Townterview Hosted by Arnab Goswami of Frankly Speaking on Times Now at St. Xavier College
Interview
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Mumbai, India
July 18, 2009
QUESTION: Secretary Clinton, first of all, it’s a pleasure to have you on Frankly Speaking.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you. Thank you so much.
QUESTION:
Secretary Clinton, you’ve come at a time when there are lots of
challenges in this region, and I just want to take up some of the main
points with you. Today, as you were here, and you were asked a lot of
questions about terrorism, about Pakistan’s role. And it’s also
interesting that in the masterminds of 26/11, we’re actually (inaudible)
in Pakistan. But that doesn’t amount to very much, Secretary Clinton,
because the trial is yet to start. The real action has not happened.
Americans have died in 26/11, people from all nationalities. Are you
concerned that the trial, the real punishment, hasn’t really started at
all?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, of course, I am concerned if
there is not a trial and if there is not justice for those who planned
the attacks of 26/11. I do have some understanding of how difficult
these cases are because, as you know, we are still holding people that
we haven’t tried who we believe were involved with the 9/11 attacks.
So
what I’m looking for is a commitment and one that is carried through.
The timing, I am understanding of, but there must be an eventual
reckoning of justice.
QUESTION: So you would say that there must be a trial, that Pakistan must have a trial?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
I believe that there has to be justice, that there has to be a full
vetting and a thorough analysis of what happened and who was behind it,
just as I think with any terrorist attack.
QUESTION: Absolutely.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
I think what countries are now understanding, wherever they are
located, is that terrorism anywhere is a threat everywhere. And I hope
that we will see the eventual full cooperation of every government
against these non-state actors who train and equip the terrorists who
wreak havoc. As you know, in this area, there have been – there has been
terrorism in nearly every country, and therefore, there should be a
joint effort in sharing of intelligence, sharing of counterterrorism
techniques, law enforcement against this common threat.
QUESTION:
Yes, absolutely. I think your reference to non-state actors takes me to
my next question: Secretary Clinton, you have also been asked questions
about the Lashkar e-Tayyiba, the Jaish e-Mohammed, and these are
organizations which have, for a long period of time, believed to have
been bleeding India to a thousand cuts. Would you put pressure – I know
you’ve said that your focus is Indo-U.S. relations and not
Pakistan-India relations. But you have that influence over Pakistan.
Would you use some of your influence or offices or would you advise the
Government of Pakistan to be – seem to be acting against groups like the
Lashkar e-Tayyiba or Jaish e-Mohammed, which eventually don’t just
target India; they target the world.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well,
we have, in our dialogue with Pakistan, over the last six months, been
very clear that we think it’s imperative that Pakistan go after all the
terrorist groups because, if for no other reason, any one of them is
actually a threat to Pakistan. Because even if they were at one time
focused elsewhere, now they are part of a criminal terrorist syndicate.
They reinforce one another, they plan together, they give safe haven to
one another.
And therefore, no terrorist group can be left alone or
forgotten about. Every one of them must be the target of intense law
enforcement and justice efforts.
QUESTION: You have focused,
and you’ve spoken of it in Congress and Senate and global forums –
Secretary Clinton, would you, at any point of time, your Administration,
consider linking the large amounts of military, civilian, other aid
that you’re giving Pakistan to tangible action against terrorism,
against these terror groups, so that there’s some visible sign which
also assures countries like India, which are also your partners --
SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.
QUESTION: -- at a global level, that Pakistan is acting not just in one area, but also towards these groups?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, as --
QUESTION: Would you link that (inaudible)?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
As you say, I mean, I’m very proud to be in India to deepen and
strengthen our relationship. But I do want you and I want your viewers
to know that we are always stressing the importance of counterterrorism
efforts in every country that we do anything with, including aid
programs.
QUESTION: Right. There is also concern about Af-Pak.
When there were visits sometime back, there were worries that India has
been (inaudible) with the Af-Pak countries, but there also is, at the
same time – my question to you would be, Secretary Clinton, would you –
do you see India’s role anywhere as a major regional power --
SECRETARY CLINTON: Absolutely.
QUESTION: -- in the problems in the Af-Pak region? Could you elaborate on those, please?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well, I consider India a not just regional, but global power. I said
that in the speech that I gave last week in Washington. I think India
has a tremendous opportunity to work to resolve problems regionally and
to work with other nations, including the United States, on some of the
global challenges we face. Now how India decides to do that is up to
India. India is a sovereign nation, a democracy. India has to make the
decisions that are right for her.
But certainly, trying to bring some
understanding, which India has, to the table in dealing with the
problems in Afghanistan and the extremist threats in Pakistan would be
very helpful. And I think that the cooperation that we’re building
between the United States and India that I am very personally committed
to on counterterrorism, on intelligence sharing, on everything that we
can do to help protect India from terrorism and to enlist India’s help
in our fight against the extremists in Afghanistan and in support of
what Pakistan is now doing will be very welcome and important.
QUESTION: And do you see any resistance to that from, say, Pakistan? Would you be worried of any resistance to that from Pakistan?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well, I must say that over the last six months, we have seen an
evolving attitude in Pakistan – the army’s efforts that are ongoing now
in Swat and Vaneer and elsewhere have only recently begun, but they have
been judged by our military leaders as being sincere, effective, and
committed. So I think that there’s an attitude within Pakistan today,
not just at the governmental levels, but within the society, that the
terrorists pose a threat to them, that you cannot unleash terrorism or
turn a blind eye to it anywhere any longer, and that’s what I am
encouraged by.
QUESTION: Recently – in fact, just three days
back – two days back, in fact, Secretary Clinton, there were meetings
between the Indian and Pakistani prime ministers in Sharm el-Sheikh in
Egypt. And the general consensus was that India showed great maturity by
dealing clean action against terror from talks. So they were in total
disagreement about how wise do you think this is to do, you should have a
more hardline approach. Having said that, would you also believe that
even though these three matters are delinked, that Pakistan should not
stop the continued efforts that it needs to take as actively as it was
telling the world in December or January about fighting against these
terror groups?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Absolutely. I think that
should be a given. I think it should be expected. And as I say, I think I
see some very positive steps in that direction. But India is a great
country. It is a country that is mature and is able to make decisions
for herself. It is also a very powerful country with an enormous
military capacity if necessary. But what I see the Government of India
doing is to try to be able to find the space to focus on what you and I
were talking about, which is eradication of poverty, increasing
educational opportunities, improved health outcomes, more jobs, better
agricultural productivity, the bread and butter issues that will enable
India to not only grow, but broadly spread the prosperity that is being
developed. So I have a great deal of admiration for the difficult
decisions that the Indian Government is trying to make.
