tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN August 31, 2016 2:34am-3:34am EDT
intelligence equities. the classified information procedures act was passed in the 1980's, and they thought they solved that problem, the friction between intelligence and law enforcement. nonsense. it required trust building, case-by-case, and person by person, so that the cia understood that the fbi would not earn their equities. a great example occurred in the summer of 1998 with the attacks on the american embassies in kenya and tanzania. the investigation that followed that involved both agency people and federal bureau of investigation people. the way we did it was, the people went on searches together to do search warrant in east africa, we send people from both organizations. so if something was found that later would be useful in a criminal case, the fbi agents could testify about it.
it never would be necessary to talk about the cia's activities or its presence. that was consistent with the law, but required trust-building to get there. three years later, fbi personnel testified about those searches in a federal courtroom in manhattan. and the cia did not have to be involved, consistent with law and discovery operations. those types of things build a culture of trust. it is not enough to say come these other roles of the road. we have to demonstrate a person by person, case-by-case. you will see that from us, trying to work with you place by we have to demonstrate a person place, enterprise by enterprise, incident by incident, to demonstrate that we know how to do this and do it well. a brief word, because i cannot resist much of talk about encryption and going dark. the issue of going dark, the term we use to describe our increasing inability with a
judicial authority to get access to information that fits on a device or is traveling in real time. at the challenge we face is that the advent of default, ubiquitous, strong encryption is making more and more of the room we are charged to investigate with, dark. there was always a corner of the room that was dark. sophisticated actors could always get access to devices or live streams. just since i have been director, post-snowden, especially through default encryption, that shadow is a spreading through more and more of the room. the conversation we have been trying to have has dipped below public consciousness him and that is fine. because we want to collect information this year so that next year, we can have an adult conversation in this country.
here is why i think it requires an adult conversation. our nation's founders struck a bargain 240 years ago. in our great country, we have a reasonable expectation of privacy, in all of our private spaces. in our houses, cars, safe-deposit boxes, devices. and that is a very important part of being an american. the government cannot invade our private spaces without good reason. good reason that is reveal a bull in court. -- revealable in court. but that also means that people of the u.s., through judges and law enforcement, can invade our private spaces. that bargain has been at the heart of our liberty since the nation was settled. to take the most common example. if law enforcement has probable cause to believe there is evidence of a crime in some space you control, whether that is your bedroom, your car, we're
safe deposit box, or your laptop, they can go to a judge, make a showing of probable cause, and get a war and that is consistent with the fourth amendment to the u.s. constitution. and then, go through your stuff. they can search wherever the judge says they can search, your closet, your dresser drawers, under your bed. they can take whatever the judge says they can take. even our memories are not absolutely private in the united states. even our communications with our spouses, lawyers, clergy, medical professionals, are not absolutely private. there is a judge in certain circumstances that can make those testify about what they saw or heard. there are really important constraints on that, but the general principle is one we have always accepted and has been at the core of our country. there is no such thing as absolute privacy in america. there is no place outside of judicial authority.
that allowed us to achieve two things we all love dearly, privacy, and security. widespread default encryption changes that bargain. in my view, i think it shatters a bargain at the center of our country. there is something seductive about the notion of absolute privacy. even when i hear it, i love it. i have an instagram account with nine followers, they are all related to me. if maybe -- i do not want anyone looking at those pictures. it is nothing inappropriate, but it is private to me. it is seductive when i hear someone say that absolute privacy is a paramount value. and come our devices are made to support privacy. i stop and step back and realize, we have never lived that way. that is a different way to live. it changes something at the center of our country, that is really important. in our case, it affects our
national security investigations and criminal investigations. we believe at the fbi that we have to talk about it. our role is limited. at the fbi's role is not to tell the american people had to live or govern themselves, our role is to say those tools you are counting on us to use to find people in criminal cases and national security cases, they are less and less effective every day because of this challenge. it is also not the job of tech companies. as wonderful as they are, to tell the people -- to tell the american people have to live. their job is to innovate and celist grade equipment. the american people should decide, how do we want to live? how do you want to govern ourselves? and you have a conversation in a mature way, we need space and time and information. we need to understand in the fbi, how is this exactly affecting our work?
