 Aloha. Hello, everyone. My name is Pamela Spratland. I am your moderator today for the ThinkTech Hawaii program on burning issues. So I'm delighted that you are with us today and over the next 90 minutes, we're going to be talking about burning issues all over the world. I just want to say a few words about myself as the moderator. And to let you know that our special focus today will be democracy and its future its challenges. I am now a public speaker, a program convener and facilitator, but I spent 40 years in as a government's public servant, first in the state of California and then 30 years with the state of California so 40 overall. And I had the great honor and privilege of serving in many different locations around the world. And I rose to the level of ambassador first in the Kyrgyz Republic and then in Uzbekistan. One of the things I had the great pleasure of doing during my career was to go to Hawaii for a year in 2005 six. And that's when I met of J Fidel, who is part of the think tech Hawaii team. And I would like to say that I had the great honor of working in the State Department that was run by Secretary Madeleine Albright. And as you all know, she died last week she passed away at age 84. She was a remarkable person in our country. She was someone who wanted to see America remain strong in its foreign policy overseas always balancing both our interests and our values and she's also a person to whom I owe a great debt of gratitude. Because she opened doors that made my leadership career possible because of a journeyman level job I had Albright was not only a trailblazer, but she was a person who understood the price of freedom, intimately from her family's flight from war obsessed Europe, and it left an indelible mark on her. I just she was she was very concerned toward the end of her life that the issue of democracy might not have the same place that she thought it should in our wide array of US foreign policy issues so I just want to read a quote from her. She said it would be a grave error for the United States to waiver in its commitment to democracy. Historically the Republic's claim on the global imagination has been inseparable from its identity, however imperfectly embodied as a champion of human freedom, which is a universal aspiration. So, our program is going to talk about this issue and many others as we go around the world and you'll have a chance to see as viewers whether you think secretary. Albright was correct and what I'd like to do you saw scroll by at the beginning, our panelists but I want to just point out how lucky we are to have each of them. Rob Baker is a senior advisor for the Pacific Forum, a nonprofit foreign policy research Institute in Honolulu that focuses on security and other issues in the Pacific. Rupmati Kandekar is the director of the global relations forum, she is an expert she has a PhD, and she is here from to talk to us today about India. Today from the Middle East is Elsa Jarhadian, who is with us from Beirut Lebanon we're delighted to have her. She is an expert from the project expedite justice program from Central Africa. We have Gilbert, New Aguirre, who is an economist in Kampala and I had the great pleasure of speaking with Gilbert earlier this week. And to talk about Eastern Europe we have Carl Ackerman, who was on the social studies faculty at the wonderful Punahou School for many years I think almost 40 years before his retirement. And then we will have a segment from a wonderful lawyer from Colombia in Latin America, Juan Pablo Telo. So, as we get started. I would like to go first to Carl, we're going to talk first and just a few housekeeping things that I need to say. Before we get started with Carl. Each guest will have about five minutes to speak and share his or her main ideas. And then there'll be another five minutes segment in which I will ask questions and we'll have a little bit of cross talk. If you are in the audience and you want to have closed captions, please just press the CC button on your screen. And you can also provide questions, they will be monitored in the Q&A and the chat box and we will try to get to as many of those as we can. So with that, let me get started. And we're going to start with Carl. Before you get started, I just want to set something up and that is that clearly China is now a major powerhouse, a global competitor of the United States in many ways. And while the world has focused lately on China's position on Russia's brutal invasion of Ukraine. There are many events that are coming up in the life of China's politics that are going to be very important, including in November when the Communist Party meets and so I hope as you have your first five minutes you'll fill us in on what we can expect this year on a rather momentous year in China's history. First, let me be clear that what I'm going to talk about is my view of what China is doing in terms of democracy, as it presents it to the rest of the world. So with that I'll begin that just ahead of President Biden's summit for democracy in December 2021. The Chinese government published two documents that were clearly intended to challenge the premise that countries not invited we're not democratic enough to be invited. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs published a paper titled, The State of Democracy in the United States. The following day, the State Council Information Office published a white paper outlining China's distinctive conception of democracy. The documents received little attention in the Western media and if they did, they were dismissed as Chinese propaganda. But if one accepts the proposition that Western democracy is in decline or suffering from a loss of credibility, the documents offer important insights into how China is seeking to position itself as a leader of those seeking an alternative to liberal democracy and its focus on institutional development as a measure of democratic maturity. Given the limited time available, I'll comment on three areas. First, I want to summarize the critique of US democracy offered in the foreign ministry release. Second, I think it's useful to examine how the white paper on China's democracy rationalizes the Communist Party's view of democracy and represents a culmination of its efforts to provide a plausible legitimation narrative. And third, perhaps most important is the message the white paper offers to other countries seeking an alternative to what China clearly views as an imposition of a dysfunctional version of democracy. So the criticism of the US democracy centers on three broad areas, systemic dysfunction based on money politics, elite rule, political polarization and self serving politicians. And I suppose anyone who watched some of the cringe worthy performances during the recent nomination hearings for Katanji Brown Jackson can probably relate to some of the criticism offered. Second, the critique highlights and the article pursuit of freedom and political tribalism that has led to chaotic events like the January 6 attack on the Capitol building in that handling of COVID-19 pandemic recurring riots and ultimately a loss of trust in the And finally, the paper criticizes what it characterizes as failed attempts to export US democracy through military force and economic sanctions, which it argues have led to regional instability and human tragedies around the world. Of course, one can accuse China of overstating some of the problems associated with an open political system. But there is at least an element of truth in the criticisms offered in all three areas. And not surprisingly, the critique also provides a starting point for the white paper on China's democracy. I don't mind be appalled at the idea that China is a democracy the PRC Constitution includes several references to democratic institutions and article three specifically states that the state organs of the People's Republic of China, apply the principle of Democratic Centralism, which is borrowed, of course from Lenin and Russian Bolsheviks, and simply means that all democratic institutions are controlled by the Communist Party. As a legitimation narrative, the white paper provides a detailed explanation of the evolution of China's political system and carefully connects the key elements to Confucian and Taoist philosophy regarding social order and balance. And also it connects with successful policies of previous leaders, for example, Mao Zedong's mass mobilization or mass line approach is associated with successfully translating political will interaction through consultation and feedback mechanisms. Deng Xiaoping's pursuit of economic development is associated with the pursuit of common prosperity, which has lifted hundreds of millions of Chinese out of poverty. And Jiang Zemin's three representatives associated with the development of a system of promotion based on merit and the elimination of corruption. And finally, of course, Xi Jinping's consolidation of these successes into a merit based results oriented system that the white paper terms as China's