QUESTION:
All right. Secretary Clinton, on Kashmir, you know there has been a
history of long conflict and difference between India and Pakistan on
it. India believes it’s a bilateral issue, and from what I heard you
earlier in the day today, you always said we don’t want to get into
India-Pakistan issues at all. But Pakistan would like to see the issue
internationalize. It’s been trying to internationalize the issue over a
long period of time. Do you see – if I were to ask you, Secretary
Clinton, do you see any role as a broker at all, directly, indirectly
for America on this issue between India and Pakistan so that the matter
can be settled, once and for – where do you stand on it?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well, the decision has to be between India and Pakistan, and of course,
taking into account the feelings of the people of Kashmir. I think
there is no resolution without India and Pakistan deciding what is in
the best interests of the future. So our role is not to be involved
other than to support the process that India and Pakistan may decide to
enter into.
QUESTION: But I think that’s absolutely
(inaudible), but there were also concerns – you’ve been asked this
before – about the nuclear deal. What (inaudible) creating, despite some
domestic opposition. Secretary Clinton, is the nuclear deal
conditionally anywhere, anywhere at all (inaudible) India signing the
nuclear deal (inaudible)? Is it at all conditional?
SECRETARY CLINTON: No.
QUESTION: No?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
No. The civil nuclear deal stands on its own merits. There are
provisions within it that we are still working on to fulfill. But what
I’m hoping, in my conversations with the leaders with whom I’ll be
meeting over the next several days, is that India can help us determine
how to keep nuclear material and knowledge out of the hands of rogue
states and non-state actors.
What is the appropriate
nonproliferation program for the future? Again, India has a tremendous
capacity to determine what direction it wants to go. In this particular
area, I was heartened by a speech that the prime minister’s special
envoy for nonproliferation delivered in Washington some days ago, where
in effect, he said we may not go the route that others have gone in the
past, but we want to be contributing to solving a problem which could
endanger all of us. So I’m interested in knowing what are some of the
ideas that India would put on the table.
QUESTION: What condition are (inaudible)?
SECRETARY CLINTON: No.
QUESTION: Would you (inaudible) --
SECRETARY CLINTON: No.
QUESTION: -- (inaudible) --
SECRETARY CLINTON:
No. I was the co-chair of the India Caucus in the United States Senate.
I worked very hard for the passage of the India-U.S. civil nuclear
deal. I am very committed to it, and committed to its full
implementation. But I do worry about what we see as proliferation in
places like North Korea and Iran, the continuing efforts by terrorist
groups to try to get a hold of nuclear weapons or material that could be
used in a terrorist act. So I want, as part of our ongoing discussion,
to explore with Indian leaders what can we do to make sure we prevent
that.
QUESTION: But that’s (inaudible)?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Absolutely.
QUESTION:
A more positive question. You keep coming back to India as (inaudible).
We always want to know, on Frankly Speaking, what’s your takeaway?
There seems to be something, if I’m not mistaken, which draws you, which
is drawing (inaudible) to this country? What’s your takeaway this time
when you’re gone, which is not tomorrow but – you’re staying at the Taj.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Yes, I am, and I chose to stay at the Taj for a very specific reason: I
wanted to send a message that I personally, and our country, is in
sympathy and solidarity with the employees and the guests of the Taj who
lost their lives, were injured, with the people of Mumbai and others
who were impacted by the horrific attacks, and really, as a rebuke to
the terrorists who may have tragically taken lives, but did not destroy
the spirit and the resilience of the people of this city or nation.
I
am attracted to India. This is my fourth trip with – my husband has
been here many times. There’s something about the dynamism of the
people, the dedication to democracy that I see, the commitment to doing
better all the time and making a better future. It’s inspiring to me.
And I can’t really express it; it’s just a feeling in my heart that
makes me very happy to be here. It’s both a privilege and an honor, I
think, and I love the food. (Laughter.) I have friends. I mean, it’s
just – it’s a place that I feel very comfortable in.
QUESTION: We wish you (inaudible).
SECRETARY CLINTON:
We will work that out, I am sure, in the future, perhaps when it’s not
so official and we can actually just walk the streets and spend time
with people instead of the schedule that one keeps as an official
visitor.
QUESTION: Can I ask you one last question, a very
personal question? We’ve seen you in many roles over three, four, five,
six years. Now you’ve talked about it – very difficult First Lady, and
now Secretary of State, (inaudible).
SECRETARY CLINTON: (Laughter.)
QUESTION: What’s next? What do you see your roles (inaudible)?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Retirement. (Laughter.) Probably it will be along the lines of what we
just did. I started out as an activist and an advocate for children and
families and women.
QUESTION: Yes.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
I worked very hard to create organizations and to promote the ideals of
equality and opportunity. And I would go back to that. I would go back
to being a voice for the voiceless, standing up against conditions that
just leech the life out of children and oppress women and prevent people
from fulfilling their God-given potential.
I think it’s a great
tragedy that walking around New York City or walking around Mumbai,
there are probably people who could have found a cure for cancer, but
they never got educated.
QUESTION: Absolutely.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
There are probably women who could have been great teachers, but they
never were given the chance. And so for me, this is a life’s work to try
to expand the opportunities for people to make decisions for themselves
in ways that will not only fulfill their own life purposes, but
contribute to their families, communities and nations.
QUESTION:
And I think what you’ve said today is going to move a lot of people,
actually. Thank you so much. It’s been greatly a pleasure and privilege
having you on Frankly Speaking.
SECRETARY CLINTON: It’s been our pleasure too.
QUESTION: Thank you.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you so much.
Remarks With Aamir Khan and Arnab Goswami, Moderator
Remarks
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
Teach India Media Event at St. Xavier College
Mumbai, India
MR. GOSWAMI:
Thank you all so much for being here. It’s truly a pleasure to have all
of you, and especially to have in our midst two icons at this wonderful
academic institution of technical excellence, two icons who represent
the whole concept of taking a challenge and turning it into an
opportunity. Their involvement in education is deep. It goes over a long
period of time. And I’m so glad, let me say, (inaudible) Secretary
Clinton, and to you, Aamir Khan, that you have given time to come to
this institution and spend some time with all the volunteers of Teach
India and Teach For India.