and then, share that with folks. the challenges in this conversation is the intensity of emotion around the issue that makes it hard for people to avoid demonizing each other, and you have a thoughtful exchange. some like to say we are trying to weaken encryption, that we are trying to build backdoors into everybody's devices. to be clear, we believe the issue is not strong versus weak encryption. we love strong encryption at the fbi. it enables us to better protect people from the, -- thieves, hackers, spies, terrorists. but we believe absolute control of data is not a requirement for encryption. a whole lot of organizations, including our own, issues personal electronic devices to employees, and so retain some control over those devices for security and business reasons. if those organizations,
including my own, is served with a warrant, those organizations are able to access the information and comply with the warned. the ability to do so by design does not require weak encryption. that is why i often describe this as a really hard problem, but not a technical problem so much as a business model problem. that does not make it easier to solve, but it is a fair description of the challenge we face. we believe in the fbi that we need a conversation. if the american people say we are ok with that portion of the room being dark, then we are ok come to use an example, in the first 10 months of this year, we got devices from state and local law-enforcement and were requested to open them. and 650 devices we were unable to open. that is criminals not caught, evidence not found, sentences of far shorter for pedophiles and
others because judges cannot see all their activity. we should not drift to a place where a wide a swath of america is off-limits to the judicial party. tech companies last year wrote a letter to the president that i found honestly, depressing and disheartening. it was a letter that wonderfully described the benefits of encryption. as i read it paragraph after paragraph i thought, absolutely, that is important. the letter ended without any acknowledgment of the costs of widespread, ubiquitous, strong encryption, especially by default. my reaction to that was, either they do not see the costs, or they are not being fair-minded about technology and the costs, which will make the conversation even harder, and that is a bit depressing. so, we need a conversation.
it needs to start from a place where we recognize that there are no evil people in this conversation. we share the same values, we all care deeply about the same things. privacy on the one hand, security and safety on the other. we may weigh them indifferently, i may see it differently from someone who lives in silicon valley, but we have the same values. that should allow us to have a thoughtful conversation, without demonizing anybody or trying to bumper sticker anybody. i hope you will participate in that conversation, and we can have it next year, when we are not engaged in an election. to finish, i do not know where whether -- whether we can stay ahead of the cyber threat. we can reduce it, send messages that change behavior. in the face of a threat unlike any we have seen before, we need enough humility to be agile,
enough humility to take feedback from our partners to figure out how we can be better. we definitely need each other. thank you for being part of that, thank you for the help you have already given to the fbi, for the advice, feedback, and assistance. together, we will make our world a safer place. i look forward to your questions. [applause] >> we have time for one or two questions. we already have a couple people up. go ahead. >> you mentioned the sony hacked several times. one of the reasons that was considered significant is that it was a foreign entity attacking a constitutionally protected speech. now we have confirmation that
potentially foreign actors have conducted an intrusion on two state election systems. how would you characterize an incident like that? and also, as we head into the november elections, is this something that would require immediate action on behalf of the federal government, securely on dhs? mr. comey: that is an important question. it will not surprise you that a white -- that i will not give an answer on a particular matter. but we take very seriously any effort by any actor, including nationstates that moves beyond the collection of information about our country, and offers the prospect of an effort to influence the conduct of affairs in our country. whether that is an election or something else, i do not want to comment on the particulars. but those kinds of things are something we take very seriously and work hard to understand so
we can equip the rest of our government with options for how to deal with it. that is all i will say at this point. >> you talk about deterrence, and along the same lines, a year ago obama signed an agreement to try to work out how to not have intellectual property theft. what are you saying as far as what we have seen from the chinese in the past year? it sounds like you're trying to change their behavior through an agreement like that. i was wondering what you had to say about that. also, how you think we should react to the russians -- have we done anything along those lines in the administration to react to that?
