missed, thanks to the national archives, the national historic preservation of records commission, the national park service and other forward-looking groups, our students can see the rich record of the people of america in ways that students could never see it before. many of your state archives have been doing remarkable work in sharing the resources of your state and local courthouses and other records. students can now see history firsthand finding true stories and thousands of digitized newspapers from their own communities. they can trace complex patterns in maps across generations. they can see military records and oral histories and television footage from the 1950s. history is -- >> you can watch the rest of this online at c-span.org. take you live now to the forum ongoing about u.s. and indo-pacific businesses. this will be a look at -- with

energy secretary rick perry and also one of the co-founders of the carlisle group. introductions are under way now. >> they're going to have, what i can promise you, is a very lively discussion. if you've ever seen either one of them, you know that to be true. you put them together, and we may have a molotov cocktail here. so let me just set the frame for this discussion that they're going to delve into. and i would like to take us to the year 2050 and talk about what the world is going to look like and what our relationship with this region means going out that far. so in 2050, the world's gdp is going to have grown by about 250%. we're going to have added 2 billion, with a b, people to this planet. and 7 of those 9 billion people are going to live in cities. energy intensive cities. cities that need a lot of energy. people that need a lot of jobs that require a lot of energy.

and while the demand for energy in 2050 is hard to forecast, and i can tell you, and rick perry would even agree with me, even his own energy agency forecast out to 2050 are absolutely going to be wrong. we know that energy is going to go up by about 75%. but incredibly the demand for electricity with this population and developing economies is going to go up by about 140% from where it is today. so the demand is being -- it's being driven by the developing world. in fact, 80% of that new demand is coming from the developing world. and some of that is coming from this region. but we need to keep in mind that as of today, still a billion and a half people don't have access, whatsoever, to any form of modern energy. and in there is india, which is a big part of this partnership. today in india, 400 million people don't have access to any form of modern energy. and to put that in context, that's about the combined population of the united states and germany.

so lots of work to do in india. and, of course, japan and australia and the rest of the countries that are involved are big energy consumers. so we have a tie that binds us in what we need for energy. today the u.s. is in a position to be a stable partner, an exporting partner, a solution to this region's energy demand. we're exporting oil. we're exporting gas. we're exporting coal. so today i would like to say energy is what binds us together. america is an energy partner and a solution for this region. and there's nobody better to talk about that than the 14th secretary of energy rick perry. now, secretary perry is a veteran of the air force. he's a farmer. he's a rancher. he was the longest serving governor of texas. and he was an eagle scout. as you can tell, he was a

classic underachiever. so while governor texas population grew, its economy greatly expanded. it welcomes the petra chemical back to the state and texas has cleaner air than when he took office. i think it might surprise you to know that houston today has cleaner air than london, paris or rome. so without any further a do, please let me welcome secretary rick perry to the stage. [ applause ] >> thank you. thank you. thank you, thank you. good afternoon. and so, karen, thank you very much. and please pass on to tom my appreciation. i don't know if he's in the audience or not. but tom donahue who we have done a few gigs together back through the years in my previous job. and so i also want to say thanks

to a couple of my cabinet members who have been in today and gave you a little bit of observation about what's going on. and, david, i don't know if david is on the stage yet or not, but he's -- david, come on up and have a seat here. give him a big hand. this is one of the --. [ applause ] >> david is going to be the -- he's going to be the interviewer, the straight guy in the act here in a little bit. but anyway, a dear friend. we got to do some things together and a great supporter of the higher education in this country and some things that goes together. he's on the kennedy board. and i think you have some of the most interesting jobs in show business. so anyway, an honor for me to be here in front of you today to share a little bit of my on look. i think we've got this tremendous opportunity to engage

with the indo-pacific region. particularly in the energy sector. and certainly it's in our interest to do so. and it may not be as simple to engage as some simple words here on this stage. but clearly send a message. we're going to stand with our allies, with our partners. and that's why i'm really proud to underscore what secretary pompeo announced this morning that we're in the process of developing a whole of government, if you will, multi-year, multi-million dollar framework for our energy efforts in the region. and we're calling that effort asia edge, enhancing development

and growth through energy. asia edge will focus on four areas, including expanding energy commerce, advancing markets based on energy policies and market reforms, cat lyso owe catalyzing projects and promoting universal access to affordable, secure and reliable energy supplies. the initiative will advance american interests even as it drives economic growth in asia. and interestingly, it's happening at a time when our nation is at this just incredible place relative to energy progress. due to this cascade of technological advancements

driven by innovation, we're producing this abundant, affordable energy from a wider array, if you will, than we ever thought possible. and we're using this energy more cleenl and -- cleanly and efficiently as well. the united states is now the leading producer of oil and gas. we are setting and regularly breaking records for oil and natural gas production. and we're exporting lng to 30 countries now on five continents. last week i had the opportunity to attend the dedication of the co-point lng plant just down on the tip of maryland. it is a noteable development since the international agency forecast that we will account, the united states will account for nearly three-quarters of the

world lng export growth between now and 2023. let that soak in just a second. i mean, this is some stunning information and stunning news for the energy world. especially important for asia, india and japan as they are contracted customers of cove point. and our exports will build obviously on that strong energy strategy. i traveled to india earlier in the year in the spring where we established a joint u.s.-india gas task force. that task force is a strategic partnership with a private sector and designed to help india unleash its own natural gas reserves. they have some substantial

reserves there. and certainly bolstering their energy security and creating a range of u.s. commercial opportunities from just our natural gas molecules going there. obviously the infrastructure that's going to be built, the innovation that comes with all of that. i've asked our other secretary over at the department of secretary mark minsy to oversee that, and i really appreciate his commitment to the region and to the concept. now, with japan, and i think ab japan, we're looking to promote greater commercial cooperation in the nuclear energy side of things. and to that end, the s2s, the deputy secretary dan bruit is going to be traveling over to japan in the next week to

participate in the first u.s.-japan bilateral industry forum on nuclear facility decommissioning. we're strongly committed to supporting the cleanup and decommissioning efforts in japan. and that forum is going to give us some real opportunities for u.s. companies there. but also they're going to be talking about, you know, what's next in the nuclear energy side and small moderator reactors are quite the -- i think quite vogue, if you will, and a lot of countries are looking at that. japan in particular. india is going to be a source of opportunity there for our smrs and the technology that is coming out of our national labs and our private sector working in partnership. and, you know, south korea, taiwan are also moving towards decommissioning some of their nuclear ra nuclear reactors. so this partnership we're talking about with japan can be