And let me also say that the
volunteers who are in the audience today are the real stars, because
they are the ones who take time out from what they do to share the
vision that one has for this. So I’d like to thank you very much, and
maybe we can begin with a round of applause for my two guests this
evening. (Applause.)
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much.
Secretary Clinton and Aamir, I’d like to keep this as interactive as
possible, but I am also sure that many in the audience have questions
for you today about your vision of education. And we would also like you
to share your wisdom and compare it to the Indian experience.
So
may I begin, Secretary Clinton, by asking you to share your wisdom of
education. And by way of a first question, let me ask you, Secretary
Clinton, that when there are inequities, there are ways in which
programs like Teach For India, Teach For America, Teach India help
bridge those inequities. How about the larger net? If you say parents
are the best teachers, how does one install teaching, then, among those
who are underprivileged?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, let
me begin by thanking you very much for giving me this opportunity to be
here at St. Xaiver’s and to have this chance to talk about an issue that
is very near and dear to my heart. It’s also, I have to confess, a
great delight to be here with Aamir Khan, a Bollywood icon, but more
than that, a dedicated, committed advocate for education, as we’re going
to hear more about as we move forward in the program.
I
wanted to make two points just to start it off and to respond to your
question, Arnam. First, I believe every child can learn. I do not
believe that children, regardless of their backgrounds, have limited or
no capacity. But I believe they don’t have equal opportunity. I think
that talent is distributed universally, but opportunity is limited. And
that is true in every country, to a greater or lesser degree. And
secondly, it is truly up to all of us – families, governments,
businesses, educational institutions – to do everything we can to narrow
the gap between talent and opportunity, and to give every child a
chance to grow up and fulfill his or her God-given potential.
Now,
children have different potentials. There are some who will be Nobel
Prize winning physicists, and there will be others who will earn an
honest living doing the hard work that keeps us all going. But every
child deserves that chance to be able to chart his or her own future.
And so for me, education is the great equalizer and the gateway to
opportunity. It does start in the family. The family is the child’s
first school, and parents are children’s first teachers. And some of us
are fortunate to have families and parents who understand the value of
education and encourage us and challenge us, and others are not.
So
we have to do more to convince all families that education is partly
their responsibility, and then we have to join forces with the
government and the schools that are funded by the government with the
private schools, with the private sector, and with groups and
organizations like Teach India and Teach For India.
So I am
committed and have been for many years to equality of opportunity for
all children, and I’m thrilled to have this chance to talk with you
about the programs that are represented here, the challenge that India
faces to increase education to people who do not have the opportunity
right now, and to look to see how the United States and India can work
together on the common cause of educational opportunity.
MR. GOSWAMI:
Thank you very much. Aamir, you get with this – you’re upset and you
feel strongly about inequities. What really, in your view, is – is that
the biggest stumbling block that one has?
MR. KHAN:
Well, let me start by saying it’s a real honor to be here with Secretary
Clinton today and I’m very happy to have met her and looking forward to
hearing her thoughts.
I really have one extremely important
thing that I would like to convey and – you know, in today. And that is
that I have, you know, the highest respect and regard for organizations
like Teach For India and Teach India, and hundreds of such organizations
all over the country who are going out of their way and doing things
for education. But what I would really like to see is that we as a
people give top priority and the kind of value that education and
teaching deserves.
I think we are still a little away from
that. And by that, I mean that I would like to see one day in India that
the top jobs that people are vying for are the teaching jobs. You see –
did anyone happen to have met – why there are a lot of people who are
really interested in teaching and are really doing a lot in this field?
But
by and large, the majority of people getting into teaching today in the
country, in our country, are those who are not able to make, you know, a
job for themselves in other places. So people who want to be engineers,
doctors, and management students, but they can’t make it and they go
into teaching as a result of not making it as far.
So by and
large, the majority of teachers are people who are not really interested
in teaching to begin with, and probably are not entirely fit for it and
are not the brightest minds either. And the reason for that --
MR. GOSWAMI: (Inaudible.)
MR. KHAN:
No. I think, as I said, there are a lot of teachers who are doing a
great job, so (inaudible), and there are a lot of people who are
genuinely interested in teaching who are doing a great job. But I think
that’s a minority. By and large in India, the people getting into
education are because they can’t find a place for themselves anywhere
else. And that is not why they should be in teaching.
What
happens is that the brightest – I mean, we, as a country, as a society,
should be giving so much importance and so much value to teaching, that
every kid coming out of college should feel like “I want to be a
teacher.” It should be the highest-paying job. It should be the job that
we all vie for. You know, young students, do they want to be doctors,
they want to be engineers, they want to make a better life for
themselves.
Teaching should be one of the most successful
lives for the youth today, and it should be such that the youth vie for
it, they want to become teachers. And that will begin with us, Arnab. I
think we as a society have to give that importance to teaching and
education as, you know, our government, our administration should give
it that kind of value. And that is when we will give that value and I
think that will dramatically change our system, and education is, in
fact, ultimately, the very foundation of any society.
If
tomorrow, we as India want to be world leaders – and I don’t mean that
in a very narrow point of view – of competing as (inaudible) leadership,
but – no, but taking responsibility and contributing towards mankind.
Then, we have to make a strong base on that and only to education.
MR. GOSWAMI: Absolutely.
MR. KHAN:
And one of the key things in education for me is not, you know, whether
you know the answer to of A+B or the root square, but are you
encouraging children to question, are you encouraging children to have
minds which are wanting to learn and are thirsty and hungry, and not
merely people who have a good memory? You know, kids are told that you
have to learn this by heart and they learn it all by heart, but you’re
not creating individuals who will have minds which can take our – you
know, which can (inaudible) dramatically forward in ways that we can’t
even imagine today. That will only happen if you have minds which are
encouraged to question, to disagree, to challenge, to search, discover.
And I don’t think that is the kind of education we follow in India
today. It’s mostly, you know, focusing on how well you can memorize
things.
The last thing that I would like to say here is that
one of the things that disturbs me most about our education in India,
and I don’t know how it is in the West, in U.S., but so much of emphasis
is given on competition – did you come first in your class, what did
you score, how is your math, how is your – I would like to see teachers
actually telling students, “Hey, your partner is weak in something. Are
you helping him?”
