Skip to main content

tv   Book TV  CSPAN  April 21, 2013 1:00pm-2:01pm EDT

1:00 pm
1:01 pm
>> joan johnson-freese is next on booktv. she argues our war college system is broken and no longer properly educate senior military officers. it is a little under an hour. >> thank you. it is a pleasure to be here at cambridge on this rainy night during harvard spring break him as a thank you are common in having this opportunity to talk about this but, which i am passionate about. i'm passionate about professional military education, which is why vote this book. my usual arc of research is in space security and globalization. this is deviation but when i felt important to write about. i want to begin by telling about what the topic isn't what i wrote about it. professional military education is the system in which most
1:02 pm
military officers receive their education after enlistment. his congressionally mandated. this is not a choice, not an option. all are required to attend for joint professional military education credit. specifically the book i talk about the war colleges, the most eager of the institutions that the cap and a kernel level at times when they transition from operational positions where they fly planes, drive notes, drive tanks into strategic areas in washington making critical policy decisions. with the work college csr csr job to educate them from jobs focused on training and they are very good at. one is better at operational jobs than our american military officers. two jobs they are not so familiar that the strategic
1:03 pm
areas that involve economic policy, require cultural differences, religion and really out of their dorm. their education questions that don't necessarily carry with them a yes or no answer that these officers are used to when operating nuclear reactors are flying a plane. that being said, i contend in the book that would owe it to our officers and country to do the best job possible at transitioning from operational to strategic positions advocate in fact a batter, that because of structural and systemic issues, we really are not serving our officers as well as a night to prepare for their future jobs in the country and they could do a much better job. a couple paragraphs of the book that in a nutshell explained the issue. consider as you read, how would
1:04 pm
you feel as a parent if your son or daughter asked you to pay between 57,166,000, which is the range of cost per student at the war colleges for him or her to attend a graduate program with or no no academic admissions standards and everyone graduates in 10 months. that's the military equivalent of lake wobegon, were other children are above average statistically, everyone graduating from accelerated rigorous graduate program but there's no admission standards is highly unlikely. further, this program will make sure she is happy of what they've been taught by faculty, some of whom have neither teaching experience or subject matter expertise. he might have qualms about the educational value of the
1:05 pm
program. so what are these challenges and what might we do to fix them? i contend in the book there are some things that are particularly difficult, but are being done simply because professional military education is a default to this is the way we've always done it. so the first problem i talk about, the student. the students come in because they are congressionally mandated to come in. many of them are eager to learn. many are very anxious make this transition quite frankly some are not. there are no academic admissions standards. some of these individuals have not written a paper in 20 plus years. they are good at what they do, but not particularly good statements in some cases. yet, because they are very good at their operational jobs in the government has spent sometimes
1:06 pm
millions of dollars to train them, they happen to be a pilot or nuclear field or highly specialized field, there is a requirement that they'll graduate. no military officer will be failed in their career bro and because of an academic program. when they attend the work college, take it to a degree, one professional military education degree, which is congressionally mandated. they'll receive a master's degree in national security studies. everybody who comes in gets a master's degree. that means the student who works very hard and the sitting next to the student who doesn't necessarily work that hard, they're both going to graduate. that's not their fault. that is not a problem of their making. they are the military equivalent
1:07 pm
of being too big to fail. they are too valuable to the military and the country to fail in an academic program. so you have a fist, were coming in, the credibility is stretched because there are no failures. occasionally you have someone who because of family issues or some other issues will complete the program in time and they're simply recycled. academically, i've been teaching professional military education for 20 years now that i've never given a final grade of ac. it's just not given. our range of grades is basically from 84 to 94. now why did i write this book? y me? i'm saying thanks pretty critical of our own institution. a second plaintiff states she was the faculty. we have a strong faculty in many areas in this faculty is
1:08 pm
diverse. there are active-duty military officers. there are practitioners, which include a high percentage of retired military officers. there are civilian academics and their civilian academics who are very act within their own professional fields and i make a differentiation they are very carefully. what happens very often as we'll have a military officer show up to be a faculty are, who last week was on a ship or flying the plane in next week is teaching economics or political science or history or some topic, which he will work hard at, but doesn't have any substantive background and here's because he doesn't have a background in the classroom, the institution goes out of its way to give them ample opportunity to get good at teaching. they give them more classes to give them an opportunity to practice and get better at what
