tv Politics and Public Policy Today CSPAN April 13, 2016 9:00am-10:01am EDT
so, that's a big deal. thank you very much. >> yeah. thank you. i'm stunned as well. people say that america's ready to sort of close in on itself. america becomes america when it looks outward. you know, when you are in concert behaving like an island, it's not who you are. waking up across the nation, actually, in these con tankerous times, people think this is one thing we can agree on. that's why i'm proud of the one campaign. in fact, one of the reasons i got interested in this refugee crisis is because of all the great work that's been done by a lot of people on this committee, a lot of people in america in the fight against extreme poverty over the last ten years
could be undone. we worked together, senator durbin, on debt consolation. with senator leahy, we worked with instagram. i got to know senator purdue. we were traveling around. i'm thinking who is the republican and who is the democrat? of course they are talking on other subjects very easy to find outlet. but on this stuff, this is like the one thing that you all agree on. it brings out the best in you. i'm sure of that. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you mr. chairman and for being here today and testifying. i certainly agree with all the comments about the importance of aide. it is about our security and the impact of what's happening in europe affecting us in the united states because we do have transit alliance that has been
critical to world order. we had a hearing this morning in the foreign relations committee on isis and international terrorism. one of the conclusions that i drew listening to the testimony and our witnesses generally agreed with this is that we have been good in the united states when it comes to military efforts, so, we were successful in afghanistan and throwing out the taliban, initially. we were successful in iraq in our military efforts. we have been working to try to take back territory from isil that has been successful. but, we have been and we have been successful in efforts to support refugees in camps and make sure aid gets there. we have been less successful when it comes to governance, what many people call nation building, the economic and social implications and the
ability to improve governance in countries that are failing. i would like to ask if you all agree with that and the extent to which you see the need to address that as being critical to countering violent extremism and, therefore, how do we do better with what we have been doing in the past? so far, we haven't been as successful in those areas as i think we need to be if we are going to address the concerns that we are all talking about today in terms of countering violent extremism. i don't know, i see you blinking. or nodding, would you like to respond to that first? blinking. you can blink too. >> i'm the nod, he's the blink. >> yeah. >> no, i think you are right on the mark, senator. the challenge of actually moving
from the case of say iraq or syria, from liberating territory and stabilizing but, then rebuilding and not just rebuilding, a political accommodation. that's where the challenge comes in. you have to look at each country in its particulars. unless we are able to get at some of the underlying issues, when we succeed, as we always do militarily, it won't be sustainable. what we are trying to focus on in dealing with the programs to counter violent extremism, not working with just natural governments, but local governments, community leaders, municipalities, bringing mayors together to talk about how they are dealing with the challenge in their own community. we are trying to apply metrics and evaluations to see what works and what doesn't to change it. let me give you a quick example. we just stood up something
called the global engagement center, our effort to -- >> yeah, i want to ask you about that. >> maybe to jump into that. one of the critical pieces of the effort against daesh is to get young people to the cost. we were not satisfied with the effort we had going. we brought in a team of technology experts, the so-called sprint team in the silicon valley. they spent a month with us and made recommendations. as a result, rereformed what we were doing. in a nutshell, what we are doing less of now is direct messaging in the voice of the united states. we were not the best messenger in this space. what we are doing, instead, is trying to identify, elevate and build a capacity of local, credible voices. instead of playing a
whack-a-mole game, we immediately tried to counter it. we've worked on doing it more theme atically. for example, very successfully, we found the testimonies of defectors from isil or daish. what it says to people is what you think you are signing up for is not the reality. they have more credibility than we do saying that. in these ways, we have stood up our effort based on trial and error, what works and doesn't work. we are determined to do it across the board. >> can i add to that? it's bizarre, going from observing this culture and how elusive maleness is. we forget how elusive maleness is where material determines --