mr. comey: i will only answer the first part of that come up for the reasons i said earlier. i will not comment on anything -- it is still early, but we see encouraging signs in the way our chinese counterparts are talking about and understanding the framework that i discussed that nation gazed -- nationstates do not engage in theft for commercial purposes. the talk is right, and there are early indications of efforts to cooperate with us in investigating and bringing to justice people who have done that. that said, it is early. and it is a process that takes a long time. and particularly because of the heart of it, we are trying to understand if people are stealing information for intelligence purposes to make money, and that is complicated, so i do not want to paint a picture that the problem assault, but there are encouraging signs.
>> i will have to cut this short. on behalf of all the attendees from our state and local government, talking about the collaboration and partnership, it is a very key one. thank you for your time and kicking off a great day for us. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] graham, who chaired the investigation committee on the 9/11 attacks, talks about terrorism and national security tomorrow. my coverage from the national press club beginning at 10:00 a.m.. then, a look at free speech on campuses. we will hear from a number of professors live from george washington university at 4:00 p.m. eastern. >> c-span's "washington journal," live every day with
news and policy issues that impact you. theng up wednesday morning, chief investigative correspondent for yahoo! news. he details the fbi's investigation, suggesting that foreign hackers penetrated tuesday election databases. then the health care reporter for the morning console over the recent hike in the cost of ibm's. .- of epipens then, whether the $1 trillion that has been spent to protect the u.s. has made an impact. you sure to watch "washington journal," beginning live at 7:00 a.m. eastern. join the discussion. weekend, c-span cities tour along with our comcast cable partners will explore the literary life and history of denver, colorado. on book tv, we visit the
tattered cover bookstore, considered a cornerstone of literary culture in denver. >> if you look at tattered cover, you will see the green carpets, the dark wood, the original barnes & noble superstore is how we modeled it. >> and an author talks about living with his father and his book, "stories i tell myself." >> he was born in 1936. when he was growing up, he era whenow up in an typically fathers were involved in raising their kids. and second, it was always the most important thing. family was secondary for sure. >> also this weekend as part of our c-span cities tour, history of denver on american history tv. fish and wildlife
service ranger on the rocky flats nuclear site transition into a national wildlife refuge. >> we do have elk that use this area. they use the drainages. , and andave deer maybe some fawns. occasionally there is a bear. >> and then kimberly field, author of "the denver mint: 100 years of gangsters, old, and ghosts," talks about how the mid to change the city. >> by the 1880's, denver itself and got rich from mining, and it wanted to become the queen city of the plains, the center of commerce, the leader in the western united states. and the city fathers at that point decided that he mint -- that a mint was going to be part of the process. >> the c-span cities tour of
denver, colorado on c-span2's book tv. working with our cable affiliates and visiting cities across the country. >> president this week will take his last trip to asia as president. next, former white house officials who worked on asia policy preview the president's trip to china and laos. center for strategic and international studies hosted the event. >> good morning, everyone. welcome to csis. this is about president obama's trip to china. if you haven't, please grab yourself a snack or coffee before we begin. my name is colin quinn, and the deputy director of strategic communications, and i will be getting out of the way to
introduce these folks. green, ouris like senior vice president for east asia. to his left is matt goodman. conley is the s.e.p. for europe, eurasia, and director of our europe program. yhen finally, abm seawright. she is the senior adviser and director of our southeast asia program. just a point of order before we begin, our panelists will give weef remarks following that will open for questions. when we do, if you could use the mike's in front of you, we will be recording a transcript so it will be easier for us to find you. that's all for me, i will hand over to mike. >> good we
will open for questions. morning. this is president obama's last trip to asia as president. week -- heve next arrives in china on the third and will have bilateral summits with president z sheen paying -- xi jingping. then september 4 and 5 in china, the chinese government will host the g20 meeting, which matthew will talk about. laose fifth, he flies to for bilateral in laos or speech, his final speech on is a policy. the east asia summit with leaders of ten members of the association and full east asia summit and amy will talk about that and there will be bilateral with turkey and other leaders
