Summary & Insights
0:00:07 In today’s episode, A16Z General Partner Katie Hahn
0:00:10 interviews Susan Rice, the former National Security Advisor
0:00:12 and U.S. Ambassador to the UN.
0:00:15 She’s the author of a memoir, “Tough Love.”
0:00:16 This is a candid talk
0:00:18 in which Ambassador Rice discusses leadership,
0:00:20 what it is, how to achieve it,
0:00:22 and how to focus under the extreme pressure
0:00:23 of global crisis.
0:00:26 She also talks about U.S. foreign relations
0:00:28 and what role the tech community can play.
0:00:29 This conversation took place
0:00:31 at our most recent innovation conference,
0:00:33 the A16Z Summit.
0:00:35 It was previously released on YouTube
0:00:36 if you’d like to check it out there.
0:00:40 (audience applauding)
0:00:43 – Susan, it’s so great to see you again here in LA.
0:00:45 And this time I get to share you with this audience,
0:00:47 which I’m really excited about.
0:00:49 You’ve had such an incredible life
0:00:51 and you’ve been in so many rooms and situations
0:00:54 that really very few of us, even in this rarefied room,
0:00:57 will ever really get to experience.
0:01:00 Aside from being Obama’s national security advisor
0:01:03 and the ambassador, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations,
0:01:05 you were also the youngest assistant secretary
0:01:07 of state in the Clinton administration.
0:01:10 And you were a Rhodes Scholar.
0:01:12 You have your doctorate from Oxford.
0:01:14 And of course, all of these experiences
0:01:16 meant that you had a front row seat
0:01:19 to some pretty interesting situations,
0:01:22 things like the Snowden Leaks, North Korea,
0:01:25 negotiations with Iran,
0:01:28 the war against ISIS, the Ukraine.
0:01:31 And now you’re on the board of Netflix.
0:01:32 You write for the New York Times
0:01:35 and you’ve just published your memoir, “Tough Love.”
0:01:37 So Susan, in “Tough Love,”
0:01:40 you write that when you were in your younger years,
0:01:43 when you were 32, people said about you
0:01:46 that you were smart and dynamic and decisive.
0:01:48 But they also said you were,
0:01:52 and I quote, “Brash, demanding and impatient.”
0:01:55 And I’m wondering if these traits are unbalanced.
0:01:57 Do you think they were a bug or a feature
0:01:59 as you rose through the ranks of the government?
0:02:01 – Well, first of all, Katie,
0:02:02 thank you so much for doing this.
0:02:03 And good afternoon, everyone.
0:02:05 It’s great to be with you.
0:02:07 Thank you.
0:02:14 I would say that I had a mix of qualities at age 32
0:02:17 that were on the one hand feature and the other hand bug.
0:02:22 On the feature side, I do think I had strong preparation.
0:02:25 I was hungry, I was driving a team
0:02:28 to a very particular set of outcomes.
0:02:31 That was feature, but I was impatient.
0:02:36 I was brash, and I think that I learned the hard way
0:02:40 that I had to adjust some of those characteristics.
0:02:42 They were more on the bug side
0:02:47 and they were not well suited to the environment
0:02:47 in which I was in.
0:02:50 This was when I was a very young assistant secretary
0:02:52 of state for African affairs.
0:02:54 I’d started the job having worked
0:02:56 at the White House previously.
0:03:01 I was 32 years old and not only the youngest person
0:03:06 by far among the people who worked with me and under me,
0:03:09 but I was also the mother
0:03:12 of a three-month-old breastfeeding son.
0:03:15 And the combination of all of those things,
0:03:18 plus my characteristics in the State Department,
0:03:22 were, I think, off-putting to some.
0:03:27 And I had a wonderful set of advisors and mentors,
0:03:30 some of whom who took me to the woodshed
0:03:33 and delivered a dose of tough love at a stage
0:03:35 when it was very useful to me.
0:03:36 – Yeah, and in particular,
0:03:39 I know you write about several of those mentors in the book,
0:03:41 but is there one that really exemplifies
0:03:44 helping you overcome some of those,
0:03:45 as you said, those characteristics
0:03:48 that you’ve deemed were a bug?
0:03:53 – Well, the most impactful experience was in 1998.
0:03:57 I’d been in the job about a year.
0:04:00 And 1998, none of you will recall,
0:04:02 but I’ll remind you it was the year
0:04:04 when not only on the African continent,
0:04:08 we had wars break out between Ethiopia and Eritrea,
0:04:13 huge war in the Congo, wars in West Africa as well.
0:04:16 And over the summer in August,
0:04:19 Al Qaeda attacked our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania
0:04:24 and killed 12 Americans and over 200 Kenyans
0:04:27 and left thousands wounded and our embassies destroyed.
0:04:31 And so it was a really high pressure, high intensity time.
0:04:35 And my approach to dealing with all of this
0:04:38 was to keep focused on the mission,
0:04:41 to drive through the pain,
0:04:46 to just stay focused and push myself and the team
0:04:48 as hard and as fast as we can
0:04:50 to deal with all these simultaneous challenges.
0:04:55 But just before Christmas, a colleague,
0:04:56 a man named Howard Wolpe,
0:04:59 who was a former member of Congress from Michigan
0:05:01 and was working as a political appointee
0:05:03 in the State Department,
0:05:06 he took me out to lunch at a really crappy Chinese restaurant
0:05:08 near the State Department.
0:05:10 And I thought it was just gonna be a social occasion.
0:05:13 And after a few bites, he came straight out
0:05:17 and said, you know, Susan, you’re gonna fail in this job
0:05:19 if you don’t change course.
0:05:22 You’re smart, you’re committed, you know your brief,
0:05:23 you’re hard charging,
0:05:26 you’ve got the support of the Secretary of State
0:05:27 and the President,
0:05:32 but you are not being sufficiently deferential
0:05:35 to sufficiently appreciative of the expertise
0:05:38 of the senior people working with you.
0:05:40 And you’re not bringing the team along,
0:05:44 you’re not investing your team in the outcomes.
0:05:47 You’re just driving relentlessly towards an outcome
0:05:49 and you’re losing people.
0:05:53 And if you don’t change course, you’re gonna fail.
0:05:55 And I don’t wanna see you fail.
0:05:57 And so we then had a conversation
0:06:01 which was obviously pretty bracing for me,
0:06:06 but I realized that he was doing this as a huge favor.
0:06:08 He was doing this as somebody who cared.
0:06:09 He could have basically said, you know,
0:06:12 I don’t care if you fail, that’s not my problem.
0:06:15 But he took me under his wing and gave me that advice
0:06:17 which enabled me, I think,
0:06:22 to be a far more patient, more inclusive,
0:06:28 more collaborative leader and manager of teams
0:06:30 than I had otherwise been.
0:06:35 And that helped me soften some of those qualities
0:06:37 that we described as a bug.
0:06:39 And so that by the time I completed my tenure
0:06:41 at the end of the Clinton administration,
0:06:45 I think I really had learned and grown
0:06:46 in ways that were very valuable.
0:06:51 And I think I was able to leave behind a record of success
0:06:53 without which I’m not sure I would be,
0:06:55 have gone on to do the other things
0:06:57 that I ended up doing in the Obama administration.
0:06:59 – Well, one of the things that struck me
0:07:01 in reading the book is you were so fortunate
0:07:04 to have a number of mentors like that,
0:07:05 including your own parents.
