tv [untitled] August 2, 2016 8:01pm-9:02pm EDT
as i told the prime minister, we welcome singapore's interest in purchasing aircraft and we will also explore the possibility of singapore troops training on qualm. we will continue to strengthen regional opportunities in line with what we agreed to earlier this year. we are reaffirmed our shared commitment to bringing a regional order where all nations play by the same rules and disputes are resolved peacefully, including the south china sea. we encourage economic growth and innovation among our economies. with a little over a decade, trade between our two countries has grown more than 50%. we are collaborating to jumpstart greater digital innovation, research and development into technology, and data to improve and promote smart cities concept that can improve the daily lives of our citizens.
we will do more to connect our vibrant startup communities so that an engineer in singapore collaborates more easily with silicon valley or austin, texas. trade is an issue that stirs great passion. global trade means that economies around the world are more in a greater than ever and jobs and capital cross borders. automation means it can be produced with fewer workers and these innovations in technology have not always benefited veryone equally. there are fears and anxieties that people may be left behind. these anxieties are legitimate. they cannot be ignored. they have to be taken seriously. as i've said before, if it means we have to do everything we can to make sure that everybody shares the prosperity, then we have strong rules to protect workers, to promote highway just, and to make sure our citizens are getting the education and the training that they need.
but the answer cannot be to back away from trade and the global economy. it is here to stay. it is not possible to cut ourselves off given how integrated our economies are. to try to pull up the drawbridge on trade would only hurt us and our workers. the answers to make sure that globalization and trade is working for us and not against us. that is why today we are reaffirming our commitment to the transpacific partnership. i'm a strong supporter of tpp because it will reduce terrorists -- tariffs and make it easier for americans to export into the fastest markets f the world. tpp levels the playing field for our workers and help insured countries abide by environmental rules. this is an opportunity to grow our economies and write the rules for trade in the 21st century.
it gives us a chance to advance american leadership and reduce economic inequality and produce great paying jobs in a vital region. think not only is tpp important, but the prime minister and i agreed that we need to extend our partnership beyond just regional efforts. we have work to do on a global scale. singapore was the first country in southeast asia to join at the global coalition to destroy isil, and we are grateful that singapore is making new contributions to this effort by providing medical support to coalition forces. as two nations on the forefront of digital innovation, we recognize the growing threats from cyber attacks and we are going to continue to work to strengthen cyber security and to promote peaceful norms of how nations should operate in yberspace.
singapore, the garden city, helped to achieve the paris climate agreement last year. we thank you for your commitment to work towards joining the paris agreement this year. we are working with the international community to reduce harmful aviation emissions. our two countries will work together to advance global health security so that the world is better prepared to address the threat. the last point -- we agreed to keep promoting people to people ties between our two countries. we are expanding our trusted travelers program to make it easier for americans and singaporeans to visit and do usiness with each other. i welcome the new student exchange program which welcome scholarships of the two countries. and to our young southeast leaders initiative, we will keep empowering people to become leaders of tomorrow in their own communities, business, and in civil society.
i will note that i had a chance to meet one of those young singapore leaders at a summit in kuala lumpur last year. it is a remarkable young woman who is helping underprivileged women become financially self-sufficient. she talked about coming together with young people from across southeast asia. she said we bonded in our common endeavor to seek and understand and learn from one another in pursuit of aspirations to a better world. young people like kerry give me hope and make me confident that singapore and the united states will continue to advance our shared aspirations for a better world for many years to come. with that, i will turn it over to you, mr. prime minister. prime minister lee: thank you, president obama. i very happy to be here on the 50th anniversary of our diplomatic license. i would like to thank president obama for his hospitality as
well as to the wider asia-pacific and for his good wishes on the condition of our former president. the president and i had conversation on a wide range of issues to improve our firm and multifaceted long-standing partnership. strong economic ties are underpinned by the u.s. and singapore free trade agreement. singapore is the u.s.'s largest trading partner in southeast asia, where as the u.s. is singapore's largest foreign investor. there are many singapore companies also in america and the relationship is vital. in the defense area, we have robust cooperations from 1990 and the strategic framework agreement that concluded in 2005.
