tv Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice Women Scholars on National... CSPAN March 13, 2021 3:27pm-4:43pm EST
the founder and ceo of girls who code, on what her company is doing to close the gender gap in technology. >> a refugee, i've had a job since i was 12. in 2010 i found myself running for congress. as part of that i we going to commuter science classrooms and see lines and lines of boys, clamoring to be the next steve jobs or mark zuckerberg. those jobs in computer science pay pretty well, almost a hundred $20,000. so 2 -- it may did not make sense, where the girls? where are the girls like me you could get a shot at one of these draws and marched to the middle class? that is when i decided i wanted to build a program, to teach girls to coat. >> -- to teach girls to code. >> today at 6:30 p.m. on the communicators on c-span. >> former secretary of state
condoleezza rice led a discussion with women scholars about national security and foreign policy issues. hosted by the hoover institution, this runs an hour and 15 minutes. institution, this runs an hour and 15 minutes. >> i want to welcome you to this very special webinar. we are going to celebrate international women's day, which is march 8. we are also going to celebrate national women's month. but we are going to celebrate it in a very special way, which is to engage with four scholars who are well known for their work as academics, their work as policymakers, their work as diplomats. they are all fellows of the hoover institution and to the hoover institution spent the last hundred years or so trying to bring the best research and data and ideas to policy challenges that face free peoples in free societies in an
effort to make certain the future for freedom is indeed bright. my guests, or i should say my colleagues today, are rose --. rose is with us as a hoover fellow. rose was the deputy secretary general of nato most recently, but has had a wonderful career as a diplomat, a wonderful career working for some of the hardest problems of international security and arms control. we have with us professor amy siegert. amy is a senior fellow at the hoover institution. she is a specialist in national security, technology and intelligence. we have with us, elizabeth, senior fellow for china studies at the council. liz is one of the best-known
known specialists on modern china. we have with we have with us a research fellow at the hoover institution, a specialist on the middle east and issues of islam culture and the challenges facing islam. now all of these women have , something else in common. they have either just published books, or they are about to release books. and so, both in an effort to give you a better idea who they are, but also so you can write down the names of their books to buy them, i will ask each of them to give a little how i got to where i am, as well as the books they are writing or have written. i will start with rose. but i told the women here i always start these conversations by saying, i was a failed piano
major who ended up in international politics. so with that opening, rose, over to you. rose: thank you for this panel. i am delighted to be here with you and my esteemed colleagues to celebrate international women's day. if you were a failed piano major, i am a sputnik baby. i got very interested in studying russian language at the time of sputnik in the late 1950's when i was a child living in columbus, ohio. there was the defense language act. i had an opportunity to study russian in high school and got my degree in georgetown and russian. i had the good opportunity to fall into a job at rand corporation. i met an analyst who was writing a book about the first strategic arms negotiations in the early
1970's. so, i was his research assistant after that, i was hooked. for that book. after that, i was hooked. tom was a great mentor and helped me push forward in my career with graduate school and working in think tanks and working with president clinton and president obama. i never expected when writing a book i would end up being the chief negotiator of strategic arms treaty -- the new start treaty. i was asked to do that by president obama and secretary clinton in 2009. it was a wonderful ride. my book, "negotiating the new start treaty" talks about two important negotiation. one is with the russians. that was a moment, the reset. remember the reset? it feels like a century ago.
president obama, he did a lot to negotiate the new start treaty. my team worked on the technical side. we work on the second important negotiation, with the u.s. senate, to get consent and ratification. ask me which was more important. people often i have to tell you they are equally important because treaties are the highest law of our land. and if we can't get treaties across the finish line in the senate, then we are doing ourselves out of a very important legal tool. so my book tells that story. i am looking forward to hearing what people think of that. look for it in the spring. thanks a lot, back over to you. director rice: we have something else in common, including in addition to russian language, i also was a defense languages act baby. to learn russian in those days
was actually the patriotic thing to do. i think a number of us were attracted to the fields because of the post-sputnik push to have people learn those languages. i think if we were to fast-forward to today, people might say the patriotic thing to do would be to learn chinese. maybe we can turn to liz for a little bit on her background and a little bit about your book. liz: it is great to be here. i want to thank you and all the women at hoover who make this such a great institution. i am afraid i will disappoint you. i too started off as a soviet baby, studying russian in college. that was my passion. i lived in leningrad before it reverted to st. petersburg in the early to mid 1980's. i came to stanford and the
studied with you and all the greats in eastern europe before working at the cia as a gorbachev analyst, which was a fantastic opportunity and experience, right at the start of his 10 year as general secretary. when i went to get my phd, i started to study china. my advisor suggested comparative communism. even though i would have stuck with soviet union. which by the time i finished in 1994, had transitioned to the ussr. i took a china job at the university of washington in seattle. that was the inflection point. that is what started me on the china track, as opposed to the russia truck. the second big inflection point was moving from academia to the think tank world.