whole process peoples democracy is highlighted as a culmination of the process of political democratic development. But more importantly, I think the white paper also attempts to offer advice to an external audience, those who have become disillusioned with Western democracy and seek to learn from or emulate China's experience. To begin, the paper makes clear that China is not interested in imposing its model of democracy on the rest of the world. And those seeking to emulate the model should begin by examining their own civilizational and national experience to develop a system that is compatible with that history. It states that only when a democracy is rooted in a country's unique social environment cannot be reliable effective and thrive. So the definition of democracy becomes a sovereign right and responsibility. And the premise of the proffered model is that democracy should be viewed as instrumental in translating political will into unified action rather than an objective instinct. Therefore, democracy is a process continuum, rather than a dichotomy. This of course makes the characterization of democracy versus autocracy a false distinction. And third, the primary focus in the in the model is on performance and results rather than procedure, as long as policies reflect public opinion. The leadership is responsive to people's interest and citizens can participate in political life. It can be considered a democracy regardless of the party system election election procedures or mechanisms to ensure separation of power. And finally, as it's typical of Chinese statements to an external audience, the white paper adds a sense of humility by concluding with platitudes about mutual respect, the importance of learning from an examination of other systems, and the need for continuous improvement. But make no mistake, these documents reflect an increasingly confident China prepared challenge, the Western conceptualization of democracy head on. And if you have gone beyond my delighted time, I will conclude by saying well this challenge to Western democracy is much more subtle than Russia's frontal assault in Ukraine. It may prove to be much more enduring and effective if not counter with a serious response. Thank you. Thank you very much, Carl. You know I have to say when I first I did download the, the whole process democracy paper. One question I have for you as somebody who's, who's been looking at China for a while is for whom, for whom was this paper really written do you think you can find 100 people in China who have any idea what whole process democracy is. And can you find, you know, 100 people in the United States who would have looked at this and understood the terms that that the Chinese are talking about. And over this year is going to be a year in which this whole business of whether Xi Jinping is going to be president for life is going to come up potentially in November when the Communist Party has its 20th meeting. And so I'm just wondering, can you just give us a little bit of context that seems pretty dry and esoteric stuff you may be right that China is seeing this in long terms. It has a long term focus here but what does this really mean for either the Chinese person on the street or anybody else in the world now who really is is taking democracy seriously. I think for the Chinese people it's very much a belief in the system because primarily because of the of the success they've had with economic development. I mean, in some respects, this is this is China's understanding of the world, based on a very closed information system, but when you in conjunction with this there was a global time survey that was conducted. You know, they claim it to be worldwide and very objective but in fact, you know, 70, 70 some percent of the Chinese that responded agreed basically with all the points I made about the successes of the feedback system from the mass line from the from the mass of of economic development and and the the success of Xi Jinping in consolidating these things into a merit based system that eliminates corruption. So, you know, so, so again, you know they've very clearly have have centrally managed this to make it successful in China. Outside, I mean I'll leave it to the rest of the world to decide whether they accept the narrative that's being offered. But again, in the in the document they were very careful to avoid suggesting that they want to impose Chinese system on anybody else. They're simply saying, you have to look at your own civilization your own national history and develop. Carl, we understand that thank you very much we have a question in the chat about whether you can have democracy in any form. If you have a leader for life I think it's an excellent question and I can't imagine that you could do that. Well, can you do you have some thoughts on that. Yeah, I mean this this is of course one of the areas that you can challenge China on is is whether whether Xi Jinping's decision to try to pursue a permanent position for himself is consistent with the principles that they talk about. So I know I don't think you can. But I think that what what they're arguing is that that you have to have a centralized control to ensure that that people understand what's important to them. In other words, it's a centrally guided democracy that ultimately is under the control of the party. Thank you very much, Carl no predictions about what may happen in November and how the Chinese are kind of setting up the future for Xi Jinping. Well, no I mean this is this is one of the first contradictions that you're going to see and of course another thing is is so far they've been successful with coven 19 but if you've been watching, you know the zero coven policy is really being tested today in both Shanghai and in Hong Kong. So there's a lot of challenges to this system. What I'm offering to you is that this is the this is the Chinese narrative, and they've gotten to the point where they're confident enough to put this out in the international media and and see how they get reaction so very much of it is a testing of reactions from the rest of the world. Well, thank you very much, Carl for for that I it's interesting and I think we should all be aware of what the government of China is doing and what they're calling democracy. And I'd also just like to note that we're very fortunate that one Pablo tello has joined us so we will not have to use a video or saw past presentation we will have him and his voice here which is terrific. And we are going to go to India, another country, formidable in the world, add to room money can take our from the global relations forum. And for you, I just like to know we had elections in mud and India and Mr. Modi very well. And I just want to know what do you have to tell us, and I'd also like if you can. I had the chance to look at a segment that you did for think tech Hawaii before about China and India together and the border dispute that they had that was about a year ago and I'm just wondering can you bring us up to date on how things are going, but primarily focus on Mr Modi and India's democracy over to you with money. Pamela and very privileged to be part of this panel and thank you to have me on board. Let's say now that India is a civilization which has now progressed to be a parliamentary Democratic Republic in the modern world. So we have a constitutional head of state, which is the president. We have the Prime Minister, who is elected directly by the people of the country. So you can imagine 1.4 billion people have a say in electing the press prime minister and the Prime Minister is the current Prime Minister who you want to hear about Mr Prime Minister is a common man, his family on the stall in and about so he, he has risen from the ranks to being the top post premier of the country, and India started out the experiment of democracy after independence, in which we created the constitution from multiple constitutions around the world we just made amalgamation of all and picked out the best points of it it was a comprehensive constitution, and then to develop it to suit a nation which has such diversity in people in culture, you have diverse, you have diverse attitudes you have diverse, you know, rebellions across to suppression after the colonization to bring this into order was a big task. So the first prime minister was rather selected rather than elected, but now Prime Minister Modi is serving his second term after 2014 2019 he has been elected. So, you can understand that attitudes towards caste politics and religion shape our nation's choice of the leader, but we have a single largest ruling party which is the party and headed by the remote. So, when we say it is, India is an example of democracy by the people for the people and off the people it's President Abraham Lincoln accord in the most optimum way possible in this country. So our freedom of choice of democracy is where we have coexistence of ideas, right, right of free discussion, we have a universal adult suffrage without any discrimination