people to jazz and hooley and castro speak at a conference hosted by the pro-israel organization j street. they sit down with the cohosts of the pod save the world podcast to discuss israel relations. ♪ >> hello, again. how is everybody doing? day three, you guys are warriors. without further ado, let's welcome our first candidate of the day to the stage. mayor pete buttigieg. [applause] ♪

>> welcome. >> thank you. >> you gave a major foreign policy address back in june. you deserve credit for being the first to lay out a foreign policy vision. you said, if prime minister netanyahu makes good on his --mise, can you unpack that a little bit? how would you ensure u.s. taxpayer dollars would not be used? >> the basis of our relationship with israel is not just a strategic alliance. it is an alliance that is based on shared values. we need to make sure our

cooperation, our security and diplomatic and strategic cooperation with israel happens in a framework that is compatible with those values. ouras to be compatible with u.s. security and policy objectives. in the long run, what makes the most sense for american and israeli and palestinian interest is peace and a two state solution. annexation isth it is incompatible with the two state solution and i believe ultimately, moving in that direction represents moving away from peace. we have a responsibility as the key ally to israel to make sure we guide things in the right direction. on security support is based strategic objectives and based on values and we need to make

intothat it does not turn a go-ahead where we would be endorsing anything like annexation. we have a responsibility and we have mechanisms to do this to ensure that u.s. taxpayer support to israel does not get turned into u.s. taxpayer support for move like annexation. [applause] of annexation is settlement construction. we have seen a spike in settlement construction. pro-settlement construction. consider also conditioning u.s. aid to israel as leverage to stop or slow future settlement construction? >> the u.s. law framework for security cooperation and aid to any country has very specific

expectations about how that will be used. this is built into the arms export control act. we need to make sure that any such cooperation in funding is going to things that are compatible with u.s. objectives, the u.s. law and if we continue to see steps that are potentially destructive, it is a reminder that we need to have visibility to know whether u.s. funds are being used in a way that is not compatible with u.s. policy. u.s. policy should not be promoting this kind of settlement construction because it is incompatible or detrimental to what we want to see happen. the bigger picture is about what this relationship means, what this friendship is like. in the same way that in the patrioticre deeply and committed to our country

thriving. without meaning that you have to support the current u.s. president and his agenda. [applause] by the same token, you can be committed to the u.s.-israel alliance without that in tailing that you are supportive of any individual policy choice by a right-wing government over there. that does not have to entail that. if you look at the bigger picture, the vacuum of u.s. leadership right now, it is emboldened adversaries. we look at the way russia throws its weight around and the way china is behaving and it is a concern in terms of what happens with our adversaries. the heart of the matter in terms of the u.s. abandoning her leadership role is what is going on with our most important allies, with our neighbors and with our allies in europe and

israel. when i think about what could be -- what could continue in terms of the settlements, i think about it the way i think of a friendship where your friend is acting in a way that you think might hurt your relationship, might hurt them and might even hurt you. what you do in that situation is you put your arm around your friend and you try to guide them toward a better place. that is our responsibility with respect to these policies. [applause] >> mayor pete, israel, stop texting your ex. >> i'm not sure you can top that -- i can top that. a lot of the focus is on a relationship with israel. there is another party here, which are the palestinians. the most high-profile thing that has happened in our relationship

was the movement of the embassy to jerusalem. there has also been the downgrading of our diplomatic relations with the palestinian people. we used to have representation through our consulate in jerusalem. there have been efforts to cut authority for the palestinian authority. you have spoken about some of the problems with the palestinian leadership over the years but in addition to talking about how you would engage the government in israel, what would you do to engage the palestinians? what would you do to show the palestinians that we want a relationship with the palestinian people as well as the israeli people? how would you go about trying to strengthen them as a potential partner for peace? >> we have a strategic obligation to try to be perceived as an honest broker, which is very difficult in this environment. we have a moral obligation to

ensure we are doing what we can to support the peace and the well-being of all people in the middle east. israeli, and otherwise. we should not have any illusions about what is going on in terms of the leadership capacity and governing capacity, whether we are talking about the west bank or what is going on in gaza. situations by withdrawing engagement and talking less and reducing lines of committee case and is almost never a productive strategy. we want there to be greater capacity on the palestinian side. it is in everybody's interest for there to be greater interest -- greater capacity in the palestinian side. otherwise, you do not have partners for peace. the conditions in gaza cannot continue without eventually an explosive outcome that is in nobody's interest.