very helpful. this past november we launched the u.s.-japan strategic partnership. that's intended to promote universal access to affordable reliable energy across the region. we're also working together to create some new business opportunities and develop advanced energy technology. we launched a u.s.-australia strategic partnership to pursue similar goals in that region. anyway, been busy and lots of partnerships going around the world. i was also pleased to note that today u.s. trade and development agency announced an agreement with japan's ministry of economy trade and industry to promote trade in the indo region. that creates a reverse trade mission for public-private

sector leaders and japan to visit the united states, to meet with u.s. suppliers of lng and related equipment and services. finally, on october 1st through the third, mark peters is the head of the idaho national lab. he'll be chairing the pacific basin nuclear conference in san francisco. this is an excellent opportunity to discuss the developments and planning of nuclear energy in countries across the pacific rim. and, again, they're going to hear a lot about small modular reactors in that conversation. so we're really here to work with folks in that region. there's some extraordinary opportunities we have. by expanding our presence in the indo asian sector, we'll promote regional peace and prosperity while guarding against those who

would use energy for coercive end. we're going to also be offering the citizens of those nations the freedom and the opportunity to create their own success. and the key to all of this, you know, whether you're in the united states or whether you're a country over in the indo pacific is energy security. and from that comes prosperity, economic growth, rising opportunities, and the freedom of each individual to pursue their dreams. and that's why i'm excited about as asia edge. that's exactly what it does. that's the result of what we're going to be doing together. and i'm eager to get engaged and work with all of you using our god-given natural resources but also our innovation and the ingenuity that comes from the united states. so with that, thank you, and,

david, we're on. [ applause ] >>. . . . fun, interesting. here's the way i would describe it. the best job i ever had in my life, and i had been blessed to do some fun and interesting things, the best job i ever had was governor of texas and it will always be that. with that said, the most interesting job i've had in my life is being the secretary of energy. at an incredibly unique time in american history and world history, for that matter. beengaged in the energy side , and that speaks for

several, think about it. 12 years ago there was a developer from texas traveling around getting an interesting speech called the oil. remember that? we found it all, we've discovered it all and even if we did find any more resources, we would not be able to afford to extract it and it would be too expensive. he wasn't saying here's what you need to switch over to. he was saying oil and gas is declining and you need to figure out what you're going to do. the great news for america, what's been a story always, david, is that the private sector innovators and in this case working with the doe size of our national lab, an innovator like george mitchell changed the world, literally.so the whole energy side of this thing is just incredibly fascinating.

15 years ago we were beholden to a lot of different countries who may not have had our best interests in mind and today we are able to share with them our resources, our innovation and giving them this great piece of mind and economic prosperity and energy security is at hand so you like living in washington, i know you like traveling a lot but did you ever consider coming back in 2024 as a candidate for president? >> i'm done you're done? >> yeah, quote me on that. thesame thing i said i was going to quit being governor of texas , we all live on a little compound together and i'm retired and i totally failed at retirement. so much of the shale oil which has revolutionized our

energy is in texas. do you think that's because god looks favorably on texas? why isn't it other places? >> that's an interesting observation. i don't want to get into, fall into the trap like someone who gave the peak oil speech . where we take a snapshot in time and say this is the world we live in caused innovation, we may find copious amounts of resources that we are able to extract in india, for instance. we're talking about the technology that working up intomarcella's and some of the other places in the country .we don't know where all these resources are . somebody told me the other day and i don't want to get too much on this but they drilled 2600 feet horizontally in one day.

these are stunning numbers we are seeing out of the oil and gas business is their ability to explore and deliver these resources cheaply. and with that said, what's happening on the nuclear energy side, the highly efficient low emission technology that's coming out of the coal industry . the renewables on wind and solar side. all this is happening at once and given the citizens of the world opportunities and options that nobody thought possible. if you think we are better off as a country to go to places like india and china and say let's give us our technology that we use to discover shale oil and shale gas for export them, which are we better off doing? >> i would suggest you both that both are in our best interest . the old phrase the dutch

disease where the.just sold their natural resources and added value and bought. there was a good lesson there. so the united states, eating in the early part of this partnership eating a deliverer of natural resources but also the innovation , the technology, the expertise to be able to use that to develop your own natural resources i think both of those are wise you were injured recently as you mentioned and decommissioning of the nuclear facilities they are. is japan planning to decommission all their facilities over time, not just the ones that have damage but all of them? is that what their plan is? >> i think there's a transition tranny going on in japan. all modular reactors from my perspective and a lot of folks that are substantially brighter and more experience

in that arena and myself would tell you that the transition over to small reactors is partly because of the efficiency, partly because of the safety area partly because they are cheaper to build will take place a lot of that zero emission power that was developed by the big plan. there is a transition going on. i don't think it's away from nuclear power, it's to a more efficient newer form of nuclear power. in our country we have 100 or so nuclear facilities. you think they are the future we are going to open openly wind down nuclear in the united states? >> can i throw deep here. i think you're correct in your observation we're going to go away from the bigger, those big old monolithic, huge reactors. that were historically built to newer technology. with further down the road, a

fusion of energy being developed. i was a couple places over the course of the last 30 days they're dealing with diffusion energy side of things again, they're not proven up, they're not the prototypes are going to be built here in the next 2 to 6 years butthere's really interesting , and i think exciting opportunities dealing with energy generation that are from a nontraditional source, fusion being one of them all before you were secretary of energy one of the issues with nuclear has been what do you do with the spent nuclear fuel rods. there was a planned years ago to move to nevada that didn't work. is there any progress on that or there's nothing that we can say that and in the near term? >> i think the keywords you said were near term. and near-term the next couple of years or is near-term the

next decade. and my goal is that one of two things happens. is that either the citizens of nevada comfortable. this is a safe and i think it is, a place to be a depository for the spent fuel or are there other locations in the united states which that may be one of the options that are out there as well. my home state, and then over in new mexico, there the with which is also a place that would take some of this away. >> that's not to say that any of those are gone. you're correct in that we are in a bit of a longer head but i think that morally irresponsible for us to continue to allow the spent fuel rods and this waste not

just from power plants but the nuclear waste to sit in some of the places we have in this country today because it's not secure and potential for an accident is certainly greater today and it's been they were in an appropriate repository . >> asia program secretary pompeo and you talk about today, do you think the people in china say wait a second, the united states, while you stay over in north america, let us worry about energy over here. we don't need you helping our energy situation. you think there's any reason about the united states helping with energy in asia by the chinese? >> so what are you going to do about that? >> competition, this is what we do. it's what we do. it's frankly what china does.