between a cascade religion sex, you know, you have, you have the people's If we go to see the people's the fundamental prince principle of democracy is when we evaluate security and human development. And it's to see how the substantialization of democracy has taken place by strengthening the different parts of our government, we have a executed we have a legislature we have a judiciary, and we have a free media. So this brings the voice of the people to every aspect of ruling institutions that in their terms I feel is democracy, and to have the sale of 1.4 billion is not a mean task, it's a huge. And if I may say that in the democratic index, we are ranking 53 as flawed democracy along with the United States, France, Belgium and Brazil. So I think all of us need to understand that we have too much of space to improve. And democracy always has is a evolving concept. The more the people come in and voice their opinion, give their representation, it is going to be more beneficial to the ruling institutions. You can ask for words on based on your promises, but to keep them and to keep the will of the people behind you is a tedious task. It's, you can't realize the fact that Mr. Narendra Modi came in on the promise of development, and he has fulfilled the promise that's why he has been reelected by a thumping majority. There have been 18 state elections which have happened in the state structure of India, and he has his party has won all of them, barring a couple of states he has won all of them. So there is a resonance of people support for him. It doesn't stop. And Indian democracy is largely commendable, because of the sheer diversity of religion of caste divisions that we have. Yes, not, not two people are the same. It is an India is famous for its revered for its culture, and to have this culture in cultivated in democracy and democratic institutions is really really fulfilling tasks. May I ask you for thank you for that very full throated support of democracy in India. In spite of the fact that it is, it is just remarkable that so many hundreds of millions of people go to the polls in India and participate in the election I certainly agree that's a commendable and amazing fact. But when you said that miss that the democracy has delivered India is a country that has really very serious challenges and there are people there's an opposition. And there are people who feel the democracy has not delivered for everyone in India. So what does Mr Modi have to say to those people who feel yes, you may have broad support, but there's an opposition and there are people who feel he is not delivering and what does India need to do to make sure that hit that that full throated support that you just gave to democracy actually reaches everyone in terms of the quality of their lives. As I just said that India is revered for its culture. Now, basically, the tenant of Indian culture is the Hindu way of life. It is a majority, and the majority cannot be apologetic about their way of life. May I stop you though, may I stop you though democracy is about everyone. So yes, it's true that there's a Hindu majority but India is a country of many languages and many other religious. Okay, please. I'm coming to that because see the Hindu majority and Hindu way of life is the primary way of life you can be apologetic of the Hindu way of life. But it has been extremely accommodated of all the minority and all the diverse. We do celebrate each other's religions. We do celebrate each other's festivals. We have communities which come together. We have political parties which have representation from all the communities. So, the single majority religion does not dominate. It is present, but it is kind of mostly omnipresent, but you can, you can ignore it and ask them to stay back. The minority and majority live in harmony. That is why we have been surviving 70 years of adapting modern institutions into Indian culture. If it was, if there was so much of a tension, why would Mr. Modi be reelected in two general pan India elections and 18 state elections. He has done more for the minority by removing the triple color for the Muslim minority, he has bought in equal inheritance rights for the minorities. So it's not like he is neglecting the minorities. He is keeping them in the, in the, in the cusp of development, and it is development for all that is happening. If he was just concentrated on one, he would not have one another pan in the election, because public opinion is not forgiving. They do catch you if you make, you know, you target somebody. It doesn't work out well. So, unless and until he is taking everybody and moving across by by giving everybody a share of development, India would not have progressed to such a stage. And you're giving, when there was after COVID, they have given two years of free ration ration is food supplies to all. Has there been a card which has stated that if you have this religion you will get the food. No, he has given it to all religions. He has given medical care to all religions. So, you're not barred from any place, any, any adult suffrage, just because of religion, irrespective of where you come from what you do which which religion you follow, you can be part of the Democratic Festival in India. Yeah, and I'm going to, I'm going to have to ask, we're going to have to move on to another topic. But before we do I wondered if you could just address the issue of China in India together, and also India's position on Ukraine if you might. Yes. Now, this, we are, we are antagonistic amongst each other on the show that I had with Mr J fighter, we had discussed that how we have undefined India China border, and the crux of the agreement that we have that there are no firearms there so we had Indian Chinese soldiers fighting fist to fist, like college boys. But now when India, China and Russia, India and India and China are taking a non-aligned stand against Ukraine. See, Russia has been a strategic ally for India. I cannot deny that because they have been supporting India more than what Ukraine did for us. Ukraine voted against the Indian government in the United Nations for several issues. We have applied our enemy with arms against this so it would be, it would be against our policy or it would be against our interest to let go of strategic friend who has gone through a longer time with us and take side with Ukraine so we have preferred to stay a bit of non-aligned stand, but there is a towards Russia. You cannot deny that. Yes, there is. And what's interesting about that, Marty, is that it's Ukraine that actually is trying to move in a more democratic direction. So while India is taking a kind of realist position about its issue of Ukraine, it means that it's not supporting a country that is smaller and weaker than Russia that is trying to become a democracy. I don't know if you have any comments on that before we, before we move on. Yes, I would like to make comment on this that now right now it's not about a democracy in Ukraine, it's about ego, isn't it? It's about, I personally feel Zelensky as a leader should have thought about his people first. There's always a saying that you live to fight another day. You can't, when you're fighting a losing battle, think about your people, how many people are dying. I would give up my ego and say let my people live. And I would give in to the demands and postpone joining NATO for some time rather than seeing mass graves. It is simply not leadership. I think NATO is already off the table for Ukraine and I think that they believe that it's important to fight for your sovereignty or independence and your territorial integrity, which I know is important to India as well. But thank you very much for your contributions. I really do appreciate them. And now we are going to go to the Middle East. The Middle East is an incredibly sensitive zone in the world. And the scene of sectarian conflict for decades. There are many, many questions about democracy. Many questions about just peace and conflict, particularly for countries that are in the Muslim world. And with us today we have Elsa Jarhadian, who is a consultant in Lebanon with Project Expedite Justice. And we had talked earlier about the idea of what happened after the Arab Spring and I know Lebanon has its unique challenges. And I wonder also if you could just bring us up to date on how things are going and how your project is trying to bring more justice to a country that very badly needs it. So over to you. Okay, thank you so much Pamela. I'm so happy to be here today. So I wanted to start with a small definition of democracy. So in theory the first person system of God. Yes. Well, it's a system of government where the people, sorry, sorry. Yeah, yeah, yeah, in the Western sense. So it's a system of government where the people vote for eligible members of the state through elections. So for many, this is the model that every country should follow to maintain peace, stability, equality and so on. But the past decade has demonstrated how difficult it is to establish democracy