including from europe, vladimir putin will address what issues might come up. this being the last trip i received a lot of questions how to think about president obama's legacy, and the history of us strategy, and good starting stuff for, i have been thinking a lot about where we are in the art of history of american engagement with asia. let me start with opening thoughts on the obama legacy, with the cosby, most historians would say it is too early to make such a judgment but reality is for decades afterward, let me
make a stab at that. after 7 years there is more about president obama's policy, it is not a radical departure from what clinton and bush did, neither is it a bold discontinuity for departure from what previous presidents did. the first to declare themselves the first pacific president was richard nixon who served in the pacific, the governor general of the philippines, herbert hoover had been a businessman in china, muttering around the white house, john f. kennedy served in the pacific and so forth and many of the initiatives that have come to prominence began in
the case of the defense realignment, but broadly speaking in a historical context what president obama has done is build on a set of broad policies started many decades earlier. every president since richard nixon has built around engagement with china and that hasn't changed. every president since reagan has complemented that, and the favorable balance of power and content with an increasingly confident and recently assertive china. for the clinton administration building of the alliance, the bush administration, an official in the nsc, building on top of
that partnership with india, president obama, strategically in the southeast asia piece, building along those lines. let me focus on that. of the closely at the pivot, the most significant legacy for the president is engagement of southeast asia. president obama had a lot to do with it, the first president to join the east asia summit, president bush decided not to for a variety of reasons including the revolution in burma. after some debate in the east asia secretaries clinton and kerry attended every meeting of the foreign ministers meeting in
asia, their predecessors in the clinton administration, this is the most sustained engagement since the vietnam war. there have been spurts of energy, no sustained comprehensive approach. the obama administration will deserve rightful credit for reconnecting to southeast asia and opening up in a sustained way. on this trip i am sure that will be part of the celebration, the
east asia summit and the summit will show that and the president's speech in laos will show that. the last country to get this high-profile attention from the us, the record on democracy and human rights, this is a long play. other aspects are challenging on this in the philippines, basically every country in southeast asia has improved relations with the us, having to do with china's rise, it is complicated. i think where the president will probably get somewhat lower marks, but below par, in the management of great power relations, president obama inherited stable relations with china and a strong relationship we had, for a variety of reasons, a relationship with japan with more defense guidelines but a bit of a trust
reasons i can explain and the relationship with china is scratchy to say the least, queens and unsettled. this has to do with factors that control the united states, the financial crisis suggested to many in beijing that the us was entering secular decline. the current leader is much more nationalistic than his predecessor. some of this is the result of stewardship that is inconsistent in asia.
the basic problem is when the pivot was announced in 2011 the bottom line was never here. in 2009 president obama and president who announced they would announce interest in asia that were received badly. in 2011, in washington, took interests out and the president -- australia had heavy military. well-received in the world well-received in china. in 2012 the president proposed a new model of great power relations and the administration embraced that in 2012. it was very badly received in japan, india and elsewhere because of correlation articulated by beijing, china and russia, india, australia. this back and forth has
exacerbated a growing problem in the context of the financial crisis. the chinese overplayed their hand. what you will see is support and encouragement, the chinese overplayed their hand but on this summit, you will see no grand joint declaration we saw earlier in the administration, no celebration, some agreement on climate change but a rough relationship. we don't know whether china will build more airfields in response to the arbitration panels in the philippines. nobody expected china would take its next move before the g 20, but no question whether the big move will happen after that. we have great difficulties with china in the un and great questions operationally with steadily increasing show of force and the incomplete gdp.
i am certain the president will say publicly and privately he is committed to gdp in lame-duck caucus, most experts say it is a longshot, i hope he succeeds because the next president will have a hard time getting back to tpp quickly. the good news is the agreement will be ratified in the fall, it will hold in australia and elsewhere, we would suffer a hit in terms of credibility and reputation but we have time to recover because the region generally wants it.