that happened because i got married. my husband was in new york city and i needed to move, so i got a job at the council on foreign relations. that is where i spent the following 26 years of my career before i was so fortunate to join everyone here at hoover. that is my trajectory. in terms of my book, "the world according to china," a companion book to the book i published in 2018, "the third revolution." that focused on xi jinping's transformation of china's domestic policy with a little it of chinese foreign policy. but this book "the world , according to china" is about xi's ambitions on the global stage. it is designed to engage the debate. it is quite polarized around what the rise of china
what the rise of china signifies. it looks at what are xi jinping's ambitions? it is less about what he says this point than what the actions and patterns of behavior are. i read all 2000 pages of xi jinping's speeches that he has published. but i think he has been in power for 8.5 years now. if you look through xi jinping's eyes at the will today, china is -- at the world today, he sees it in four concentric circles china is reunified, china is the , dominant power in east asia, sending the u.s. back across the pacific, packing its bags. it will be a regional atlantic power again, china is on the global stage where the political economics are embedded.
through things like china's technological dominance. finally, china's role in global governance and institutions like the united nations where xi is fond of saying this. it is all about how xi jinping is trying to reorder the world order. i talk about how he is doing it and what the united states should do to respond. director rice: amy, when we first met, you were also going to be a china specialist. so we seem to have a theme. i don't think you are ever going to be a soviet specialist. i think you're probably too young to have cared. amy: that is kind of you to say but not true, i am not too young. i was originally a china person. i drove in the hotbed of the study of china, rural kentucky,
where i watched deng xiaoping visit the united states on tv. and captivated the country. my mom is an antique dealer, she could find something for everyone. so found a taiwanese immigrant she who started to teach me chinese afterschool. i then came to stanford and walked into a class that was taught by two incredible and difficult and demanding professors and became fascinated by relations. i moved from china and thinking about organizations and national security. like any good political scientist, i could not just do any case on joint security, i needed my third case. so i found it, it was called the
national singtel and -- national -- central intelligence agency. now, this book is a live algorithm, the history and future of american intelligence. it is really a different kind of book for me it looks at the , history of our 18 intelligence agencies, the cia and others. how they operate today and how technologies are challenging everything they do. for tomorrow. so, it is a bit about the past and the future. and i really started this book with two questions. one was what don't people know about our intelligence community that they should? and by people i mean everyone. members of congress, there are more powder milk experts in congress than people who have worked in intelligence agencies
before. and to the general public. i did some polling that found some pretty shocking things. most americans learned about intelligence through spy themed entertainment. that is sort of the first question that motivated me, we need to better understand how the intelligence community works to have more effective agencies and the second question was what is different about this era with emerging technologies like quantum computing, artificial intelligence, the proliferation of commercial satellite technology and how can we think about this technological involvement and how it is dramatically affecting these rates for decision advantages. those were the motivating questions. the hope is the book will be the basis of a new class that i will be teaching at stanford and my students will actually read it.
director rice: thank you, liz, i am sure, where were you born -- not sure, where were you born? rose is from ohio, amy is from kentucky. liz: i was born in buffalo and grew up in santa fe. director rice: buffalo and san jose. you are not foreign in buffalo and santa fe. we also have the immigrant perspective. you had a very interesting pathway to where you are. if i can say that russian was once the language of the future and may chinese still is, arabic is perpetually a language for national security. talk to us about your background and the work you have done in the book.
>> i was not born in any part of the united states but i can't tell you how excited and grateful i am to be in the room with you. looking at my life, i wish i was born in the united states. the present-day people actually i am quite glad that i was not , born in the united states because i can come in here with the perspective from outside but back in the day, i was living in somalia, the road was divided into the soviet sphere of influence and the american sphere of influence and i was born in the soviet one. and i continue comfortably people my age all wanted to come , this way.