0:07:06 And so I wanna take a step back
0:07:08 and talk about your origin story
0:07:10 because I’m sure a lot of people in this room
0:07:12 are familiar with a lot of your accomplishments,
0:07:15 but your parents were also really accomplished
0:07:16 in their own right.
0:07:19 I mean, your dad descended from slaves in South Carolina,
0:07:22 went on to become a member of the Tuskegee Airmen.
0:07:24 And then he went on also
0:07:27 to become an economics professor at Cornell,
0:07:30 eventually serving as governor of the Federal Reserve Bank
0:07:33 and in several senior roles at Treasury and the World Bank.
0:07:37 Your mom had a very different experience.
0:07:40 She was the daughter of immigrants from Jamaica
0:07:42 who settled in Maine,
0:07:44 which explains your main connection.
0:07:49 And she went on to Radcliffe, not only to Radcliffe,
0:07:52 but also to become the student body president
0:07:53 and then served on the boards
0:07:57 of 11 different major public companies.
0:07:59 Now, that seems, all of those things
0:08:02 seem like really impressive accomplishments
0:08:04 for any person at any time,
0:08:08 but really rare, especially for a woman of color
0:08:09 at that time.
0:08:13 And so I’m just curious, what lessons did you take
0:08:15 from these incredible parents you had?
0:08:19 – Well, I really was blessed with two extraordinary parents
0:08:23 who came, as Katie said, from extremely different backgrounds,
0:08:25 but they had several things in common.
0:08:27 They had a commitment to education,
0:08:31 they had a commitment to service,
0:08:36 and they had a sense that they had been blessed
0:08:38 with the gifts of their parents and grandparents,
0:08:41 and it was their responsibility to make the most of those,
0:08:44 and the expectation for me and my brother
0:08:45 was that we’d do the same.
0:08:51 And as you said, their background’s very different,
0:08:53 but on my father’s side,
0:08:59 he grew up in really the most raw form of Jim Crow,
0:09:05 and brutal segregation in South Carolina, born in 1920.
0:09:08 And then, as you said, served at Tuskegee
0:09:10 with the Tuskegee Airmen.
0:09:14 And his challenge, as somebody whose parents
0:09:18 and grandparents had both gone to college,
0:09:21 his grandfather, my great grandfather, was a slave
0:09:24 who ended up getting a college education
0:09:28 after fighting in the Civil War on the side
0:09:31 of the Union Army and founding a school in New Jersey
0:09:34 that educated generations of African Americans.
0:09:38 So there was a tradition on my father’s side
0:09:43 of having the extraordinary opportunity to attend university,
0:09:47 but in his experience, he was so freighted
0:09:52 with the oppression of bigotry and segregation,
0:09:54 and so resentful of having to serve
0:09:58 in the segregated military in World War II
0:10:03 and be expected to prove what to him was absolutely obvious,
0:10:06 which was that African Americans could fly
0:10:08 and fight as well as anybody.
0:10:10 So he’d left trying to figure out
0:10:15 how does an African American man in the 1940s,
0:10:19 who had already gotten a college education,
0:10:22 went on to get his PhD in economics at Berkeley,
0:10:27 believe in himself when society is pushing him down.
0:10:29 And my mom, from her perspective,
0:10:30 a very different set of challenges,
0:10:33 but again, the daughter of immigrants
0:10:34 who came to this country with nothing,
0:10:36 sent all their kids to college,
0:10:42 and the expectation for her was also to excel and succeed.
0:10:45 And what they taught me and my brother was, in essence,
0:10:50 that we couldn’t let other people define us for us.
0:10:53 We had to believe in ourselves and know our worth
0:10:56 and not let others discount us.
0:11:00 My father had an expression which was,
0:11:04 if my being black is going to be a problem,
0:11:08 it’s gonna be a problem for somebody else, not for me.
0:11:11 In other words, what he understood was that bigotry
0:11:15 is the function of somebody else’s insecurity.
0:11:17 And even though there’s structural and institutional
0:11:21 and legal impediments that he faced every step of the way,
0:11:24 he did realize that he got to choose
0:11:26 how he thought of himself.
0:11:31 And if he let the bigot’s definition of him become his own,
0:11:33 then the bigot would succeed and he would fail.
0:11:36 He would not believe in his own capacity.
0:11:41 And so what he and my mother taught me and my brother, John,
0:11:46 is that we were worthy, we were capable,
0:11:48 and we had to believe in ourselves.
0:11:52 And we would inevitably encounter racism or sexism
0:11:55 or ageism or whatever it might be.
0:11:57 But the way to deal with that is,
0:12:00 in essence, a psychological jujitsu,
0:12:05 to let that be somebody else’s concern, not yours.
0:12:09 And to try not to expend your precious mental energy
0:12:11 doubting yourself.
0:12:13 And that’s really hard to do,
0:12:15 whether you’re a male or a female,
0:12:17 a person of color or not.
0:12:20 – Yeah, wow, so powerful.
0:12:22 I’m wondering also, in addition to the lessons
0:12:24 that you were taking from your parents,
0:12:24 and you wrote about them,
0:12:26 I encourage everyone who hasn’t read the book
0:12:27 to go read for yourself,
0:12:30 because they’re really a set of extraordinary things
0:12:33 you took from both your mom and your dad
0:12:34 and their extended family.
0:12:36 I mean, you write a lot about some of the memories
0:12:39 you had growing up, the summers in Maine.
0:12:41 But I’m also curious in writing your book,
0:12:43 if there are themes that you kind of discovered
0:12:47 about yourself that help motivate you
0:12:50 to become the kind of successful person that you became.
0:12:54 – Well, writing the book was a real opportunity,
0:12:58 a gift of a chance to reflect
0:13:00 and to think back as to all of the things
0:13:01 that influenced me,
0:13:04 because frankly, I realized in writing this,
0:13:06 that essentially from high school,
0:13:09 until the day I left the Obama administration,
0:13:12 I’d been going at almost full speed nonstop.
0:13:17 And what I really realized
0:13:20 is that the most formative experiences
0:13:23 were the lessons I learned from my parents,
0:13:28 and the real challenge I had coming through
0:13:30 my parents’ divorce.
0:13:32 You’ve heard how great my parents were,
0:13:33 and they really were,
0:13:35 but they absolutely had no business
0:13:37 being married to each other.
0:13:39 And there’s– – And you wrote about that a lot,
0:13:41 and you talked about it. – I write a lot about it.
0:13:42 I write a lot about it,
0:13:45 because I realized that I can’t explain myself
0:13:46 without explaining that experience.
0:13:47 – Can you impact that a little,
0:13:49 because I think that’s just really so interesting
0:13:52 as you found yourself in some of these crisis situations
0:13:54 later, mostly professionally,
0:13:57 but also personally, explain that a little bit,
0:14:00 how you think that your parents’ own relations
0:14:02 with each other and then their eventual divorce
0:14:04 kind of contributed to that.
0:14:07 – Well, by the time I was about seven,
0:14:12 they were fighting constantly, and sometimes violently,
0:14:15 and it was really terrifying for me and my brother,
0:14:18 who was two years younger than me.
0:14:21 We’d be in bed at night trying to go to sleep,
0:14:24 and I’d wake up to them screaming and yelling,
0:14:29 and I was scared, frankly, that it could spin out of control.
0:14:32 And so I would creep downstairs and spy on them,
0:14:36 and try to figure out if this was gonna get out of control.