[applause] gaza has misery in many sources and there is plenty of blame to go around, we know this does not get better unless there is stronger leadership capacity on the palestinian side. if we have learned anything, the u.s. cannot assume responsibility for the governingt of ideal capacity in other countries hurt what we can do is to make sure we are a beneficial party. that includes support and aid and multilateral engagement. at a minimum, it means talking and connecting as much as possible rather than cutting off those engagements and expecting anything but further estrangement to be the result. [applause] >> i'm glad you brought up gaza.

were in thehen we obama administration, the security challenges were well known, the threat well-established, the iron dome system very important in protecting israelis from rockets fired from gaza. at the same time, i look back with regret at the intolerable humanitarian situation in gaza. the horrific conditions the people are living under. is there a way for the united humanitariane a approach to gaza? that seeks to work with the israeli government to loosen the elements of the blockade. how can we try to use leadership to make life better for the people of gaza even at the same time we are dealing with the

real threats that emanate from hamas? >> this is what i mean when i say that the world needs america right now but not just any america. it has to be one but is trusted on many sides. [applause] it, this is's face not just an israel policy question. this involves the egyptians and a lot of dynamics around the mediterranean. the short answer is yes, a humanitarian approach is the appropriate one. if we really want to gain ground on the humanitarian front in a way that is compatible with legitimate security interests of regional players, the u.s. has to be engaging with tremendous nuance and a deep reserve of good faith.

and nuance and good faith are not exactly hallmarks of the current administration. how this gets any bed with this white house at the helm. >> so we're in this bizarre place where president trump is sort ofup to victor orban, and accusing everyone in the democratic party of just by virtue of being a democrat. you said that. supporter ofs israel, criticize those people likeiticize netanyahu who have made statements,cist seemingly becoming more authoritarian himself, while not trap of trup trump as anti-semitic because of those criticisms? >> so it shouldn't be hard to be

against bad policies and to be against anti-semitism. that should be table steaks. [cheering] >> and i don't mean to be flip because i'm mindful that we just marked the anniversary of the tree of life massacre and the worst anti-semitic violence in modern american history that is that this is not theoretical. anti-semyoanti-semitism kills. kills, and it is killing right here in our country. cynicism oftting this white house is that you on one hand, who, literal no shit uss will not replace anti-semites as very fine people

and on the other hand believes people to think that he is a friend of the jewish people by aligning, not with israel but with a certain kind of politics within israel. that the american people and the american jewish community are a lot smarter than that. [cheers and applause] >> that's very well said. you know, one issue obviously, anticipating how these issues have kind of been oneonized in our politics, issue that, you know, in particular we experienced -- my was on iran.n the obama administration was on iran. and if you're the next president, you will inherit a very complicated situation where essentially trump is pulled out jcpoa. iran has resumed some of its

activity. how would you approach the iran in particular? would you seek to return to the existing nuclear agreement that walked out of as a platform to pursue an iran or would you seek to take a new and different approach? realistically the facts on the ground have shifted and they'll continue to shift by the the new president takes office in 2021, by the time i 2021.ffice in [cheering] to look think we've got at the iran nuclear deal as a floor. the problem, i think, in the way it was talked about politically was, you saw all these maligned activities by the iranians in terms of the hezbollah and destabilizingly activities. of course, that's not what the