they all wanted to belong to the american sphere of influence. i'm not going to void with that that is not what my book is , about. but i wanted to go to the comment about when you said i am a failed pianist and i want to say i am a failed athlete. i thought that the 400 meters sprint was going to be my way out of the soviet union/muslim sphere of influence. because i could get scholarships and i could do like many of my countrymen but there were not many of them. so that aside, i came to the netherlands in 1992, and, with
the collapse of that power, we get a lot of failed and failing states that continue to fail to this day and it is very difficult in the post-1989 world to find any of those powers taking responsibility for what is going on where they were having the proxy wars. in continents like africa and east south asia. i know that the united states has done quite a lot. especially in the bush administration. this administration has been forced by circumstances to take this stuff on. things should have been done if really, things should have been done better, resentment, on it
goes. in my book, i focus on those things that have their roots in the collapse of that world. the collapse of the soviet union brought down the two pillar system. countries and societies that think they belong to one or the other never get to the point of think they belong to one or the other never get to the point of developing, and africa and parts of south asia states collapse, , what happened to the people? they move, they migrate. most of them go to a place that they think that the way to
improve their lives are to go to the mother country. many of these mother countries colonize in europe. and so we have mass migration, immigration and that is into europe. and from a national security perspective, some of these european countries are really facing issues that they have had at least three decades to think about and they haven't done any thinking about. and there will be wave after wave of managed migration. so, my book is about the tiny aspects of what the unintended consequence of migrations can do. sexual violence is getting out
of control in cities like of control in cities like europe. what doesn't surprise me isn't the fact that that is happening, what surprises me is that these government leaders on the local , provincial and national level, all of these levels of government, what is it that they are doing about the unintended consequences of immigration or migration? the answer to the question is bleak. they are throwing the ball back and forth. there is not much happening, there is complete gridlock there. and this gives an opportunity to the far right the populist wings in that continent. and also the radical islamists to be the ones to divide the population into those who are
either full of that extreme or that extreme. in the center is left with no home. if in the u.s., we think, that wait a second, hold it right it is all lost. there, look at what is going on in europe. director rice: you spent some time in european politics so this is something you understand from that perspective so now i will go around with one more set of questions. by the way, audience questions, please put them into the q&a and i will monitor those and ask those of our panelists. but, i asked, so you believe the , unintended consequence of this migration is empowering radical islamists and empowering the far-right and it is really having an effect on women's rights and women's lives.
for instance, sexual violence. when you were in european government, european politics, was this even an issue? did people try to bring this issue up? obviously, europe waited too late. talk about how it looked. a couple of decades ago. ayaan: when i was in politics, they did bring it up but it was the minority of people and they were all reassured. i was saying wait a second, the civil wars that we are seeing, that are ongoing, in terms of proximity, what is going on in the former yugoslavia. and so in france, it was
, countries like algeria and then it was very countries in africa, these countries were falling apart and there was this big policeman that was coming in from the soviet union or the united states of america that was saying let's keep this together. we are getting into anarchy it was called the arab spring. in the continent of africa, one billion people strong, most people are under the age of 30. whereas, in europe, people are over the age of about 50.
we will get into the details of this but if you asked me why people are addressing these issues, yes, it is because they were a tiny minority. and they were dismissed because -- they were dismissed as alarmists people who were afraid , of how things were going to be. back in europe, we were using the word cosmopolitan instead of globalist. if you had a university degree and your occupation was any place where you did not have to work with your hands, you were a cosmopolitan, you traveled the world, you are sophisticated, you knew what was going on. but a majority of the country was still working with their hands. and make or may not have had
within their family, so those people are dismissed. these people are not open to the world, i think they underestimated the consequent as of that. -- the consequences of that. 15 years ago, maybe 30 years ago, something could've been done. you have had programs stimulating into european society. it could have been a win-win for both sides. but ultimately, that was squandered, and now here we are. director rice: i will ask you later about somalia but let me go to liz, there is a question in the q&a that i was going to use. women in china, ayaan has been
talking about the certain effects of certain policies in europe, the immigration, china has this reputation of having equality for women. and so if i could ask you to , talk about that and as a woman dealing with the chinese, how do you find it? liz: it is true. mao famously said that women hold up half the sky but if you look at china's political system today, they may hold up half the sky but they have far fewer hands holding up half the sky. because, women are sorely underrepresented in china. at the very top level the top 25 , people, there is one woman among them. that is down from 2 in 2012. if you look at the next level down, the sort of top 200, it is about 4% women and even in the entire communist party, 90 odd million members of the chinese communist party in china there , are less than a third, about
26% of the members of the chinese communist party are women. very poor representation. there is a big lack of gender equality. they fair a little bit better if you look at the number of billionaires, there are a good number of female chinese billionaires. over a third of the self-made billionaires in the world today are women, there are about 67 from china. so that is good. but they also face a lot of challenges. in all sectors in china. apart from their employment opportunities are constrained when they get pregnant. they are a good decade behind united states in terms of how they look at women, women who are pregnant can be fired, they are not supposed to be but they can be.