So psychologically, and very, very
subconsciously, we give importance not to competing, but to caring. We
teach our kids to be caring human beings, and that, in my opinion – I’ve
been saying the last year for here – everywhere I go. But we have to
teach our kids to be caring. We have to put a premium on love and care.
And in my opinion, we do that, you know, from the age of toddlers, when
today we go to a school recent – parents are “My son should come first.”
Unimportant; let him be happy, let him be caring about his friends,
teach him that is important.
MR. GOSWAMI: But I find that --
MR. KHAN: That will make a huge difference 20 years from now.
MR. GOSWAMI:
Just a small contradiction on that, Secretary Clinton, that if one
sees, for example, the most recent statements that have come out of your
Administration in the U.S. since it took over, and the last two or
three statements of President Obama, whenever he speaks about the
education system of it – and I am told Secretary Clinton knows this – he
always takes the example of good education systems being in countries
like India and China.
You know, there is – there are positive
references to the – and he’s always – President Obama’s recent
statements have been in the light of “We must be able – our education
system must be able to compete with the education systems in India and
China.” So I wanted to understand from you what really are the handicaps
in the present American system, and what would your Administration seek
to change? Also, if you’d like to respond to some of what Aamir said.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
No, I think that he’s made some excellent points about what is going to
be required to be successful in the world in the future. Obviously,
competition is part of the human genome; that’s how we’re made. But
cooperation and collaboration is more and more important. It’s important
among people and it’s important among countries.
I think you
can look and see our education system and realize that we have some of
the greatest schools and universities in the world. But we don’t have
them for everyone, and we don’t take care of students who fall behind as
well as we should. So part of our challenge is to lift up the students
who don’t always have the easiest time of it in life, whose families are
not able or willing to assist them and support them, who comes from
groups that are perhaps more marginalized than the majority. And we’ve
made a lot of progress, but we are very candid in saying we have much to
do in order to fulfill the promise of equal education.
Certainly,
in India – so when you hear President Obama or another American talk
about India, you can look at the very best in Indian education, and it’s
the best in the world. You can look at the technical education and it
is to be envied. It is so effective. But then there are hundreds of
levels down where millions and millions of children don’t have an
adequate primary education or a secondary education or, certainly,
college education.
So I look at our country and I see that
we’re providing an education to everyone, but it’s very unequal. India
faces the challenge of so many more people to serve in very rural areas,
often without adequate infrastructure, so you have to come to grips
with how you actually produce the schools that are needed, the teachers
who will be dedicated, the curriculum and materials that are required.
So
in one way, we have a similar problem, that we leave people behind in
greater or lesser numbers; and the other way, we have a different
problem, which is that we have the infrastructure and we spend a lot of
money on education, but we often don’t get what we consider to be the
best return for the children.
Now we have another issue which I
don’t really know whether it’s a problem here, and that is that there
is a lot of competition for children’s attention. There is so much else
going on in the culture that the idea of school seems less important
than it did when I went to school. When I went to school all those years
ago, the family structure was more intact, the teacher was a more
authoritative figure, there really wasn’t a lot of other temptation and
competition in the air. We didn’t have hundreds and hundreds of TV
stations and internet sites and everything that children are attracted
to now.
So part of our challenge is how do we keep a child’s
attention, and how do we use technology in a way to assist the learning
of children? But as I think about it, that may be an opportunity for
India; rather than building the infrastructure for thousands and
thousands of schools, how is technology used to communicate and educate?
I met this morning with a group of some of the leading business and
industrial leaders in India, and they’re moving toward using cell phones
for banking. And one of them said that eight, nine years ago, there
were not very many cell phones in India; now there are 500 million.
So
having that technology can be a learning experience. It’s not the
traditional one we think of, but it’s an opportunity to reach so many
more people. So I think in a way – and you have a dynamic new education
minister, I am told – so in a way, for India to think creatively, to go
exactly to your point, that rather than “Okay, we – this is the way we
do it, this is the way we always have done it, this is what we’ve
memorized and this is what we’ll tell you,” let’s be creative, and how
do we get beyond it. And we’re looking at some of the same ideas in our
country.
MR. GOSWAMI: Secretary Clinton, I have one
question to ask you before I take more questions from the audience, and
that question takes me to a really vicarious pleasure that I have got
when I read one of your statements, where you apparently said – and I am
sure many of us who have been students at any stage, and all of us have
been, would really get a sense of vicarious pleasure at your statement
that there must be a one-time test for teachers as well. You said that
there should be a one-time test for teachers. And if I am not mistaken –
correct me if I am wrong – you said if they don’t pass the test, then
fire them.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.
MR. GOSWAMI: We don’t have one-time tests for teachers in India, Secretary Clinton. Did you manage to get that done --
SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.
MR. GOSWAMI: -- in America and --
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Not in America, but many years ago, when my husband was the governor of
one of our states, Arkansas, which on the map is by Texas, we were very
concerned about the low level of education in our state. My husband
came from a family where he was the first to go to college, and yet his
family believed in education, so they encouraged him and they made him
study. And so he became academically successful and could follow his own
path in life.
So my husband asked me to work on what we could
do to make our education system better. And one of the concerns that I
heard from people across our state was that there was such a disparity
in the quality of teaching. There were some of the great teachers who
were dedicated, who were there because they loved their work, and there
were teachers who should not have been teaching because they didn’t know
the subject matter, they didn’t seem to really be devoted to the task
of teaching.
So I proposed a – what we called a teacher test.
Now these teachers remember; they had gone to college and they had been
given their certificates. But there were so many complaints about their
teaching and their understanding of subject matter that we said we’re
going to have a test. It was so controversial.
MR. GOSWAMI: It must have been.
SECRETARY CLINTON: It was extremely difficult. But we really stuck to our guns.
MR. GOSWAMI: Did they resist?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
There was great resistance and great concern about it. We stuck to our
guns. There was a test designed. And about 10 percent of the teachers
failed it.