last year, we concluded the and hands affects corporation -- cooperation agreement into two areas like disaster relief and counterterrorism. we are also deepening security cooperation between our agencies and areas of counterterrorism come a cyber crime, corruption, transportation security, and trade enforcement. we are expanding into new areas ike cyber security while agencies are signing and mo you to work together to protect national security and our economic interest against cyber attacks. we also share an interest in smart cities. we discussed how cities can use technology to tackle problems from health care to transportation to delivery of public services. there is a lot of interest from companies on both sides. underpinning the ties between the two countries are the friendships and relationships between our peoples. thousands of american students are studying and working in
singapore. thousands of singaporeans are studying and working in america. last time they hosted a national assembly hosting our embassy here in 600 people showed appeared it is fitting to mark this special occasion of our 50th anniversary that we are launching a scholarship for singaporeans and americans to do exchanges with each other's countries and are all young people closer together and to get to know each other in society, culture, strength, an opportunity to cooperate ogether. we recently and limited a trusted traveler program will also specifically travel singaporeans to the u.s.. the president and i discussed the tpp. just as you heard the president give an eloquent expedition of why it is important to america and to asia. it is an integral component of
america's rebalance to asia. apart from the benefits to trade and market standing, it is vital from a strategic point of view and a strong signal of the u.s. commitment to continue its deep ngagement in the region. we greatly appreciate the efforts of the president and his team to push for the tpp, which grew from a small think that singapore started together with chile, brunei, and new zealand. now the tpp will be a free trade agreement encompassing 40% of the world population and one third of the world's gdp. we are near the finish line and we hope that the countries, particularly the u.s., will able to ratify the tpp as soon as possible. finally, the president and i discussed our partnership in tackling global challenges like counterterrorism. it is a problem for all countries. every day in the newspapers the read of new attacks somewhere -- america, europe, the middle east, closer to home in indonesia and asia. we in southeast asia are very concerned about this because the terrorists are active in many countries in the region.
several hundred, perhaps thousands from southeast asia and the middle east fighting isis. we have witnessed attacks in malaysia that were mounted by isis followers under orders from isis operatives in the middle east to launch attacks in their ome countries. the efforts to counter isis are crucial and that is why singapore is a member of the coalition and we are making a modest contribution to the effort. we are going to be sending a edical team to iraq.
we have already been participating with image interpretation and in other ways and now we are going to send a medical team into iraq. it is also important to fundamental attack the root source of violent extremism to counter the underlying ideology of isis and issues of extremism and views being propagated. these are major issues which we have discussed amongst our two countries and we look forward to working together and taking a relationship even further. president obama: the first question is margaret brendan. >> thank you, mr. president. given the republican nominee's recent comments about the khan family and his statement that if he was president, he would consider organizing russia's annexation of crimea, does it make you question his fitness to be president? secondly, sir, on libya, yet set in the past that the worst mistake of your presidency may have been your failure to plan for the aftermath of that 2011 nato intervention of libya. do you see your new decision to bomb isis there as a direct esult of that?
president obama: yes, i think the republican nominee is unfit to serve as president. i said so last week and he keeps on proving it. he notion that he would attack a gold star family that had made such extraordinary sacrifices on behalf of our country, the fact that he does not appear to have asic knowledge around critical issues in europe, in the middle east, in asia, means that he is woefully unprepared to do this job. and this is not just my opinion.