you have no access to material things. you exaggerate your maleness. i think you have to think about a young man and think about that. it's funny. don't laugh. i think comedy should be deployed because if you look at national socialism and daesh and isil, we have seen this before. very vain. they have all the signs. showb showbusine showbusiness. the first people that adolf hitler threw out were the surrealists. you speak violence, you speak their language. you laugh at them when they are goose stepping down the street and it takes away their power. so, i'm suggesting that the senate send in amy schumer and
chris rock and sasha. thank you. >> actually, that's not the first time i have heard experts on how to counter violent extremism. >> i'm actually serious. >> it is one of the things that i know we are looking at. it also speaks to the importance of empowering women around the world and focusing on human rights for women and children and making sure that they -- we have the same focus on what's happening with them in particularly countries that where we are seeing violent extremism the most are countries where women have not been empowered. >> ugly. >> a critical need for our foreign policy. thank you. mr. chairman. >> i would like to add a little bit to that. generally, the practice that we
follow over there, many, many years has been one of reacting to bad things. i would suggest that in the years ahead, being proactive has a skill set all to itself in terms of what you could do. first of all, for example, on the security measure, if you -- you can't do everything everywhere, but let's suggest a failing state in africa the size of nigeria, for example and what that would cause or a failing state like the congo or pick any other large country. so the question is, if you are worried about it now, isn't it cheaper and more effective to engage now proactively, to fix what needs to be fixed, whether
it's security, by security, i don't mean american forces or nato forces going into fight, i mean to go in and help people learn how to defend themselves and in some cases you can stitch together entire regions of several countries that would benefit from that kind of training. and while you are doing that, you can encourage the private sector to go in and start showing people how their lives are better in a capitalist system, a free market system, education, distance learning, all these things. the problem is, we tend to do one very well and in the case of afghanistan and iraq, there was no real plan to nation build. i think that's the missing link. if you are going to do one, be prepared to do the other things that have to be there. it's much cheaper to be proactive than reactive.
of that, i am sure. >> i totally agree with that. i think we haven't yet, however, aligned the priorities in our spending in a way that supports that. look at how much we spend for humanitarian aide, usaid, diplomatic efforts compared to the military side. you know, there's a huge dispari disparity. we have to realign our priorities so we are focusing on prevention than reacting to the situation. >> we have the benefit of unified geographic commanders in most of the major regions of the world and i think that with a little bit of tweaking in the right direction, that is not just security, but economic development rule of law that i think you have forward basis in regions we won't affect. i think that would be a good way to engage proactively. >> thank you. >> senator danes.
>> thank you, more chairman. this is a great panel today, thank you for being here. americans are the most generous people in the world when it comes to humanitarian aid and relief efforts that span the globe. at the same time, my fellow colleagues are weighing how best to contribute where the needs are overwhelming. listen to the needs of the world today, adding limited resources. how do we counterterrorism, provide humanitarian relief and be effective on behalf of the american taxpayer. i want to start with general jones, first of all. i want to tell you, thank you for your service to our country, as the son of a marine, yourself, i got raised right. thank you for what you have done for our nation. thank you for coming today. general, in the philippines, at least 18 were killed in fighting a terrorist organization in the southern part of the country.
it's indicative to the threat of the islamic state and asia pacific and the entire world. the u.s. special forces use strict operations by embedding forces and partnerships as they battle the terrorist organizations on a special task force with the philippines following 9/11. we are seeing them take the approach in resolve. a question for you, someone who has a lot of experience, do you feel this is a way to counter violent extremism? >> the critical ingredient, i think, that you need to have is, that wherever we engage that the people of that country and the government of that particular country have to want what we are offering. i think imposing what our values and goals are is the long road.
in the philippines where i have spent quite a few years, the problem has been with us for a long time. the two or three or four extremist groups that exist there. what worries me is that, if i understand it correctly, there's an effort of appeasement of the violent extremist groups. personally, i'm opposed to that. that just gives them a point from which they will expand their base of operations. so, i'm a little bit removed. i defer to secretary blinken about our current policies. as a matter of principle, i don't favor appeasing extremists. root them out, stamp them out. a lot of it depends on the will and the capacity of the people. we can help them do these things, but i don't think we can do it for them.