MR. GOSWAMI: Ten percent is a lot.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
It’s a lot. And oftentimes, they were concentrated in the areas of the
poorest children who needed the best teachers. I often think about my
own daughter. I mean, we read to her from the time she was born, we took
her to museums, we took her to libraries, we talked all the time to
her, so she has an amazing vocabulary. And I kept thinking she could
actually survive going to a bad school. She didn’t. I mean, we made sure
she didn’t, but she could, whereas a child without that kind of
background and encouragement really can’t.
And the final thing
I would say, because I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about how we
help parents to become better teachers of their own children, there is
very solid research in the United States, and I think it’s universal,
that if you divide parents into wealthy and educated, middle class,
lower middle class, working class, somewhat educated but certainly not
college or post-graduate, and then poor people and poorly educated, if
at all, what you find is that people from this higher educated class,
like my husband and I, we talk to our children all the time. And we do
exactly what you are saying, which is to ask them to solve problems –
“Well, what do you think about that,” or “What would you do,” or “See
that? How would you respond?”
So there’s a constant learning
going on. As you move down the income scale into more working class
environments, there is not as much talking, and it’s very utilitarian.
It’s like “This is what you have to do,” and “Please pass the salt,” and
“Please go do this,” and “Don’t do that.” It’s very utilitarian, but
there is talking going on. But when you get into the lower
socioeconomics, there is very little talking. Now, in part, because life
is very hard; there’s not a lot of time to talk. You are trying to
keep, as we would say, body and soul together – put food on the table
and a roof over one’s head. And talking is just not part of the daily
routine.
So by the time a child is five, that child has
acquired 50 percent of the entire vocabulary the child will ever have.
And so if you have been filled up with words so that you have a very
active vocabulary, think of how much more it will be. And I don’t
believe that a child can read above the level of that child’s
vocabulary. So starting in the home and starting with an understanding
that you need good nutrition for children to learn, a child who is
malnourished is likely to be behind, both physically and mentally, and
you need an atmosphere that encourages thinking and problem solving. All
of that goes hand in hand before the child ever gets to the school.
MR. GOSWAMI:
Secretary Clinton, I’m totally taken with what you said. You’re
obviously an exceptional parent, and I think people have missed a
wonderful teacher in you. But I saw Aamir drawn into that conversation,
because Aamir’s movie, which I hope you see sometime, Taare Zameen Par,
which was a hit all over India, was exactly about that, was (inaudible).
It was about that special touch, that extra caring, that you don’t
teach a – treat a child like someone who has to come out with a product
at the end of so many years of education.
MR. KHAN: I
mean, I think – I mean, education should ultimately, you know,
contribute to how you turn out as a person and educate. For – and the
fact is that reading and writing are only two intelligences that we as
humans possess. There are so many intelligences, and each one of us can
learn so much in different aspects of life and what impresses, what
doesn’t. So I actually have very – I mean, I don’t have conventional
views on education. I mean, a kid may not be interested in math, and
that may not be something he’s interested at all in doing, but he might
be really interested in singing. So we should encourage him and teach
him singing.
So, I mean, when I, for example – I was only 12
when I decided to start learning about cinema and filmmaking, and for
that, I wanted to drop out of college. It was conventional education.
And my parents said to me that, you know, you have to be graduate, you
know, don’t stop your studies. I said, “No, I’m not stopping my studies.
I’m starting them. My education begins now, because this is what I want
to learn about. I want to learn about cinema. I want to learn about
filmmaking. So I’m not stopping my education. I am, I think, starting
it.”
So like, you know, I don’t remember who said this, but
don’t let schooling ever get in the way of education. This is what I
absolutely believe. So I think that, you know, like TZP, the film that I
made, I mean, we are trying to talk about inclusion. Every child has a
right to education. And we shouldn’t judge children and assume that a
child is dumb or doesn’t deserve our --
MR. GOSWAMI: Or the fear of rejection early on in education.
MR. KHAN:
Certainly, certainly. I mean, you know, inclusion is such an important
part, which again, is an area where, in India, we need to really
soul-search and improve on, because we still have special schools for
children. They should be in regular schools. All children should be in
regular schools. I mean, every child has a right to be with children his
age, and we don’t have a right to pick him up and put him somewhere
else.
So, you know, inclusion is another very important aspect of education and growing up.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
I just wanted to echo what Aamir said because there is a wonderful
researcher at Harvard University named Howard Gardner, who has proven
what you have just described, and that is that there are several
different kinds of intelligence and ways of learning. Some people are
very good at sitting in a classroom and absorbing the teacher’s lecture
through their ears and through their eyes. They watch what’s written or
they read what they’re given or they listen to the lectures.
But
that is not the only way to learn. And it is not the – it is not better
or worse than any other way of learning, but it is the way that our
schools are structured, so that children who learn by doing and children
who learn by a kind of kinesthetic --
MR. KHAN: Ability.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
-- ability, right, which goes with performing arts and goes with the
visual arts. And very often, they’re not given any outlet for their
intelligence. And we keep learning these lessons in America, but then we
don’t apply them in our schools. Like, for example, if you keep
children just sitting in that classroom with very little opportunity to
experience other forms of education, you’re going to lose the attention
of a significant percentage of them. Whereas if you have a better way of
identifying who would be the good singer – because it’s not only that
this person might grow up to be a singer – not everyone will, by any
means – but they might begin to feel confident about themselves, which
will then enable them to pursue a different form of learning that will
actually lead to a job and income.
I mean, part of – and I
think what you said before is so important – part of what happens to
kids in every education system right now that I know of in the world, is
that a lot of the creativity and energy is channeled so narrowly.
MR. KHAN: Absolutely.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
And then children who don’t fit into that channel feel like outsiders,
and some of them have enough confidence that they’re able to survive.
They --
MR. KHAN: But a lot of them don’t.
MR. GOSWAMI: But a lot of them don’t.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
But a lot of them don’t. And then – see, what happens is that that
child who doesn’t have the confidence and gets discouraged becomes a
parent who wants to stay away from education. So, instead of encouraging
his or her child, you are finding a parent who doesn’t want to go talk
to the teachers, doesn’t want to be involved in the educational
experience because they had such a bad time of it. So you then
perpetuate the kind of generational resistance and rejection of
education.
So, I mean, there’s so much more we could do, which
is why programs like Teach India and Teach For America are important,
because your interacting with children can light the spark that nobody
else has lit. I’ve seen it happen over and over again, where some kind
of interaction between a caring adult and a child who is looking for
direction, inspiration, whatever, makes the difference. And that’s what
we need more of and we just don’t have enough of it.