they get paid less. they still have a lot of companies that advertise for women who are attractive for the position. the feminist movement is alive and not well in recent times but the chinese government's crackdown on it. but there are a lot of very strong women, they are there, but there opportunities are still not great. as far as being a woman and doing the search in china, the biggest disappointment is really that when i participate in dialogues or i am engaging in my research, there are so few women, there are basically two women that the chinese trots out for any kind of discussion, foreign policy discussion. year after year it is the same to women. -- it is the same two women.
because they constrain the opportunities for engagement in foreign dialogues, i feel sad that there are so many of the younger chinese scholars, because they are out there, the younger female scholars they are , not getting the opportunities to engage with their foreign counterparts. i think it will only be to the detriment of their scholarships going forward. so not an ideal situation for women in china today. director rice: rose, you worked in a position with women in health in nato and there are , women who are very powerful in the state, angela merkel is probably the most powerful leader in europe but you have done everything from negotiate to arms control agreements, does this mean that you really care about bombs and bullets? this is actually a soviet
general who said this to me. and i said actually, yes i do. what was it like to be a woman in international security where you did know what throw weight meant. rose: i ask myself where it is worse for today's woman -- to raise women, is it in russia or china? i know that for a woman to be seen except for the minister of culture which was a former cosmonaut, otherwise, forget about it. there are a few here and there but they're not in the upper echelon of the diplomatic corps by any means there are only men in the front row at the table on the russian delegation, i began a secret campaign to get women to sit at the table and begin to deliver talking points on behalf of the russian delegation and by golly, it worked.
it took me almost a whole year of negotiations but eventually a a very capable woman lawyer was able to come and present her very good legal analysis that we needed completed for the treaty to be completed. so, i think i have been fighting , small guerrilla wars on behalf female russian professionals. at the end of the day, my efforts, were probably not much for their career. has to be ac change. they are missing out on so much talent, such enormous talent, talk about the younger researchers that i think are really good young researchers and good diplomats as well and they are just never going to rise up through the ranks. as far as my own experience, as all of the women on this panel
the women on this panel no, and many in the audience know, we have a tough life. there is no way around it, it is often unforgiving because your games that can be played by the foreign counterparts and often by your own countrymen can be really extreme so you just have to have a tough hide and fill your way through it. elsewhere, in academia in our country, i think that they can do it, they can develop tough hides, one person on this call has been able to do so much. it is survival tactics at the end of the day, but it is how you managed to get through and the last thing i would ever say about my service at nato, people about my service at nato, people do suspect that it was that overarching male orientation of military lines. there was some of
military lines. there was some of that, the inspector general who is speaking tomorrow in our european security initiative election series so if people are interested, they should check it out but he was very supportive from the outset in bringing women into junior and middle management. there is still a glass ceiling at nato that is beginning to crack. but i do think that the institution even in my time had started to change the momentum moving in the right direction and we were seeing on the military side of the institution some more women commanders, the canadians were very proud to say that they were committing several operations, including in iraq, including the battle in lafayette, both committed by women in the last couple of years. so, there are big changes happening. and i think it is going to be incumbent on nato leadership to push those big changes. director rice: amy, i will ask you to address a couple of things that came up in the q&a
as well as your own experience, intelligence is not overrepresented with women even know we just had a director of the cia that is a woman but what -- but you have also experienced this in the academy. which is worse, in intelligence or in the academy? people have also asked a couple of questions about the world of cybersecurity, where and how both affirmatively and not affirmatively, do women stand out in that very technical field? i think we can say the same about ai, as these fields become more technical and as women are not as represented in the stem areas, how do we think about this? maybe both in the academy and in the government and the perspective that you have interacted with. amy: and the answer to your
first question, being a woman in the intelligence committee -- community or starting, is a lot easier than being a woman in the academy. a lot of progress among women in the intelligence community, i am not saying there is not more room to improve but there has been a real, marked improvement. the academy is much harder for women. i had three kids before i came up for tenure. there is end inescapable challenge for the academy for women, which is that the biological clock coincides with the career clock. there is nothing you can do about either one, they are taking -- ticking at the same time. i think the university has come
along long way but basely what i had to do was to things, number lower the hygiene standards for one, my children but i think we have to think about ways to help women scholars. when i had my third kid, people thought i was crazy. -- i asked the dean for something and people that i was crazy. i said i don't want maternity leave. she said why don't you and i said one thing i know i can do with no sleep with a newborn is to show class i have taught before. the one thing i know i cannot do is write anything coherent that is good research. so i want to teach with my , newborn. by the way, i can now do round-the-clock stimulation and help for my class. and i want to delay my leave so i can take it once my kids are champion sleepers. so, the dean said yes she took a , flyer on this idea and i was able to have a grant from ms. richardson and one year of uninterrupted research when i most needed it.