>> secretary blinken, unforseeable contingencies, the foreign aid is to assist countries and obtain certain humanitarian in which aid is no longer required. as you look at your longer term goals, investing we make in aid, what are some measurable benchmarks that might indicate if a country is utilizing government assistance and what, if any country, can you maybe pull out that could be viewed as a model of success? >> sorry. first, the previous question, i agree with general jones on the point he made. we are trying to work be, with and through partners to build their capacity but with them along the way. you are exactly right that ultimately, success for the foreign assistance business is to get out of that business. we want countries to get on
their own feet to be effective and provide for their own citizens. indeed, i deally, we would like to channel as much as possible to the private sector and have it work that way. in the near term, as we look at these programs, we are trying to develop clear measures of effectiveness. just to give you one example, in the violent extremism space, trying to counter that, on the one hand, it's tough to measure how many people didn't become radicalized in a way that's unknowable. but, what we are trying to do is, first of all, have some consistency across the programs. second, we are making sure that we have third parties come in and evaluate what we are doing, to see if the goals are doing that. in particular, we are trying to look at when we provide assistance and transfer knowledge, how are they using
that. is it making a difference? >> if you look at the landscape, which country, if you had to stack rank and i realize perfection is never going to be obtainable, but there are better outcomes than others. what country is a model of this has been success. >> you have to look at different areas. countries in the past are now leading countries around the world if you go further than south korea, for example. >> that's a good example. >> in the present day, it varies program to program, sector to sector. it would be hard to rank order countries across the board. we have seen jordan use some of the assistance we provided to start to make macro economic changes. that's what we are looking for. we have seen other countries not make those changes. >> bono, a question, we are talking about a syrian, humanitarian crisis earlier and
this potential lost generation of children as the refugee camps turn into long durations throughout much of a lifetime. from your perspective, what would you say is the most effective way to tell this committee, where we can invest american taxpayer dollars to ensure we don't lose the syrian children? >> in short, listen to miss kelly clemens. i think they are doing a spectacular job. i'm glad to hear you think about that and, you know, i have talked to the families and get to know them. you come in as refugees and you come out and have gotten to know them. syrians are industrious. i was fortunate to be a friend of steve jobs. there was a syrian. he was the son of a syrian
migrant and, you know, he had that industriousness. a funny story in the camp, i think it was -- dutch people were getting 600 bicycles to the camp. within, i think within minutes, they had set up a bicycle repair shop to deal with the bikes. when the bikes arrived, they had a delivery service for pizza before they had the pizza place. these are the best people in the world. they are extraordinary people. they would be so moved to hear you talk about them today. >> thank you. mr. chairman? >> thank you, chairman. thank you for the chance to have this hearing and to work with you on this important issue. general jones, great to see you, again. i think our last conversation was in rowwandrwanda. secretary blinken, thank you for your decades of service to the
nation in the highest levels and deputy commissioner clemens, thank you for your pointed and constructed proposals. one of my hardest days as a senator was with senator graham in jordan. seeing the enormous challenges and the potential of a refugee camp of people of all ages and backgrounds. tony lake runs unicef and was a professor of mine in college. we need to realign our imagination, reconsider the funding that we provide for humanitarian relief in an emergency situation and the investments we make and recognize that millions of refugees are likely to be outside their countries of origin for a long period of time. if we change direction and make investments in a wiser, more targeted way in partnership with allies across the world, we
could make a difference, not just in combatting extremism although that is a goal today, but to build up human kind and relieve suffering. bono, i was moved to hear you talk about how the american people are generally generous. our investment laid the foundation for a western europe that is united, stable and free and your reference threw the work of senior senators touched the lives of 9 million. i will mention the ebola where volunteers from around the world worked with the united states in turning around the tragic disease. i am encouraged and challenged by your op-ed in the new york times and what i have heard about from you in the ways we ought to be working together to craft a more disciplined and
thoughtful plan. general, in your written temperatu testimony, we have a good call to arms. sophisticated, serious and passional as any fight in history, designed and resourced as if the future depends on it, because it does. >> that's right. >> with the time remaining, speak to, if congress were to embark on a large scale plant for foreign assistance that combined all the elements, real investment alongside humanitarian relief, partner to prevent fragile states from becoming failed states, what would it look like? what conditions would you put on aid? how would you decide which countries come in that arc and which would be out of it and how would we tell the american people how long this would last and what our goals are. general, i would be interested