i think what has been interesting is the repeated denunciations of his statements by leading republicans, including the speaker of the house and the senate majority leader and prominent republicans like john mccain. the question i think that they have to ask themselves is, if you are repeatedly having to say in very strong terms that what he has said is unacceptable, why are you still endorsing him? what does this say about your party that this is your tandardbearer? this is not a situation where
you have an episodic gap. this is daily and weekly where they are distancing themselves from statements he is making. there has to be a point at which you say this is not somebody i can support for president of the united states. even if he purports to be a ember of my party. the fact that that has not yet happened makes some of these denunciations ring hollow. i don't doubt their sincerity. don't doubt that they are outraged about some of the statements that mr. trump and is supporters made about the khan family, but there has to come a point at which you say,
somebody can makes those kinds of statements doesn't have the judgment, the temperament, the understanding to occupy the most powerful position in the world, because a lot of people depend on the white house getting stuff right. and this is different than just having policy disagreements. i recognize that they all for family disagreement myself and hillary clinton on tax policy or certain elements of foreign policy, but there have been republican presidents with whom i disagree with, but i do not have a doubt that they could function as president. i think i was right and mitt romney and john mccain were wrong on certain policy issues, but i never thought that they cannot do the job.
had they won, i would have been disappointed, but i would've said to all americans that this is our president and i know that they are going to abide by certain norms and rules and ommon sense. they will observe basic decency. they will have enough knowledge about economic policy and foreign policy and our constitutional traditions and rule of law. that our government will work and will compete for years from now to try to win an election. but that is not the situation ere.
that is not just my opinion. that is the opinion of many prominent republicans. there has to come a point at which he say enough. -- you say enough. the alternative is that the entire party, the republican party, effectively endorses and validates the positions that are being articulated by mr. trump. as i said in my speech last week, i do not think that actually represents the views of a whole lot of republicans out there. with respect to libya, i have said on several occasions that we did the right thing in preventing what could've been a massacre, a bloodbath in libya. we did so as part of an international coalition and nder u.n. law. i think that all of us
collectively were not sufficiently attentive to what had happened happen the day after and the day after and the day after that in order to ensure that there were strong tructures in place to assure a of liby -- basic security and peace inside of libya. the good news is that we have the beginnings of a government and a government national court. they are serious about trying to bring all the factions together to start creating a basic ecurity structure, to begin to monitor libya's borders, and to cooperate internationally to deal with issues like isil and penetration on their territory. at the request of that government, after they had already made significant progress against isil and had essentially pushed isil into a very confined area in and around cert, it is an america's national security interest in our fight against isil that they
re able to finish the job. e are working in partnership with them to usher that -- assure that isil does not get a stronghold in libya as libya begins what will be a long process to establish a functioning government and security system there. the good news is that they recognize this terrorist organization in their midst is contrary to their national interest as well as the world's.
we are hopeful that having ompleted this process of driving isil out that they will be in a position to start bringing parties together inside that country, and not only us but the europeans and other ountries around the world have a great interest in seeing stability in libya because the absence of stability has helped to fuel some of the challenges we have seen in terms of the migration crisis in europe and some of the humanitarian tragedies we have seen in the open seas between libya and urope. >> all right, nicholas. >> thank you. the first question is for prime minister lee. he has spoken about the continuation of the u.s. rebalancing and a significant part of peace and stability in asia. how do you vision this continuation perceived in -- proceeding in the next 50 years? and what role do you see
singapore playing in this process? what are the hot button issues as the u.s. hopefully continues its rebalance? second question -- you mentioned the strong bipartisan links that singapore has had with nine different presidents from both sides of the focal divide -- political divide. how would you address a u.s. leader who has proposed more empty globalization? present obama has a question -- president obama has a question about the cornerstone of the relationship of the u.s. and singapore in response to the medical team from singapore to to iraq. the potential for military confrontation in the south china sea, how do you see singapore featuring in the u.s. plans to ddress this going forward?