the last one, north korea. no president has handed to his etc. better situation with north korea, they are blowing through every agreement. kim jong-il may not remain quiet as the world works on that part of that -- . >> from the sublime to the ridiculous, the g 20 on the east asia summit, very involved. the group of 20 summit will be held on september 4th and fifth, the 11th leaders summit since the g 20 was elevated from finance ministry for him to the middle of the global financial crisis in 2008. 10 of those 11 summits so the g 20 brings together 80% of the global economy. the map of the g 20 never works so it is actually g 63.
i just tilted it up, 19 individual countries plus eu 28, tween 9 invited guests plus 7 international financial institutions so there will be a lot of people around the table. from a us perspective this is a legacy tour, legacy trip. if you recall in january of 2009 when the president came into office the us economy, the global economy was crashing and burning at the g 20 was part of the effort to stabilize in part by bringing passengers upfront to steer the plane so through regular summits, try to get cooperation on global growth, financial stability and reform of the international financial architecture so these things don't happen again. the president and the white house will one to celebrate the progress that has been made, stabilizing things and getting growth back on track and more financial stability, avoiding protectionism is a big accomplishment, what they didn't fly, there has been a lot of
little protection which will be a source of great concern. climate change is another piece of the g 20 broader agenda. i think -- there are major challenges of global growth that are inadequate, it is underwhelming, and trade, protectionism, flipped back into parochialism, the president will take that on. there is a particular concern about overcapacity in steel and other commodities, a major topic of conversation steel will be mentioned in the g 20 which is pretty unusual and that is one of the headlines, establishing a local forum. from a chinese perspective it is mostly about the show. china when they host these
international events, we all remember the show, in the positive since china wants to be a good steward of this organization, the first time it is chairing it, a milestone in china's participation in global economic governance and it is important for this to go well. china has identified four themes, adjectives to describe the word growth, innovative, invigorated, interconnected and inclusive and they have particular meaning. inclusive is the most important for china, they want to get these people around the table and so they are the leader of the developing world in particular but innovation is important and they are committed to stronger growth for an interconnected infrastructure and trade kind of activity they want to highlight.
sort upholding from mike's thought about legacy, indeed it will be a very interesting legacy discussion regarding president obama's turkey policy. as you recall in 2009 in one of his first speeches as president going abroad, he delivered the keynote speech recall the u.s.-turkish relationship a model partnership and certainly turkey to become a model partner for the middle east. and today, i think we see a very fundamentally changed relationship between the united states and turkey. you have two descriptions right now of u.s. government officials, deputy necessary
-- national advisor ben rhodes describes the relationship in the context of a broad and active agenda special envoy brett mcgurk described it yesterday as turkish intervention in syria unacceptable and a source of deep concern. you certainly don't have necessary agreement within the u.s. government about the shape and contour of this relationship. i would describe it as one that's rapidly deteriorating. it's been an historic number of your senior visits to turkey following the july 15 coup. you at chairman of joint chiefs general dunford, the first senior sufficient to arrive in turkey after the coup. unit vice president biden's visit last week, august 24 and
now you have this bilateral meeting between president erdogan and president obama on the fourth. clearly, syria will be a critical element of the agenda. a plan that the u.s. government had been formulating related to syria i think now no longer exists. this meeting with president erdogan has to reconstitute a strategy for syria. the original plan was to close the turkish border where ice is controls the gap between where syrian kurds control the west and east of the border, but the center is where the islamic state still rests, and with turkey's military intervention, again at the time and vice
president biden's visit to turkey, again, signals i think the great break in this relationship. so i hope we'll see from this bilateral meeting a new understanding about the objectives of the syrian strategy. i think it's going to be extremely difficult to move to pyd, this year encourage military east of the euphrates. that is the guarantee that the obama administration has made to turkey. that will be difficult and is clear turkey is continuing its intervention. so this will be a huge element of this bilateral discussion. the second element is clearly centered around the status of the extradition of mr. gulen which was an important part of the conversation turned vice president biden's trip last week. and other than sending a justice department, state department team last week to turkey, it's unclear that process to determine whether the strategic use trade relationship will absolutely rest on whether mr. gulen is extradited or not. so clearly this relationship is near a breaking point, and he it will be very interesting to see a president obama couches the
future of that relationship. after that heavy lift we're told it will be an informal meeting between president putin and president obama, at the discussion will also be syria as well as ukraine. again on syria we have an interesting development with the turkey russia were approach much. and to see how that understanding works and whether russia will work to be a cooperative partner in syria can even after last week's marathon meeting between secretary kerry and foreign minister lavrov. we see absolutely no productivity. we see lots of meetings. we just see no outcomes.