0:14:40 And if I feared it might, I’d intervene,
0:14:42 sometimes physically,
0:14:48 but more often actually trying to talk them down
0:14:51 and therefore listen to what they were arguing about,
0:14:53 what were the, who was making what point
0:14:57 and where reason lay at seven or eight.
0:14:59 – So you’re doing diplomacy then, really.
0:15:03 I mean, really a precursor to what came later,
0:15:04 I guess, professionally.
0:15:06 I had no idea, obviously, that any of that
0:15:07 would have any relevance,
0:15:12 but I did find myself trying to fire fight, in essence.
0:15:20 And then when I was 10, they actually separated
0:15:24 and then went through a very bitter and ugly divorce
0:15:26 and a very public custody battle.
0:15:29 And so really until I was 15,
0:15:33 this thing dragged out in one shape or another.
0:15:37 And I had to make a decision about
0:15:41 whether I was gonna let it crush me
0:15:44 or whether I was going to control what I could control
0:15:48 and not try to be weighted down by what I couldn’t.
0:15:49 I couldn’t control them
0:15:51 and how they were dealing with each other,
0:15:54 but I could control how I performed in school
0:15:57 and whether I tried to repair my friendships
0:15:58 which had suffered.
0:16:01 And whether I was gonna be an athlete
0:16:03 and a student leader and all this stuff.
0:16:05 And what I learned from all of that
0:16:08 is that I could take a hit and keep going.
0:16:13 And it gave me a degree of confidence in my own resiliency
0:16:17 that turns out, I think, in retrospect,
0:16:19 to have been probably the most important,
0:16:24 formative revelation that I had early on.
0:16:28 And rather than feeling like, you know,
0:16:29 this was the worst thing that ever could happen,
0:16:30 which, of course, it wasn’t,
0:16:34 but it was bad in my experience.
0:16:36 I realized, wow, this was really bad,
0:16:40 but I can still keep doing what I need to do.
0:16:44 And I think that strength was something
0:16:47 that I wouldn’t know I’d need down the road,
0:16:48 but was incredibly valuable.
0:16:50 – Well, we’ve talked before, you and I,
0:16:52 about how you have an ability,
0:16:54 I think you’d agree, to compartmentalize.
0:16:55 – Yeah.
0:16:59 – And that it served you well later professionally
0:17:00 in times of crisis.
0:17:02 – And by compartmentalize in this context,
0:17:06 what I mean is, and as I had to do
0:17:09 as national security advisor, for example,
0:17:12 when there’s all this stuff going on,
0:17:17 whether it’s your parents fighting or, you know,
0:17:21 working on the most difficult problems and crises
0:17:24 in the world when almost every major decision
0:17:26 has life and death implications,
0:17:31 I would found that I was able to do the work of the job
0:17:34 and be focused and committed to that work
0:17:39 without it affecting me in every day,
0:17:43 all day emotionally and being debilitating.
0:17:47 I feel, you know, if we’re working on a very difficult issue,
0:17:50 I felt that weight, I felt that pain,
0:17:55 but it didn’t become something that I could not cope with.
0:17:59 It didn’t cripple my ability to focus
0:18:01 and do the job functionally.
0:18:04 And I think, you know, you have to have some measure
0:18:06 of that wherever it comes from
0:18:08 to work on those kinds of issues
0:18:12 and not, you know, be crushed, for example,
0:18:15 by the weight of the humanitarian crisis in Syria.
0:18:17 – Well, and you’ve been in a number
0:18:19 of those crisis situations, obviously,
0:18:22 you just mentioned Syria, the humanitarian crisis.
0:18:24 And I’m just wondering, you’re gonna tie it to this room,
0:18:28 what best practices or philosophy
0:18:31 do you bring to bear, Susan, in moments of real crisis?
0:18:37 – Well, I think my way of approaching crisis is,
0:18:39 first of all, to get super calm.
0:18:41 The worst the situation is,
0:18:46 the more I kinda just chill out and not freak out.
0:18:51 – I mean, you wrote about the embassy bombings.
0:18:54 – Yeah, the embassy bombings were an example.
0:18:58 So, trying to stay calm, trying to gather the information,
0:19:01 trying to focus on outcomes that we could control
0:19:08 and not allow the overwhelming nature of the crisis
0:19:14 to impede our ability to act rationally and effectively.
0:19:19 So, in 1998, when the embassies were bombed
0:19:24 in Kenya and Tanzania, my focus was on what can we do
0:19:28 in the moment to be impactful and effective?
0:19:31 We had to get search and rescue teams out
0:19:34 in the shortest order to try to save people
0:19:36 who were buried in the rubble.
0:19:40 We had to get the FBI and the other investigative elements
0:19:42 on the ground to gather the evidence
0:19:45 so that we could find the perpetrators.
0:19:48 We had to support the families of the victims
0:19:50 with information and with comfort.
0:19:54 We had to do all these things in the moment
0:19:58 and so my emphasis was on what can we practically do
0:20:03 immediately without falling apart and despairing
0:20:06 and how also at the same time,
0:20:07 and this is what I learned the hard way,
0:20:11 became better at as I got more experiences,
0:20:16 recognize that the people you are working with
0:20:20 process these crises differently than you may
0:20:23 and may need a different kind of support and approach.
0:20:27 And so being a compassionate leader that recognizes
0:20:29 that you need to provide space for people
0:20:32 to work through their pain and cope with it
0:20:36 while trying to keep them on the focus to be effective.
0:20:40 That was where I was lacking at age 32
0:20:44 and I hope by say 52, I’d gotten a little bit better at.
0:20:45 – Yeah.
0:20:47 Well, you know, look, you’ve clearly been
0:20:51 in some really high pressure situations.
0:20:54 And at the time you mentioned the embassy bombings,
0:20:57 you know, you had Jake, your son,
0:21:00 who was practically a newborn at that point, right?
0:21:01 – He was a newborn.
0:21:01 – He was a newborn, right?
0:21:03 Well, so clearly you’ve been in these
0:21:07 high pressure situations, but then you add marriage,
0:21:09 you add kids and somehow you’re managing
0:21:11 a really complicated life, Susan,
0:21:13 and you’ve managed a really complicated life
0:21:16 with a great deal of elegance as an outsider.
0:21:17 – Thank you.
0:21:18 – Looking in.
0:21:20 And I’m wondering just as I think
0:21:21 about all you’ve accomplished,
0:21:23 and you have two kids we’ll talk about in a minute,
0:21:26 and I think Ian is here in the audience, your husband.
0:21:28 – My wonderful husband.
0:21:30 – But what are, how are you hacking this?
0:21:31 How have you done this?
0:21:33 And what practical tips do you have
0:21:34 for people in the audience?
0:21:36 Because I’d sure love to hear them
0:21:38 and I’m sure others would.
0:21:41 How do you manage this really robust professional career
0:21:45 and yet also a robust personal life?
0:21:48 – Well, I don’t think anybody does it perfectly
0:21:50 or to their own satisfaction.
0:21:53 What I learned along the way is that there’s certain things,
0:21:55 again, that you can control.
0:21:58 And those are the ones you should focus on.
0:22:03 So I really tried to take care of myself,
0:22:06 to sleep as much as I reasonably could,
0:22:10 to exercise as much as I reasonably could.
0:22:14 And to prioritize time with family and friends
0:22:16 because that was rejuvenative time.
0:22:21 And gave me sort of the strength and the perspective
0:22:25 to deal with the things I couldn’t control.
0:22:27 Those were all critically important.