last question, four more years is a phrase that i think you are hearing a little bit in the past few weeks and months. while that is not possible, if it were -- how would you continue developing relationships with singapore? full of beer key focus going forward in the next few years -- what would be your full key focus going forward in the next two years? prime minister lee: no one can imagine what singapore would be like today or the world will be like today. we have to see a broad relationship and some the things to do together. we will like to bud on this for the next 50 years. it depends on how each of our countries does and singapore were we are able to remain stable and prosperous and open and successful. in america, what the remain wanted dynamic, vibrant leading economies in the world, and a world in which there are other centers and creativity and
technology and science and rogress. and yet, a unique participant with a history of contributing to the world not just for your wn interest, but because you believe that the world would be a better place for all countries. if america can do that and singapore can maintain our success, then i think there are many opportunities for us to make common cause together. the rebalancing which the president has enunciated will sustain and endure for many years to come. it will be a very different world as countries will grow and others will slow down. demographics will be a big factor to come. when you look at japan, the population has been shrinking and they will have to do something somehow to turn it around. otherwise 50 more years of population shrieking and you have a very small country left in terms of the economy and
influence international. singapore has demographic ssues. america has a demographic change. the population is not checking, but the composition is changing. with this situation, we have to adjust to a new world. maintaining our position and our ability to compete and yet knowing that it is not going to be the same as it was in 1946 when america was half the world's gdp. so -- one quarter of the world's gdp. so that is the crucial factor for the next 50 years. as for what we do with bipartisan links if there is a u.s. leader who is more closed off and wants to turn inward, i do not think this is right for me to talk about you -- u.s. politics at the moment. we will work with whichever party.
we have worked with five republicans and four democrat administration. our experience of american presidential elections has been that many pressures build up during the election campaign. after the elections and a calm her, cooler atmosphere, positions are besought. strategies are nuanced and a certain balance is kept in the
direction. it does not turn completely upside down. the americans take pride in having a system of checks and balances so that it is not so easy to do things, but it is not so easy to completely messed things up. prime minister lee: and we admire that and sometimes we depend upon that. president obama: he is absolutely right. president obama: the wisdom of our founders. with respect to military cooperation, obviously singapore is a small country, but as i've said before, it carries much of its weight. so much of our work in the asia-pacific region is not a matter of active conflict but rather creating an architecture, a framework of rules and norms that keeps the peace and that has underwritten security for the region and for us for many years now. singapore is so often the adult in the room, the level head, that can help us work with a wide range of countries around certain issues, help defuse ensions. in many ways, the diplomatic
work and collaboration that we do with singapore is as critical, if not more critical, then the work militarily. what is also true is the nature f threats today. when you think of cyber threats or our concern about enforcing sanctions against north korea to ensure non-proliferation of nuclear materials or being able to counter message isil in a place like southeast asia and ensure information sharing with countries where there may be a budding terrorist threat, those are all issues of military finesse and intelligence and precision. those are areas where singapore excels. in addition to being a very
important logistical hub and center for our operations, the partnership that we are able to maintain helps us to work with a whole range of other countries much more effectively than we would if singapore were not there and we were just trying to gather up these countries individually. that is where the east asia summit has been very important. it is institutionalizing many of these practices and ways that hopefully avoid conflict in the first place. that would be in everybody's interest. as far as where the relationship goes, the prime minister is
right. 50 years from now, it's very hard to anticipate where we are going. there are certain trends that are inevitable. the asia-pacific region will grow an account or a larger -- and account for a larger share of the world's economy. there are going to be countries in the southeast asian region that look to follow the path of singapore into a mature and advanced economy. it is going to be a big market. the united states is going to have a massive interest in maintaining itself as asia-pacific power and as maintaining strong odds of trade and commerce in scientific exchange and educational exchange and given the close strategic interests and maybe even more importantly, the close people ties between america and singapore, we can anticipate being just a strong 50 years as it is today.