in the role u.n. peacemaking. secretary blinken, how far you think we are toward developing and delivering this and deputy commissioner, how you see the plate and role of refugees. think big and tell us how you would structure it, if you would, please. >> thank you, senator. i'll try to be very brief. i just am of the opinion that we are -- in order to deal with the challenges and the threats that face us and mankind, really, that we have to approach it a little bit differently. when i was national security adviser, we tried to work on the more holistic approach to responding to international threats, things like cyber security, energy security, water security, food security and of
course the conventional definition of security we lenned on in the 20th century. in the world we face today, people have choices and people know a lot more and people in the disadvantaged developing countries have access to information that shows them that they don't have to live like this. the battle is on between extremist ideologies who captivate the minds and say the reason you are not doing better is because of these guys. generally, they point to us. i'm very optimistic that if we can put together a strategic concept for how each administration deals with these kinds of problems, more holistically to include the private sector and the public sector working together, to
advance the idea that america doesn't have to do this alone. what we can do, i think better than anybody, is certainly provide assets and resources and also provide an organizing principle around which other countries would follow. the north atlantic treaty is an example of an organization of 28 countries with a fantastic history. what is its future? if we can't lead that organization into the 21st century by being more proactive, preemptive and more strategic in thinking, which saves money in the long term, then i think we have a difficult time. so, leadership, u.s. leadership, i think, in organizing principles to do these things, to bring international public and private sectors together. to help countries that are on the fringe of going one way or
the other in terms of democracy and whose people know exactly what they are missing and will not hesitate to move by tens of thousands from the mediterranean from africa to europe if they don't see hope for the future. it's agriculture, food, water, physical security. but it has to be -- it's using organizations like the u.n. obviously ngos. we have to find the table where everybody can sit together and plan this. it's not as expensive as it looks. what's expensive is when you have to go through another iraq or afghanistan or libya without a complete tool kit that says okay, you defeated. we got security now, now what? >> thank you, general. mr. chairman, other members of
the panel respond? >> sure. >> i'm beyond my time. secretary, briefly, if you might. what countries are in and out. >> what general johns said second, in terms of the countries in and out, we have to do an assessment of the countries most at risk, which matter most to us in terms of interest and security and which are most likely to be willing to be partners and make the changes necessary. conditions, you mentioned. we want to make sure that, in fact, what we are trying to do is leverage our assistance in different ways. first, leverage it so the countries that receive it make the changes we think are the right ones to make. second, leverage our assistance to get other countries to put in as well. one of the things we are trying to do on the refugee crisis. president obama convened a summit meeting on the u.n.
general assembly in september. one of the goals of the summit meeting is to increase the assistance provided around the world to 30% to the global crisis. to be at the table to do more. we can do that, too. third, i think as we are thinking about designing such a program, we have to be looking at innovative solutions that are not necessarily driven by money. so, for example, we were talking earlier in the refugee crisis. we need to do things like ending the divide and the way we do development. they need to be married together in the way we budget and think about the problem. second, we were talking about providing loans to middle income country that is don't qualify for them. the jordans and lebanons. ideas like creating enterprise zones where, if countries invest
in those zones, the products get preferential treatment. idea of those kind are the thinking we need to have it work more effectively. >> terrific ideas. bono, you have done a great job of leveraging to provide relief for hiv/aids. how would we do the same thing in this challenge? >> i am humbled to be asked that question and hea you debating senator graham is one of the great thrills of my life and some extraordinary place on the far end of the globe. and to hear your passion on these subjects. i'm not sure exactly what the marshall plan looks like. i like the three-tiered approach that i thought tony brought up there. i can speak better about the -- because i know it better than
what you all do. i want to remind people, africa is really rich. i mean, not just in its resources, but it's people. it's extraordinary. i think it will be an amazing partner for us going forward. i just think for trade, for commerce. remember the marshall plan did great for the u.s. keep thinking. at the time people saying we can't afford it, we can't afford it. actually, the '50s and '60s were born out of these customers. can you believe a rock star talking about it? it's true. i think the biggest problem in the way of that growth, any african will tell you is reform and finding corruption and tapping corruption. the africans are leading this. you make it easier when you make these packages conditional on
that kind. that's what they want. finance ministers say to me all the time on debt consolation, the key piece of that was having our debts. we had to reform. i think it's a fantastic thing to arrive in the region, the difficult regions. you can advise them to reform or say, look, here is what happens when you doch. here is the club. you want to be in the club? it's a great club. that's the way i'm seeing it. just to end, just to say, we need an america that is strong, like the general describes, but also an america that is smart. you are strong and smart when you talk like this. i'm just amazed. i'm caught back listening to you all having to pinch myself saying, wow, people really get this thing. they are talking about, you know, asking the american people