deal was for. nuclear was to restrict activity and it worked. it worked. [cheers and applause] >> so by the same token, the take, priority, i would would be to ensure that we contain and restrict the nuclear activity. all ofse, we care about the other problems emanating from the iranian regime. don't think that we need to solve everything in order to solve anything. pick oneu have to thing to prioritize, i believe the obama administration got right, that the one thing top prioritize is to make sure they're not nuclear. [applause] one of the difficult challenges, of course, that the will inherit is the blow to u.s. credibility from withdrawing not just from the iran nuclear from the whole slew of agreements, not just

obama agreements, well beyond that. to mention just the shifting international politics, the kind of authoritarian trend that's been building. as you have to reengage on january 21, 2021, and address an like iran specifically where you need to build international consensus, need to work with european allies, russia and china, how do you americanhe currency of leadership? what would be the approach for an incoming buttigieg administration to rebuild our credibility with allies and partners that we need on certain issues in order to get something done like restoring the iran nuclear agreement and building on it? >> so job number one in terms of the nextfairs for president is going to have to be restoring u.s. credibility. and it would be hard to overstate how costly the loss of credibility has been. deployed, i could

fullyin ways i can't even explain, the power of the flag on my shoulder, and sense that as my body armor and any military equipment. safeof what was keeping me was that that flag stood for a country known to keep its word. and our allies knew it and our enemies knew it and that mattered. losing that is unbelievably costly, anyplace in the world, counting on alliances in order to protect american troops and american interests. has really stuck with me, even before this of our kurdishal allies, was the president's appearance at the general assembly. his speech by trumpian was actually not memorable. [laughter] >> which is good. [laughter] >> grading on a curve here. [laughter]

>> but what was memorable and what hurt was seeing the faces of the world leaders watching president speak. not as a democratic but as an -- not as a democrat but as an hurt to see the leaders of the world who usually look at the american president for leadership, looking at our mixtures leader with a of, i think, pity and contempt. anever again want to see american leader looked on that way by the leaders of the world. [cheers and applause] >> so how do we do something about it? saying do nojust harm, obviously there are a whole bunch of things that we reverse or not do. i think we need to look for values,ere american american interests, and the aspirations of people around the all linked, because

this has always been america's strategic edge, the fact that people, either publicly or privately, anywhere around the world, sympathize with what we for. and i'm thinking about the desire for democracy, the desire for religious freedom, providing foreast moral support for, example, the people of hong kong, who have not heard a peep this white house of support. [cheers and applause] >> i'm thinking about some of our biggest problems. as a global community. thatme there's a problem the u.s. can't solve alone and that the world can't solve us, that's an opportunity for leadership, which also means it's an opportunity to earn credibility. climate.ing about imagine if global climate diplomacy were a thing. [applause] >> if global climate diplomacy something that mattered deeply in geopolitics, it would sign of hope for this global security crisis, but

how we mightle of be back on the front foot with china. i thinkhe biggest thing needed to really answer the core of your question, to build up the credibility, is for world to see the u.s. meaningfully advancing things world needs. and putting our resources and kit ofle tool diplomatic, economic and thosety resources behind values and behind getting something done. then we can recover some of the blown up byas been this administration. [applause] >> so yesterday the president fanfare,, with some the death of the head of isis, mr. al-baghdadi. we all can celebrate his demise and celebrate the operatorsr special and our intelligence agencies and partners around the world to that operation. but i also say this with

as someonee humility who worked in the obama administration, for a president 100,000 troops to afghanistan for a period of time and we're still there, 19 years it doesn't seem like the situation has measurably improved. isis in now pockets of inhanistan and ben and i sat countless terrorist meetings where we heard about the latest al-qaeda three. the cancer metastasized and these organizations exist. what are we missing as a u.s. government, as a operation, that has led us to a point where extremistsore sunni living today than there were on 9/11? wasou know, i remember -- i in afghanistan in summer of 2014 emergence of this isis was happening. hall,tting in the chow watching it on television, with

multipleo had served tours in iraq and now were in afghanistan and are watching the and theding metastasizing of terrorism there, even while we were trying to make sure that something good would happen in afghanistan, i think does, first of all, teach humility, as you say. but the other thing we should a perverse wayn that this whole recent experience in syria reflects, is forward isen the way through the right targeted light presence of special operations, plus intelligence, ground.ies on the so to me, the most extraordinary thing that we learn in this episode is what that tiny specialof u.s. operators was preventing. exactly the kind of thing that from having to get into a large ground war and

