the streets. we looked like we were on the wrong side and gradqually froze situations for a while. to be supported by the u.s. government, that is the kiss of the death was the iranian goept
says you are western stooges. here is what we could do. if we had plans, the network was saying you would have in the u.s. for that, universities and businesses, and religious groups a complicated because they carry passionately and we help support a network. that doesn't mean we construct it. and the ability to reach many
different parts of your society and iran, businesses, again, civil society. a lot of our foundations. we support you without it coming from the government but from the government's point of view we would be in a better position and better to communicate the sort of full range of who we are as a people if you encouraged the networks esc n without
formal diplomatic relationships. >> at the end of the day, you would argue if you were effectively practicing the state craft in this increasingly connected world the more interaction in the web doesn't weaken your options. it increases the options. >> i would say practice state and web craft. state craft comes from the government. web craft can come from the government, be encouraged, but it can come for a foundation. a great example going back to climate change is the mayor mike bloomberg did a lot of work to bring together mares from around
the world who are committed to reducing carbon emissions in the united states. he connects 7,000 people and in the laj within of the covenent, which sounds like a treaty, all mares can take action regardless of whether donald trump pulls out of the paris agreement on climate change or not. the obama administration would have been supported of that, the trump administration less so. i think ultimately that is enlisting the power of the american people, it could be business, civic organizations and mayors and governments. they advance our interest
see the kind of carbon reduction revisions in the makingf of the paris agreement. it will be pretty remarkable, if true. >> i have a former student who is working on that and he backs it up. he is if you are looking at the cities around the world tay are the population of the 50% growing and that is where the you have the denses carbon emissions. people in charge of the tose cities, if tay support payer who says we will reduce carbon emissions yus like a city says we will control traffic or emissions controls because have to live in the city. they should be audibble to take
the action. the supreme court will probably look at this but it is hard to believe they can say you cannot improve your life in the statey because the federal government doesn't want to commit the nation to initiate tv emissions. go ahead. sgh mrezering, no ahead. >> talk things like global health where theigates fou gate foundation worked to vaccinate children all over the world. we all benefit from that. if they are immunized there is
likely less world epidemics can take off. that involves government but doesn't depened on the dpument and that will call that reb craft. i >> if a cuper books agone, you called feat emergency's kwet. you have those quote, the epurging network of the 21st century is above, below or central to the stanl. the them so again my question to you is is when you say theitate with the most cunecks and skw
need to the think trustate department's decisionally power is your size, it size of your xha nierm it is a number of connections. i would say the quality of connections as well and i don't think there is fought necessarily one center because there are multiple states that are connected. again, think about a map of the internet. you have a number of porttles with a huge number of connections and smaller ones. certainly, i think the united states today if we don't hafr our snoem self while choosing yourselves open and remain open
while protecting yourselves we are the most connected from the people, business, culture, and trudilgzal sylph rights. we do and that is what was ewanted nut in the 7 is 00 and it is till true. educationed the strategy of one belt, one road says openly we are going to build our power and spread our influence by building tread networks and people networks and they are building the infrastructure to do itism drug lanes, sea noim eu has a
similar strategy saying we can build the webs. canada has the same thing. talking about building networks around the house and i were hady the united states mauz tex and closing off the border and opsis of waw i think we need to do dwi. so yem you are write when you look at north korea is a state that is cefwu phillip china is the one state north korea relies on but if they chaps they will
end up in which hes china. dut -- but it means we have very little leverage. we have sanctionss and imposed them but china daes organic is not pending on trust trait. # a number of administration and we are thinking about obviously where it gets it's military supplies and nuclear supplies although that is hard to choke off. but fundamentally it means we have to work through the sate with the most connections and that is china and china has its
own agenda which is why it is hard. >> the one we watch in real time and it is interesting to see how the trump administration and the new team is working ask doing precisely as you said working aaggressivesly with the chinese. it seems to me if i were to boil down this argument it is that the more network actors are going to ultimately be more dynamic and influential and farber eter to protect the interests. you mentioned the fact we are in a current political mood and period where some of those acs toward greater network, posture
of the united states, trade agreement, and so forth. lead to some dislocation. that dislocation is leading to political push back against maintenance of some of these networks. i guess a question i have and maybe this goes to the work you are doing at new america and elsewhere is what it is the secret to maintaining the u.s. that comes from the united states being as networked as it is even pushing up against an increased skepticism about whether this world is leading to good opportunities across the country.
how do we square the emerging domestic political challenges between that and the gop imperative we remain engaged in the world? what is the secret there? >> jecff. >> you have to make an argument for openness that explains to americans why ultimately that is our greatest advantage. for many of us who grew up in the cold war this is aerohazardous. you know the soviet union was sealed. there was an ioon current n. we were open. they were closed. we were open to other nations. they were a closed society and had to put up walls to keep
people in. and people wanted to get out of what people were very closed and hierarchic hierarchical. the u.s. is going to be like the netherlands to the rest of the world. economies like that succeed by changing and trading of ideas. of course he has to protect ourselves. not all networks are good ones.
they are disconnected from the organizations that take care of people. everything from salvation army to ymca and little league and all that fabric of fibrant civil life. one thing we have to do and one thing that left my life and many of the smaller cities and communities as a nation we need to be thinking about how do you connect the kids in those places to opportunities. you do you connect thes business to the national economy. how do you connect the ability of smaller farms and people not in the communities but the rural areas around them.