to go further and that hurts you politically. that's real leadership, isn't it? when you do the right thing and it costs you. >> thank you. >> it's really easy to come after these three gentlemen because obviously, the concepts are inspirational, but also very concrete. just a couple things to add. we talk about this arc of crisis from southwest asia, middle east through the horn of africa and the late chad basin. in terms of that being the stretch of where people are being disrooted, that is where to focus on a so-called marshall plan reductix. we are talking failed states, all that is important. if we can get, when we have those crises solved makes a tremendous difference. syria, iraq and somalia.
they are responsible for half of the uprooted people we were talking about earlier. that needs to be part of the overall equation. i couldn't agree more in terms of marrying them in a concrete way. we have a moment now that we haven't had in decades in terms of political attention. thank you. >> i would like to thank senator leahy and senator graham and the entire panel for what you have done to raise our eyes to challenge us to confront this moment of opportunity and difficulty for millions around the world. thank you. >> senator? >> thank you chairman. i appreciate your testimony. it's great to connect with you all again. senator cons led a delegation and we were able to be in the field. it's a wonderful compliment to being here in washington, d.c. and discussing the challenges.
mercy corps is in my home state of oregon. ic connected with them in terms of encountering violent extremism. i will share with you points they made. single sector programming, support multisector, multiyear programs to create systems youth can survive. target the most vulnerable youth. shape the future through rigorous analysis and political economic factors that drive youth to support violence. fourth, connect youth voices with corruption, predatory justice system and government structures. i just wanted to mention those and see if you all would find those things to fit with your own experience or if you would
like to take issue with them. anyone? yes. thank you. >> thank you. maybe i can start this time in terms of obviously mercy corps is a tremendous partner and does tremendous work around the world. one thing to mention, it's the issue of integration. nothing can be more powerful in terms of radicalization. having hosts and refugees side by side and friends, neighbors, et cetera. i have to say, in terms of the u.s. being a leader, one of the reasons it has been successful historically, we see things north in canada. there's a real integration. in terms of preventing that extremism, welcoming people into the community is the first and strongest step. thanks. >> thank you. anyone else? yes, senator blinken. >> i think the points mercy corps makes are on the money and
consistent with the way we are looking at the problem. in particular, i think exactly as they said, the multisector programming is important. we have to have these inner connects and that's what we are trying to do. for example, in trying to bring together what we are doing on counterterrorism with violent extremism, what we are doing before the problem becomes a problem and afterward, we can create coordination of efforts. if you are training a law enforcement organization to deal with terrorism, but you are also helping it understand what the drivers are of terrorism, it may be more effective at getting to the problem before it starts. bringing them together is pornlt. second, you are right about targeting the most as a rule
netwo vulnerable. creating or having people in their midst become radicalized. it goes as far as exchange programs to make sure people we are bringing over represent those communities and represent the work we are doing. then, exactly right as well, we need to be elevating their voices, not so much ours, but their voices because ultimately, the most effective messengers, people with the credibility are speaking to their own. that fits in with what we are trying to do. >> all this is struck by the emphasis on the rigorous analysis. we have to continuously test different strategies and see what's working and what's working in one part of the world may be different than elsewhere. bono, join my colleagues and thank you so much for the work on your campaign. my daughter is enjoying
interning with your organization and is moved by the mission as so many americans are. you mentioned a number of things i want to particularly stress. first, aid is not charity, it is national security. so often i have asked my colleagues, if we had another dollar, would we do more security in the world through these type of programs than procuring another weapon, if you will. i think the balance still is too much on the weapon and not enough on this side. certainly, that ties in with the notion that i think the way you put it was it's more cost effective to invest today than address crises later. you also noted that it's important to connect, if you will, humanitarian aid and
development efforts. i think that's anim mediate and short term and longer term strategy. would you like to expand on that? >> yeah, sure. just on the military piece, the stoord thing about general jones is ten years ago, he was talking about the reimagining of the military. i went to the atlantic, is that what it's called, the big military gathering? yeah, atlantic council. there were all these ph.d.s standing up. they were all generals. they are so philosophical. you realize that the military is the head of the politicians on this one. they really understand what has to be done and i'm amazed by that. in an asymmetrical conflict, you can't use the old strategies. there's new weapons needed.