singapore has to take into account not just american interests. china is a big neighbor. there are strong ties there as well. in that sense, singapore can serve as a useful partner with us and with china. i think that would be in the interest of both countries. this is going to be a central engine for world growth. if we do a good job of maintaining stability and ensuring a rules-based order, we will promote greater
transparency and reduce corruption so that all people are benefiting from the rapid growth that is taking place. the future 50 years from now will be good. >> thank you, mr. president. you are here today to tout the tpp. hillary clinton is against it. donald trump is as well. the next president will be opposed to the deal. how do you plan to get congress to pass this deal during the lame-duck? how can you get members to do so? they are certain that the hacks the dnc had it came from russia. does it look like they are meddling in the u.s. election? what impact should that have on your relationship with moscow? president obama: right now, i am
president and i think i've got the better argument. we are part of a global economy. we are not reversing that. it can't be reversed. it is driven by technology. it is driven by travel and cargo containers and the fact that the demand of four products inside our country means we've got to get things from other places. our export sector is a huge contributor.
most manufactured products involve a global supply chain were parts are made in all corners of the globe. the notion that we are going to pull that up is unrealistic. point number two, it is absolutely true, the evidence shows some past trade deals have not delivered on all the benefits that were promised and had very localized communities that were hurt because plants moved out. people lost jobs. jobs were created because of those trade deals, but jobs were also lost. people who experienced those losses, they did not get as much help as they needed to.
what is also true is as a consequence of automation and globalization, labor, workers are losing leverage and capital being mobile, been able to locate around the world, that has grown inequality here and many advanced economies. there is a real problem. the answer is not letting off globalization. you the answer is how do we make sure that globalization works for us, not against us. tpp is designed to do that. it knocks out 18,000 tariffs that other countries place on american products. our economy currently has fewer
tariffs and is more open than many of our trading partners. if everybody agrees we will have an lower tariffs, that's good for american businesses and workers. we should want that. we should pursue that. number two, the complaint about previous trade deals was labor agreements and environmental agreements sounded good, but they were not enforceable the same way you could complain about tariffs and actually get action to ensure that tariffs were not enforced. tpp strengthens labor agreements and environmental agreements, and they are just as enforceable as any other part of the
agreement. people take them so seriously, vietnam is drafting and presenting unprecedented labor reforms in vietnam. they are changing their constitution to recognize worker organizations for the first time. what we are doing is we're raising standards. it's harder for them to undercut labor standards here in the united states. the same is true for environmental standards. the same is true for things like human trafficking. malaysia is taking serious efforts to crack down on human trafficking because tpp says you need to. it gives us leverage to promote things that progressives and people here in this country including labor unions say they care about. if you care about preventing the abuse of workers or child labor
or wildlife trafficking, the decimation of forests, all those things are addressed in this agreement. i have not yet heard anybody make an argument yet that the existing trading rules are better for issues like labor rights and environmental rights than they would be if we got tpp passed. i will continue to make this case. i have some very close friends, people i admire a lot. i disagree with him. that's ok. i respect the argument they are making. they are coming from a sincere concern about the position of
workers and wages in this country. i think i have the better argument and i have the evidence to support it. hopefully after the election is over, there will be more attention to the actual fact behind the deal it will just be a political symbol or a political football. i will sit down with people on both sides, on the right and on the left, i will sit down publicly with them and we will go down through the provisions. i would enjoy that. there is a lot of misinformation. i am really confident i can make the case that this is good for american workers. somehow, we muddle through and got it done. i intend to do the same with
respect to the actual agreement. you had the second question? that was a long answer. i apologize. the fbi is still doing an investigation. there have been some assessments made this might have been a russian hack. what i can tell you without commenting on the specifics is there are a lot of countries out there that are trying to hack into our stuff. governmental, databases, private sector databases. not-for-profit databases. this is why we have stood up such an aggressive effort to improve our cyber security. we have provisions in place where if we see evidence of a
malicious attack by a state actor, we can enforce penalties. that requires us to be able to pin down and know what we are talking about. i don't want to get out ahead of the legal evidence and the facts that we may have in order to make those kinds of decisions. more broadly, we are trying to promote international norms and rules that say there are certain things that states should not be doing it to each other when it comes to cyber attacks. certain things are out of bounds. those norms are going to slowly build. they will get more adherence over time.