1:09 pm
they're doing. what that means is a stronger experienced teachers who do have the background to teach us much. when they do get good after two years, then they are gone to restart this all over again. so you have a student.he was no academic standards. you have a faculty, which is very diverse. everybody is well-meaning, but somehow they substantive background and others don't. this is all being run by an increasingly large bureaucracy, most of them have no background in either education or educational administration. this creates basically a situation. i use the example in the book by saying it would be putting me in charge of a squad. i would be well-meaning, but i
1:10 pm
don't know what i'm doing. therefore nobody fly. everybody be careful. we've got a great safety record here. what happens in education is there is a default position as be as conservative as possible. keep everybody happy. as a teacher, that's not your job to keep people happy. your job is to challenge them, to get the students -- at all like the expression but it works, think outside the box. what happens at the war colleges well is faculty, unlike civilian academic institutions are not tenured. they are not on a tenure track. they usually three or four year contracts. these contracts to a very large degree initially, renewal of these contracts depends on coming to the students like you?
1:11 pm
what does that do in the classroom? you don't challenge the students because it becomes imperative that they like you. i'm very fortunate. a few years ago we had a naval war college president who had a merit-based program policy of granting tenure to a small number of people and i am equivalent. i have what is called a contract without turn. at about the same time they received this ten-year equivalent, there were a lot of retired professional military education faculty members who started writing about the topic. much to my dismay, they were maligned by their fellow faculty members in the institutions as disgruntled. and i didn't see it that way.
1:12 pm
because i was tenured, i decided i was going to write a book about it and this is the resulting book. this is the resulting book, which i'm pleased to say started out in media has very beneficial in getting this topic discussed. i started out writing blog articles for aol defense and u.s. naval institute. i then wrote an article with a lot of controversy. sometimes not brought to me directly. and then i wrote the book and i'm very appreciative to the naval war college for the academic freedoms that it very much supporters that allows me to write the book, to talk about the book had to really voice my own opinions. this is some thing again the naval war college of all the professional military war
1:13 pm
colleges and army war college and marine work college and national defense university, the naval war college. of those, i consider the naval war college for in the faculty member to be the flagship academic institution because of its strong defense of academic freedom and its increasing willingness to go out and find faculty who are willing to kind of be in-house heretics. i'm always very careful on occasions like this to say when i'm talking, i'm talking for myself. being able to do that is sent and that's not always the case at all of the other pme institutions. i take advantage of my position as a tenured faculty member to write this book. one of the things they talked about extensively in the book, going back to this idea that
1:14 pm
mr. eggers, most of the administrators are retired military officers, very well-meaning patriots, all good americans. no background in education, no background in academic administration. that means the things they are asked to do, curricula, development, hiring faculty, promoting faculty, tenured faculty they've never done before. i spent eight years as a department chair and with its been a great deal of time in meetings, trying to explain to those in charge how things were done in academia and very often, most often their response was we are not in academia. that's not how we do it, which got us to a system of when i first started working war
1:15 pm
college, every faculty member was high up as a full professor. in an environment where they are so right conscious, the idea of hiring people, all faculty members as a full professor is just unheard of and hurt the institutional credibility. trying to explain that to a kernel of why they should not be a full professor fell on ears. this is a problem how to administrators who really have no experience is part of the problem. the other part of the problem and i'll be honest i'll be writing a following chapter of the department chair from the naval war college, captain tony were body are doing a book chapter that was the oversight? with the supervision? there to supervising
1:16 pm
organizations with something called military education coordinating council -- the military loves acronyms. a part of the pentagon called the g7, part of the joint staff. the congress is busy. we on the sequestration is basically taking up all of their time. the economy. now that allows those in the pentagon and those that this military coordinating council, to basically it our what i've been told they consider the noise, the noise that this book raises, the noise that other articles raised and things proceed pretty much the way they always have. it is my view that we can do some things. the first thing we need to do a separate the congressionally mandated military education program and a master's degree.