sometimes those weapons are education. you know, fighting disease. it's really cheap and i remember with the aids stuff we did, i remember telling president bush, paint those drugs red, white and blue because they are from america. he was laughing. now, everyone is applauding the dude. america polls very well. it's amazing. so, then on the long term versus the short term, the humanitarian aid and the long term develop, they are coming together now. you can't care about development and poverty and not care about conflict because 50% of the core come from fragile, conflict prone areas. i'm learning from kelly and she's learning from the people smarter than me.
s it is coming together. it used to be two separate silos. i'm glad it's coming together. it wasn't your question, but because we were in rowwanda together, i think rwanda is an example of a country that came out of conflict that took our investment in aid and actually has done quite an incredible job. i know it's frustrating for some of us that the president went for a third term. he's absolutely convicted and his security of his country was right, he was doing it for the security of his country. aside from that, he's doing a spectacular job and he is an example of how to do this right. >> one of the things that tremendously truck me there was the government's emphasis on no
longer talking and identifying as tribal but rwandans. it's a fragile moment still. one of the concerns he expressed was campaigns will cause people to immediately either directly or indirectly reach out to their tribal roots. the memories are so painful that it's a situation we have a hard time fully comprehending given the past in rwanda. i'll just close with noting, i appreciate the emphasis on corruption. there's been mention of the global anti-corruption summit in london and the u.s. will back an ambitious set of proposals. i would love to hear more about it, but i am out of time. senator? >> thank you for the hearing and your suggestion on the marshall plan. i respect it very much. >> keep it to yourself.
>> thanks to this panel. history tells us that world war ii was a learning experience for the united states. we were not open to refugees. we turned them away. refugees from europe. refugees, jewish refugees coming in trying to escape the holocaust. after the war, we tried to change that policy and point in a new direction. for the most part, we have done it. now, we are faced with the refugee crisis of our time out of syria and afghanistan. bono, i can remember the first time we sat down to talk was about hiv/aids. i remember my first reaction, the reaction of most was fear. what does this mean? am i going to die? how many people are going to die? is there any way to stop it? the reaction to the refugee crisis, fear. how many people are coming? are they going to threaten us? it's not unusual for us to face
new challenges with the first reaction in fear. i hope that we have, we certainly have grown out of it when it comes to hiv/aids. we are more knowledgeable and thoughtful and know what we can achieve. will we get back on the right track when it comes to refugees? we have to get back to the reality of a lot of deserving people. i was on the island and i saw them coming in on these leaky, rubber, plastic boats with babies, with water wings we put on them in wading pools. that's all they had to protect them across the straits. how desperate they must be to risk their lives and the lives of their children and bring only what they can carry. the question comes down to this, it's a general question. i think the genuine concern in europe is about the uncertainty of when this is going to end. is there going to be an end of
the flow of refugees? is there a finite number in terms of absorbing into germany and sweden? how many? the uncertainty of that is certainly understandable because as you have said, speaking of your experience in africa, this is not confined to the middle east. and, i remember when an ambassador from middle east said syrians rank third in sending refugees to italy. my question to you is this, if this humanitarian crisis is not abnormal, but the new normal in our world, where people are living longer because of public health, surviving, where we see, as you tipped it off, the extreme ideology, extreme poverty, extreme climate, can we engage our friends of the world
of like mind to make investments to allow these people to stay in place, rather than to strike out in desperation to find some refuge, some opportunity? >> yeah, it's a giant -- it's a giant challenge. it's kind of very american. i think if you get your best and brightest focused on it, you know, as i'm listening to you today, you can see we are going to get somewhere. in the private sector, there's mark zuckerberg trying to bring access to the internet. i have had conversation with larry page at google. lots of people. your tech people. they are determined. incredible parts of your society, bill gates. we can do anything in the one campaign with bill and melinda