it would be no more appropriate for china to tell us a, we don't want you over here with your energy, newfound energy anymore than we would say we don't want you any here with your newfound telecommunications. it's the competition we are in the world. do we need to make sure that the play field is fair, balanced and nobody is either subsidizing or putting their company unfair disadvantage to somebody else but the fact is you gave americans a level playing field. you keep us in a competitive arena and we'll play anywhere. >> i'm in the business where other investing and energy so if i asked you if i said i have $1 billion or $2 million, should i invest in liquefied natural gas for shield oil extraction? where's the future for my

money? >>. >> i would never set up on the stage and tell you jen with carlisle but i would tell you that we have a capable people. it's not my business is helpful to where to invest. is that an appropriate ethical thing to say? >> you think liquefied natural gas is a good area? >> the energy market rightnow is a fascinating place to be . and they're investing in because of the japan versus the growth in the supply. infrastructure. i mean, since you gave me this open, let me one way to deal with it. the third largest oil and gas field in the world the hide it russia, saudi arabia is an

oil field in west texas. the permian basin is only third behind those other two and has the potential to be the number one producer of oil in the world. it's a stunning development. there's 4000 foot of formation there to be developed. the limiting factor in the permian basin today is line capacity. so we are going to be building infrastructure. we are going to be building lng facilities. we are going to be power in the world and i think any good investments advisement would be part of your portfolio would be in the energy sector, particularly in the infrastructure. >> you think the keystone pipeline will be built? >> i do, it needs to be let's

talk supercomputers for a moment. your department has been involved in financing for supercomputers.why does the department of energy get involved with supercomputers? >> one of the things, people think about the department of energy and what we've been talking about his fossil fuels, renewable energy and energy sources. that's actually a minor part of what me and department of energy is involved with. the largest part of our budget is involved with nuclear weapons. the curators if you will, we are the moderators, we have to nuclear weapons as well to support in a number of degrees are 17 national labs. the most fascinating, and that's the reason this is the most interesting job. it's not because of what's happened in the last, he hasn't heard that we found a list energy and happily things going on but the

reason the department or i should say the secretary of energy is the most interesting job is because of the national labs, the work that they do. the areas they are working on from a-z. if you can think of it, they're working on it in some form or fashion. supercomputing is one of those. of the 10 fastest supercomputers in the world, five of them belong to the united states and those are the property of the department of energy. we announced last month resuming our lead in the supercomputing capability speed and sarah with a computer called summit that oak ridge national lab at los alamos and idaho very involved in the nuclear weapons side of things. supercomputers, the reason supercomputers are so important and i'm going to get on one tangent. you would not think the

department of energy would be involved in medical research. but we are and we are involved in because of the computing capacity that we have. for instance, on the veterans health site, posttraumatic stress, traumatic brain injury and suicide prevention is very important in that sector, as it is in professional football and hockey and our kids playing sports. from the traumatic brain injuries. where working in conjunction with the university of california san francisco and their neurosciences department they are accessing the supercomputers the department of energy to find solutions to questions that before and were just impossible to answer because they did not have the computing capability. and today, because we have been allow them access to these supercomputers, we are finding answers to challenges

on from brain injury that we never possible and i'll finish with this anecdotal story that comes out of usb san francisco. a small device no bigger than across the border that you can put a drop of blood in, slide it into a small analysis machine about this size that they develop, can tell you in 10 minutes whether or not you've been concussed. the value of that to the private sector is untold. even concussed in an automobile accident, for instance. they can check you while you are in and know which hospital to take you to. it can be the difference between you living, dying or you living with a brain

injury that had gone somewhere else, you could have been substantially trained better. and the military side of things, being tell if these young people will make massive differences in their lives. that's what you want your government to be doing. that's the type of result for tax dollars being spent at a national lab. that's what i pay for. so let me ask you, one of your responsibilities to protect our national grid. some interrupted by cyber terrorists, how secure is our national grid and are you worried about any interruption by foreign entities? >> we have an old grid that's 60 years old. find the good news bad news, there is no single point of failure by and large. but with that said, we live in a really new world. 10 years ago, you would be

sitting on the stage here having a conversation with someone about a cyber attack one or electrical grid. today we know that's a possibility. you probably read something in the last 72 hours of the russians. penetrating into a us power company control panel. and that's the true story they did. we are working diligently. our national lab has been very involved with both the defenses and the offenses ways of dealing with this. i worry about our being able to deliver power not just a single event, not just a of a power station, we buy large comfortably handle those.

we get pinged millions of times a day. the doe and millions of times a day as you all these other control systems. what i worry about is making sure that we have a diverse portfolio of energy. one of the reasons the president asked me on the coal and nuclear side, to make sure that we don't allow ourselves to become codependent upon natural gas and we've been blessed with all this gas but don't become so dependent on it that you have a pipeline that gets interrupted and instead of maybe one or twopower generators going out, five years ago , you lose dozens by one gas pipeline being interrupted. so making sure you have coal, making sure you have nuclear because they store on-site. they are uninterruptible from

excess so a little bit off the subject but it's not. >> my responsibility is to make sure that nobody ever called us and says why does the electricity go off? that's ultimately protecting against a cyber attack, emp. that is a sector specific from the fast and from a presidential declaration that the department of energy, i think we are the only agency that has a sector specific role in making sure the electrical grid is not affected by cyber attack. >> you mentioned coal, the president campaign saying he was going to help the coal industry. we are trying to get india and china not to use as much coal because of their air pollution problems. are you worried about air pollution from coal in the

united states and how realistic isit to keep the coal industry alive for another 20, 30 years . >> looks like to take their snapshots in time and go here's the way the world is and here's the way the world always going to be. >> i don't get into that place. >> the technology is there for us to use coal that's an abundant supply in this country and around the world. i think i mentioned highly efficient low emission technology. there's a plant down in the country where we are doing tests that allows for use of coal. we opened the largest carbon capture utilization sequestration coal power plants right outside of houston in the spring or a year ago last spring that japan is a partner in.