1:17 pm
that would mean very simply that officers who came in and many of them are ready to have a masters degree or some are approaching retirement and feel they don't need a masters degree would come in and fulfill their mandated she pme requirements. those who wanted a masters degree would sign up on a separate program and would be a more rigorous program, where there was an opportunity to say you have not met the academic qualifications. not fulfill the requirements and they wouldn't receive that masters degree. that would get rid of that hundred% graduation rate, which i think immediately affects credibility. the second thing i think we need to do is have some sort of faculty tenure program, where faculty are not constantly fearful that they will lose their job if the students aren't happy with them. now there's a big pushback from
1:18 pm
a substantial portion of the military saint tenured faculty createseadwood. it's rather ironic to me that this is being fed by individuals in their career when you reach a certain point in the military, you have an expectation he will continue until you reach your retirement point, which is the same thing i argue for faculty members. furthermore, this could be done the same way as civilian academic institutions, where you have a trial. you don't tenure immediately. it would be six or seven years his senior faculty active in our profession. one of the problems in a survey like looked at is the industry to bloat the qualifications of administrators in charge of these very important programs. my fear is with all the economic
1:19 pm
woes of washington the military education will be seen as low-hanging fruit. it will be seen as an easy target for the budget act. it should be. it is critical. it is something we need to do more of, not less and there's ways to save money. i mention the figures were 57,000 to 166,000 pursuit, where the big differentiation? i would argue newport as a brave. we have one elderly among faculty, which teaches two courses. we teach the war college senior course and we teach an intermediate course called command and staff college. the air force and the army have two schools in two faculties to teach each. i would be an easy cost saving to combine them. we don't have regional studies strips which are two to three
1:20 pm
week trips retakes students and show that regions they been studying. very costly and you don't learn anything on a junket to peez. let's be realistic here. it is important that we really work on the credibility of the program. it is to the institution. it's important to the students. it's important to build up bricker in ways that don't complain about metrics as department chair at a regular basis i was asked to provide a metrics for their return on investment and this is where we get into talking about the differentiation between training and education. there is a real texas is in the military, which pushes a high number of people to get their degrees in technical engineering fields. understandable and fine planes and operating nuclear reactors and submarines.
1:21 pm
when they go to washington, that's not what they're doing anymore. the military unfortunately doesn't differentiate between training and education and in some cases are governed by the same command. givest metrics for how well students are doing. givest not chicks for what can they do -- how can we do it better? how come into a faster? education is not something you do quick way. it is something you need time to read a book and think about it. we are fighting a battle right now over calendar whitespace. any day that doesn't have something on the calendar is a wasted day. when you do with the name is already thinks any day on the ship is a wasted day of the problem. the four students, it is important they have time to
1:22 pm
read, thinkhow mr. decides they're going to seminars and discuss without the preliminary time there is a tendency to say give me the answer at a high level of frustration among the student body when we can't give them an answer. when the question is what should we do about syria? there is no easy answer. there is no single answer. the difference between puzzles and mysteries. puzzles you can find the answer. mr. ace, maybe not. you may never know. but we try to get our students to do is be comfortable understanding they will be dealing with problems that don't necessarily have these bottom line is that no answers. i'd like to just read one more portion here. it's kind of law, but this is the last one i read and then
1:23 pm
move it to q&a. it is simply live with the book but i hope to get out of it. the purpose of this book is twofold. to familiarize the american public and decision-makers, specifically the senior war college and to encourage discussion on how to improve the education of their important missions. the latter sense of the idea that there's room for improvement. cocos must be clear. whether war college goals are clear and whether articulated goals are supported by practices and processes that these institutions as part of the discussion. admiral james stafford is provided to think or take a nation of busy of for college education goes up to 2011 national war college convocation by describing this situation when he arrived at national in 1991.