0:22:30 And then I couldn’t have done it, frankly,
0:22:34 without an extremely supportive and hands-on partner
0:22:39 who was very much engaged in his own high pressure career
0:22:43 as an executive producer at ABC News.
0:22:47 But was hugely helpful with the kids,
0:22:50 with my parents who were ailing at the time,
0:22:51 and in supporting me.
0:22:56 So I was blessed with all of those systems of support.
0:23:02 But I think the main things that most of us
0:23:06 can try to prioritize are taking care of our physical
0:23:10 and mental health through basic things like sleeping
0:23:13 and exercising, hopefully eating reasonably well.
0:23:18 And cherishing that time with the people you love
0:23:22 as what you need to keep giving you fuel.
0:23:24 – That’s great practical advice.
0:23:26 I mean, speaking of kids, you have two.
0:23:27 – We have two.
0:23:30 – Daughter Maris, who’s junior in high school.
0:23:31 – Yes.
0:23:34 – And then Jake, who’s a senior at Stanford.
0:23:35 – Yes.
0:23:36 – And everyone says this about their kids, Susan.
0:23:40 Oh, there might, anyone who has more than one child
0:23:42 says, oh, they’re so different from each other.
0:23:46 But you kind of take things to a new extreme with your kids.
0:23:47 Because–
0:23:48 – They took us to an extreme.
0:23:49 – They took you to an extreme.
0:23:51 I mean, for those who aren’t familiar,
0:23:55 I mean, your son Jake, here you are having served
0:23:59 in the Clinton administration, in the Obama administration.
0:24:02 And your son Jake is the president of,
0:24:04 was president of the Stanford College Republicans?
0:24:05 – Yes.
0:24:08 – And then you have your daughter,
0:24:10 and I wish we had a picture of them,
0:24:11 but anyone can grab the book,
0:24:14 and there’s pictures of them in the book.
0:24:18 Maris, you describe us to the left of you and Ian.
0:24:19 – Yes.
0:24:20 – And yet the two of them are very close,
0:24:22 and also close in age.
0:24:24 And how did that happen?
0:24:26 And tell us a little bit more about that.
0:24:29 – Uh.
0:24:32 (audience laughing)
0:24:34 – I know you were trying to raise independent thinkers.
0:24:38 – You know, we wonder sometimes what we fed them,
0:24:43 and we really did try to teach them
0:24:46 that they should think for themselves
0:24:49 and have the courage of their convictions.
0:24:53 And we tried to impress upon them our respect
0:24:57 for their independence and individualism.
0:24:59 And unfortunately, that’s what we got.
0:25:00 (audience laughing)
0:25:03 And we love them both.
0:25:05 I mean, they’re both wonderful,
0:25:07 bright, thoughtful, committed kids.
0:25:09 And they’re not just different politically.
0:25:11 I mean, they’re different temperamentally.
0:25:13 They could not be more different.
0:25:16 And sometimes you wonder, like, how’s that possible?
0:25:19 Same household, same parents, same diet.
0:25:22 – I mean, you took Jake with you campaigning.
0:25:26 – Yeah, he used to be, he campaigned for me with me
0:25:31 in 2008 for Obama in the snows of New Hampshire.
0:25:35 And this was before he had this metamorphosis.
0:25:38 – Very hosting speaking engagements at Stanford.
0:25:39 – Yes.
0:25:45 And he’s just, you know, he’s gone his own way politically,
0:25:48 but not emotionally.
0:25:52 He’s still very much my baby,
0:25:57 and very much an integral part of our family.
0:26:01 And so we have some robust debates,
0:26:04 and sometimes at the dinner table, food will fly.
0:26:06 (audience laughing)
0:26:09 Mostly between the kids, I’d like to believe,
0:26:12 but Ian is here, so I’m not gonna state that categorically.
0:26:13 – Yeah, that’s great.
0:26:17 – He knows better, but it’s all good.
0:26:22 And I’ve learned a lot from having somebody so close to us
0:26:27 who reflects and represents a very different perspective.
0:26:30 And one that I think is really important
0:26:33 for me to understand, but for all of us to understand,
0:26:36 regardless of whether you’re on the right or the left,
0:26:38 understanding, we’re in the middle more,
0:26:40 like some of us wanna be,
0:26:44 respecting opinions with which we differ,
0:26:49 and being willing to engage them thoughtfully.
0:26:51 – Yeah, well, it’s so great to see
0:26:53 that you were able to raise such independent thinkers,
0:26:56 in addition to doing everything else
0:26:58 that you and Ian had going on.
0:27:01 So hats off for that.
0:27:03 And then also, you know, I was struck by,
0:27:05 actually it’s such a coincidence
0:27:07 that Shonda Rhimes is going to speak next,
0:27:10 because Shonda Rhimes was one of the people
0:27:12 who read your book first,
0:27:15 and she said that reading your book was like a masterclass
0:27:17 in how to be a powerful woman.
0:27:19 I think reading your book was like a masterclass
0:27:21 in how to be a powerful person.
0:27:24 And many of us think that being a powerful woman
0:27:26 equals being a career woman.
0:27:29 But you know, Susan, you told a different story
0:27:30 in your book.
0:27:32 You talked not about just being a career woman.
0:27:35 In fact, I think half of that book
0:27:39 is about how to be a loving wife, a devoted mother,
0:27:41 and also caring for your parents,
0:27:43 both of them, when they were aging.
0:27:45 And I know they’ve now both since passed.
0:27:48 At the same time, you’re making these incredibly hard decisions
0:27:51 and in the public eye, met with a great deal of scrutiny.
0:27:53 You wrote about a great deal of scrutiny
0:27:55 when your mom was watching you.
0:27:59 You said obsessively on CNN during the Benghazi story.
0:28:00 – Not watching me, but watching the news.
0:28:01 – Watching the news.
0:28:02 – Freaking out about me.
0:28:03 – Right.
0:28:06 And so amidst all that, you know,
0:28:08 I wanna know, Susan, like what do you think
0:28:12 takes to be a powerful woman or a powerful person?
0:28:13 What are the traits?
0:28:17 – I would say in the first instance,
0:28:19 it requires confidence.
0:28:23 It requires believing in your own self-worth.
0:28:26 And that’s the huge gift I got from my parents.
0:28:31 I think it requires integrity and strength
0:28:33 and compassion, quite frankly.
0:28:38 I think being powerful means not being hard.
0:28:44 It means being, to the greatest extent possible,
0:28:49 somebody who can lead and inspire and motivate others.
0:28:54 And one of the things I learned as I grew
0:28:58 from that young Brash assistant secretary
0:29:03 was that the secret to having effective teams
0:29:06 is that every member of the team feels valued
0:29:11 and feels like they care and that they count.
0:29:13 That you care about them and that they count.
0:29:18 And so to me, that’s the secret sauce.
0:29:23 It’s leading in a fashion that values the individuals
0:29:27 and the human beings on the team.
0:29:32 And the model, quite frankly, that President Obama set
0:29:37 and that I and I think others tried to manifest
0:29:42 was to give all of our colleagues the confidence
0:29:45 to know that if and when they had to put
0:29:48 their personal lives first because somebody was sick
0:29:53 or their kid needed them for something important,
0:29:56 that the team would fill in behind them
0:29:59 and that we would manage collectively in their absence.
0:30:02 Not none of us was indispensable,
0:30:04 not when I was national security advisor, never.
0:30:07 I had partners and deputies who could fill in
0:30:11 and at the lowest levels, that was the way we tried
0:30:12 to run our teams.