and it's taken 95 percent of the carbon out of the air. obviously with the scrubbers, the emissions, the emissions that you want to have out of their coming outas well . my point is we are going to need all of this energy. how do you use wideband cleanly and we are seeing. the united states, we were user emissions by 14 percent between 2005 and 2017. more than any country in the world europe is doing its part and it was driven by innovation. so getting that, they're going to burn coal. the idea some or another we say they're going to burn coal. let's give them our technology. let's give them the support they need to be able to use it and obviously, my home

state, we reduce emissions by massive amounts in 2000. was partly because we moved away from old, inefficient plants moved tonatural gas . we also had the lowest wind energy development in the country, so climate change. do you believe there is climate change caused by human activity or you're not sure? >> the climate is changing. i think the question for me is is there a way that you can continue to have development in the world and do it in a way that is least harmful to the climate as you can? i think you can do that. the united states has shown you can do that, but here's

an even bigger moral question. if there's 1 billion people in the worldthat don't have access to electricity , you go to africa and the continent a sickly dozen, or a substantial amount doesn't have access toelectricity . and to tell them sorry because you know, there's some thought process out there if you have access to electricity, the climate and the globe is going to be impacted. i don't think you can do that. i think what america's role should be is to show the world here's how you can have energy security. here's how you can have energy accessibility and affordability and heading this country, heading this globe in the right direction relative to all of us but the

problem with the paris agreement and climate change is that it wasn't effective or what is the reason why the administration doesn't support it? >> my read is that it wasn't fair. china and india have to participate here and the united states did and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that a lot of that technology that has the ability to change china and india's practices was going to come from the united states and if we affect our economy, you think about the, i don't know whether billions of dollars was going to cost to participate in this going forward when you consider the impact that the paris agreement could have had on the united states economy and the president said how about you just join us on what we

do. how about you judge us on the fact that we are lowering our mission. and nobody else's. when i go to rome, in april 2017, sitting down with my counterpart in the g-7, we were out of the paris accord by that particular time but it was really clear that the president was talking about it. and they got up and gave very strong impassioned pleas about the united states had to stay in this agreement and then we went into our bilateral, the doors were closed, theywere like , it should be interesting i some of your lng and it became very clear to me that there's kind of two conversations going on. there's the public conversation we're all in this together. we love paris and then you need to stay in it. and then you see actionslike

your many . that are politically taking power plants on line we're getting away from gas, getting away from nuclear. and they're replacing it with coal because their citizens are going to demand the source of powerand their emissions are going up . and i take a little offense to that, quite frankly that the united states over that old 5 to 2017 period, we reduce our emissions by 14 percent. and you've got folks in europe over there and other places around theworld , that are addressing. let me ask you, we are i guess the biggest producer of gas and oil in the united states now. we used to be a big importer but now we are an exporter. are we better off if will prices go up because we've been benefiting because they are producing or are we better off oil prices go down

because they're consuming? where do you think we are better off? >> it depends on where you find yourself in the food chain. >> so you're happy around $80 a barrel? >> here's what we're doing. we are learning through technology how to produce this with less money and that's the key i think. the market is going to find its place. i don't think it's the government's role to be manipulating the market. the market will find the appropriate level. but because we have put resources into innovation, the private sectors resources into innovation and we found new, more efficient ways to develop our oil and gas and our wind and our solar, all of those have been driven by innovation.

and if we will continue to keep a market force in place that allows for the competition to occur, then we will be able to more economically cheaply pump this oil and gas into that particular point in time. if you have $60 oil versus $80 oil, producers can continue to find a way to make a living. you get the drive-through keeper and the economy as a whole is more effective. >> are just about out of time so let me ask you one final question. what's the biggest surprise you found in being territory of energy compared to what you thought it would be in the biggest surpriseabout being in the federal government as opposed to state government . >> let me draw this comparison.

the daughter in texas works pretty much unilaterally with the legislature. and. >> in other words, the governor and legislative leaders can get things done. >> know, the point is we didn't have a cabinet to have a government . >> i got it. >> so you're due, being the governor of the state of texas, the legislature allowed you to be one and done and work that you needed to be done, in washington dc if not quite that seamless. members of congress are hard to deal with the members of thelegislature . >> yes. >>. >> because they're more knowledgeable or they have more power? >>.

>> my is is because the texas legislature only needs for 140 days every other year. >>. >> you're not suggesting that congress? >> i'm thinking is an efficient way to do business. >> well, secretary i want to thank you for your time and thank you for letting us know about the asia conference, thank you. >> thank you david. [applause]

>>. [music]

energy policy with energy secretary rick perry. next up at the forum, a look at economic priorities and later congressional priorities for the economy in the indo-pacific region hosted by the us chamber of commerce. while they are on the short break we will take a look at remarks earlier by secretary of state mike pompeo. >> i wanted to come here this morning to talk about the trump administrations strategy for advancing a free and open indo-pacific and why us business engagement is at the center of it.

it's the staple of our mission to promote peace and stability through the region. we were at the apec summit last year, the national security strategy also detailed vision . make no mistake, the indo-pacific which wretches from the united states west coast to the west coast of india is a subject of great importance to american foreign policy. as i will detail, this region is one of the greatest engines of future global economy than it already is today. the american people and the world have a stake in the indo-pacific peace and prosperity . it's why theindo-pacific must be free and open . so for those of you who might not be familiar with our terminology , i want to spend a minute talking about what it is his administration means when it uses that language.

when we say free, it means we all want all nations, every nation to be protect their sovereignty and coercion other countries. the national level, meaning good governance, it means the citizens can ensure their rights and liberties. recent open, in the indo-pacific means we want all nations to enjoy access to airwaves. we will peaceful resolution of territorial and maritime disputes. this is key for international peace and for each country's attainment of its own national names. economically, open means fair and reciprocal trade. investment, transparent agreement between nations and improve on activity to drive regional ties. these are the path for sustainable growth. us commitment to free and open indo-pacific is rooted. the state department established a counselor presence in, in 1794.

american entrepreneurs who most of you in this room represented were trading and investing even longer than that. and i will give you a whole history but i will note how the united states depends on his role in enabling the growth we see the entire indo-pacific today. >>. >> the great state of our engagement is this. where america goes, we see partnership, not domination. after world war ii we worked with japan for the great alliance to stimulate boom 51 by conflicts. american assistance, investment in railway support and other infrastructure upgrades our nation for our south korean friends to recover, and build one of the world's most prosperous economies, one that is now strong enough to aid other

countries in their development. the 60s, we grew partnerships to address basic elemental needs. we support a transformational agriculture effort such as the green revolution which improves farming of wheat and rice worldwide. and nowhere more than in the indo-pacific. we help hong kong, singapore and other asian economies rise from the 70s onwards. in taiwan, economic development went hand-in-hand with creating an open democratic society blossomed with high-tech powerhouse. and america was proud to support foundational institutions like apec and the asiandevelopment bank . thanks to this history of economic and commercial engagements, america's relationships through the indo-pacific are characterized by mutual trust and respect.