we still early in the process. in some ways the explosion of the internet and its importance to our systems has outstretched the legal architecture. we're playing catch. were going to have to keep at it. in terms of how it affects our relationship with russia, we've got a lot of differences with russia on a bunch of issues. i think we have been able to stay focused on those areas where we still have a common interest. we have deep disagreements on issues like ukraine. if we have an interest in bringing an end to violence in syria, how we balance those issues. that is pretty standard statecraft at this point with
russia. if in fact russia engaged in this activity, it's a long list of issues that me and vladimir putin talk about. i have a real problem with it. i don't think it wildly swings what is a tough, difficult relationship we have right now. it's not going to stop us from trying to pursue solutions so that we can implement the minsk agreement and get russia and those separatists to lay down arms and stop bullying ukraine. it won't stop us from bringing a political transition inside syria that can and the hardship there.
prime minister lee: can i say something about tpp? i don't want to get into your domestic politics. looking at someone who is someone who has been intimately involved in triggered the whole process, it has become this important initiative. the economic arguments for the tpp in terms of trade, i think the president has presented them eloquently. it is a deal the countries have negotiated. each one provides market access on their side in return for gaining market access on the other side. they are committing to rules. it is a hard fought bargaining ross us. the negotiators spent many trips and nights and many dawns and
find out. at the and of it, everybody must decide is a plus or minus for them? in your case, i think mike froman did a very good job. ours did the best they could bring back something the political leadership could stand by and support. it's an achievement that all the members of the tpp at the end of this are still with us. nobody has struck out of this. there is something in it for each one of us. i think we should look at the other side of the economic benefit. i am exporting. i am earning a job. i am spending and i am consuming and importing and because of this, i am getting a wider range of products and services and opportunities that will improve. people talk about walmart with product coming from all over asia. who benefits? people in america. not just exporters.
these are part of your invisible standard of living. it is real and it is valuable. in terms of the economic benefits, the tpp is a big deal. in terms of america's engagement in the region, you have put a reputation on the line. it is the big thing which america is doing in the asia-pacific with the obama administration. partners, your friends who have come to the table who have negotiated, each one of them has overcome some objection, some sensitivity, some political cost to come to the table and make this deal. if the bride doesn't arrive, i think people will feel very hurt.
it several of his predecessors thought seriously about participating in the tpp. they walked away. he wants to help. he wants his country to benefit and to open up its market. this is one way to do that. you don't do this. it hurts relationship with japan. it hurts your should. agreement with japan and the japanese living in on an uncertain world. they are depending on the american nuclear umbrella. on life-and-death, whom do i have to depend on? this will not be set openly. i have no doubt.
i think if you go beyond that, i would like the tea people question with an earlier question. where do we go for the next 50 years? that depends if we go toward interdependence and therefore peaceful cooperation or we go for self-sufficiency, rivalry, a higher risk of conflict. asia has tried both. the world has tried both. in the 1930's, with a very difficult international environment, you had a rivalry with japan which led to war. after the war, because america was open and because you
promoted trade and you encouraged investment and other countries to open up, the asia-pacific has been peaceful. if over the next 50 years you continue to work toward interdependence and cooperation and neutral prosperity, we can say these have been peaceful years and we have made further progress together. if you go in the opposite direction and you decide that this will split down the middle. i think that's a very different world. one of the reasons why you don't have a manageable relationship with china now is because you have trade. it is mutually that official.