across the North African and Middle Eastern region. Only three countries are considered democratic in this area, which are Lebanon, Israel and Tunisia. Events such as the Arab Spring have underlined how hard it is for free elections to set up stable governments. In the Middle East and North Africa with mysterious tears of dictatorship that have prevented the emergence of necessary institution that can make democracy work. The Arab Spring marked a turning point in Mina history. In 2011 a revolution started in the in the North African region that expanded in the Middle East by civilians reclaiming their fundamental human rights and the end of totalitarian regimes. Unfortunately, the Arab Spring seemed to have reached its goals because it caused the end of some authoritarian governments such as in Libya, Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt. But the outcome of the end of this model brought a broader problem to the concerned countries. Embracing democracy was complex because they had never experienced such governments before. And for example, in Egypt, after the fall of Hosni Mubarak's regime, elections took place and Mohammed Morsi was elected president by the civilians. But while in power, Morsi issued a temporary constitutional declaration that granted him unlimited power and the power to legislate without the judicial oversight of his acts. And this led to new protests that caused the fall of Morsi's regime through a coup led by LCC and a retired military officer. And because of that event, the Egyptian situation went back to the starting point. Another example is Libya, which has been divided into two different blocks, witnessing a civil war for almost a decade, same for Yemen and other neighboring countries. Another aspect that prevents democracy from prevailing is the colonization. The problem is that since those countries became independent, they never really acquired autonomy, always being influenced by the colonizers that still have personal interest in the area. Not only that, after the colonization of the region, power was given to religious minorities in some countries such as in Iraq or Syria, which always caused a lot of internal instabilities. Conflicts between the different religious groups are still ongoing, each trying to reach power. In addition to the dispute different religious groups are fighting, religion per se is an important aspect to note. And that is because democracy doesn't comply with Islamic law, which most of those countries are based on. Democracy should be naturally blended within the society as imposing it will not help the situation get better. Even in Lebanon, one of the democratic countries of the region, the democratic system involves different religious groups in the political process. This type of democracy is called concordance democracy. It sometimes looks like a good compromise between the different religious groups, but it actually generates conflict as they have different views, beliefs and interests. Nevertheless, a part of the MENA region, the United Arab Emirates UAE, lives in peace despite being autocratic. In fact, in 2007, the UAE launched the so-called UAE government strategy to advance towards the highest global lifestyle standards without changing the laws and principles they believe in. Since independence, the UAE has enjoyed a significant degree of stability. So to answer your question, can MENA survive without democracy? In my opinion, each country has its specific issue and each of them must find the most suitable government system to establish stability. That doesn't mean that I support or agree with authoritarian regimes, but I believe there are alternative solutions to solve the MENA issue. If democracy is to work in MENA, it must incorporate the full spectrum of mainstream views from Islamism to secularism. Thank you. Well, thank you very much for that. Let me ask you though about Lebanon specifically because there's a hard situation there. Can you just tell us a little bit about this whole conception that you've just talked about of having a wide spectrum of opinion operate in a democratic system in a Middle Eastern country? Using your own country, Lebanon, can you just tell us what's going on because it seems strife has been the rule for a very long time in spite of the concordant system that you say is the aspiration? So can you just talk a little bit about Lebanon and its particularities? And I'm also interested in addition to religion and some of the other issues you've mentioned, are there any generational issues that our viewers should be thinking about? So the problem of Lebanon starts since the civil war that happened in the late 70s and mid 90s. The problem in Lebanon is that since it has been decolonized in 1946, the French colonizers decided to divide power between Muslims and Christians because at the time we were half Muslims and half Christians. And it seemed like a good idea to share power between those two main religions. But the problem is that as the time was moving forward, the Muslim numbers started to grow. So there were more Muslim civilians than Christians that were reclaiming more power because the president was supposed to be Christian and the Prime Minister Muslim Sunni. But those Sunnis didn't want this rule anymore and they wanted to have more power. So in the 80s, they reached their goals after the civil war with an agreement called TAF, which took some power from the president and gave those powers to the Prime Minister. And already here we felt some instabilities inside the country because each religion was trying to have more power and they were not agreeing on several agreements that they had to do. And we're feeling those tensions till now. And in 2019, a revolution started because taxes were starting to be very expensive and poverty was increasing, a lot of problems were coming up and a revolution started. But it seems like the government won over this revolution because everything got worse and nothing has changed in the government. And in May, we will have elections and we're hoping that the new generation will actually vote for the independent parties. Okay, can you talk a little bit about your project and what it's trying to accomplish in Lebanon? So with project expedite justice, we are working with global south lawyers and with a lawyer based in Colombia, another in Cambodia and me here in Lebanon. And we're trying to find, figure out some ways to fight corruption and save human rights defenders with the law and implement like the domestic laws to save human rights defenders. Okay, and are you having success? We just started working on it. So we're on the process. You're in the process. Okay. All right. Well, thank you. Thank you very much. There's certainly a lot to do in Lebanon. It's hard to see the way forward there. And one just question. What is the role of outside powers, especially the United States and Russia? Can you just talk a little bit about that before we move on to Africa? I feel like the Cold War is still ongoing in this region, because like each political parties are affiliated to either the United States or Russia. So that is another, another reason why there are still conflicts in the region, because as they are affiliated to two enemies, let's say global enemies, it's inevitable to have conflicts in the region. So people feel buffeted by the larger geo-strategic competition. Exactly. And also Lebanon, which is a really, really small country, is also stuck between those two big powers. Yes. Yes. Well, thank you also very much. And I certainly wish your project well as you move forward with it. It's certainly inspirational that you're trying to do something like that and save human rights defenders in a situation that is so, so very conflict laden and where that's hard work. So thank you. We're going to move next to Uganda in East Africa and talk to Gilbert Nuagira, who is an economist there and Africa is of course a continent with great promise, but it's also a place of competition and challenge. China and Russia are increasingly present there. And Europe is trying to find its way in a post-colonial world. The United States seems to be weighing its options and there are criticisms that the United States has been too absent, too passive, not really taken the reins in trying to build relations in Africa. And it turns it is reticent and bullish on Africa. Meanwhile, the African states themselves are taking their own futures into their own hands by many different means. You are from Uganda, Gilbert, which is part of the East African community, an intergovernmental association of seven countries that was started in 1967. Earlier you were very excited about the addition of the Democratic Republic of the Congo in this body when we spoke of its new geographic breadth. Can you just tell us a little bit about why you Uganda first and then why you think this is important and what it means for this particular part of the continent. So over to you Gilbert and again thank you for joining us today. Aloha and thank you for having