and so, it was that partnership and that sort of planning that enabled me to write the book they got me tenure. so that is what we need to do, to help women that the two clocks are going to go at the same time. in terms of the second question you asked about cyber, that is a big challenge. and tasks of leaving women like they do at stanford in artificial intelligence. i think there are a lot of efforts to improve the pipeline. when i think about what we can do here at hoover and at stanford, it is to get more women into the pipeline of these critical areas sooner, introductory classes for freshmen and sophomores where women feel like they belong. the reality is is that computer science is the number one major at stanford. that means there are a lot of women majoring at stanford,
let's get them interested in international security when they are freshmen and sophomores. let's expand the pipeline. and that is how i think we improve. director rice: we have a few questions that are specific to each of you. there are a number of questions about immigration, number one is whether or not immigration is seen differently, migration in eastern europe and what was once called western europe. or as my colleague don rumsfeld said, old europe. and in the same regard, just the , question of can you tell us a little bit about how you would see immigration and national security policy given that it is a big issue of debate in the united states as well? so perhaps a little bit by those , topics.
ayaan: eastern europe versus western europe, eastern europe is poorer. that is one. if you were to actually accommodate and help immigrants the way northern european countries can do, that is what one. eastern europe has over western europe is that the eastern european countries are more attuned to their value system. for people like me 1989 was not , so long ago but not so long ago, they were under the iron curtain, the authoritarian government. they were denied their freedoms.
so when you start talking about liberties, ideologies, eastern europeans are more in touch with that than the western europeans. when you had this encounter between islam and the west, i think, in my research that , eastern europeans seem to be able to have that conversation that i find more meaningful than western europeans can do. and so, that is their edge. western europeans have the money, they have the appeal. i am just describing things to you. if i were to say the continent of europe needs immigrants and they do and those immigrants are going to come from the middle east, africa and south asia, in
terms of money, who is going to pay for that? or what is this going to look like financially and who is going to be the economic rival? the western european countries have an edge. the eastern european countries are more attuned to their values. i think they do need to work together and stop demonizing one another and figure out how to manage. what they have right now is a mismanaged migration crisis. it confronts the continent. how to improve that? you would say let's have a managed type of thing and maybe the eastern europeans would be actually the ones who would say here is what and assimilation
integration process would look , like if we do it ourselves and and then the western europeans might say we are able to split the bill. there is plenty to discuss here. if you're talking about foreign-policy and national security, that is where you would be going. now in terms of national , security, when you talk about these attacks, the most talked about are the homegrown, white supremacy, neo-nazi types of terrorism, they get it, most people speak their language and they are those organizations, they know how to do that. all of these countries speak the
languages. it is a no-brainer. when they have not understood is how to deal with when national security issues from islamic movements and organizations, sometimes from countries like iran, saudi arabia, i am the kind of person who tends to say to the saudi government that i will trust you when i see what you have actually done. i don't give them a blank check beforehand. what some of these countries are saying to you in the room when you're having a conversation on diplomacy and economy and so on and what they are doing behind the scenes it seems to me that , many european countries fail at that.
in one of those failures, to give you an example, is the establishment of the entire network of islamic's. teaching large communities of muslims who are settling into france, germany, scandinavian countries, european countries, that when the french president says we need to stop the islamist separatism, he does have a point. what the failure is about is the national security issue, why did they let that happen for decades and decades. the average french person is asking what makes you different from the previous president? you have to make things real.
i want to say, i have looked at that film. -- i look at that bill. that has gone through the table and is now going to the senate. they had tried to find a balance between standing up for their values, what is it to be french, and not alienate or discriminate against people who are different or more immigrants. it is very hard tightrope to walk. but macron is trying to do that. and as a first installment, i would say i approve of it. , do i sound like a politician?