american friendship is welcome and american businesses are recognized for the ingenuity , reliability and honesty. today, no country does moreto wage rate in the indo-pacific than the united states . southeast asia, is the single largest source of foreign investment larger than china, japan and the european union. open up the indo-pacific today is with private efforts to foster self-reliance, build elections and promote private-sector growth . in the philippines, dallas-based texas instruments open a factory that helped the country turned into a crucial part of the global semi conductor supply chain. in malaysia, general electric first invested in a sales and service center in 1975 area today, ge has over 1300 employees from kuala lumpur to ottawa. when malaysians recently elected a new government want

them and their leaders to america stands ready as we always do for others around the region . the commercial government, people to people i always on our sheer democratic values. all travel there. chevron was the first company oil expiration right in thailand and in 1973 december 1 hydrocarbon and high waters. >> this gave birth to a major local industry. today, chevron is a natural gas and crude oil producer and its investments support hundred thousand jobs. german energy science product chairs science, quality, engineering, the strength of intellectual capital makes greater return on investment. skyline provided equipment and legal advice recent rescue of those courageous boys who were trapped in a flooded cave. us companies literally helped

indo-pacific parker nations reach for the stars, space x, one of america's most innovative firms launched its first ever indigenous communications satellite. to be clear, the us government doesn't tell american companies what to do but we help old environments that foster good product if capitalism. we help american firms succeed local communities and flourish and bilateral partnerships can grow. that's why the united states for educational efforts is fulbright university and the young southeast asia leaders initiative. this is the same benefit we showed when we established the institute of technology along with 14 regional and engineering colleges and eight agricultural universities across india . finance is also important. our overseas private investment corporation as a

portfolio of 3.9 billion invested in the indo-pacific alongside american firms from healthcare to banking. every dollar that opec has invested, the private sector has invested $2.76. in indonesia, opec has teamed up with upc renewables to develop the country's first wind farm to provide clean portable power to 70,000 indonesianhouseholds . in our millennium challenge corporation $2.1 billion since 2004 to promote development and good government in indo-pacific nations. right now mtc is spending 500 million to build electricity transmission lines in nepal and realize that countries energy control and today, the indo-pacific business for i am proud to announce $350

million contact with the government of mongolia to develop new long-term sources of water supply. in addition to helping polio will fill a critical human need, this will position the country to attract new investment and stimulate growth. i know mongolia's foreign minister intended to be here today but he was called away for business . the program will benefit both on polio, the region and the world . i could go on much longer and give you more examples. american companies have been a force for prosperity throughout the indo pacific region. our good faith as a partner is evident in their support of economic development honors local autonomy and national sovereignty. the united states of america does not infest for political influence but rather practical partnership and economics. the successes of the past and present are just a prelude to what i expect will come in the future. i'm here to say emphatically the trumpet ministration is committed to expanding our

economic engagement in the indo-pacific region. we capitalize in authorities with freedom and openness. as president from say in vietnam last year the indo-pacific is a beautiful constellation of nations . >> that was a fascinating conversation with secretary perry and i would say that david rubenstein is certainly a hard act to follow but we have a very fascinating conversation i had as we look at and explore some of the regional perspectives to the conversations that we've been having today. before we get into that i'm going to make one program note. following this panel conversation, we will be hearing congressional perspectives. and i just want to make note that senator warner who was going to be appearing this afternoon is not able to make it for a personal contingency

, but senator sullivan is joining us this afternoon. and executive vice president will be having conversations with senator sullivan and get a little bit of the congressional perspective as well as the senators own perspective on adopting economic diplomacy and career as well so we're looking forward to conversations be to bring into conversation and share some of their perspectives. a very senior colleagues. both from the diplomatic community and from the diplomatic community of asia as well as from the white house and nsc. we have to us after show of singapore who has been the singapore ambassador to the united states since july 2012 has prior to this appointment

served as ambassador to indonesia high commissioner to malaysia , high commissioner to australia and a very esteemed and experienced in the region and the us engagement in the region. we have joining us from indonesia the deputy minister from maritime authority and sovereignty indonesia's coordinating ministry of maritime affairs. minister order via, joining us. next to him, ambassador sarna who charged as india's ambassador to the united states in 2016. november 2016, very interesting moment in which he began his tenure. and has a distinguished member of the indian foreign services 1980 as served as

india's high commissioner to the united kingdom ambassador to israel and many, many other posts and we're very pleased to have you join us today. finally, we have met, and her is the beauty assistant to the president and senior director for asian affairsthe national . the council and has ensured very involved in all of the proceedings today from the executive branch and the indo pacific strategy and vision that has been laid out and so we look forward to hearing more from you as well. welcome all of you gentlemen. and i thought we could start off the conversation perhaps as we heard today a whole government approach to end indo-pacific strategy for the united states and many announcements. in a couple of days, secretary pompeo will be heading your country, mister ambassador. and he will be engaging with

the foreign minister. you tell us a little bit about how you saw today's events and also what you think the ministers will be looking for? did they hear what they wanted to hear and what do you think would be the next step they would be looking for? >> you for inviting me here. we have a call between david rubenstein and the secretary perry this is a multilateral group, no longer bilateral and that's really what's happening in the region. both international engagement, even supported strong bilateral relationship. this morning, i've been here all morning and having a cabinet secretary, pompeo, secretary across jeffrey terrace, speaking about these

things in a sense joins up the us strategy. we heard at the end of last year the national security strategy that was instrumental in putting together but in a sense, that was a security different approach. those of you who know the indo-pacific, in that region economics is a strategy. it is not just security and this was the part thatneeded to complement security strategy . >> your administration is a good time for this. we're 18 months into the administration this is about the right time as they the security strategy together. with secretary pompeo going up this week, it's an opportunity to frame this out in the region and i would encourage the other cabinet secretaries. secretary ross, secretary perry to make conversations over there. having been in washington is useful but getting out to the region is critical. what we are expecting to see this week in singapore is the foreign ministers meeting.

we speak about the government taking place with it us and the dprk last month but the region is also coming together as one larger group. that really fits in with what the us is trying to do. how do we get that infrastructure? how do we get a sustainable development model for the future? and in all of these, the us has an important part to play. the whole digital economy, energy infrastructure fits into this activity in 2025 and last month when singapore , this is a new layer of cooperation and we are looking for partners from our side of the region to partner with other countries because what you are seeing in the region and we heard a lot of this this morning is a growing consumer demand for urbanization and we want to develop a mode that goes

beyond the 10 national capitals to solve national capitals as well. and the 2016 came around, it speaks again of many ofthe things the us is interested in . sustainability, energy, infrastructure. singapore is looking to partner with the united states in many of these areas. we already have one corporation, secretary pompeo will sign a new agreement in singapore where we work together to train people in many of these areas and we are looking to read all that effort in the future so it's a good opportunity and i'm glad it's all come together and i am looking forward to working with the us in the next few years. >> while i say one thing that goes to an initial round, we will turn to all ofyou, if you would like to ask a question , there should be cards on your table. these phrases question and

put your hand up with the card and we will make sure we get to as many audience questions as well. you focused on issues of maritime security and obviously for many of the asian nations and for europe in particular the economy is very important. how do you look at the nexus between security and economic connectivity and what did you hear today that helped you think about indonesia's interests and investments in collectivity in the region because you are clearly one of the countries that has so much trade and collectivity across the region . >> thank you alicia. thank you for having me here. let me tell you about asia. asia is the largest country in the world. we have 70,000 and 500 islands with 100,000 kilometers of coastline, 700 languages.