me Pamela and a huge thank you to Karl, Marti and Elsa. I think there's much to glean from there. Now I mentioned to Pamela that we now have an East Coast and West Coast in East Africa now that the Democratic Republic of Congo has joined the East African community. Of course, it's a process that will, you know, when it comes to the border controls and that will come into fruition in a couple of months, it could take even a few years to materialize but it also begs to call that the stakes for democracy are now much higher for a region that has histories of fragility and conflict both internally and you know externally Uganda currently was coming to 1.6 million refugees and most recently in the part of the country we had refugees fleeing from the Democratic Republic of Congo even while the Democratic Republic of Congo was joining the East African community at almost the same instant we had refugees coming in. So that shows that there is still quite a bit of work to be done and while I anchor myself in Uganda, a landlocked country which will definitely benefit from being a part of the community in terms of positioning itself for trade. And we're talking about a 300 million people market and you know you, the DRC, the DRC coming on makes 300 million because the DRC has 90 million people and that is huge for the East African community and feed into the agenda of the African Union, African continental free trade area. And a big question for Ugandans right now even as we reflect on the East African community growing is you know when we talk about the big, the most common definition of democracy of the people by the people for the people. The huge question that is in Uganda right now is who are the people really, and it comes from a place of, you know, years of conflict and in northern Uganda and, you know, years of also refugee hosting and a couple of situations that have led us to that point. And very many questions are being raised and fingers are being pointed and one of the biggest issues that popped up on the radar of Ugandan were comments made by the chief justice of the country and you know pinpointing pointing a finger at another ethnic group and and he said it's you can't you can't do that and and this was after the death of of our speaker of parliament who is the third person in you know the executive the parliament and the judiciary and and that goes a lot of tensions in the country and many questions were asked and I have a couple of colleagues who are walking on the streets and they were told because you belong to this particular group of people you you probably have money and or you you are, you're the one who is stealing our money and that has sort of started up a deep seated sense and question of all the people and who the people are and while while the current regime which is going on to 40 years by the next election has been working hard to galvanize the country and is still doing so and and and we saw yesterday we saw something that has not been seen in Uganda in the recent past and the chief justice went and apologized to the kingdom of Uganda that he had offended in person which was a remarkable gesture which for me as a Ugandan who has had an opportunity to move the different parts of the country and interact with different people different ethnicities and religions and been asked several questions that are coming to me about do you earn an allowance from being part of this country or not and I see that there is there is progress but there is also we need to be very very very careful and and and I say this because I grew up in a part of a country that had a close relationship to the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, especially when issues, economic governance become regulated or streamlined along ethnic grounds or religious grounds it's, it's, it's, it becomes problematic and the democratic and public of Congo joining the East African community brings in a whole, the Francophone world into, into the East African community we will become more multi ethnic will become more multilingual which is, which is hopeful in many ways. But in, in, in, in reflecting on the fragility that has plagued the region, it's, it can raises the stakes even higher to be able to have a functioning functioning democracies within the seven countries that are in in the staff and community. And, and I think the efforts are there, and we, you know we have a multi party system, but is it actually a functioning multi party system. So as, as, as, as, as Carl mentioned earlier, you know the whole, the whole question of the whole process democracy. These are Uganda and the East African communities part of the audience that, that is thinking about, okay, what does democracy actually mean for us and what would it translate to and. And then I think we're going to see a couple of things changing and shifting around in the next couple of years leading up to the elections in 2026. Good, you know, Gilbert, I wish we had more time to talk about this because I think I'd like to know a lot more about how anybody in the seven countries that you talked about in the East African community, how do they feel democracy. And when you're using words like fragility and we're talking about conflict, one of the common themes that crosses many of the countries here on this panel is corruption so I don't know if you would like to just say a final word about just how people can actually feel democracy across the seven countries that you're talking about. Yeah, I think I think the biggest one would be transition of power transition of governments and I think South Sudan in the north of Uganda has had trouble with that and we see the conflict is still happening. The world has had its own fair share of coups and has had its, you know, fast transition and the world is watching to see how that unfolds. The Bundy and Rwanda have had their fair share as well, but you have a regime in Rwanda that has also been there for a while so the question is what will happen, what would the transition look like. Uganda has not had a transition for the past 37 years and the previous transitions post independence were all very difficult transition. Kenya has modeled what it means to have transitions and and by far has had the most transitions. Kenya has had several transitions and had hiccups and you know elections are coming up in August in Kenya and the African community members are also watching. What does that mean and I think that's, that's for the community and for investors thinking of doing business that is very important. Can we transition from one government to the next, without having any form of conflict or bloodshed, can we have relationships that across these countries that transcend different regimes and we are seeing the Uganda border was closed for business for close to two years and it's only begun opening up because it's only begun opening up because of, you know, renewed conversation but it's, it's still, it's still, you know, something that is a bit delicate at the moment, but it goes to show how the situation is unfolding here. Yes, well thank you so much Gilbert there's a lot to see there and I appreciate your kind of giving us a lens into a part of the world that very very few of us too few of us really know anything about so thank you very much for that. We're now going to turn to a part of the world that's very much on everyone's mind and that is with Carl Ackerman, who was for many years on the social studies faculty at Punahou school the very famous Punahou school which was the school of our former president Barack Obama. And several decades teaching there and he's now engaged in many promising community endeavors, and he's going to be talking about Eastern Europe so that's very much on our minds now Carl I'm going to give you the floor and you've heard some people say some things about how the world perceives what's going on in Ukraine so over to you for your, your perspective. Thank you Ambassador and also I'd also like to thank Mr. Fidel for allowing all of us to be part of this panel and it's quite a privilege to be with such distinguished and thoughtful people and talking about democracy. Let me begin by just forming a sort of a waiver you know I don't speak for Punahou school although I still teach European history on occasion there so but I want to make sure that that things are clear here and so I have to say that at the very beginning. Sure. I think you know when we're talking about Eastern Europe we have to start with the date 1989 when the Berlin Wall fell and you had the creation of democratic states all across Eastern Europe. I'm particularly fond of the Czech Republic because it is there that you had the first president being a playwright of Echohavl. And so you begin to see the democratic institutions and I really want to quote Rob Mati here because she said you know when you in India you have democratic institutions they're not perfect. And I don't think we should see the Eastern European block nations as perfect whether that be Poland or Hungary they all have