1:24 pm
quote, i knew it i was good at and what i do well, driving a destroyer or crusader, leading a boarding party with a surrogate mother, landed in an air defense. beating sailors on the deck leadership, but fails to sense what i did not know or understand well. global politics and grand strategy, importance of the logistic nation, the community works. what are the levers of power practice in the world nns is, how everything fits together in producing security for the united states and poorer partners, end quote. goal of the war college should be to educate students in the areas they are not familiar with the tape them out of their comfort zones. more college students officers transitioning career positions were tactical, often technical skills are key. leading and from tree treat to
1:25 pm
positions requiring the military and u.s. security affairs, including non-tech call, not kinetic nature. global politics and grand strategy are areas with which the war college students are largely unfamiliar, but for which some will be responsible in their future positions and others will support. too often, educational achievement is diluted, sacrifice for expedient at the nation's war college. that being the case, america is neither good and what is paid for in the millions, billions annually spent on more college is coming prepared military leaders to fight wars and construct events for peace. admittedly, the broad range were college student intellectual future jobs and missions and unique constraints of the military profession create challenges and the professional
1:26 pm
military education not evident in institutions. it also makes it more important to continually strive for improvement. i guess it would conclude my presentation with one more point and that is the knee-jerk reaction to the statement of problems i hear most often are twofold. one, closed the war colleges. the second is close to war colleges and some of these military officers to civilian academic institution. i would argue closing the war college is not a good idea, that students need these educations more than other, that the environment is more complex. their need for the understanding is in this complex environment more than ever. second, the idea we can close the war college and send everyone to civilian academic institution is untenable.
1:27 pm
we are talking thousands of students a year. we would want them to go to top schools for security studies programs, but there aren't enough of those programs. so i would have been his student senate going to some other schools without an appropriate program and take courses relevant to somebody, but not a military officer. so we don't want them going to any school, taking anything. furthermore, one of the key benefits of the war colleges to stephen if they meet other students in other branches of the military, and other fields and they have an opportunity to talk with each other. this entry seminar networking is a key part of educational experience. i've had instances where i have two individuals from the navy,
1:28 pm
one in aviator, one a submariner sitting next to each other like someone talking from buyers to somebody from jupiter. they have no idea what the other does or what their world is like. if i want them to fight as a joint military for a variety of reasons, capabilities and economics, we need them to understand each other and this would not be available in just any program anywhere. the war colleges are important. we have to do a better job. at first i been doing since been something i've been encouraging based on personal experience. they hear a lot of things and a lot of powerpoint slides. either way, one of the most -- one of the bleakest days was sitting in on a presentation
1:29 pm
from a three-star admiral who made the comment about ready religious strappado goldplating out of our curriculum and when admit, a very sad looking captain turned and said we just told not to excel? i was a few years ago. laster at a phone call from someone on the navy staff who said you know, dr. johnson-freese, we'd like your -- we need stories. we just need the metaphor cost. the first thing we need to do a study, validate or refute would have written that the period i rehiring the right kind of faculty? are the goals stated? said he supported the policies and programs to support the goals? what is the situation? this needs to be done by
1:30 pm
independent hottie. i senate panel not too long ago and you have a vested interest in the result. we have to see where we are and where we need to go. i hope all of you will help me raise awareness to this. i feel no qualms in encouraging you to buy the book. in this case they do, because importance of the subject after that because i'm donating my pearl teas to the warrior project. i feel like say please buy the book. i would like to open in a questions. [applause] i would ask you, we're filming this, so we read of the breakup makes you questions are raised. [inaudible]
1:31 pm
>> my question as why you are the chair if you are ever called -- [inaudible] what you are to put together in the book -- [inaudible]
1:32 pm
[inaudible] >> thank you for the question. the question is basically how much have i talked to my colleagues from arguing the points i argue in the book. there was a cadre, a small cadre this site are to fight the good fight. don quixote was the windmill. we for a while was very willing to listen to us. didn't always go our way, but was willing to listen. quite frankly, the majority of the faculty would doubtless were quite entrenched in positions unhappy with the status quo. there's an expression my students taught me this year. ducks pick dacs. that means -- what is that? if it's time for promotion and you're in aviator, you're going to get demoted.