mobilization. of special operations troops, with the right kind of andlligence kansa capacity relationships on the ground, xaferexactly the kind of thing t the way forward in afghanistan, instead of having thousands and thousands of holdings what we had, the line in that part of syria. and when you remove it, we see that has beenbox opened. the answer is not to disappear from the rest of the world. make sure thato our presence in the rest of the the minimum level consistent with u.s. security, context ofin the partnerships, and that it is checked against american values too. [applause] >> one last question that i think is very relevant here, at street. extraordinary students from across the country.

[cheering] >> you know, you talked about a generational change. in our politics. that j street particularly u.s.-israel relationship being pro israel and peace, i think for younger people there's a cynicism, right? because they've heard the same u.s.-israelut the relationship and now they see trump and netanyahu using those cynically.ry you know, if you don't support everything netanyahu does, as you're anti-semitic or u.s. politicians say, well, we're for a palestine state and not -- palestinian state and not really doing anything to advance that. what do you do to combat, as a part of generational change, that could erode really the foundation of relations? younger people in this country, their whole experience of this netanyahu. trump and how do you point it to something

more hopeful, optimistic, in a situation that can seem very futile at certain points? >> so my hope comes very much the capacity of young people to change categories and change rules. i'm thinking about how, for example, a new bipartisan push has emerged around the subject criminal justice reform, just to take one example of how a new across its political spectrum sees different besibilities of what used to in certain party silos. i think about this here, because real ande very disturbing risk of the relationship with israel becoming a partisan issue. that is bad news for everybody. we cannot allow this to be a partisan issue. an young people have exquisite relationship with truth. a way of detecting all of

that layers of nonsense have been piled on by the current president, and in this context. and can cut through to see the humanity that is at stake here defy anyone telling them have to adopt this political view according to your identity. and instead can really search into what the values that come with these identities that we carry actually mean, whether ors a political identity religious identity or american identity. deal of hope great peoplereadiness of young to challenge a lot of what we have been told and to refuse to sold byhat we're being this white house. and that mobilization, i think, is what will change the answer. and no pressure, but -- [laughter] clear, to be really mathematically it is within the

of anybody in college inay that the situation israel, for israelis and will either reach ore kind of harmony catastrophe. you will live to see one of these two things happen. news is, you will also get to be in charge while those things are happening. it's a goodke sure outcome. [applause] >> mayor pete, thank you so much! mayor pete! up!se give it [cheers and applause] [whistling] ♪[music] ♪[music]

>> all right. i think... >> all right. you guys ready to go? all right. we are extremely excited for our the day.terview of secretary julian castro. [cheers and applause] ♪[music] >> i thought i'd mix it up this

morning, a little spanish music. it! love honestly. >> to get folks going. >> i know. we promise we'll try to be fun. you so much for being here. >> yes. a prettyk j street is cool story about what kind of organization progressives can build in a short period of time. so it's awesome that you showed up. [cheers and applause] you --first question for pardon me. first question for you, mayor about histalked a bit belief that we need to condition aid to israel in the event of some sort of annexization of the promised by benjamin netanyahu. is that something you would also support? >> that would be my first move. all, i think that -- [cheers and applause] >> look, what i believe, what i hope is that as israel forms a we're goingnt, that to have a new opportunity to ensureth our ally, to that there is not unilateral

we pursue ahat two-state solution, which as you all know has been the approach the united states has taken for a very long time and used to have strong support, i think, on sides of the aisle. and so my hope is that we can don'tike crazy so that we get to that point. i would not take it off the table. but, you know, i want to focus on what we can do hopefully with a new government and a new 2021dent in january of that is willing to work with our allies to avoid that. [applause] want to push you on this a little bit, because i think, you know, ben and i have fairly clear about our beliefs about prime minister netanyahu, but i think there's a sense that on the peace process question, they won't be as hope.ent as people might and, you know, historically conditionedaid be in many places, including on the palestinian authority, to into incentivizing