constitutions they all have what I call representative governments. Now what I mean and going back to Elsa's wonderful beginning by defining democracy. The way I would define democracy is going back to the American Revolution and the French revolutions where you have constitutions representative of democracy not not direct democracy. And one person one vote and everything is evolving as we see currently in the United States that we're still working towards a perfect democracy. I think the reason I began in 1989 with the fall of with the fall of the Berlin Wall is because in East Germany there was a KGB agent by the name of Vladimir Putin who is there. And he had to burn a lot of documents or put them through you know a shredder and this is the man who is now in charge of Russia. And what I'm going to maintain today is this is not a democratic war. It is a war of one man Vladimir Putin against the Ukrainians. The Ukrainian Ukrainians under President Zelensky have a democratic framework with the constitutional government. And one of the earliest speeches of the heroic President Zelensky was talking about how every square in Ukraine now is is freedom square. And so looking at the Ukraine I'm not going to today talk about the specific military maneuvers etc. And the Korean you could see that on CNN or any of our major networks in all countries. But instead what I'm going to talk about is this counter position of democratic institutions in the Ukraine and the increasing totalitarian framework of Vladimir Putin. And so I want to talk about what happens when you have a totalitarian state like in Russia. And what you have is as in people have been talking about the United States about the great law great law lie of the former election that the former election in the United States was not fair at things like this. You begin to have lies that overcome the democratic frameworks of any country and what Vladimir Putin has done is he's told two major lies that I would like to debunk today by talking about the history of the Ukraine. In the first place Vladimir Putin talks about oh Ukraine is not a country and we're one group of people and it is true that ethnically and in terms of cultural traditions the Ukraine is very close to Russia. But what Vladimir Putin does not mention is that Kiev and I'm using the old pronunciation. Kiev and Rus was the beginning of all Russian civilization. It began around the city of what is now Kiev. And there was trade between Kiev and Constantinople. And through this trade there is a democratic state emerging in the early years we're talking now 10th century 11th centuries in Russia. And unfortunately for the people there in 1240 what I call the Pax Mongolika came to Kiev and they sort of because the Mongolians were great fighters decimated the city and people were forced to flee north. So the notion that there is no original Ukraine is nonsense and the Ukraine has been there actually longer than the Muscovites and the Russians later on. So that's one historical thing I wanted to make sure that everyone knew. The second thing talks about the Ukraine not being a state because of the of no sort of historical focus on anything in the Ukraine. And this is is really a crazy and as an aside I want to go back to something that Gilbert said and he was talking about the problems with democracy in relations in relationship to refugees. So in the Ukraine right now there have been about four or five million now refugees and the other Eastern European countries have taken them in Poland alone with two million people. I'm going to suggest that it is the willingness and the ability of Republican democratic states to do this and to honor the great and heroic nature of the Ukrainian people. And so that part of I think the Republican democratic state is to be accepting of a variety of ideas. Now I'm going to take everyone back into the 19th century and this is again. You've got about a minute to do that, Carl. Okay, well I'm going to do it fast then. Teres Yashenko where there's a a statue to him in Dupont Circle not too far from where the ambassador lives was a great 19th century poet and he beats the origin of all Russian literature. This is his poem. He's fighting for the Ukraine in the 19th century. When I die, let me rest. Let me lie amidst Ukraine's broad steps. Let me see the endless fields and steep slopes I hold so dear. Let me hear the neepers great roar and when the blood of Ukraine flows flows into the blue waters of the sea. That's when I'll forget the fields and hills and live it all and pray to God. Until then I know no God so bury me, rise up and break your chains. Water your freedom with the blood of oppressors and then remember me with gentle whispers and kind words in the great family of the newly free. In the 19th century you already had Ukrainian movement for independence. It continues today and I'll add one historical aside that I think all will like. This man, Taras Shevchenko was a serf for 24 years beginning his life. And he was a great poet, a man of literature, but he also was a great painter. And I will leave you with this to talk about the internationalism of the Ukrainian movement. He also painted a portrait of Ira Aldridge, the great 19th century African-American gentleman who fought for the freedom of slavery in the United States. Yes, and was an artist too. So, yeah, very interesting. Thank you very much Carl for that. I think it's everybody has I think a great deal of respect for the bravery of the Ukrainians, even though there are many different opinions as we've heard from Rupemati and others about about their cause but we really seem to be having a world that is dividing fragmenting in many, many different directions but Carl, thank you very much for articulating a certain point of view about Ukraine and its great struggle to preserve its life as an independent as an independent state. I want to move now to one Pablo Telo who I know one you've had some technical problems staying with us but it's wonderful to see you. Thank you. You are not a stranger to, to this program you've been on it before, and you're going to be talking about Columbia you are an attorney and policy analyst working passionately to improve governance and quality of life in your country and a lot of that you are trying to do through infrastructure. So I want to welcome you back and also just turn the floor over to you but just note that for decades violence has kind of overshadowed anything that might be done or called progress in Columbia, we had a peace process and now it's the state of that is fragile. And just as you and the President Ivan Duque has started to suspend election guarantees as one of the latest assaults on the country's constitution and political system. Can you just give us an update on what is happening right now in Columbia, and how your aspirations for making Columbia a better place through infrastructure development can can prosper with this pressure on the political system in the country. So over to you one. It's a pleasure to be again with all of you here discussing such interesting topics I'm sorry for the technical issues I was having. So I think we can divide your questioning to different parts the first one is addressing violence and the peace process and the second one is Columbia has been moving forward from my perspective into building a democracy and that's that's a point that I want to reference in my statement that we can discuss a lot about what is what isn't democracy what happens when we don't have democracy just as Carl mentioned. But how do we get there, how do we actually develop a country and make it a democratic republic that works and serves the interest of its people right. So the first part is, as you know, Columbia's a big state is twice the size of Texas and violence has faster most of Colombian history through 2000 years. If we want to go into a fast look and fast review of what happened is just a lot of geographic isolation the state has never had the capacity to reach all the corners of the country. And this has mean, this means different problems through throughout history the most recent ones narco traffic which most of the people around the world is is aware of when they think about Columbia. And then we have the peace process that tried to address one of the main and most important rebel groups and terrorist groups that were operating in Colombia which was far. As you just mentioned Pamela, recently the peace process is in a fragile state. The government has been very vocal about it's about that it does not agree with how was negotiated and agreed. Instead of thinking in the wrong part of these I choose to believe in hope, and I choose, I choose to believe that there's a possibility of change and the fact that peace is a better business for everyone so the state of the art right now is we're currently facing presidential elections in a few months, if not a month from now. And the countries divided just as well as most of the word we have seen the extremes getting to rise again right so we have