1:33 pm
if you're in aviator and never miss a step derringer, ducks pick dacs. to apply that to the war college, basically when i came, there is a high percentage of the faculty errs who are retired military. who did they hire? retired military. so that was a system they were happy with and comfortable ways. again, there were instances, a couple of us who tried very hard to put for programs. one meeting in particular, probably 20 people and somebody said i was arguing -- a colleague and i were arguing for a tenure system. does anybody in this room think somebody would get fired if you have the administration? two of this raise their hands. the rest of like that's
1:34 pm
not the right thing to say. my answer is some of us who tried, but in order to get their message heard further and louder, i wrote the book. this is my college, dr. john chandler from the naval war college. i'm a little afraid of this question. >> thank you for the always cogent remarks. were having a discussion today of the kick off collaboration, where we've seen tactical up aeration excellence by calling it anything other than a strategic failure would be kind. i say this as someone who participated in it. while it is easy to fault the bush administration and rightly so, there were an awful lot of failures to think strategically. we had serious reform after vietnam in an effort to get it right next time.
1:35 pm
twofold question. do you think the climate is moving the direction to not only your work and frankly in the early 70s, took a good girl a much smaller institution. what will it take no legs >> great question. to take it into pirate, and about 2005, when it was clear that iraq was a strategic failure, there is a man they passed out, dod wide, but we got the educational institution, everything is an acronym. countering ideological support for terrorists. basically said we need to think on a broader strategic level. what that meant is in a very short period, the size of our
1:36 pm
faculty grew exponentially and i was able to higher for the very first time an anthropologists, a religion specialist, a counterterrorism specialist, and historian of education, a much wider range of civilian academics. we are now past the tipping point on that. we have quite a diverse range of faculty members in the department. regional, specialist, we have nuclear expert, all kinds of a wide variety. we're over the tipping point in terms of the brat at the education. whether or not i will continue to evolve again depends on the administrators not just at the duchenne because at the institutional level, they deal with the big tenure and promotion offices.
1:37 pm
it's going to depend on those in the joint staff and whether or not anybody in congress starts paying attention to this issue. congressman ike skelton was the champ again. he was always watching. the expression kids don't misbehave in another mom is watching. well, ike skelton is retired and the feedback i get about this spoken with going on now is that it's just noise, pay no attention. i hope congress takes up this flag and carries it forward to do again the simple changes that need to be done. did i miss anything critical of my present patient? >> now. the one thing is coming from the naval war college, which he said
1:38 pm
because i'm part of it really is for falls. we have all these problems. none of this is fixable with a able to do it. were not talking about much money at all. it's nothing literally. the question of will. i think it also has a lot to do with how are these services in congress think pme actually is. it does actually meet larger cause then i don't think he can be emphasized enough that as long as there is a lack of rigor and forced upon the students, the message is we will make sense at the end of the day. >> yes, question back here. >> this is clarification at least. i don't understand the full context.
1:39 pm
i understood you to say it is mandated by congress and these people are going from tactical military operations to washington, which i assume means more policy. either people that do this select a from attending a military unit? because my impression is it's not every service person gawain through this. i am wondering what the selection process is they are and then the advanced than promotion afterword. >> that's a great question of clarification. it is congressionally mandated that every military officer as they progress in rank receives this joint professional military education one and two and that is the intermediate course and the senior course. not everyone attends or college.