i think questions if they raised about what this ongoing dialogue is producing i think it is produced very little. on ukraine, although not certainly the headlines that syria is grabbing, the cease-fire agreement is rapidly deteriorating in ukraine as well. two weeks ago a very serious buildup in crimea. russia's unannounced snap military exercises on the ukrainian border. this isn't unsolved issue. it is continue to deteriorate and it's very unclear how and what the role of the u.s. will be in helping to shape the outcome. we are not sure whether president putin will be meeting with french president holland and chairman chancellor angela merkel. that meeting has been canceled, put back on and canceled again. we will see this normandy format minus you can because it's unclear whether you clean it president petrol poroshenporoshen ko would be part of that discussion.
again, there is no clear solution and russia continues its military buildup, and the cease-fire violations continue. so this will again the legacy of president obama's russia policy is very much a question mark finally chisel bit of european context. i open the informal meeting that we don't know about but is scheduled in the margins of the g20 is president obama's meeting with prime minister theresa may. this is are coming out party, her first major international event. prime minister may will be having a meeting with president putin. this is actually an important meeting as well. british-russian relations have been very rocky, to say the least, and there's been a sense of seeking to normalize that relationship. the uk has been a stalwart force on using sanctions against russia because events in ukraine and crimea. so we will see what that turns
out to be. it will be interesting theresa may's visit to china as it comes whenever first issues as prime minister was to review a major chinese investment in the uk, nuclear power plant, which is -- has created a little attention, certainly the chinese government very upset by this decision being reviewed and she will have to work very hard to put some minds at ease over also very interested to see as brexit negotiations are ongoing what form that will take. and begin what impact that will have on the global economy. finally, i couldn't end without a brief note on european relations with china, particularly in the european spectrum. very much overcapacity in steel. stew will be on the minds of europeans, very concerned about overcapacity, market economy status. there's a growing unease about chinese investment in europe, i would say, on a larger trend. and certainly we will be looking, the german chancellor was just in china in june. or can't visit.
10th visit, she's been the one european leader that has been seized with trying to create a robust economic relationship, and a german business leaders are increasing speaking out about all the problems that american businesses have been having in china. now certainly driven companies and others are expressing very similar issues. and as much as we are extremely concerned about the status of tpp, i would argue our european colleagues both the german and french are increasingly not happy with the transatlantic investment and trade investment partnership. so ttip is as strained as tpp. certainly as the global economy, free trade is not in good shape on both sides of the trading block.