behavior. the american taxpayer is doing, $3.8 billion a year in security assistance to israel boss, president obama, signed this 10-year mou. isn't it appropriate to sort of normalize the way that aid is treated and to use it as, you know, a carrot and stick approach towards pushing for inicies that we think are the interests of the security of israel and in the u.s.? >> well, the fact is, in so many ways, we do have a carrot and stick approach, whether we're dealing with money domestically granted or with foreign assistance. framework that already exists that the intensity of it or the it may bey of something different. i would not take that off the table. do think we need to use this opportunity that we have, hopefully with the new israeli government, and with a new administration, i believe, in 2021, to do everything that we israel to go back in the direction of pursuing a

canstate solution so we avoid having to condition our aid on that. i completely agree with you that that netanyahu has say counterproductive to the least. and has partisannized israel for in thef people here country, which was a terrible mistake that was made a few years ago. and that we need an administration over there, a ivernment over there, that think -- i hope will be more productive and engage in getting back on a track of a two-state solution, because it's very that netanyahu, you know, not only has rejected that but actively campaigned for his benefit far away from that, and i disagree with his approach. i reject it. and i hope, even though, as you point out and others have , that benny may not

be very different. i still hope there's a way that we can avoid the path that israel has been on, under netanyahu. [applause] >> another question is, you know, there's -- how do we engage the government of israel in? the new president comes another way of looking at this also is how do we engage know,inians, who, you have seen the united states move to jerusalem, have seen their own diplomatic relationship with the u.s. essentially downgraded as the consulate that used to be the representation towards them has obviously been assumed by the embassy, seeing efforts by the trump administration to cut to them, ande palestinian to citizens of israel, there's been a prime minister of israel who fully embraced by the president who has used very derogatory language about the

palestinians in rainfall. what would you -- israel. what would you do coming to office to try to set a new tone the palestinian people as well as the israeli people? >> number one, the trump administration has made a putting its finger on the scale, so much in line with netanyahu and his administration. and i am glad to see, in this that thec primary, voices of folks who are concerned about the rights of has emerged, has risen, stronger than before. [applause] thing.ink that's a good and i hope that that also our approach in the future. under me it would. so here are a couple things i you mentioned one of them, which is that we need consulatelish a u.s. in east jerusalem and make sure that under a two-state approach, the embassy under a palestinian state -- [cheering] >> in addition to that, we need

have the that they opportunity to restart their mission here in the united states. [applause] >> i would also restore the u.n. funding, u.n. rwa funding that was stripped by the trump administration, which was a mistake, to provide aid that is desperately needed. those are the kinds of things that i believe the next president could do immediately some trust, rebuild trust and confidence, among palestinians in addition to taking a different tone. >> well, you know, i think those all be important steps. and then obviously the question thehow do you approach israeli palestinian peace issue comes to the forefront. assume you wouldn't send jared kushner to a meeting in the gulf israeli or palestinian representatives but obviously one of the things that wrestled with in the obama

whichstration, you know, you obviously were a part of, is how to -- how specific to be positions in terms of what should be the outcome of negotiations? the long standing position of u.s. government, you know, had usually been these final of refugees, security, territory in jerusalem are kind of left to the parties to negotiate. but by the end of our know --ration, we, you out of a mixture of frustration and diplomatic work, were very specific about at least what u.s. ideas would be for those. think that it would be constructive, given how much begun tot activity has reach into territory that most observers would think would be part of a in particular,te do you think that the u.s. should be specific in laying out, here's what we think the outcome of this should be, here's what the two states in

our view should look like, at least terms for negotiation? >> well, i remember and i'm sure you remember even better than i do when president obama -- what it, about 10 years ago, early in his administration, said what others had been we wanted to is base this off the 1967 borders with land swaths. that theber the fury into --ng went >> netanyahu conveniently left off the land swaps. >> i think that has been the blueprint. add agree that we can something of value to the negotiation. course the negotiation is between those two parties ultimately. that. there's a limit to but i do think, giving some direction, and i understand, of course, the frution and the sense of -- frustration and sense of urgency of the need for specificity. can build on that, again, hopefully with an administration that is more receptive to that.