1:40 pm
the vast majority of the officers received this through distance education program. and there are many ways this distance education program is offered and there is basically an online cd one program, is as good as an online cd-rom program can be able to call for the navy to sleep on our programs, where different naval bases around the country simulate what we do in newport with the seminar and instruct her in the classroom so you have this interaction. the vast majority of the students because it is required for them to get promoted. a few years ago, you could get weavers. if you were in a critical position or a pilot, you could say -- your commanding officer could say any joe smith, you
1:41 pm
could get a waiver for military education. the navy did that so often called simply for bb in congress company does and sad they have to get their jpme. they get them through mark weekly. this is one the programs were started pretty well known i'm not going on the land that they won the race to the bottom for who could get the simplest program to get these people through fast enough, basically they took the test until you got it right. that occurs last now. we have built some rigor into the programs in the distance education programs are quite
1:42 pm
good. there's a program in washington, a naval war college program in washington that is very valuable. it is again one of these please seminar programs, were a very high percentage of congressional staffers learn whatever it is they know about security studies. many of them came out with a degree in literature and now find themselves dealing on the armed services committee and they take this distance education program to get a strong background so there's certainly value to it. the were college themselves, the way people attend varies by service. the air force and the army are able to attend a program based on selection varies by service, but they sound their best and
1:43 pm
brightest is demonstrated by their regional jobs, not necessarily academics. for the navy, on occasion to jerkin system works. they might find themselves on a ship on friday and the war college the following friday because they need to fill the seat. some of them are annoyed at being there and don't like it at first day of class will say this is a waste of time, but they will be leaving with their jpme and astor's degree. yes. >> who could make the decision would you say congress, is there an individual somewhere who can fit in a closed room and make these decisions and changes? >> i wish i could give you a definitive answer to that. it is my understanding, my colleague and i are working on that there have been proposals
1:44 pm
at this cordoning account will do in fact right for kate jay pme -- jpme aster's degree. there is resistance to considering not at those who have an interest in the status quo because that's the way they've always done it. at about the decision can be made fair, at the joint staff. i do know congress told them they wanted some thing done, these organizations would get on it. i don't now that it requires congress to initiate and approve it, but i do know congress could motivate to make it happen. any other questions? >> i do want to follow up if we've got time here. the book is getting attention in the national interest.
1:45 pm
what sense, if you have any, how it is being received outside the very narrow halls of those who deeply care about this? what is your sense of the community as they were quiet >> i do know it is any more attention by faculty members, the people are speaking out. when i wrote this book, it was basically a taboo subject. there have been two individuals prior, two retired individuals prior. one wrote a book and the other wrote a book chapter and terrific guns of ad hominem attacks, disgruntled employees have any pay no attention to them. i wrote this incident then i'm very pleased to see there's been a proliferation of articles and
1:46 pm
comments of faculty members who are willing to speak out quite frank way because it's understood now it's out. a few stifle faculty members dispute with reservation. so i'm not eight, there's far more dvds. at the institutional level, there is at least awareness guidelines that can be crossed. i am increasingly see it problem at the higher levels one of the reviewers of my book says johnson phrases like to take on the echo chamber of military education. that pretty much sums it up at
1:47 pm
the higher levels. the tipping point will come if congress starts paying attention. >> what she said about the need for the education of people that two different focus. from what you said about the flaws in the current system, how does the military see this as an advantage to do so? to leave the status quo. >> there are many things and this is a situation was sometimes rhetoric and action don't match. there is a lot of rhetoric about we support education, among the higher brass. but the admiral stafford is types are few and far between. there is a lot of rhetoric about the importance of education.
1:48 pm
what they really mean is okay, we will allow it as long as it is in a tight corfield. i talk about informers and in my book. probably one of the five students i've ever taught anywhere. and i've had a long teaching career. she did two tours in iraq, army colonel and wanted to go on to get a doctorate in the soul by the army he could do that, but only if he got a degree in engineering and handed it to be aware of probably hurt his career in the army. so the value of education began, the rhetoric and the action don't play match. in the navy and mentioned before the navy adage of any dac is a wasted day.
1:49 pm
there are many admirals whose still feel that way. they believe a military officer can learn more by working with him directly at magdalena again in a classroom and being taught by civilian academics whose css theory bound and had his expression i've heard more than one. so whether or not they see as the value, i'm not sure they do. one of the men he atmos stuffiness to get the course. make it shorter. we can't spare them for 10 months. can't you get it done in four months? this is where we get the whitespace argument. they have every afternoon off. if we have been a class from eight to five, we could do it in size. that's training. that's not education.
1:50 pm
yes, there's a question in the back. >> i am not sure how much research work possibly we could gain with contrasting and comparing foreign military education. to improve our military. >> actually there several people over on this comparative field of military education. we worked on it ourselves. one of the programs we have at the were college that i'm very proud of is an engagement program with war colleges around the world, where we work and help them set up curriculum, give lectures. dr. schindler and i were in colombia and many time.