MR. GOSWAMI: Also because it opens up the eyes of those who – advantage --
SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.
MR. GOSWAMI: -- who have the opportunities to those who don’t have the same opportunities.
SECRETARY CLINTON: That’s right. That’s right.
MR. GOSWAMI: Yes.
MR. KHAN:
You know, I think this program, Teach For India, which is similar for
Teach For America, which has begun this year – I think a very important
program. And when I was approached to endorse it and to support it, I
was, you know, quite excited, actually, because it’s an idea – I don’t
know how many people in our country know about it, but let me just
briefly tell you.
MR. GOSWAMI: Yes.
MR. KHAN:
It’s a program where students coming out of the leading colleges in
India are invited to commit two years of their lives in becoming part of
the education system in India, and teaching children from primary
schools and municipal schools in our country. So this is the first year –
and there are batches of, I think, 90 or so students who have signed in
and who have been through a training program.
Now these are
the brightest minds of our country, mind you. So imagine, you know, 90
of our students who are really bright going into municipal schools and
teaching children, you know, at the age of eight or nine. And that’s the
age where your basics are formed, you know, really. But this is just 90
students. I imagine 9,000 or 90,000 or nine lat students coming out
could only mean – not only will it dramatically change and contribute to
the education of our children, but it will significantly change that
person as well, because when I – maybe I want to be a doctor. Maybe
that’s what I want to be.
But after finishing my education
and before getting into medicine, if I spend two years with little
children, interacting with them, teaching with – teaching them, that
experience is something money can’t buy. If I want to be a CEO of a
company or I want to get into business, again, this experience that I
have of two years with children is going to be something that will – you
know, that’ll stand by me all through my life.
So I think it contributes to society in both ways: Children benefit and so do adults.
MR. GOSWAMI: Of course.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
And I wanted to add a word too about Teach India, which I have learned
about from both of you. The idea that people from all walks of life
would spend some time in the schools will help to raise the visibility
of the challenges that you face. And every school can use more caring
adults.
I mean, I remember when my daughter was in the first
grade and her first grade teacher said, “I don’t feel comfortable
teaching about science, but I would really like it if some of the
mothers would come in and do the science lessons,” and one of the
mothers of Chelsea’s classmates was actually a scientist who had decided
to take some time off to raise her children. So I’m not a scientist,
but she asked me if I would help, and I said, “Well, if you tell me what
I’m supposed to do, I will.” And so four of us went into the first
grade and just taught these little science programs. And it got us into
the classroom in a way that you never can if you’re just a mother
showing up to bring cupcakes for a birthday or some other kind of
special event.
And then I’ve seen, over the years, more
programs like this start in the United States, where a business might
adopt a school. They would take one school and then the people in the
business would sign up to help in whatever way they thought they could,
or other programs of service would be established so that if a school
didn’t have enough reading tutors, people would come in and help. I did
that also later – not in my daughter’s school, but working with a group
of kids who needed help with reading, and there were 25 kids in the
classroom and the teacher couldn’t possibly give them all the attention
they needed during the day. So several of us would come in and work with
them.
So the Teach India program gives people a chance – not
to have a full-time commitment like Teach For India will do for a year
or two, but to have enough of a commitment that you can see what the
needs are and then become advocates for the children and the schools.
MR. GOSWAMI: Absolutely. And it will have a trickle-down effect.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes, it will.
MR. GOSWAMI: You’ll start with 19, but I’m sure it’s going to go down. It’s got to come from the hardbone.
Let’s
take some questions simply because (inaudible) would be very unpopular
if I held the limelight. We have some (inaudible) out there, okay. Let
me start. I’ll try to be as well-distributed as possible. The lady right
there in the front, second row, please. Wait for the mike to come
through, please. Thank you. And who are you – who is your question?
QUESTION:
Good evening. I – since I am working with (inaudible) and I was a part
of the Teach India program, I vouch for it that kids must have learned
something from me. But what I got from the program was tremendous.
Keeping those same kids entertained for an hour was a task by itself,
and those kids get kids so they can tell you (inaudible), “Maybe I’m
bored, this is not interesting me anymore, do something different.” So
you have to think on your feet and keep them entertained all the time.
My
question to you, ma’am, is about the thing you were talking about,
vocabulary. In India, what happens is I was teaching these kids English.
No – they were brilliant in terms of the regional language that they
were studying in, but they just speak no English and they felt
inadequate. Their parents speak no English, so they could not give them
the vocabulary that’s needed to go out in the real world. I’m standing
here today because I speak English.
Now how do we address it?
Yes, it’s very true that parents need to teach their kids. My parents
taught me; I’m here today. But how do we address this whole issue of
English being so important to people who seem well-educated?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
That’s an excellent question. We have the same issue to a lesser
degree. We don’t have many languages spoken by as many people as you do
in India, but as you might know, we have a number of students in our
schools – I know New York best because I was a senator from New York and
I live in New York. And in the New York City public schools, there are
something like a hundred different languages. Now the most prominent are
languages like Spanish, languages like Chinese and Russian. So part of
the challenge is how do you teach a child who doesn’t speak English
without breaking their spirit and making them feel that they’re so
ignorant because they may know a lot in their own language, they may
express themselves well in their own language. But speaking English in
our country and, frankly, now in India and most places in the world is
such a precondition.
We’ve done a lot of work on what we call
bilingual education, and there are two different schools of thought. One
is that as soon as the children come into school as early as possible,
start teaching them in English and make them learn English quickly when
they’re young and they can absorb it. The other school of thought is:
Teach the children in their own language and gradually transition them
to English. There are arguments on both sides.
Here’s the
problem: We don’t have enough teachers, let alone bilingual teachers. So
the difficulty of trying to take, in one classroom, say in New York
City, kids who speak Spanish, Chinese and Russian, and try to work with
them in their own language is – it’s just hard for the system to absorb.
So it’s – we don’t have any answers. We are working hard to
come up with the best approaches, but a lot of people believe the best
approach, especially when you’re young, it is to immerse you in English
and help you learn English before you’re self-conscious about not
knowing it. I think that part of what India should do is experiment to
see what works in India, because there are different approaches.
MR. KHAN:
Absolutely. You know, what I feel about that is that English is a
language like Marathi or Hindi or Gujarati or any language. The
education is not really about languages. I think when you’re teaching a
child something, I think each society and each culture has a language,
and that is extremely important for that culture and society.