the extreme left, trying to take over the country and selling a message that everything has failed in the past 20 years which is not true. Of course, there have been a lot of mistakes, especially when facing these terrorist groups, but Colombians, the standard of living of Colombians has improved dramatically in the last 25 years. So that's something we have to acknowledge although there's an issue and it's inequality and we have to address it. And that's precisely the point that I want to address today, and is how do we address those gaps through infrastructure to build democracy. So, as a Latin America, as a Latin American for me, it's really interesting to see how other countries always set the democratic debates around different topics that are important. Gender, how do we address more equality things. But when it comes down to Latin America at this my interpretation is, let's go back to basics. If we want democracy, we need services. If you want democracy, you need roads, you need pipelines and you need education, especially in these countries that are huge in a geographic sense. So when it goes back to building democracy, in the past 20 years, I think infrastructure changes that have been promoted in the country are addressing that issue and are making Colombia a safer, peaceful and more competitive country. Well, thank you. Thank you very much, Juan. And I do like, it's interesting to hear you sound a note of optimism when the things that I was reading about Colombia, as I prepared for this we're not terribly optimistic but that you firmly believe that it's possible to make some progress in the challenges of how do you see, you know, when you talk about those areas of the country again I'm interested in this issue of how people feel democracy. For those people who are living in the areas that the government has had the greatest struggle in reaching what do you think are the next two or three things that those people really want in order for for them to feel that democracy is real. So the first thing Pamela, I would say security. It's it's a debate and it's an issue that Colombians in the past five years have overlooked. But it is still needs to be addressed and it's still need to be talked about security was for almost 40 or 30 years the most important budget in Colombia's agenda. And since the peace process talks about security have been diminishing dramatically because there's political interest in selling Colombia as a peaceful place which it has improved dramatically then again, I repeat that. But if you ask someone that lives in the outskirts of the country where there's no light, there's no pipelines. There's anything else, but you have para states and criminal organizations that actually govern those territories. They would like security. That's the first thing they would like to feel the state president being there because otherwise what happens is those groups are the ones that provide that service to the people. So I will go to first security, then communication. Colombia is a country that is geographically isolated because we have three different mountain ranges that cross our country rivers the Amazon deserts. You need to communicate these people with the rest of the country for them to connect with the state and with the productivity of the country itself. And finally, I'll say opportunities. The biggest issue that Latin Americans have to address is inequality, and you don't battle inequality with guns, you battle inequality with education, and with opportunities. Well, thank you very much one. I think it's, it's great that we are kind of ending on the whole series of presentations with with those issues that you've just articulated because I think we can see pieces of those issues and many, many different, many different countries. I'm going to move where I can't believe we are almost at the end of our time we only have about 15 minutes left. And each of you was to have two minutes left to just kind of wrap up if there was anything that you wanted to say to say. I'm starting and I'm going to have to be quite a disciplinarian about this. I'm going to give each of you just probably a minute and a half to speak just so we can make sure that we have a proper close out. And knowing that there's going to be a little overage so with that let me move to Carl and just ask you. After you've heard everything, kind of what's on, what's on your mind, Carl. And what are you thinking about, particularly as you sort of laid out this idea of the Chinese paper and Gilbert, saying that this, his country was one where people might be thinking about the future in this can you just kind of wrap up for us. I think that, you know, China, I think sees, again, democracy as a process of aggregating political will. And I think what what we're hearing from the rest of the world and what China is perceiving is that what is really important about democracy is unified action is able to act as a state to satisfy human needs. And I think that's where that's where it is attractive to other people when they look at the ability of China to actually aggregate that will not on the front end, but on the back end through their their feedback, and their consultation mechanisms. That's the argument I think that China is trying to make. Okay, well, thank you. Thank you very much. You used a lot less than two minutes. I guess the question would be, again, just what kind of democracy is it if everything is aggregated and we're talking about unified action. I know our own president talks a lot about unity and wanting to have it but at the same time we have this issue of voice, some of the issues that some of our other panelists have mentioned. There was really time that I would certainly be interested in your views about how the Chinese government would deal with this issue of voice. So far it's the Communist Party that is the only voice for for China. I'm sorry, I'm sorry family you're missing my point. I'm just asking you to articulate. Okay, but China is exactly doing that through their consultation mechanisms and their feedback mechanisms. That's the point I'm trying to make to you. They're not just ignoring that voice. They're saying this is the proposal. Now here, you accept it, because this is what we're going to do and we're going to offer you the opportunity to give us feedback on it so they're not ignoring it. They're just treating it from a different end of the spectrum. Okay, well I would say that if they're the agenda setters and they're the only ones who can really speak and they're asking you what what they want you to tell them about with respect to one question. Then I would say that that's not necessarily anything that we would recognize as democracy but I do, I do take your point well we will move on now to root muddy for your two minutes please please why don't you get started and let us know what's on your mind. It's amazing news by everybody on the panel and it's thrilling to know that everybody faces difficult situations in each each country. But I would say that democracy has to be inclusive, and it is unique for each country and what works can be termed as democracy if it brings in the will of the people or it brings in development for the people. Having concrete guidelines for democracy would would rather be more compartmentalizing unique experiments which are happening country by country case by case. So what works for a country in its development in its in its international relations in its internal development. I think that is democracy. If we can bring it to that. And India has been a successful democracy because for over seven decades, we have built successful infrastructure from being a colonial kind even our independence was fought on democratic grounds we never used violence. It was on the on the tenants of justice, you know, we we requested for it rather than we waited for it. So, democracy has been ongoing experiment with our nation. Well, thank you very much. There's no question that you're a very very as I said earlier a full throated advocate for democracy in India. I know poverty is a challenge for India equality, many, many issues but as so one said it's something that has to be built over time so thank you very much for giving us your view about India and democracy. Yes, so now what I think we'd like to do. I'm trying to think of who was third. Sorry. The next person I'd like to have speak is Gilbert why don't you speak to us up for a couple of minutes. Thank you. Thank you, Ambassador Pamela. I think for me. That's kind of the futuristic thinking for for East Africa and for Uganda is to kind of reflect on the question of the bit of for the people can. Can we can we forge a way that looks at the aggregate experiences of you know, the different peoples of Uganda of the region and see we've been through conflict with hard war. What does it mean and I think when Pablo said it very well like, can we have the service provision can the roads be there can you know can can we have security can we be able to communicate because we we are talking now