so so far, our economy grows by five percent but because of our archipelago state, we need a lot of development. so far over the last three years we've increased our standing by 160 percent on a unilateral basis but we understand that our money is not enough to advance our projects. so we have invited investors from foreign countries and the most aggressive oneis china . an example amounting to $44.6 million in three integrated sectors of development and security.

those who come to us are all from china. they are willing to invest 6 million $5 billion and plenty of them have already signed and also they are willing to invest for $17.2 billion. initially, we can get investment from china easily. that was before i took this position but as soon as i take this position, they assessed again the conditions . all of the points will become one with china. that will compromise our sovereignty, that something happened with china. so i think this is why the importance of this morning

declaration for equality and for compromise, the term is for cooperation and not domination. we are continuing doing something like this and finding investment from china for one country only will be eventually dominated.that's why we need this new world war i partnership from the indo-pacific. >> we basically invite all investors to come to the country. so i think in the movement it's good for us to find that in the future, we improve certain conditionality's. under the current conditions i don't believe this indo-pacific can compare to china. . china is willing to invest as much as 60 billion dollars

and they told me they are ready to invest all of the pri, close to $900 billion but the amount of money is significant and they are also very sweet in executing their project. back in china when i ran there and invited them to come to asia, in three weeks already sent a team for their first project and in two months they already designed amounting to $2 billion so i hope in the future, this new movement can completely china's forefront so that we can have a more balanced investment in the country. we are trying to balance the way by inviting japan to invest in india and invest in the mother islands. i hope in the future this

movement can create a balance and back with asia to extend their dominance by any other country in asia. >> a lot of good themes to come back on in both of your responses and let me transfer update and say india has in fact been engaging much more robustly across the indo-pacific. you moved from the northeast policy you and each policy and have prioritized diplomatic and economic engagement with the region. how do you view one, today's conference and some of the initiatives that were announced and two, what do you see as the opportunities from the indian perspective to partner and collaborate and engage? >> thank you alicia. i think there's a lot of take

away from this conference. i think it's a very revved up initiative. we heard about the indo-pacific strategy now and in different high level statements over the past year and we've been particularly involved given the fact that it is indo-pacific and the fact that you know, as a major foreign-policystatement last year . india and the united states were seen as two bookends of stability in the region as the two democracies and the strategy that was filled out. we had a fairly good idea as to how the strategic and security relationships were working. and in fact, india has been already involved with the now called indo back, and working outthese . all this stuff that we

brought today can work if there is underlying security. if there is underlying stability and if that is not there, then i don't think whatever we want, the private sector is going to put money in these spaces and in these projects . so one aspect was that we have now got a presumption of the underlying strategic stability and security because of the work that we have been doing together with the united states and several other countries including the multilateral exercises that go on and so forth. so what we had today is a build up on that. we have a buildup of economic and business superstructure. the creation of infrastructure and so on. i was struck by the residence

that i've heard in secretaries pompeo speak with what prime minister moti said in singapore, the dialogue. a number of commonalities of principal and division that we could see, for instance the idea that it is free and open and what does free and open mean? >> .. >> navigation freedom of flight as well as for settlement of disputes. the fact that they want to create a trade and investment environment which creates prosperity for all and the fact that we are going there as partners and not to dominate. i think that was something which we heard this morning, and these

are, these coincide to a tremendous extent with what prime minister moti said outlining his position of the pacific. so to come to your question to our policy, with we had a look east policy since the early '90s and, well, we reached a point when we thought that looking was not just good enough. we had to get up and do something. and i think 2014 was when the prime minister renamed this policy as act east. this means, you know, the east in the sense when i see it in indo-pacific is not strictly the east for us. because you may well see that the indo-park begins on the western -- pacific begins on the western shores of india, but for us it really matters what is at the other end of the indian ocean to. that is what we're determined

remains free, open and stable. we have the east coast of africa, we have the island in the indian states, we we have maldives. so we see it in a broader framework. i think our policy has been essentially one in which we can work together for these countries with mutual respect, open up dialogue, create and participate in fora which integrate with each other. there are dozens of such fora actually working there, even if you just take the various operating under ase a n, where they're security forums like the erf or whether they are the indian ocean rim association which is, you know, trying to create commonalities and bonds

and economic prosperity in these countries. we have been engaging now for 20 years with asean, and now -- and 15 years as summit partners. and this was celebrated when we had the honor of inviting and receiving all ten heads of state and government from asean countries last year. a sean is, gets 20% of india's investment. it gets 10% of -- we have 10% of our trade goes to asean. we have about six million people of indian descent living in the region. so i think our act east policy has been to actually strengthen these bonds both in political terms, in infrastructure project or economic terms broadly speaking, and we've got dozens

of projects now ongoing with different countries. and i would say that, you know, we have seen -- connectivity was a big theme today, and connectivity has been a very big theme of what we've been trying to do. not only in physical terms. for instance, we have the massive connectivity projecting in myanmar which we're trying to connect the entire northeast india to iowa sean in a way -- asean in a way. and, of course, now the digital process. but i just want to make one last point. it is that these are not just physical infrastructure which is important in that region. we see these as bridges of trust. so these are, these should be projects which are actually sustainable, which are demand-driven, which respond to the concerns of those countries, which are transparent, which are

sustainable. and actually create mutual good and not something like my colleague from indonesia mentioned. but in the sense that this has to be a trust-based relationship. and i think that was also something which was heard this morning. so i think these initiatives will dovetail very well with our policies and our projects that we're already undertaking in the region. >> before i turn to matt, let me ask the three of you, is there anything that you had hoped to hear that you didn't hear today? [laughter] or we can let you think about that a little bit. >> you know you can always look at the glass and say it's half empty or half full. today i can say it's half full, and we're on the way forward. and you can always say there's still more to be done. yes, there's always more to be