So
when you’re talking about education, I think we should retain what is
our own and what is the child’s own culture. So if a child is
comfortable in Marathi, he should be – he or she should be taught in
Marathi. If he ever feels like communicating with a person who knows
English or wants to communicate in a field which requires him to learn
English, he will if he needs to.
But I think that’s not
important if you don’t (inaudible). Education is not about languages.
There are so many languages in the world and all of them are beautiful.
And we should not assume that – let us move towards any one language. I
don’t, you know, buy into that.
MR. GOSWAMI: You have
to think of it, Aamir. English is never the primary language in India.
It’s the link language and that’s also our advantage, that it’s --
MR. KHAN:
No, I mean, it’s a great language. I mean, I think in English. I mean, I
grew up in India, I – my mother tongue is Urdu and my mom tried to
teach me Urdu. Unfortunately, I never learned it. I regret it today. I
really do. And I think in English and I’m – English is a great language.
I don’t have any issues with it. But I think that it’s also important
for me to be tied to my own roots, in a way, emotionally, and that’s
important as well.
MR. GOSWAMI: Well, absolutely. The next question, okay. The gentleman right at the corner there. Yeah, please go ahead, yes.
QUESTION:
Hello, everyone. It’s an honor standing here in front of you, both of
you. My name is Rahool Vengent, Teach For India Fellow 2009, and the
class teacher of second standard (inaudible) high school.
Actually,
the question is that on any rainy day in Bombay, we enter a class that
is – I mean, that is quite a lot, but it has very, very eager students
who are there to learn. Also, we have students who are in second
standard, but they don’t even know the basic alphabets. We – I’ll teach
(inaudible) that challenge almost on a daily basis.
So as the
leader that you have been and you are, how do you think that resolving
such education challenges makes you a good leader?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, could I ask you a question? How long have you been teaching?
QUESTION: Three months in total.
SECRETARY CLINTON: And what age children are you teaching?
QUESTION: The children are six and seven, six years and seven years.
SECRETARY CLINTON: What have you learned in three months that helps you feel like you’re teaching them?
QUESTION:
First and foremost, I cannot enter my classroom unplanned. I have to
plan before I enter my classroom because I get only five hours, and
those five hours are very, very precious for those kids.
SECRETARY CLINTON: That’s right.
QUESTION: So I need to plan very well, every second of it, so that I’m able to give them what I’m here for.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
I really appreciate what you said because it goes back to Aamir’s – one
of his first points, the amount of time it takes to be a good teacher –
to really plan, to be prepared, to get into the classroom and keep the
children’s attention and try to figure out who’s learning and who is
not.
I really believe that what you’re doing is so important
because there needs to be an understanding of how important teaching is
in order for the public to support paying teachers better, to convince
people to go into teaching so you can recruit better teachers. And there
is no substitute for experience. I mean, you could be in a classroom
and say that, but it wouldn’t have the same credibility as what you’ve
just said, because you’ve now been doing it.
And I think from
my own experience, what I remember most over the many years that I’ve
been advocating for better education are the times when I was
interacting with teachers and students. And very often, teachers want to
do a good job, but they’re given no support. They’re basically – just
said, “Here are your students, go teach them.” There is not the kind of
teacher training, continuing education; there is not the materials that a
good teacher needs. In our country, teachers spend up to $400 a year
out of their own pocket buying supplies that are not given to them by
the schools because they want to do a good job.
So I hope that
this program, which – both of these programs, which are really good in
and of themselves spur a debate about education more broadly so that
people who won’t go into the classrooms for Teach For America or Teach
India will be aware of what you’re doing. And I think you’ll have some
real credibility, and it’s through that credibility that perhaps there
can be a real movement for change.
MR. GOSWAMI: Thank
you so much and thank you for helping spur that debate by being here
today. Look, there are a lot of hands going up for you.
SECRETARY CLINTON: (Laughter.)
MR. GOSWAMI:
More than we can accommodate, perhaps. Okay, let me take the lady
there. Yes, right there, you – the fourth row, the lady in the fourth
row, please. Thank you.
QUESTION: Good evening. My name
is Diachi. My question is really first a statement and then a question.
I have been really recently quite shocked to hear that a lot of
children are – rather, all children in school have to go for extra
tuition not because they can’t handle the pressure of school, but
because it’s expected out of them. And the teachers that they’re
learning – to whom they go to for extra tuition are the same teachers at
these (inaudible) schools. So it’s not that the teachers are not
capable. It’s probably out of what Aamir (inaudible) said, that they’re
not paying enough in school to pay them extra money for the tuition, and
then they give them more attention.
So what happens to those
children who can’t afford that extra tuition week? And how do we solve
it? Is it just by paying them more, or is it a systemic problem that’s
much worse than now?
MR. KHAN: The thing is that, you
know, in India, there are so many issues and so many problems. And
certainly, the population is huge. There is a lot of poverty. I think
that as people, as Indians, we have to give high priority to education
and also our government and administration. I’m saying in the long run,
suppose we want great scientists, we want great doctors, we want great
businessmen, we want great leaders, we want great politicians; where are
they going to come from? They’re going to come from a good education.
So
I think that if we invest in that and give that a lot of value, you
know, like – I don’t know, I’m not a politician, I’m not into running a
country. But I would imagine that the kind of – starting from the annual
budget that you have, the kind of money that we should keep aside for
education should be much higher, I think, than what we have, especially
considering the fact that we are a poor country, that there is so much
poverty in the country.
And I think that this is – you know,
the fact is that this is going to be the base for anything that we hope
positive to happen in our country. It would depend on how our children
are educated.
MR. GOSWAMI: It stems to the point that Secretary Clinton also made – you can’t buy good teachers. You can’t buy good teachers, (inaudible).
MR. KHAN: Well, the thing is that you can give emphasis and value to teaching.
MR. GOSWAMI: But it has to come – it’s a calling, also. It’s a kind of calling. It has to come from within.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
But I think – but it’s a kind of combination. You want to attract and
keep quality teachers, but if teachers’ status and pay are so below
other professionals, a lot of people who might want to teach will feel
that they can’t afford to teach. And one of the challenges in our
country and elsewhere is how you pay teachers appropriately. We have
some places in our – in America where teachers are paid a lot, but it
doesn’t seem to reflect in the increase in enrollment. So it’s not
either/or. It’s both ends, exactly.