0:30:15 If you had to go to do what was vitally important
0:30:19 to you as a human being, then that was what was most important.
0:30:22 Not least because you weren’t gonna be effective anyway,
0:30:24 if you were stressing out about this,
0:30:27 but also because it’s a way of saying we care about you
0:30:31 and we value you as a human being and we got your back
0:30:34 and we as a team can fill in behind you.
0:30:40 And that I think is empowering to one’s team
0:30:44 and one’s people, but it’s also in many ways
0:30:47 the source of one’s own strength as a leader.
0:30:50 – Speaking of being a leader and leadership,
0:30:53 you have another, I mean, I’m curious what you think about
0:30:56 then all of the traits you’re mentioning make me think,
0:30:58 well, I would really like to work for that person.
0:31:00 I really like them.
0:31:03 And one of the favorite quotes that I have of yours,
0:31:04 as you said, and I quote,
0:31:08 “People who are so intent on being liked
0:31:10 “may not have the fortitude to do the right thing
0:31:11 “or the tough thing.”
0:31:15 And so what advice would you give to leaders?
0:31:18 A lot of leaders, including some in this room,
0:31:19 really wanna be liked.
0:31:22 – Well, I think, look, it’s always better
0:31:25 to be liked than not be liked.
0:31:26 Let’s be clear.
0:31:30 But what I discovered at some stage was,
0:31:32 at least for me, if I had to choose,
0:31:34 if I couldn’t have both,
0:31:38 I’d rather be respected than liked.
0:31:41 And that was because I realized that sometimes,
0:31:44 and this is sort of reflected in the quote you read,
0:31:49 sometimes by being overly concerned about being nice,
0:31:52 particularly women who sometimes that manifests
0:31:54 as being deferential or asking for permission
0:31:58 or affirmation, it’s not effective.
0:32:01 And it is diminishing of your capacity
0:32:05 to perform to your optimal level.
0:32:07 And I realized that just by being me,
0:32:09 by believing in myself,
0:32:11 by being an African-American woman
0:32:13 who really wasn’t asking for permission
0:32:17 or affirmation in the circles in which I ran,
0:32:19 some people weren’t gonna like that.
0:32:21 – You said that you intimidated a lot of people
0:32:23 most notably.
0:32:25 – Some men, but I mean, I didn’t set out to do that,
0:32:29 but I think, and I still don’t set out to do that,
0:32:30 I’m just trying to be myself,
0:32:33 but I’m not gonna be somebody I’m not
0:32:35 to make somebody else more comfortable.
0:32:36 – Well, I love that you’ve embraced
0:32:37 those characteristics of yourself.
0:32:41 – And that leads you to being not always liked.
0:32:44 And if you’re so obsessed with being liked,
0:32:48 I think it can lead you to be somebody you’re not.
0:32:51 And as I said, better to be liked,
0:32:54 I much prefer that,
0:32:59 but not at the expense of being who I am.
0:33:00 – Well, we’re gonna get to a,
0:33:04 I wanna tell a story which I thought was fake news.
0:33:06 And then I asked you about it and you said it was true.
0:33:07 – It’s not fake news, it’s in the book.
0:33:08 I don’t know where to go.
0:33:12 – Well, I read it and I thought, oh, this is true.
0:33:15 There’s a situation where at one time,
0:33:17 you had to give the middle finger
0:33:19 to Ambassador Richard Holbrook
0:33:22 in front of a room full of ambassadors and diplomats.
0:33:23 Can you tell us about that?
0:33:27 – So we’re rewinding the tape again to this time.
0:33:28 – To the brash days.
0:33:31 – No, but this was not brash.
0:33:36 This was implementing a philosophy
0:33:41 that my father had beat into me from a very early age,
0:33:45 which was don’t take crap off of anybody.
0:33:47 If somebody is bullying you or dismissing you
0:33:51 or discounting you, don’t let them get away with it.
0:33:54 Now, I’d like to think that at 55,
0:33:56 I might have found the words
0:33:58 that would have been more appropriate,
0:34:00 but words failed me in that moment
0:34:04 and I ended up realizing that my hands had not failed me.
0:34:11 But the back story is that I’m Assistant Secretary
0:34:12 of State for African Affairs.
0:34:15 I’m probably now 33 or 34.
0:34:18 Ambassador Holbrook had been nominated
0:34:20 to be the UN Ambassador,
0:34:22 but not confirmed as confirmation
0:34:24 had been held up for many months.
0:34:27 And one day, I’m up on Capitol Hill
0:34:29 meeting with members of Congress
0:34:31 and my secretary calls.
0:34:34 I remember those cell phones that were the size of bricks.
0:34:37 That was what we were dealing with back in those days.
0:34:40 And she says, Ambassador Holbrook is in your office
0:34:43 and he wants to meet with you now.
0:34:45 And I said, well, I’m sure you explained
0:34:47 I’m on Capitol Hill meeting with members of Congress.
0:34:49 I can’t just come back to meet with him now.
0:34:51 Why don’t you schedule an appointment
0:34:53 and we’ll figure it out.
0:34:55 And she said, he’s not leaving.
0:35:01 And I said, well, okay, then I’ll see him when I get back,
0:35:02 but that’s gonna be a while
0:35:04 and make sure you don’t take anything while I’m there.
0:35:07 (audience laughs)
0:35:09 So I come back about an hour and a half later
0:35:12 and sure enough, he’s sitting in my office.
0:35:15 Very comfortable on my couch.
0:35:17 And I sit down and I introduced myself
0:35:18 ’cause we’d never met.
0:35:22 And I say, what’s so urgent
0:35:27 that you had to be camped out here in my office?
0:35:30 And the first words out of his mouth were,
0:35:35 I dislike you already because you beat my record
0:35:38 as the youngest regional assistant secretary of state.
0:35:42 And our relationship went downhill from there.
0:35:43 (audience laughs)
0:35:48 And I realized, I was dealing with very talented,
0:35:53 diplomat on the one hand, but a classic bully on the other.
0:35:58 So now, maybe a year later, he’s UN ambassador.
0:36:00 He’s established in the job.
0:36:03 And he decides in the month that the United States
0:36:05 is chairing the Security Council
0:36:07 that he’s gonna make it the month of Africa.
0:36:09 Africa already consumes a large share
0:36:11 of the Security Council agenda.
0:36:15 And that meant that we had to interact quite a bit.
0:36:18 And he decided he was gonna have a summit meeting
0:36:22 with the African heads of state from Central Africa.
0:36:25 And he therefore summoned these heads of state.
0:36:27 And of course, he was only an ambassador.
0:36:28 So he had to have the secretary of state
0:36:31 at least be the person to chair the meeting.
0:36:35 And he summoned back the ambassadors who reported to me
0:36:37 who were the ambassadors
0:36:39 in each of these Central African countries.
0:36:42 And he calls a meeting on a Sunday afternoon
0:36:43 in his office in New York.
0:36:48 And in the meeting are my maybe six or seven
0:36:50 of the ambassadors who report to me,
0:36:53 all of whom are 20 to 30 years my senior.
0:36:58 All men, all white.
0:37:02 And a handful of my staffers and Holbrook
0:37:04 and a few of his team.
0:37:07 And there’s a robust argument that we’re all engaged in
0:37:10 about a real important policy issue.
0:37:12 And at one stage after I’d listened to the debate,
0:37:17 I weighed in with my own opinion, which differed from his.
0:37:20 And he leans over this table where we’re all seated
0:37:22 in a very cramped room.
0:37:24 He’s a big guy with a hulking body.