done. it's a region which, as you mentioned, has got $26 trillion worth of infrastructure needs, and the u.s. is putting on the table maybe $200 million? there's a huge gap. and there's space for everyone to come in. there's space for the private sector, there's space for governments, there's space for regulatory ideas. so let's look at it as sort of a half-full glass, and we can work our way up towards the next stage. >> okay. very diplomatic answer. [laughter] yes. >> i think -- i hope, initially i hope it would be a multilateral approach, but apparently this morning it's basically a single-country approach and still not clear for me. under the current condition, by the weighed a approach, i think it is mimicking the chinese way to conduct its road initiative but with smaller amount of money. so i think i expect in the pacific a strategy to be better

than that, yeah. in the future, i believe we move toward that direction, because we need a balanced investment in the area. >> so, matt, what i would say is clearly, you know, today we heard kind of a whole-of-government approach to the indo-pacific. i think one of the themes stressed was the fact that the infrastructure needs were not going to be met by any one government alone or even any, you know, all governments working together, that it was really going to be about the ability to leverage the private capital. and, obviously, american private capital is a major driver of global infrastructure investment. can you talk a little bit about how you see that and perhaps react a little bit to some of the comments that you heard from your colleagues? >> yeah, of course, nisha, and thanks to the u.s. chamber for

hosting today. thanks also to my colleagues across the government. as the ambassador just mentioned, this does know show the joining of a whole of government effort. we had about a dozen different departments and agencies involved in the event today and even more than that that are behind the strategying that underlies the event today. this event is really an expression of a first step, in a sense a down payment on a strategy that is designed to help the united states compete for many, many years to come. i'd also like to pay deference really to the private sector representatives who are here today. i mean, to put it very plainly, the best weapon that the united states has in the competitions that we are going to be engaged in for the foreseeable future is the american private sector for all the reasons that you were just alluding to in your question and my colleagues'

remarks here. it is the private sector that -- well, i mean, you could ask, for example, all my colleagues here which he'd rather host, who would you rather host in your countries, i mean, a u.s. official showing up with a list of demands or complaints or someone in this room, u.s. business person who represents a new proposal for partnership, has capital behind it, efficient capital which is good for both sides and clean capital? and i think it's really no contest. and that's why our strategy in many respects is about getting all of you off the sidelines to the extend that any -- extent that any of you are still on the sidelines to invest and to show up in the region and to really

examine the region of the whole indo-pacific with fresh eyes looking at opportunities that you may have missed when you were looking at one particular or just a couple of particular countries instead of the region as a whole. the, i'll just make a couple very quick points. one, of course, is that the indo-pacific region is extremely hungry for u.s. business. that's only become clearer to me in the 18 months that i've been in this job. they are hungry for our technology, for investment, our expertise, pickup. partnership, and, again, the transparency and clean approach to business that the u.s. represents at its best. second, and we heard earlier today and many times today expressed that partners here and around the world are really looking for an a affirmative

vision of the u.s. economic engagement in the reason, and i hope that today went some way towards fleshing out that vision. again, it's a first but critical step in a direction. we know, of course, that there's anxiety the about the adjustment that's taking place in u.s. bilateral economic relationships, in a couple in particular, maybe one in particular. i'd like to say that that adjustment is overdue, it's inevitable, and what's important now is for the united states and for our partners to look forward to the 21st century competition that all of us are facing. and that together we will be able to win. the third one is really a question, and it's a question for partners in the region. it's one that as u.s. business looks for opportunities in the wider indo-pacific region, are the national governments doing

the very best that they can to create the kind of business ecology, the kind of business environment that is necessary to continue drawing our investment, our commerce and really fair market-based competition which is what the u.s. craves and really demands as its prerequisite for coming into markets. that is really what has to happen if indo-pacific countries are going to maintain their long-term sovereignty, their diversity, their economic vialty. and -- vitality. and, of course, weakness in governance, weakness in economic institutions, poor adherence to market values and market principles are things hard going to create vacuums that others will fill in ways that are not going to be beneficial to any of us really and to your own people and long-term sovereignty and independence. so the u.s. government programs and initiatives that my colleagues announced earliered today are really -- earlier

today are really not in and of themselves decisive, but they are examples of the kinds of investment the u.s. has been making for decades and which we're really doubling down on. they're a modest down payment in some sense by the u.s. taxpayer, which we hope that comes back to u.s. business in the form of export growth above all. and finally to colleagues in the private sector the, you all have shareholder, of course, that you've got to answer to on a quarterly basis, and you know best where to apply your resources to maximize profits. let me just say we're really at a pivotal moment in many respects. and with the economic development of the region, now is the time, now really is the time to think strategically. because the decisions that you make over the next, say, 24 months are really going to be decisive for your businesses over the next two or three decades. and so with that, maybe leave it

to you to the field some questions. >> absolutely. so let me see if we have some questions from our audience. has someone been collecting? okay. maybe not. yes, thank you. and as kelsey comes up here, let me, let me ask another question as we wait for the audience questions to come forward. there's been some discussion about the need to be able to insure that there is security across the indo-pacific. and you talked about fostering that trust-based relationship that genders that feeling of partnership and cooperation. can you talk a little bit about how important is the now by secretary -- the announcement by secretary ross for india to have

sta-1 status in terms of signal and the impact in terms of your ability to advance is security in the region. >> sure, nisha. first of all, first of all i'd like to thank secretary ross. i think the multiagency colleagues who have worked towards that announcement this morning and the fact that this was made from the stage, i think, is also important for us. as secretary ross himself said, this is an acknowledgment of the security as well as the economic relationship between india and the united states. i think this is a logical step of india being designated as a major defense partner to whiching you know, we had been working with the u.s. administration.