1:51 pm
i've been everywhere from ethiopia to are required to south africa. the thing is, most countries tilt the military education programs based on hours. we are the model. the british have somewhat of a different system and other countries to slight variations as well. the general rule of thumb is that moderates the united states and much of what america will find more college curriculum but are they trained taken into spanish. there's some important and strong points. in ethiopia, for example, a group of faculty members were there helping them develop a curriculum and noticed everyone was carrying boxes everywhere. we asked what was going on and they said they were moving to a new building and pointed out his inbuilt by the chinese.
1:52 pm
but the chinese are building to building and the united states is building a curriculum. that's the way we have to do it. most of the programs are built on our model and the value is substantial to have sent in the john schindler talking to colombians is very important for them and i can see the them as well. >> specifically what i was asking us what we can learn. >> what we can learn from them. >> specifically counterterrorism, israel or the united kingdom to improve. >> in sensitive areas i counterterrorism, we work with faculty members and experts on a regular basis. to be learned in terms of how to
1:53 pm
better educate people? quite frankly there is a presumption of u.s. preeminence in that field. if you could ring to make forward, could you comment on that since you work with other counterterrorism experts on a regular basis? >> gem professional military education back-and-forth was quite close with written in israel. i know i am one of them who've got an academic exchange. i did a great deal of work with the british equivalent institution. said the faculty level, it is a lot of cross-fertilization unless his learn, lessons identified. the british say lessons identified because they assume that i was smart. but that is actually really excellent relationship. >> i know i work on a regular basis security issues and going
1:54 pm
to jamaica in the near future another place is. subsampling site there. >> the cold war between the u.s. and soviet union is over. there may have been areas in which the soviets surpass military education and now since they're open, what are we learning if anything quite >> naval war college has a relationship with one of the soviet naval education institutions in these irregular exchanges go on. what did we learn specifically? i know this is difficult to accept, for most of the time as a presumption that we hear the teacher, not the miscreants of the information and maybe we have to be looking more at that. we work with these institutions.
1:55 pm
we gain an individual subject areas, but overall how to do the education, we are the model. if there are no more questions, thank you very much. i really appreciate the attention. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> and it's another picture-perfect day in los angeles for a book festival. this is book tvs live coverage of day two of the 18th annual l.a. times festival of books and the university of southern california. here is our lineup for the next six and a half hours. we will have leading authors for you to interact with via phone
1:56 pm
calls, treats and paste the comments. just in an apple poetry panel on hollywood and politics.
1:57 pm
1:58 pm
[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> okay, everyone, welcome. we are here to make sure this is the amount and at the start of the airline site, where we want to make sure you are not on the plane issues and when you want to go to jfk. so you are here at history, the cold war hollywood jan. my name is jim rainey, more
1:59 pm
recently a political writer at "the l.a. times." the couple announcements, everyone should turn off their cell phones. probably turn them off, even if they're on vibrate. richard is particularly sensitive. is a cell phone goes off, he will hunt you down and correct it. after the session, there are going to be signing of the folks here about today and the signing area is area one, which you can look on a map where someone will direct you. you're also not opposed to record this. i'm going to introduce the three panelists, starting in the middle with jon wiener. john teaches at you see irvine and has contributed an editor to the nation agassi. he also is a weekly radio program wednesdays at 4:00 p.m. on 90.7 fm. he is best known for suing the
2:00 pm
fbi for their files on john lennon. that story was told in the book, give me some truth, the john lennon ei trials. his most recent book is how we forgot the cold war, historical journey across america, which you can pick up later and get signed to john. that is john in the middle. next we've got the brass who has a home or advantage here perhaps. he's a professor of history at u.s. needs in a certain extensively about the working-class social history in film. his face that focused on cincinnati. his second was working-class hollywood come which focuses the subtitles that come the senate summons shaping of class in america. his latest book is hollywood left and right, how many shares shaped american politics and received the film scholars award from the academy of motion picture arts and


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on