i apologize. [laughter] director rice: there are a few more foreign policy questions. if you can make one key policy change in u.s. foreign policy at this point with this new administration, what would be a good lever for an advance in foreign policy? >> to my mind, others may want to comment on their own countries but i think we need to be smarter about our sanctions policy. here is an example. andrea kendall mentioned it in another session i was in. she was talking about the fact that russians are starting to see the chinese investing
heavily in the arctic, they have no one else at the moment who is after the arctic. russians are not that keen about seeing the chinese investing in the arctic. we because of our sanctions policy have shut out u.s. and european countries from investing in the arctic. i don't want to blame, if i am somehow mischaracterizing what she had to say, but it is an example of what has accumulated in my mind as a necessity for smarter sanctions policy. we need to be able to consider when it is in our national security interest to say it makes sense for the united states and european countries to be working together with russia in the arctic as well as taking appropriate measures. we see the russian buildup in the arctic and nato is very minded about the necessity of building in the art too but i think we need to be able to say does it make sense for us to be working together with russia in the arctic as we already do with the arctic council?
but that is quite limited activities. compared to a commercial cooperation going on. that is an issue i am very interested in. i would like to see us be smarter about sanctions policy i do not want to give anybody guy -- to give anybody the idea that i think we should be forgiving sanctions on russia right left. because i do think that we need to continue to be tough on sanctions with regards to crimea and all other russian misbehavior including the human rights violations like alexei navalny. and also the issues with cyberattack. but let's try to be smarter about it. and that takes a balancing act. that would be a top priority for me if i were inside the kind of big russia desk in a corrupt
, administration. -- in the current administration. director rice: the issues with china are also the sanctions with china, some people asked about north korea and climate change and they said that is a place where we have to cooperate with china, but this broad question about china, can you comment? >> china is making a huge play in the arctic. norway and finland has been pushing back and they have not been very welcoming to chinese investment, they have become quite concerned about the tie-in of national security and china. but china now calls itself -- it is on its way to becoming a great polar power. in any case, i think it is right to be concerned and think about ways we can partner with russia
on this. i think more broadly, when we are speaking about u.s. policy toward china, to me, the biggest changes that need to take place are some that already are with the biden administration, for example, getting ourselves back into international organizations. china is basically taking advantage of our nafta agreements. and the absence in international organizations over the past four years. china has attempted to step in to our place but the biden administration is getting back in. i think that is important. working with our allies. but i think the most important thing we can do is for congress to get its act together and to make our national security is priority and so that we don't have a polarized and divided congress that is just looking for political gain for each of the two parties. when the chinese look at the united states today, the narrative that has developed is that the united states is so divided and so polarized that
congress and the administration can't get their act together and this is a moment of incredible strategic opportunity for china. and so if we don't get our act , together, not only does it tarnish our reputation but it really does affect us. and that holds true both in terms of the values we represent and in terms of our ability to renew america and do the kinds of things that the biden administration wants to do to get back in terms of public and private partnerships and developing manufacturing capabilities. all of these things. we need to be on the same page. for me the most important thing , is we need to get a unified sense within our congress. director rice: just one word about north korea? liz: this is an area where the trump administration tried to break some new ground, it started off with a pretty aggressive approach. it did not materialize.
the chinese and russians have moved in a very different direction than united states. they are more interested in trading and opening, even south korea is on that page. so i think, we have to start getting back to the six party talks or five party talks. and figure out new strategy. it is incredibly difficult for us for the chinese and the russians to get back together. i think we will need a new roadmap for north korea. director rice: yes, amy? amy: if we were to have this panel years from now and the question were let's look back and say which of the united states have done to advance its values and its security and
advance its role in the world, what was the missed opportunity? which gets to your question about what is the most important foreign policy biden administration could have? we need a technology innovation policy, a strategy across the u.s. government and the private sector. that gets to liz's point about competition and cooperation with china. we are in a fundamentally different landscape during the cold war where this played out differently from the global economic system and now those two things are merged so power comes from technology and that technology is inherently dual use. it has commercial applications and military applications. so, if we don't win the race for standards we won't have the economic clout and we won't be able to set the international
bars, we won't be able to shape the international order in a way that benefits our freedom and the freedoms of the people around the world. i think if the biden administration had to do one thing strategically, it would be focusing on innovation and technology strategy. director rice: let me ask a few questions and then returned to a few questions to wrap up our panel on women and national security and international security. there is a question about women in saudi arabia and how should we think about what is happening in saudi arabia? we read women are driving and women can participate in elections. maybe, ayaan, you would like to take that one on. there is another middle east angle. is china involved in the middle east? would you take on women in saudi arabia first? ayaan: i am happy to take that question.
we a paradox. the biden administration has a paradox on its hand where the conversation is god help us all. saying they are committed to these modernizations of saudi arabia, which the administration has i would say and i hear this , from saudi women and other women, it is going to have a positive effect. saudi women have been trying for years and years. this has given them the right to drive. he is a lot of work.