>> official washington -- ben often calls them the blob. to trademarkserves that name. has slowly come to the realization that the saudi government and mohammad bin salman in particular aren't the best people. think the horrific murder of jamal khashoggi shocked the world.us of the it's truly disappointing to see politicalnesses, leaders, a year later, attending, you know, investment arabia.ces in saudi i think it sends a message that, you know, finances are more values.t than but, you know, again -- [applause] considerable with humility, given that president obama went to saudi arabia multiple times. supported the civil war in yemen, which was wrong and has proven to be a humanitarian disaster. question for you is, as president, how would you rethink the u.s.-saudi

relationship? are they still an ally, given laste've learned in the couple of years? >> i agree with those who say i think we need to reassess that relationship. i believe we do needs to reassess that relationship. [applause] that as we move forward in this 21st century, you know, that ourou suggest, values should be bigger drivers relationships. obviously sometimes there are very urgent imperatives, interests, sometimes economic interests, but i believe that somewhere along the way, we've come to rely too much on those interests or prioritize them instead of prioritizing the values that we have. and what are those values? theink those values are ones that have helped make this nation the nation that it is, a freedom of individual liberty, of democracy. and whether it's what we've seen kong and that we should be standing up for them in hong in china thatople we should be speaking up for --

applause]d >> we should be leading the values more. and the next president has the do that, when it comes to saudi arabia i would do that. mentioning ther leaguers. it's really important that people constantly bring that up. so sort of staying in saudi arabia, i mean, a month ago, two ago, i think a lot of us were worried that we were on the a saudi-iran war or u.s. military action in seen as to what was either, you know, iranian proxy the iranian military striking saudi facilities. how would you approach any effort to broker, you know, some sort of détente between the iranians? would that involve getting back into the iran nuclear deal? what are the pieces of that puzzle in

i wishimmediate that this administration would work on the deer that you guys negotiated during the obama administration. the first half might be pressuring imad to make sure that they are compliant, but also getting the last into it. and then, looking down the road at how that can be be negotiated . one of the points i have been making on the campaign trail is tos is much more important to manage the nuclear weapons capacity. this speaks to the element of strut -- of trust in the world. why would you ever sign an agreement with the u.s. right nuclearurtail your weapons program when trump came in and tore up an agreement that

everyone acknowledged, iran was following, to do the very thing that we are asking north korea to do. we have lost trust. people have lost respect for the u.s. under this administration and i see it as not only helpful , the dynamics of the region and the security of israel, but also where we go on north korea and a number of other issues around the world. >> you say that very well. the politics that we can envision on this set of issues, particularly on israel. one of the things that has been suppressing about how this administration has approached effort tois cynical

demonize as anti-semitic anybody with his and board benjamin netanyahu's view. using rhetoric that seems to be attractive to anti-semites in things., among other if you are the nominee, how would you contend with the inevitable attacks that would come, any criticism of israel proves that you are an anti-semi. this kind of toxicity that we bad fort is very historical bipartisan support. how would you navigate that

terrain as a nominee and make clear that there is a way to support israel while being .ritical of their policies it does not necessarily mean that you have to fall into the trap of what they are going to be throwing at you. >> that is why i am here. that is why there are so many people in the audience that are .art of this there is a different way that we can do things and we recognize that israel is an ally and a friend. at the same time, the road that benjamin netanyahu is taking israel on is not in the best interest of israelis and the road that president trump is taking us on is not in the best interest of the u.s. or weretinians, whose rights also concerned.