gates. warren buffett. it's the whole country that is showing the way, not just the public sector, it's the private sector. it's going to do it. you can do it. strangely enough, they have done studies on bringing the internet to developing countries and it's transformati transformative. that's one thing. electricity. you know, your innovations in solar. the president has the initiative to bring power to africa. it's good. these are transformative. the only thing i worry about and i'm guilty of this, i'm great at raising the alarm and these are serious crisis. we need to attend to it. i don't want to drag down the vision of this as away from what it could be. it could be your greatest challenge. you are talking about china, the
influence to china. in 50 years time, i will tell you this, in 50 years time, if the united states walks away from the continent of africa and sends it to china, it will be seen as the worst foreign policy mistake of the start of the 21st century. it's that big. why would you? these are people that love you. they want their entrepreneurs, they are smart, coming to universities. great that china is competing with that, too. i hope to see china, i would like to see the president, one thing about him is he is very, very big on tackling corruption in china and now africa. if he starts to tackle corruption in africa, it would be transformative. i'm not sure he's watching c-span at the minute. i look to have that conversation.
>> mr. chairman, thank you very much for the hearing. thank you all. >> thank you. >> thank you all very much. just to wrap it up, a couple observations, we are trying to be proactive. the goal of the hearing is to focus on the problem is going to get worse if somebody doesn't deal with it now. better to invest now or pay later. losing jordan, we have to get a grip on this refugee crisis. it's not just providing food, shelter and clothing, it's a way to integrate them so they don't come here. it is designed to undercut radical extremism, a hopeful life. ten years ago when you first tackled the aids crisis, no one could have imagined in their wildest dreams how successful it has been and we have a ways to go. i can tell you, mother to child aids transmission is reduced by 75%. there are five countries inside the 20 yard line that can be
self-sufficient when it comes to dealing with aids. south africa leading the charge. millions of people alive today because what we did ten years ago. to without some of us being there to help in that endeavor. i cannot find a way in my own mind to deal with encountering violent extremism without some kind of international plan which we'll be apart to change the economies of these reasons to give people hope. the more education a child has, the better off we'll do. after 37 visits to iraq and afghanistan, i can assure the american people that they're not buying what these crazy people are selling. they don't want to go down that
road. they don't want to turn their daughters over to isil. they being the mothers and fathers. i can promise you, you are safer here, when we're helping people over there. and this whole concept of coming up with a marshall plan for the 21st century, call it what you like, is long overdue. we spent a lot of money. the most important thing we've done is spend 6,000 plus lives and thousands of people have had their lives disrupted, legs blown off, traumatic brain injury. i can go on and on and on. i would like to make the next ten years more successful. the only way i know to do that is to have something outside the military solution that compliments security once you achieve t once you achieve security, you will lose it if you do not do the things we talked about. >> at the risk of damaging your career back home, i agree with
you. all for the people here, people that we've known for a long, long time. >> you made an enormous difference today. you will look back on this hearing, i hope, and say that's when it began to change. senator graham and i, we have to bring members of both parties together to vote for this bill the way the public is, why are we giving 25% of our budget for -- of course, it's a fraction. it's a fraction of one percent. and the return, pay for it now or many, many, many times later on. you've given us a lot of ammunition to work with both republicans and democrats, i think.
division. [ inaudible ] >> in the way you have treated, created pressure, i'm sure. for jobs. i know you are looking at people have a real life. there is a phrase called second exile. people aren't just exiled from the countries they are running from. they can't move when they are in the host country. i think if turkey deserves more support. if the turkish people can really embrace the refugees the way we are hearing about it they deserve to be saluted.