0:37:29 And he looks at me and he says, “Ah, I too remember
0:37:33 when I was a young assistant secretary.”
0:37:35 (laughing)
0:37:36 And I was like–
0:37:37 – And that’s where words failed you.
0:37:38 – That’s where words failed me.
0:37:44 And so I did exhibit my dismay with a gesture,
0:37:49 which was displayed long enough for him to see it.
0:37:54 And everybody else to see it and like freak out.
0:37:57 Some with real relish and others with horror.
0:38:00 And he just kept talking.
0:38:03 And that meeting continued.
0:38:05 It became a bit urban legend,
0:38:08 but the end of the story is I realized
0:38:11 that I had better discreetly step out of the meeting
0:38:13 and call back to Washington.
0:38:15 – To your boss, then, Madeline Albright.
0:38:17 – To the secretary of state whom I called in,
0:38:19 I said, “Madame Secretary, I’m calling to report
0:38:21 that I’ve just given the finger
0:38:24 to a member of President Clinton’s cabinet.”
0:38:25 (laughing)
0:38:28 She said, “Oh, tell me more.”
0:38:30 (laughing)
0:38:31 So I explained.
0:38:33 And at the end she said words to the effect
0:38:35 of “You go, girl.”
0:38:38 (laughing and applauding)
0:38:45 – Well, so fast forward from the brash,
0:38:48 the brash woman that you once were, Susan.
0:38:50 And I wanna go right into kind of one of the issues
0:38:53 that consumed a lot of your time
0:38:56 when you were working for President Obama was China.
0:38:58 And now it seems like China’s taking
0:38:59 even more of a center stage.
0:39:01 Of course, a lot of people in this audience
0:39:03 were talking a lot about tech and China
0:39:07 and government and tech, or maybe not government and tech.
0:39:10 And I wanna ask if you agree or disagree
0:39:13 with a statement that I pulled.
0:39:14 Actually, I won’t tell you who said this.
0:39:16 I wanna see if you agree or disagree.
0:39:19 That China poses one of the most severe
0:39:22 intelligence collection threats to the United States
0:39:24 and to U.S. businesses today.
0:39:28 – Yes, agree, very strenuously.
0:39:29 – And they’re doing it not with traditional
0:39:34 spy craft anymore, but with putting actually agents
0:39:37 in private companies and in graduate programs
0:39:39 and universities in the U.S.
0:39:43 Like, how should industry leaders in this room
0:39:45 think about that and grapple with that?
0:39:48 – Well, China is not only using human assets,
0:39:53 as you just described, plants or moles.
0:39:55 But they’re also using cyber tools, as we know,
0:40:00 to steal intellectual property and exfiltrate data.
0:40:04 I think that the most important thing
0:40:07 that I would just share as a former National Security Advisor
0:40:11 is this threat is deadly serious
0:40:14 and it’s not getting any better.
0:40:17 And China’s objective, quite plainly,
0:40:21 is to compete and ultimately surpass us
0:40:26 economically, geostrategically, technologically.
0:40:29 And in fact, they’re explicitly stating it
0:40:30 as their objective.
0:40:33 And what they are doing to accomplish that
0:40:37 is basically using any means at their potential disposal.
0:40:41 And what we need to do as a nation,
0:40:44 and I think it applies as much to the government
0:40:46 as it does to the private sector,
0:40:47 is to be witting of this threat
0:40:51 and work really hard to prevent it.
0:40:56 Recognizing that the most dangerous individuals
0:41:00 are often the ones inside,
0:41:02 as we in the United States government
0:41:06 had learned the hard way many times with Snowden and others.
0:41:10 That you really do need to take as seriously
0:41:15 as you possibly can the hardening of your cyber security.
0:41:21 That you also need to recognize that in your effort
0:41:26 and work to get a foothold or expand your business in China,
0:41:29 that as they ask you to do things
0:41:32 that cause you to share information
0:41:37 or provide the kinds of access or information that they seek,
0:41:44 they’re doing it at our expense, geostrategically.
0:41:47 And I think quite honestly,
0:41:50 we really need a revolution of patriotism
0:41:56 in business as well as in the tech sector,
0:42:01 but as well as across the greater American public
0:42:05 to recognize that we are unfortunately
0:42:10 in a kind of Cold War type challenge.
0:42:16 That’s not to say we have to treat China as an adversary.
0:42:18 I actually don’t argue that,
0:42:23 but we have to recognize that we are in a real competition
0:42:28 that requires us to behave as if we’re in a competition,
0:42:32 not as if everything is, you know, go along to get along.
0:42:35 – And you coined that term today, didn’t you?
0:42:37 The revolution of patriotism.
0:42:39 And I asked if you’d ever said that before
0:42:41 and you thought that the revolution of patriotism
0:42:43 needs to happen in the tech community.
0:42:45 – It needs to happen, including in the tech community.
0:42:47 But not exclusively. – And how do we get that started?
0:42:49 – And by the reason why we were talking
0:42:54 about the tech community, just so people are understanding,
0:42:59 given that we are in a era
0:43:03 of arguably existential competition,
0:43:09 we need to be matching to the extent we can,
0:43:12 consistent with our democracy and our values,
0:43:15 the strength of the Chinese model.
0:43:16 The Chinese, as you all know,
0:43:20 are using all elements of their capacity,
0:43:25 government, the private sector, academia,
0:43:29 in complete unison to advance their capacities,
0:43:32 whether in biotech or AI or you name it.
0:43:35 We’re not.
0:43:39 We now have lost that historical triumvirate
0:43:43 between the academy, the private sector and government
0:43:48 that enabled us to compete against the Soviet Union.
0:43:52 And there are all kinds of reasons why that’s broken down,
0:43:57 but it’s the animosity between elements in the tech world
0:44:04 towards government and arguably vice versa,
0:44:08 that is in part preventing our capacity
0:44:11 to concert our efforts consistent with our values
0:44:14 and free enterprise and all of that stuff,
0:44:17 that we need to be competitive.
0:44:20 We’ve need to find ways to put that triumvirate
0:44:22 in some form or fashion back together,
0:44:27 not at the expense of our values,
0:44:31 but in service of our strength and our competitiveness
0:44:33 and ultimately our way of life.
0:44:34 – Well, so there are a lot of leaders
0:44:36 from the tech community in this room,
0:44:37 and I’m just curious,
0:44:39 how do you think we can get some of that collaboration
0:44:42 going again practically?
0:44:45 – Well, I don’t have all the answers to that,
0:44:48 but I do think it needs to,
0:44:53 it could be catalyzed by a sustained exchange
0:44:57 that was institutionalized
0:45:00 between the private sector and government.
0:45:03 And we’ve got really smart, talented people in government.
0:45:06 We’ve got even more smart, talented people
0:45:08 in the private sector.
0:45:10 And I think there’s,
0:45:13 particularly among some in the employee base
0:45:14 in the tech sector,
0:45:17 a real suspicion of or hostility towards government
0:45:21 and a perception that if you’re working on something
0:45:24 that serves the US government
0:45:27 and particularly might advantage us
0:45:29 technologically or militarily,
0:45:31 that somehow there’s something wrong with that.
0:45:34 And that’s what I mean about a revolution in patriotism.
0:45:36 We need to understand that actually,
0:45:39 you know, we’re on the same team here.