amy: thank you, heather. so for the second half of the trip to kind of return to some of the things mike laid out, this will be very much about president obama's signature foreign policy initiative, the rebounds for the pivot, and from the beginning this really has south east asia at the center. it specifically has had a real embrace of austin, the association of southeast asian nations, as an organization and a support for asean and the super bowl out of place as a container in the region and the center, central player in the region secure secure architecture. the rebalance is also very much about building up new cooperative relationships with emerging partners, new partners and laos is a good example of that. so laos is chair of asean issue which is what it is hosting the main summits in its country. and so president obama will be the first sitting president to ever visit laos. and we have been building up our relationship with laos on a number of fronts. so the bilateral visit will very much served to highlight our bilateral relationship,
particularly in the area of development assistance where we have some programs on health and nutrition and agriculture. and legacy of were issues where we do a lot of work on unexploded ordnance and cooperation in finding remains of our missing in action. president obama will travel where he will hold a town -- a town hall with young leaders of laos. very similar to the youth engagement, the town only did in malaysia last year or for those of you who may have seen, this was covered live on television, and it's a really good example of a free flowing exchange of ideas with the president of the united states and youth leaders in southeast asia. i think it's a very meaningful especially for them to be able to have that kind of exchange. and as mike said this going to be a wide ranging speech that will attempt to capture all the progress that the obama administration has made under the rebounds and look towards
the future of our relationship. on the second day in laos, president obama will meet with all 10 of the leaders of asean. this would be the ninth time the president obama has met with asean leaders of u.s. policy in, which is pretty remarkable in eight years. the last time you met with him was in february in sunny land california. this meeting in laos we very much about building on the momentum that was achieved in sunny lands. i think there will be a real focus on discussion around the south china sea and maritime security cooperation more broadly. to also be a focused discussion on economic engagement and the obama administration will announce some collaboration of its u.s. asean connect initiative that it initially announced in sunnylands.
this is his attempt to bring together a number of different programs that are run by many different agencies to bring it together into a, platform to really promote engagement with the private sector a round issues of infrastructure and entrepreneurship and innovation. there will also be a discussion on some transnational issues like counterterrorism and climate change. i think there will be a real emphasis on youth engagement through the young leaders of southeast asian initiative. and women's leadership as well. and then finally it is the main event, which is at the east asia summit. this brings together all 10 liters from asean with a dialogue partners which in addition to the u.s. includes china, japan, south korea, india, australia, new zealand and russia. the east asian summit has really emerged.
it celebrated its 10th anniversary last in malaysia so this'll be the 11th of its net and its emerge as the premier leader led forum for discussion leader led forum for discussion in the region on political and security issues. this would be the fifth time president obama has participated in east asian summit, and i expect he will use this as an opportunity to advance the rules-based order in the context of specific challenges, most notably perhaps south china sea, and recent developments related to the south china sea, including the ruling by the geneva-based, excuse me, tribunal panel in the case of the philippines brought against china on maritime issues and south china sea. i'm sure president obama
will reiterate the u.s. view that this ruling is final and binding, but at the same time we also see it as an opportunity, a turning point for using more diplomacy to try to resolve some of these disputes. another topic will be north korea, and the need to enforce u.n. sanctions against north korea and its recent easy. and also there will be i think more discussion than before on the issue of human trafficking and migration. finally in addition to these summits, president obama will be meeting with the 10 asean leaders as a crew. the we some limited amount of time to have some of the bilateral meetings with some asian leaders. i'm told he will not have very much times i don't think there'll be a lot of bilaterals and, of course, he is met a lot of southeast asian leaders recently. he just was in vietnam in may. is hosting in washington, d.c. the week after he gets back. he hosted president gerry cauley
here late last you the one southeast leader a pretty companies go to meet is the new president of the philippines who was elected in june. is a very colorful figure of course. easements a very controversial remarks and has taken some very troubling steps on domestic policy in terms of dealing with drugs and crime that have cost real human rights concerns. in the larger context the u.s. philippine alliance has made great strides in recent years with negotiation of enhanced development cooperation agreement and begin admitting that in a number of other things we've been doing to build capacity for the philippines in terms of its security, as well as economic areas. so i think this will be a good opportunity for president obama to sit down and touch base on
all of our cooperation and build that relationship. i will stop there. >> we will not open it up to questions. just point of order, if it's any and who you're with a double help the transcript the there's a few people in the back where we have microphones for you as well. >> two questions for you. you are the one talking about the need to -- [inaudible] what in your mind china u.s. navy other major economy should do individually or maybe together in this regard? second, can you explain to average people like g20 is accomplished over the years? thank you. >> good questions. on growth i think the u.s. and china will be aligned in wanting more combination of more demand stimulus and structural reform. the u.s. perhaps a little more action on the form of steam leading demand through fiscal and monetary policy, and china a little more on the structural reform agenda.