both sides want to maintain that relationship. if you didn't, it would be like the soviet union during the cold war. you still had to find ways to work together, but it's much harder. the tpp does not include china. it points the direction toward the world. if you set the wrong direction, in the next 50 years maybe you will turn around, but it will cost you many years in the world will have to pay quite a high price. >> i am from the business times in singapore. good afternoon. i have two questions. everybody knows what the stakes are. what is the future of the tpp if it does not get ratified during the lame-duck session? the fear is that if things wait
too long, it might need to be opened up for re-negotiation. how can we reassure the nations and the people there is the political will to get this done as soon as possible? the second question is for president obama. we are almost at the end of your eight years in office. i would like you to evaluate progress regarding a ship. what is the thing you're most proud of? what is something you would have done it differently? what is your message to your successor to engage singapore, southeast asia, the asia-pacific? prime minister lee: with respect
-- president obama: with respect to tpp, i thought prime minister lee's points were right on target. this is an economic agreement. what we have learned in history is you can't separate economics and issues and security issues. the prime minister is right. we have benefited from a norm us enormous peace and prosperity around the world. we have had an unprecedented time where the great powers were not engaged in conflict. this was in part as a growing interdependence. if you think about those parts of the world where we still see conflict, where we still see high levels of violence, they are places that are less integrated into the world economy.
there is a reason for that. there is a powerful economic case, a bread-and-butter case about why this is good for american workers. it's ultimately good for american wages if it's structured properly. i think it's important for people to recognize that the alternative is not tpp or some imaginary circumstance in which something we are able to sell goods around the world wherever we want but nobody is able to
sell goods to us. we can operate anywhere around the world. that is not the alternative. the alternative is what we have today. a situation in which we don't have as many protections around aber and environmental issues as we would like. a situation in which there are countries like japan that sell a lot of goods here, but keep restricted access for u.s. companies and u.s. workers to their markets. prime minister lee is right. the prime minister of japan is taking some risks because he knows he needs to make his economy more competitive. this will open up access we haven't seen in the past. that is a big market. it is still one of the top three economies in the world. the last point i would make
around this is china. as prime minister lee mentioned, china is not part of the tpp. if we don't establish strong rules and norms for have trade and commerce is conducted in the asia-pacific region, china will. china is engaging all the countries in the region around its own version of trade agreements. they are not worried about labor standards or environmental standards or human trafficking or anticorruption measures. you get a low standard, lowest common denominator trade deal. if america is it creating high standards, china's rules will govern in the fastest-growing part of the world. that's bad for us economically. it's also bad for security
interests. it's bad for the interests in promoting norms against child labor or human trafficking or making sure everybody is working harder to raise conservation standards. that is the alternative. those are the options. i think it's important for us to get this done. nothing in life is certain. we've got a good track record of getting stuff done when i think it's important. i will say this: this is not just an obama administration initiative. this concept began in a republican administration. we pushed it through. we made it happen. we made sure that the things
that i care about were incorporated into it. historically this is had strong bipartisan support. we will go out there and make those arguments. i think we will be successful. in terms of my balanced legacy, across the board, we are in the game. we are focused on asia and away we weren't when i came into office. the countries have noticed. our alliances are strong. our security arrangements are deeper. whether in australia or the philippines or singapore, our defense budgets reflect our commitment to things like maritime security in the region. the continuing efforts around
building the east asia summit architecture means there is day-to-day attention around a bunch of issues whether it's disaster relief or public health or counterterrorism. there are consultations today that weren't taking place eight years ago. on every dimension, we are a much stronger position to engage, influence, and learn from our asia-pacific partners. the thing i enjoyed most was our young southeast asian leaders program. whenever i meet with the young
people, i am inspired. it makes me very optimistic about the future and what's going to happen. if you ask them about the future they want to see, they are very much committed to an interdependent world, a world in which people are learning and exchanging ideas and engaged in scientific and educational exchange. and a world in which people's different cultures and backgrounds are a source of asength and cooperation opposed to conflict and fear. and that is true in southeast asia, in africa, latin america. that's true in europe. lot of this fear, the choice
that was posed by prime minister that iself-sufficiency not achievable and ultimately rivalry and conflict, those who opt for rivalry are folks who are looking backwards. you talk to young people around the world, they understand interdependence is the way we are going to assure peace and prosperity for all of us, for years to come. thatat may be the thing has some of the most lasting impact. there are some future prime ministers and presidents and business leaders and nonprofit leaders that are going to do great things and i'm glad to have played a small part in that. >> thank you.