0:45:41 And by the way,
0:45:43 to the extent that many companies
0:45:46 are making compromises and accommodations
0:45:49 to open the Chinese market
0:45:51 and expand their foothold in the Chinese market,
0:45:54 doing things that quite frankly in my judgment,
0:45:57 advantage China in this competition,
0:45:59 but then won’t be comfortable
0:46:00 cooperating with the US government.
0:46:03 I think we’ve got things kind of upside down.
0:46:07 And so a partnership whereby,
0:46:09 you know, for three, five years,
0:46:13 you know, best in the brightest in both government
0:46:16 and industry, you know,
0:46:19 basically change places, trade places for a little while
0:46:22 and learn to understand and respect the motives
0:46:24 and the perspectives and the skills
0:46:27 and the weaknesses of each,
0:46:28 would be at least a starting point
0:46:33 for trying to establish bridges
0:46:38 and recognize that we are,
0:46:41 just as we are in many other ways,
0:46:44 you know, we have more that unites us than divides us.
0:46:46 – Well, and I suppose you’re bringing,
0:46:47 you’re on the board of Netflix.
0:46:50 What kind of voice are you bringing to that boardroom
0:46:53 and what some of the skills and experiences
0:46:55 from your own past that you’re bringing to bear?
0:46:57 Are you having these conversations?
0:47:00 – Well, I think that the main thing that I bring
0:47:02 is a deep knowledge and understanding
0:47:05 about many, many different parts of the world
0:47:06 and the international landscape
0:47:09 to a company like Netflix that is increasingly
0:47:13 growing globally and views its, you know,
0:47:16 his path forward as being very much
0:47:18 in the international realm.
0:47:20 I have an understanding of, you know,
0:47:23 of crisis management and how government works
0:47:27 and how to make teams optimize their capacity
0:47:31 to address crises under pressure,
0:47:32 all of those sorts of things.
0:47:35 And also an understanding of the security terrain,
0:47:38 physical and cyber and otherwise.
0:47:40 And a recognition that, you know,
0:47:43 some of the things we’ve just talked about,
0:47:47 which may not be necessarily front of mind
0:47:52 far from Washington are actually some of the things
0:47:55 that companies need to be increasingly mindful of.
0:47:56 – We’ve covered so much.
0:47:58 We’ve covered, you know, you’ve written a book,
0:48:00 you serve on boards, you speak.
0:48:04 You’re about to be an empty nester a year and a half.
0:48:07 And I want to just wrap up by asking you, what’s next?
0:48:08 What lies ahead?
0:48:09 – We couldn’t just end this.
0:48:12 – Well, tell me, tell the audience what you told me
0:48:14 when I asked you this question before once.
0:48:16 – I’ll, without the profanity?
0:48:18 – Yeah, please. – Okay, no.
0:48:21 I don’t know.
0:48:23 You know, I love my freedom,
0:48:26 which I now have having left government.
0:48:28 And I’ve enjoyed very much the process of writing the book.
0:48:30 And now going on book tour,
0:48:33 and I love writing my columns with the New York Times.
0:48:34 And I love serving on Netflix board.
0:48:37 And I’m interested in continuing
0:48:41 to participate in board service.
0:48:45 But the fundamental question that I have to wrestle with
0:48:48 is do I want to throw myself again,
0:48:51 full time into any one intensive endeavor,
0:48:55 whether that’s, you know, in the public sector,
0:48:57 in the private sector, in the nonprofit world,
0:49:00 or do I want to continue to have a combination of things,
0:49:02 which some people call a portfolio,
0:49:05 that allows me to maximize my freedom.
0:49:07 And I love maximizing my freedom,
0:49:10 but I do think I might wake up one day
0:49:14 and be so grabbed by something that I’m passionate about,
0:49:16 that I’m willing to jump back in
0:49:18 and throw myself entirely into it.
0:49:19 – When you told me today,
0:49:21 you’re not running for Senate in 2020,
0:49:24 but you told me that you weren’t ruling out for all time.
0:49:27 – I’m not running for the Senate from Maine in 2020,
0:49:30 which is something I’ve thought about for a period of time.
0:49:37 And that’s mainly because we have this junior in high school
0:49:41 who deserves to have her parents present
0:49:45 and not be yanked out of one high school into another.
0:49:50 But I haven’t given up the thought that I might serve again,
0:49:52 whether in an elected capacity,
0:49:53 and I don’t know at what level,
0:49:56 or in an appointed capacity,
0:50:00 but I’m also not planning on it and aiming for it.
0:50:02 I feel very privileged to be able to say
0:50:05 that I got to serve this country
0:50:10 under two presidents that I had enormous respect for,
0:50:14 and that’s the greatest privilege.
0:50:19 And if that’s the last of my service,
0:50:20 I’ll feel good about it,
0:50:25 and I’ll be happy to try to take my talents elsewhere.
0:50:29 Well, so to speak.
0:50:31 – Well, Susan, it’s such a privilege to sit down with you,
0:50:33 and I want to say thank you
0:50:36 for your service to our country. – No, thank you, no, thank you.
0:50:37 – On behalf of everyone in the room,
0:50:39 and also for joining us here today,
0:50:41 it’s been so great to get to chat with you
0:50:42 and have this conversation. – Thank you, all.
0:50:43 – So thank you so much. – Appreciate you.
0:50:44 – Thank you so much.
0:50:45 – It’s great to be here too.
0:50:45 – Thank you.
0:50:48 (applause)
Các mô hình AI không hề khách quan; chúng mang những quan điểm định kiến mạnh mẽ về lịch sử, văn hóa và giá trị. Vì các mô hình này đang trở thành giao diện chính cho mọi lĩnh vực từ giáo dục đến cơ sở hạ tầng, nên những “giá trị” được tích hợp trong mã nguồn về cơ bản sẽ trở thành một dạng chủ quyền kỹ thuật số. Nếu một quốc gia phụ thuộc vào một mô hình nước ngoài, họ không chỉ đơn thuần là nhập khẩu phần mềm—mà là đang nhập khẩu một thế giới quan và một hệ thống đạo đức cụ thể, dẫn đến một cuộc đấu tranh hiện đại nơi các quốc gia nỗ lực để không bị “xâm chiếm trong không gian mạng”.
Sự chuyển dịch này đã biến công nghệ từ một lĩnh vực kinh doanh thuần túy trở thành đấu trường trung tâm của an ninh quốc gia và ảnh hưởng địa chính trị. Khả năng răn đe không còn được đo lường chỉ bằng quy mô quân sự, mà bằng tốc độ đổi mới trong việc ứng phó với các công nghệ giá rẻ được xây dựng bằng phần mềm. Vì những công cụ này được phát triển bởi khu vực tư nhân thay vì chính phủ, khoảng cách giữa chính sách nhà nước và thực tế công nghệ đang ngày càng nới rộng, khiến cho sự hợp tác sâu rộng giữa các quỹ đầu tư mạo hiểm, những nhà sáng lập và các chính phủ quốc tế trở nên thiết yếu để duy trì sự ổn định và tăng trưởng kinh tế.
Đối với các doanh nhân, cuốn “sách hướng dẫn” truyền thống về mở rộng quốc tế—chờ cho đến khi đạt doanh thu hàng trăm triệu đô la—đã trở nên lỗi thời. Hiện nay, sản phẩm lan truyền nhanh hơn cả khả năng vận hành của công ty, khi AI cho phép địa phương hóa và tiếp cận toàn cầu gần như tức thời. Tuy nhiên, trong khi công nghệ vận hành trơn tru, việc mở rộng quy mô kinh doanh vẫn dựa trên các mối quan hệ. Thành công tại các nền kinh tế “tập trung quyền lực” (top-heavy) như Mexico, Nhật Bản hay Ả Rập Xê Út phụ thuộc vào việc vận hành trong các cấu trúc quyền lực địa phương và đảm bảo được một vài đối tác chiến lược chủ chốt, thay vì cố gắng thâm nhập thị trường theo diện rộng từ cấp cơ sở.