the challenge in the g20 is that not everybody agrees, everybody agrees on structural reform because everybody knows they have to fix their own economy but it's difficult politically and is domestically, based on domestic policy decisions and political choices that are difficult for a group like this do anything other than to see structural reform is an important thing and we should all be doing that in our own country. on demand, the problem is that one country in particular, and i won't mention any names, its initials are germany, is very opposed to any talk of fiscal stimulus. germany is a host of the g20 next year so that are already part of the so-called troika of leaders which previous post turkey and future germany with china. i just don't think it will be any substantive progress on demand stimulus, and so that's the real challenge. overall, i was as i said in my
introductory remarks, the g20, what i was editing what president obama's going to say to the american people about the g20 is that the g20 has done three brought things. it has set an agenda for global economic cooperation, and that's important for trying to talk about these issues of growth, financial sibley, tax reform and other things people talk about. where the leaders have said an agenda, political agenda. secondly, it does solve some problems starting with intervening to prevent a deep and lasting crisis in the global economy and financial system. more specifically it solved some specific smaller problems like advancing the trade agenda or doing, improving, cracking down on tax evasion and so forth. and then the third thing it has helped to build habits of cooperation. it has brought together countries representing a very diverse group of economies large
and small to talk about comment interest, common challenges. that's a big deal. it's something that doesn't happen very often, and so the g20 as a group can take credit and the fact that china, largest emerging market, second largest economy in the world, is now chairing this group, shows there's been tremendous progress in advancing international discussion and cooperation. i think those are the things i would emphasize -- . >> george, national children might come to talk about the president builds on previous administrations and then he talked about the stars president in southeast asia, but is there any reason to believe that anything on the pavement or in southeast asia endures past january 20, that this will last? >> lots of reasons.
the simplest is if you look at the structure of international relations with all respect to our european friends, a dynamism both good and bad is shifting to the far east. the developments in the far east now are affecting the globe after centuries whether west basically influenced the far east. americans know that. pretty consistently. there's one exception in the new pupil but pretty consistently, polls which asked americans what region of the most important u.s. interests have shown asia is never one for the past five years. it was europe for decades before that in the german marshall fund, chicago council on global affairs. we their own survey at csis, our counterparts, think tank, academics and elites and former government officials in 10
countries, and we asked about the gulf of the rebalancing do you support it, should we continue? over 80% in asia suggests outside of china. it was a reverse in china. only about 20% and china thought it was a good thing. but the most interesting result was in the u.s. come over 90% said yes. we sent the survey to hudson, heritage, aei. so i think beyond republican, democrat, right left politics at the elite level there's a broad consensus. and precisely because it's not new, it's built, the g20 started at the end of bush, the japan policy i worked on in the bush administration started in clinton. is a lot more continuity. so i'm pretty optimistic about it. to me the wildcard, there are two, one is do you get senior people in the next administration who know asia? candidly, we don't have that right now. if you look at the top ranks right now, the literacy and experience working on asia is not as strong as the past four. four. it was lower than it was in the first obama term.
so willed senior deputy secretaries, secretaries bp to instantly get asia and? the other question is what happens in the middle east and russia? how much bandwidth will the next president have to continue this work? i'm optimistic, actually. >> i will add briefly, i think it will be enduring, although a lot will depend on the new leadership coming in with the new administration, as mike says. i see within or decisions, within the pentagon but within other agencies as well just a real shift in focus on priorities and programs in real frameworks and agreements towards southeast asia in particular compared to previous administrations. to take defense, for example, first of all he do have a very knowledgeable and committed leader in secretary carter. but over the last couple of years it hasn't just been secretary carter's engagement of president obama's engagement on defense and secure the cooperation. it's been the whole of the department, a combination to baltimore to a focus on southeast asia and asean in particular.