everybody whoend has been building up this organization because it is a strong part of that voice and now we are just talking about the politics of this to help navigate that because we do need those voices. for the longest time, there was one voice. people know what i am talking about. we need more than that. >> to follow up on that, i think the voice you are referring to. think that is part of a general sense. if you are out on the campaign trail and meeting with young students, college age

and all they have got from this relationship is a lot of this cynical back-and-forth and demonization, that if you do not support this 100%, you are going called anti-semitic. what would you tell them to get back to values? why should they care about the u.s. israel relationship? ways, trump is wiping so many slates clean, what is rebuilds upon which we that sense of why young people ?eed to care about this >> yesterday was the anniversary

life massacre in pittsburgh. it was also a powerful reminder thehy israel exists in first place, as a place of safety, ability of expression of the jewish people and of how consistent those values are with the values that we hold dear as americans, and we also want to be able to see palestinians enjoy. that in many ways, if we can get this right, it is of our highest calling to help to bring that about because it is consistent with who we are and who we want to be. you mentioned young people. they are hearing it both ways from the trump administration

that if you are not all the way over here, you are anti-semitic and so forth. fromare also hearing others and there is a demonization of israel and other .rders ido not agree with them, but also do not support cracking down on political speech. people should be able to express themselves. [applause] >> what i have seen in our young is that more than anything else, people want to know what you really believe and to connect with young people, it is to connect them with what we we support a two

state solution. we can do that and part of that is the work that other are doing as they get out there. [applause] is cliche to say that israel is in a tough neighborhood, but i think that fact is underscored by the fact that the head of killed yesterday or two days ago. the special forces that were part of that all deserve credit for taking him off the battlefield, but that does not mean that the syria policy is completely incoherent. we are ditching the and we are now securing oil fields. it is hard to keep track of. security,hink about

syria is a key piece of that puzzle. make of trump's syria policy today, knowing that would be a year from now. how would you think about the presence of u.s. troops in the region to try to deal with isis and keep it stable? >> it does not need to be said anymore that the president has been so erratic. it has been a disaster. abandoning our allies, causing others to doubt our loyalty, empowering the russians. .hat part has been a disaster i agree with those who say that we should be drawn down from the

middle east, but i also believe that you have to be as thoughtful coming out as you are coming in. what lease all was a lack of thoughtfulness and seriousness going in. what we see in syria was a lack of thoughtfulness coming out. whether they are, afghanistan or other places, i believe there is a small level of forces in a supported capacity, whether special operation or diplomatic forces, to be able to support our efforts and to maintain stability. that might be where we end up getting to in syria. the president on monday will say one thing and then another. at i hope that we will get to point where we do not have

thousands of troops there, but we are able to contribute to maintaining a stability [applause] . -- a stability. [applause] to -- he talked havee about it and we talked about a lot of issues in a tough neighborhood, but stepping back, what would you do coming into office to try to restore and reset american credibility in the world that has suffered so much because of .ulling out national agreement how would you go about the project from day one of saying, here is how we are presenting america to the world? >> that is the biggest challenge for us because i think that what the leaders around the world are

feeling in their head or getting in their head is that they see the limits of our government. the limit to how constant or stable our approach can be. you have so much polarization in congress. there are some things that the next president can do. to make very clear during the campaign where you stand on asse issues, to lay that out early as possible, to indicate, through your appointments, to ambassadorships and appointments within the administration, people who had a track record of and being clear. what this president has done to and sote department forth. in your words and your actions, you can send very strong signals

about the direction you are going to take. there are longer-term things that we need to do for our benefit. for instance, supporting the hr one that would take all states to nonpartisan or neutral redistricting. if you want to reduce the polarization, you need to give the congressional people incentive to reach across the aisle. >> in my mind, i am connecting the dots of how to change our system here, not only to what they are going to do to improve governance at home, but how they will impact our ability to operate overseas. that will take a wild, but in the long run, i believe that will pay off. just stop being so erratic.

people will not trust right away that the president will be more stable, but they will see that. to live up to that. even though we disagreed with george w. bush and some of the republican president, they were a lot more consistent than this guy has been. we need to get back to a consistency. >> said he would make rudy giuliani your secretary of state? thank you so much for all the work you have done. >> thank you very much. ♪