MR. GOSWAMI: But change will not come overnight.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Yes.
MR. GOSWAMI:
It’s going to take investment over a long period of time. I see more
hands going up each time I look at the audience. I have limited time, so
– but I will take a few more questions. It’ll be two or three more
questions.
Okay. The gentleman in the fourth row there, yes, you. Yeah, go ahead. The mike (inaudible).
QUESTION:
Okay. Good afternoon. So, the reality that we face in our classrooms
every day are extremely different. I mean, some of them are universal –
children go through a lot of abuse in different forms from the societies
they come from and the backgrounds that they come from. And these same
challenges that I, as a first-time teacher, I’m facing is how do I make
society aware of these incredibly gaping insecurities? You know, the
child’s rights are not defined. They are so ambiguous. A teacher slaps a
child and goes away scot-free. A child is abused in the house and he’s
afraid to come out and talk about it.
How, as a nation, how,
as an educational entity which we’re sitting here and talking about –
you know, equal opportunities and all of that, how do we address an
issue like this? And as a leader, how would you address an issue like
this?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, the whole issue of
children’s rights has been something I’ve worked on for many years. I
wrote an article, one of the first articles that was written in our
country, called Children’s Rights Under The Law. And I talked
about exactly what you’re describing. I mean, what happens when the
adults who are supposed to care for children abuse them, ignore and
neglect them, whether it’s in the family or it’s in the classroom? And
how you balance parental rights with children’s rights?
Because
obviously, adults need to take responsibility and they need to have
authority over children, but if they abuse it, who steps in? And I think
that part of the answer lies in what you just did, which is to stand up
and talk about this, and to organize around this so that people become
more aware of the consequences of their actions. Many people,
particularly parents, just don’t know any better. I mean, that’s the way
they were raised and the way their parents were raised and – corporal
punishment of the most severe kind, discrimination between boy and girl
children, I mean, that’s just how people were raised.
So part
of the challenge is to change the culture, and it, again, doesn’t happen
overnight. But you make things less acceptable. And having a movement
around the rights of children, as defined appropriately within Indian
society, is one that I think will come from a lot of the work that is
being done now, because you are seeing it, more and more people will see
it, and it will begin to take on a reality for the society.
So
there is no perfect answer and we certainly still have child abuse, and
we have all kinds of other problems, but it’s no longer acceptable.
When I first started working on child abuse after I was in law school,
we had just recognized child abuse as a serious problem, and this was
probably 1973. And before, people just didn’t pay attention. If a child
came to a hospital with burns or a broken arm and the parents said, “Oh,
he fell under the radiator,” or “She fell down the stairs,” nobody said
anything.
But then starting in the mid ‘70s, people started
saying, “Wait a minute, we know children are being physically abused. We
have to start paying attention.” So now, we have a whole system for
reporting and responding. It’s just – but that’s not a very long time
that this has been part of our law and part of our cultural mindset.
MR. GOSWAMI:
I’ll take one last question, only because of want of time, and there is
a lady right in the very end. She seems very (inaudible) to ask a
question.
QUESTION: Good evening to one and all. I am
(inaudible) and I’m a student of St. Xavier College. I’m extremely glad
that my colleagues are giving me this opportunity. I’m not a part of any
of these organizations, but I saved time, which is very close to
(inaudible), which is like a (inaudible). I tried teaching, like, a
group of five children, just like a school under the tree without much
of infrastructure. But a huge problem that I faced was that the parents
wouldn’t allow them to come. After like, one or two days, they would be
like, “No, but they need to go.” They wouldn’t say (inaudible), but I
did understand, or they needed to go to (inaudible). And after some
point of time, I found myself handicapped because I start going to their
places too, but they weren’t there at home.
So at that
point, I thought that, you know, like, all my dream of – you know, at
least bringing up these five kids when – you know, trying to teach them
something were just shattered. So I don’t know what – then what to do
exactly.
MR. KHAN: You know, in India there’s so many
problems, and certainly, poverty is one huge issue, and I just think you
shouldn’t give up. You know, I just think that yes, these problems are
there, and I think that what you’re doing is beautiful. I think that the
emotion with which you are coming forward to contribute to the lives of
those children and to your own life is a very important thing, and you
should just continue that.
Find five other children or, you
know, try and convince one of them to come and learn with you, you know?
It’s a very important thing, what you’re doing. Don’t be disappointed.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
I would echo that completely because, I mean, really, we’re not just
talking about education here. We’re talking about service, and we’re
talking about an ethic of service. And I think it’s important to
remember Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who of course learned so much from
Gandhi, and carried the message that he picked up from studying Gandhi
back in the United States, he said one time, “Everyone can be great
because everyone can serve.”
And it is often discouraging and
sometimes it feels futile, but you never know when the magic will
strike, when you convince some mother or father that you can actually
give their child a better life, when a child will say, “No, I want to
stay here under the tree because I’m learning something.” You just will
never know that unless you try. And you cannot give up. I mean, you
clearly have the heart for it, which did come through so passionately,
so you just have to keep working at it and be smart about trying to find
the situations that will enable you to help children who can benefit
from your intervention.
We have a program in the United States
called Big Brothers Big Sisters. And people sign up to sponsor a child,
and they spend just one afternoon or one evening a week with a child,
and it’s usually a poor child. It’s often a child who has lost a parent,
and so the mother has left or the father has left; they want the child
to have another adult in the life. And it’s amazing what those kind of
personal relationships can actually produce if they click, if they’re
worthwhile, if the adults enter into it with good faith and a good
heart.
So I just think there are so many ways to serve, and
you are exemplifying that and it’s the most powerful message that you
could send.
MR. GOSWAMI: I don’t have the heart to wrap
this up, but I know I have to for want of time. I’m just going to wrap
up by just saying one thing, and I’m sure I represent the feelings of
everyone here today: Secretary Clinton, and to you, Aamir, thank you for
giving your time. Your passion is obvious, your commitment is deep,
more power to you, and you’re always very popular in India, as your
husband was and continues to be. And I’m sure that after this event when
people approach you, people will – the admiration for you will even
grow further. Thank you very much, Secretary Clinton.
A round of applause for both our guests. (Applause.) Thank you so much. Thank you.