he has led investors to come in. what else has he done? there is just a whole list of things that he has done and he is doing. now, if you are a feminist in saudi arabia, you might end up in jail so you just have to deploy different tactics. but, the biden administration has to condemn the human rights situation in saudi arabia. we have to reestablish our relationship with saudi arabia on the one hand. we also have to figure out how we are going to but if i look at this particular thing, i would
say that, whatever modernization plan he has, we need to get out of it. for me to say that is incredibly difficult because i know that country and i know all the harm they have done worldwide but for me to come out and say right now, i don't know, this is really what politics is all about, choosing the lesser evil, . for me, i would say let's hope this conference accomplish the modernization goals that he says he is committed to. and hold him accountable for those rather than, and we might
find ourselves back in the middle ages. you have been in that place where you have to make these terrible choices. mohammad bin salman authorized the chopping up of a journalist in a consulate in turkey. that is a fact. there are no other words for it. but to condemn it. i say let's stand up to that. right now, that evil person we are talking about is opening up a drawer for modernity to come in and i don't think the biden administration should close that door.
it is up to us as americans and other westerners to figure out how we are going to do that. director rice: you put it very well, having been secretary of state, you are rarely presented with two good choices, you are usually presented with two difficult or maybe even bad choices and you often have to reconcile the need to express our values with the fact that other things are going on like the modernization of the middle east which was also demonstrated in the abraham accords. which are going to end the state of war with israel in order to modernize the country, always contradictory in the east. maybe that is why the chinese should stay out of the middle east. with that be a good argument to them? liz: i think the chinese are trying to find the right balance and they are doing a pretty good job of it.
they are saying they are not going to get mucked up in human rights issues in the middle east. obviously they have their own enormous human rights issues that need to deal with. i think that makes them in some respects easy allies and they have certainly been investing in the middle east for a long time. saudi arabia is china's largest source of oil. i think a number of other middle eastern countries are in the top eight or 10 as well. so, it's important, they have also become much more engaged on the ground. china, the interesting thing to watch from my perspective now is less about the economic engagement than the military engagement because you know have china, russia and iran doing naval exercises together and i think increasingly, china wants to play in that space.
it is taking a norma steak's, a question about whether or not it will develop. i think it sees itself, also i should say the third largest , purveyor of arms. some people think it is going to surpass russia. what is interesting for me to think about is you might have other bit of a competition between russia and china on the security front in the middle east because there has long been a sort of divide. right? china was the economics player and russia was the security player. as china grows and grows and becomes more of a global power, does russia feel consistently squeezed out? i think that is going to be interesting to watch. director rice: i think we will try a lightning round here. amy, a question about how covid
has affected women in particular. i know your kids are home and your kids are college age. but women, in terms of all of , the other things women are expected to do, can you talk a little bit about covid and -- can you talk a little bit about covid and young women? >> there was a story in the wall street journal a day or two ago talking about actual data that men are dropping out of the workforce at faster rates because of covid and it is a huge challenge. in the academy, the data shows women are taken on more of the homeschooling, work around the house. there is a point where what is the solution to this? universities are saying let's extend the tenure clock. men have been able to publish more while the women have not. the challenges for covid are the
long-term effects for women in the worst -- in the workforce. that said, there are benefits. how do we accelerate the benefits? remote work, for example, is much more accepted than it was before covid. some industries that would not have thought about so much remote work, it is the new normal. can we capitalize on those gains in productivity to make it easier for women to stay in those workforces? i don't think that it is all bad news although there is a lot of it. what i'm hearing from intelligence agencies too, how can we capture what we learned about remote work even in a classified environment to do what we do better so people can live and be more -- without sacrificing productivity? >> great.
a question about younger self, what would you tell your younger self, particularly as a woman in a field that is not dominated by women, and how you have gotten through it when tough times have come and maybe somebody thought you walked into the wrong meeting, which has certainly happened to me? >> sure. i would say that when i was younger i did not fully appreciate the obstacles i actually confronted. sympathizing with amy's story on the tenure front. my first boss, when he was hiring me, he asked me what my husband did. i said he is a junior person in the finance industry. he said good, i don't have to pay you much. my response was, that is true. i would make him pay later, but at the moment, it seemed reasonable and logical to me that that was the case.
it became less reasonable and logical as i got older. i watched various bosses talk to my male colleagues about you had a child and i will give you a raise. nobody came to me and said you had a baby, may give you a bump in your salary. i never had that conversation. if i was looking at my younger self, and i think many younger women are better at this than maybe some of us were at the time, it is to step forward and recognize you have the right to claim your space and your voice, and ensure you are treated equally every step of the way, and never take a step back. i was on a panel just last week with two men, and it was a contentious discussion and there were contentious points.