Những góc nhìn bất ngờ
- Nghịch lý “Lưỡng dụng”: Khả năng tìm ra lỗ hổng trong mã nguồn của AI là một con dao hai lưỡi; việc thắt chặt các khả năng này để ngăn chặn tấn công mạng cũng đồng thời ngăn cản những người phòng vệ tìm và vá các lỗ hổng của chính họ, khiến họ có nguy cơ dễ bị tổn thương hơn trước các mô hình AI bị “bẻ khóa” (jailbroken).
- Sự tiến hóa của khả năng răn đe: An ninh quốc gia đang chuyển dịch từ các “nền tảng tinh vi” (những tài sản đắt đỏ, số lượng ít) sang các hệ thống tự vận hành với số lượng lớn hơn, giá thành rẻ hơn và được phát triển bởi khu vực tư nhân.
- Ví dụ từ Na Uy: Việc áp dụng thuế lãi vốn chưa thực hiện (unrealized capital gains tax) tại Na Uy được dẫn chứng là nguyên nhân chính khiến hệ sinh thái công nghệ tại đây gần như sụp đổ, cho thấy một thay đổi chính sách đơn lẻ có thể giết chết tinh thần chấp nhận rủi ro của doanh nhân như thế nào.
- Sự tiến hóa của chiến tranh mạng: Quỹ đạo của tấn công mạng đã dịch chuyển tuyến tính và nhanh chóng từ phá hoại đơn giản (làm treo máy tính) sang trộm cắp (tội phạm tài chính) và cuối cùng là chiến tranh cấp độ quốc gia.
Bài học thực tiễn
- Quốc tế hóa sớm hơn: Đừng đợi đến khi đạt được những mốc doanh thu khổng lồ mới cân nhắc thị trường toàn cầu. Hãy sử dụng các công cụ AI để địa phương hóa sản phẩm và thâm nhập vào các khu vực tiềm năng ngay khi bạn còn trong giai đoạn tăng trưởng.
- Nhắm vào các thị trường “tập trung quyền lực”: Trong các nền kinh tế coi trọng quan hệ, hãy tập trung vào 5–10 công ty hoặc cơ quan chính phủ có ảnh hưởng nhất. Một đối tác lớn tại các khu vực này thường giá trị hơn một văn phòng địa phương quy mô đầy đủ.
- Ưu tiên cơ sở hạ tầng “đáng tin cậy”: Khi triển khai AI toàn cầu, hãy nhấn mạnh vào tính minh bạch và các giá trị của mô hình để tạo sự khác biệt với các lựa chọn thay thế độc đoán vốn có thể sử dụng kiểm duyệt hoặc cài đặt cửa sau (backdoors).
- Kiểm tra mã nguồn cũ bằng AI: Hãy sử dụng các mô hình AI hiện nay để chủ động “hack” chính các kho mã nguồn cũ (legacy code) 20 năm tuổi của bạn, vì chi phí sửa chữa lỗ hổng hiện đã giảm xuống trong khi chi phí cho một vụ rò rỉ dữ liệu đã tăng vọt.
AI 模型並非客觀;它們對歷史、文化和價值觀持有強烈的傾向。由於這些模型正逐漸成為從教育到基礎設施等各個領域的主要介面,內建於代碼中的「價值觀」在本質上成為了一種數位主權。如果一個國家依賴外國模型,他們不僅僅是在導入軟體,而是在導入一套特定的世界觀和倫理體系,這導致了現代的一場鬥爭:各國正努力避免在「網路空間被殖民」。
這一轉變使科技從單純的商業部門,變成了國家安全和地緣政治影響力的核心戰場。威懾力不再僅由軍隊規模來衡量,而取決於面對廉價、由軟體構建的科技時,創新反應的速度。由於這些工具是由私營部門而非政府開發,政府政策與科技現實之間的差距正在擴大,這使得風險投資、創業者與國際政府之間的深度合作,對於維持穩定和經濟成長至關重要。
對於創業家而言,傳統的國際擴張模式——即等待營收達到數億美元後再出擊——已經過時。現在產品的傳播速度快於公司的擴張速度,AI 使得近乎即時的在地化和全球化發現成為可能。然而,儘管技術端沒有摩擦,但規模化的商業運作依然依賴於人際關係。在墨西哥、日本或沙烏地阿拉伯等「頂層主導」(top-heavy)的經濟體中,成功的關鍵在於如何駕馭當地的權力結構並確保少數關鍵的旗艦合作夥伴關係,而非嘗試廣泛的草根市場切入。
驚人的洞察
- 「雙用途」悖論: AI 尋找代碼漏洞的能力是一把雙面刃;為了防止網路攻擊而封鎖這些能力,同時也阻礙了防禦者發現並修復自身的漏洞,可能使其在面對「越獄」模型時更加脆弱。
- 威懾力的演變: 國家安全正從「精銳平台」(昂貴且稀少的資產)轉向由私營部門開發的、數量更多且更廉價的自主系統。
- 挪威案例: 挪威引入的未實現資本利得稅被視為當地科技生態系統實際上終結的主因,這說明了單一的政策轉向如何扼殺創業的風險承擔精神。
- 網路戰爭的演進: 駭客攻擊的軌跡呈現線性且快速的發展:從簡單的惡作劇(電腦當機)到盜竊(金融犯罪),最後演變為國家級的戰爭。
實務建議
- 儘早國際化: 不要等到達到巨大的營收里程碑才考慮全球市場。利用 AI 工具將產品在地化,並在成長階段就進入高機會區域。
- 鎖定「頂層主導」市場: 在關係驅動的經濟體中,將焦點放在最具影響力的 5 到 10 家公司或政府實體。在這些地區,一個重大合作夥伴關係的價值往往高於開設一個全規模的在地辦公室。
- 優先考慮「可信」基礎設施: 在全球部署 AI 時,強調模型的透明度和價值觀,以與那些可能使用審查制度或後門的威權替代方案區分開來。
- 使用 AI 審查舊有代碼: 現在就利用現有 AI 模型積極地「駭入」公司內部擁有 20 年歷史的舊代碼庫,因為修復漏洞的成本已經降低,而數據洩露的代價卻在飆升。
Susan shares how she learned to leverage the characteristics of her personality early in her career as assistant secretary of state [2:05]
One of the important conversations Susan had with a mentor that changed the trajectory of her career [4:50]
Her parent’s commitment to education, their personal backgrounds, and the legacies they created [8:10]
The result of instilling self-belief into children and mastering “psychological jiu jitsu” [10:22]
What the early lessons of family diplomacy taught her [14:00]
The importance of strategic compartmentalization [16:48]
How to approach crisis during high stakes situations [18:29]
How to practice compassionate leadership while maintaining effectiveness [20:10]
Hacking the concept of “work-life balance” [21:10]
The required characteristics of powerful leaders [28:14]
The hard things about leadership and the idea of being liked [31:20]
The “middle finger story”/the time Susan stood up for herself in an important meeting [33:23]
Susan talks about China’s intelligence collection in the US [39:45]
A call for unity between the private, public, and academic sectors [42:54]

Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.