about the two breed of youth who are thinking about democracy and not afraid and are saying, okay, we're not afraid of conflict now because we've had relative stability but where are the services to go with that. So we need to have a for the people kind of democracy and demonstrate that and part of modeling that would be a peaceful transition and you know, for Uganda, but also within the region. Well, thank you. Thank you very much. It's a big region has lots of issues. And as you said it's struggling with basic security so that's, that's definitely a challenge. Why don't we move now to the Middle East and ask Elsa to give her closing comments. To me, in order to establish democracy in the Middle East and North Africa. It is necessary that the civilians try to unify and put hate aside to reach the one and only goal, which is peace and stability. And I think that religion must be separated from politics in order to to reach that goal. Also that's that's a fascinating point of view, especially in the Middle East where religion is so much a part of everything. Do you are you hopeful that it is possible to do that, especially in Lebanon. You know, I think it is really hard, because first, all the governments are corrupt almost in the Middle East and North Africa which makes things even more difficult. So we are dealing with the majority is like poor people are like poor people. They need money and those governments try to like to keep them calm by giving them like some help for the end of the month stuff like that so that's why it's really hard for those people to overcome this kind of thinking and unite and fight for the same cause. Yes, yes, it's very tough. That's absolutely for sure. Thank you very much though for your for your comments and for that aspiration. Why don't we move now to Carl Ackerman and why don't you give us your closing thoughts about democracy after you've already left us with poetry. What more would you like to add. Very simple and I want to leave the rest to one of my great colleagues, but the first thing I want to say is that my two of my students, Robert and Brian are on this call on this webinar. And they were with me when we saw the Soviet Union fall in August of 1991, which was a glorious day for me because I believe in representative democracy. I want to say one thing about democratic centralism that you see in Marcus on this government having lived in the former Soviet Union and also Havana, Cuba. There are good things about people getting the basic ingredients of life, but they both were totalitarian regimes. So as Bob Dylan might say, there was no democracy at all. But my final comments are for the entire group and it's a quote from Red Faye who is the undersecretary of the Navy under John Fitzgerald Kennedy and he talked about the pleasure of his company. I just want to say to all of my colleagues, it's the pleasure of your company. Thank you all. Well, that's, that's very, very generous, generous of you Carl and I'm glad that you're one of your students is on the call in fact we have almost 70 guests on the program so I appreciate it of everyone being here. I'm going to try to get to at least one question but first I want to go and give Juan Pablo tell a chance to give his closing comments so one over to you. Thanks, family. I think my reflection for the end of the panel will be let's keep building what whatever democracy means to us right. We have seen that throughout the different places and throughout the different places where the panelists are set and are sitting at now today. Different interpretations different challenges but definitely this, I think this decades to come are going to be fundamental to protecting the rights that we have fought so hard to get. And it's an invitation to protect democracy in all its shapes, and hopefully get a more equal and happy word I mean this sounds a bit cheesy but I think it's important to always remind ourselves that democracy is a fight. It's something that we can take for granted. I think those are wonderful words we're actually a little bit ahead of time. And so, if anybody has something that they are burning to say that they didn't have a chance to say now is your opportunity. I just like to observe as the moderator that you all have very very different outlooks and points of views but I do see this thread of hope running through a lot of what you're saying I mean some of you are working on or working in countries that have tremendous challenges, Lebanon, Uganda, Colombia, even India, you know, it's as big as it is and as as much as it has changed in the last 70 years of its democracy. There are tremendous, tremendous challenges and yet I'm still hearing through most of what you're saying that there are great hopes that a system that is hard to believe that Abraham Lincoln has been alive in this program but of by and for the people is what what you see as an aspiration, in spite of all the challenges that the countries are facing whether those challenges have to do with corruption, whether they have to do with poverty. The expectation basic security as one said, all of those things are true and yet as we think about what would help us move forward across the world for many, many people, the idea of a democratic system that gives voice to people's aspirations that gives them rights that prove that says that the expectation is that the state is there to work for the people. That is the whole idea of of democracy, and yet as as Karl Baker has told us there's a different conception, not that the Chinese don't think that their conception of democracy is working for the people, but it's a very very different almost on its head conception of where the center of gravity lies whether it should be with the people, or with the people, and so I think this is going to be something that the world is is going to be grappling with we heard during the program, lots of different conceptions, East, West, north, south of how people are getting their decision and making their decisions we've also heard about how countries have to are choosing to perhaps be very bullish on the idea of democracy as is the case in India, and yet still make a very hard boiled decision about where his interests lie, and choosing with a authoritarian government in the case of Russia rather than one that is aspiring to democracy because the of the partnership that is of long standing so I am you know I understood that very clearly as well. One of the things that I want to take the prerogative I want to, I started with Madeline Albright, and I'd like to end with with her to. What she said, I just want to close contrary to conventional wisdom the momentum is not with the enemies of democracy. It's true in recent years that some authoritarians have grown stronger, but in many cases they are now failing to deliver, in countries where people increasingly expect accountable leadership, even in the absence of democratic rule. This is a key point that few observers have yet grasp. Democracy is not a dying cause. In fact, it is poised for a comeback. That's the end of her quote. This is me like a lot of you who are living in states with all mixed systems democratic systems more authoritarian ones, whatever. But that sense of hope that note of hope that she sounds in an article that she wrote just a few weeks before she passed away shows that the hope for democracy is there and I think we have heard that from all of the panel members so I would just like on behalf of this whole panel again thank Jay Fidel for this think tech Hawaii program. I would like to thank each and every one of the panelists for taking time today to be with us to share your views to be courteous to one another. I would like to thank our audience which has been extremely attentive. I'm sorry we were not able to get to all of your, your questions, some of them were very good, but I hope that you found this panel to be useful. I know that I found it very interesting, and I wish all of you good health, and perhaps there'll be some other time when we'll all have a chance to get together again, and see what is happening since there are some democratic milestones in place in Africa we heard about the Kenyan elections in a couple of years or with the elections in India in China with the Communist Party meeting and many many many other opportunities for the citizens of the world we hope to have a chance to tell their what they expect through exercising the franchise so I'm very hopeful about democracy myself. I put myself on the side that Madeleine Albright was on, and I think again each of you for your contributions and appreciate your aspirations for your country, and all of us for the world so with that I'm going to say goodbye and aloha mahalo. Thank you very much. Thank you so much for watching Think Tech Hawaii. If you like what we do, please like us and click the subscribe button on YouTube and the follow button on Vimeo. You can also follow us on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and LinkedIn, and donate to us at thinktechhawaii.com. Mahalo.