after it was over, i got 30 emails from women and men saying thank you for not stepping back, thank you for holding your ground. even at this late stage in my career, you can still face these kind of challenging circumstances. >> one last question, there is this sense, maybe women in leadership, doesn't it make a difference to the kinds of issues that get raised? rose, maybe to you, is it true that women lead differently? you have been yourself a leader but you've also watched very powerful women. and can you speak to the question as to whether issues get raised differently when women are in the room? i remember issues around rape as a consequence of war or a weapon
of war, and the ministers recognized it as a weapon of war that people used. do women bring different issues to the table? >> they expect it, too. people know issues are going around, the subject of my book, violence have gone up -- has gone up in europe. women leaders are expected to bring it up and if they do not bring it up, it's not going to happen. you have a point in that. to what liz said about using your voice is completely important and i totally agree with you. it is just, how do you do that without coming across the victim?
i have a sense of pride, a sense of achievement, i have a sense of myself and who i am. i am not looking for pity. i want to change things. if i say i have just had a baby, i'm trying to balance things, i not looking for that condescending tap on my shoulder. i am looking for how can we resolve this as a society? it is true that women raise these questions. dropping out of the workforce, childcare, amy, i completely agree with you. i have never been more productive in my life than during covid. because i don't have to commute, i don't have to do the small
talk in the office, i sit down five minutes before, 15 minutes before, whatever the arrangement is. a lot of women are feeling -- the sort of women who do the sort of work we do -- i am not talking about the women who physically have to be in their workplace. that has been great. but i also want us to be wary of one thing, which is decision-making is gendered. i don't think that is true at all. you know this better than me, when you were secretary of state, you were presented with options and you have to make those decisions and you are making them on behalf of your country and it doesn't matter if you are female, male, young or old, gay or straight.
you have to make those decisions. i hate it when people confuse that, i hate it when people are asked, will you vote for this person just because of their gender or skin color? i hate that because i know how difficult those positions are and how superficial things like skin color and gender are. so that is my two cents about it. let me tell you, when i was researching this book, the worst mistake in the 21st century -- mistake i don't think it was intentional -- was made by a woman leader, angela merkel, in 2015, she said open the doors to immigration. i think in history it will go down as one of the worst decisions made in germany and it was made by a woman. i want to give that woman
leader, angela merkel, the exact same compassion i would give to a man leader, is it was the moment and she was asked to show compassion and she did. if she were to come out today and say that was a mistake, i think that would be a great trait of leadership. i am not sure many men would do that. but as a woman, it would be wonderful. it is complicated. >> i just want to get some last words about this issue, women in leadership. >> thank you, i'm going to pick up on something i also said, and i'm going to pick up on angela merkel. the cliché is women leaders are better leaders. she has never had any kids, but she's had this cliché surrounding her as a mother figure. i think in a certain way, we have to fight back against that
that we also have to embrace it. i think it means anybody -- we were talking earlier in the session today -- they understand you have to juggle a lot and you have to be conflicted between what is most important. there is a practicality to the image i think is really good, and it also means you are deeply attuned. again and again, research has shown us that peace process is our best when women are at the table because they are deeply attuned, down to the basic humanness of society. they can tell the men around the table what needs to be in the solution set. i think in some ways, we have to stand tall against that cliché of the mother, we also have to be the problem solvers. >> thank you very much, ladies,
for really wonderful session. i can say one thing, the hoover institution is a better place because of your presence, because of the experiences you bring, and because the hoover institution, which really does want to contribute to a world for free peoples, we know we have great voices in each of you to do that. thank you very much and thank you to our audience, i hope you enjoyed this session. happy international women's day. happy national women's month. but remember, we are here all of the time. all of the women you just have seen here, they don't just work on international women's day or during women's month. we work 365 days a year. thank you so much. >> c-span's washington journal,
every day taking your calls live on the air on the news of the day and policy issues that impact you. sunday morning, and author and chair of the calvin coolidge foundation, discusses her recent article on the future of the republican party. and the president and ceo for the institute for women's research. watch washington journal live sunday morning, and join the discussion with your phone calls, facebook comments, text messages and tweets. >> the senate banking committee heard testimony from finance experts on whether stock trading apps like robin hood should have more regulation. they also talked about the role of the government in educating the public on investing and how low income families can benefit. this runs one hour, 50 minutes.