i think it is a sign of trust not only in the relationship, but also on india's capabilities as an economy and as a security partner because it also presupposes that india has the multilateral export control regime in place which would allow the transfer of more sensitive but defense technologies and dual-use technologies to india. and without the risk of any proliferation. i mean, it also testifies to our excellent record that we have had in maintaining non-proliferation of these technologies. so i think it's a timely announcement. it comes ahead of the two plus two dialogue, shoot for early

september when secretary pompeo and secretary mattis are due to visit india and meet with their counterparts. and i certainly think it is, it fleshes out our defense partnership in a big way. >> wonderful. did you want to -- >> [inaudible] about the regional ecology. in many ways the regional ecosystem has been one that the u.s. has helped us develop. secretary pompeo this morning spoke about decades of trade and investment that's really helped to set up that whole ecosystem that has worked; open markets, innovation, free enterprise. and it's really something we want to look a forward to. as we are going into the next stage of economic development for many of these countries, it is going to be around day, e-commerce. and we really want to work with the u.s. on getting some of these frameworks right as well. that will benefit u.s. companies and companies from around the region where the u.s. has played

an important role into the next 50 years. helping us sort of frame these things in some ways. and we keep sort of bouncing off about china's rule. i mean, it's come up several times. i think in the region we to not see this as a u.s. is versus china competition. there is space for everyone. this is space for the australians, the japanese, the koreans, the europeans, the indians. it's the really a region that is -- wants to partner around the world. we don't see it as a binary, you know, zero couple game. so broadening that partnership, obviously, tensions in u.s./china economic relationships. finish we would like to see these result within the multilateral framework even as the u.s. may have to use real strategies to dole with china, and china will respond. we don't want to end up being

that -- here for that competition, we want to be here for the partnership. >> thank you -- please. >> have we developed ad good ecology? basically, we have been trying to improve our business climate in the country in the past -- or ranking of business is 120, now 70 something. but apparently it has not impact on u.s. investors. mbi from u.s. to a asia turn to negative meaning many investors are leaving asia. so i'm still wondering what's happening. we are ready to learn from you and to hear from businessmen, what do they want to improve our investment client with -- even though our government has been trying very hard, apparently

there's still some missing link. thank you. >> so did -- >> the same question. >> yes. so what i was going to ask is if matt wanted to maybe take a crack at kind of a couple of the themes that i've heard or in these questions or responses. one, is there a preference over bilateral initiatives versus multilateral approaches to looking at connectivity and looking at trying to boost trade and investment. and i think we've heard these comments from a number of our colleagues. if you could take that on. another is how do you not create the perception that there is a counter-china effort underway,

that this is zero sum, and i think secretary pompeo made the comment that this is not against any one country, and all are welcome to participate. but if you could maybe elaborate on that. because i think folks in the room and particularly the members of the media tend to look at this and immediately jump to the lends of is this a counter-china move, is this an answer to bed and road, and how -- to belt and road, and how do you address that. >> well, your first question about bilateral agreements versus multilateral ones, we are and remain a party to a great many multilateral institutions and frameworks and trade agreements. it's no secret that the american people had lost confidence in the ability of their government to negotiate multilateral are

trade agreements that they thought would deliver what had been promised. i -- they felt that some is of the previous arrangements underdeliverred, to put it mildly. and president trump, it's one of the reasons he was elected. people knew that there was a very authentic view that the president holds that some of these deals did not deliver -- weren't all that they were cracked up to be, that there was a hollowing out out in particular in manufacturing across the heartland of the united states. and so he was going to look at any other attempts at multilateral trade frameworks with a pretty jaundiced eye. not a closed eye. he made clear that he's willing to hook at a multilateral deal so long as they are going to do well by the broadest segment of american society.

and in the meantime, he's going to be looking at biloorl opportunities across the i e ndo-pacific. and there's plenty of work underway in that vein right now. you know, in terms of the second question, secretary pompeo's exactly right. this is not a -- when we talk about a free and open indo-pacific, this is not a closed club. it is not, it's really a common et of principles -- set of principles that we are standing up for and that we welcome any country in the world including china to stand with us in supporting. and so i think that over time it's going to be abundantly clear that we need exactly what we say. and what the president spoke of when he was in da nang at the apec ceo summit last september were words from his heart.

he wants to see the entire region have agency over its future, each country in a sense being a star in a grand constellation. no country being a satellite to any other country. that is really the specific of the free and open indo-pacific. >> we've got a few questions that have come in from our audience. let me just go ahead and read them out. first one, do cups in the indo-pacific need to be looking more carefully at who is investing and what is the intention of the investment? as the u.s. is looking at its cfius process, should asean countries be more concerned as well? why don't we start with our asean colleagues. ambassador. >> i think every country has to work out its own rules of what investments they let in and

which are strategic investments whether it's the energy grid, whether it's the cyber security realm. the u.s. is obviously more concerned because they have the technology, innovation emerge out of their labs and -- it's long required. but you want to do this in a way, and i get a sense from the congressional conversations is that they want to do it in a way that doesn't shut the u.s. off to foreign investment. i think that's what's happening as well. we will keep watch of each one of our systems, but you don't want to do it that shuts off investment. that's really critical. that do we work with private sector, do we work with the multilateral development

agencies? >> i think it's mentioned by --

every country has its way of looking at each project and each investment that comes. without -- so i think that's a normal presumption. whether it's sector in which you're getting the investment, the source of the investment, the terms of the investment, the security implications of the investment, i think these are all looked at by different institutions within each country, and i think that is a normal, healthy approach to have. having said that, i would say that, yes, we have been receiving investments, and to answer matt's earlier question, in part we have been able to create an atmosphere in which india is one of the most popular destinations for foreign direct investment. also because we've been trying to bring down the ease of doing business, we've been trying to put in a lot of fundamental,

transformational reforms like the goods and services tax and all that which create an equal system which is more friendly to those wanting to invest. so i think that, i think ultimately it's the principles when you look at the broader sense that will matter that the projects that are being built are governed by the principles which have been -- [inaudible] there must be transparency. there must be a rule of law behind them. there must be according to international norms and principles. and that by itself will rule out a lot of things which one would be scared of. and as to the multilateral or bilateral, i think both need to operate, both do work. for instance, again, going back to, you know, your work in the in, the o-pacific --

indo-pacific, we have other institutions like the bay of bengal initiative on multisectoral technical cooperation. we have the asian community dialogue, we have the indian ocean rim association and several others. but we also work bilaterally particularly in our own neighborhood. whether it is in nepal, sri lanka, myanmar, bangladesh, there's a lot of -- afghanistan. there's a lot of multilateral creation of infrastructure and so on as well as with several of the asean countries. so i think that it is not an either/or situation, but you have to see what is the particular project, what are the commonalities that can work together. so there really can't be one size fits all for everything. >> let me move on to the next question. it seems that when you talk

about cooperation in a quad setting, you're talking about the big guys versus in an asean setting you're talking about smaller players, smaller countries. is there an equal partnership to be achieved and how, and is there need for creating some kind of donor coordination mechanism or something to bring all of these together? i think that was the intent of the question. let me, let me ask is there, is there a tech between a quad mechanism versus creating engaging with asean and the asean dialogues and such, or do you see those as being complementary? i'll start with you, matt. >> i mean, in terms of -- you know, phrased that way i can say that certainly within the president's strategy, there is no tension. the president's strategy is indo-pacific strategy, his

vision of a free and open indo-pacific views asean and the existing organizations and groupings that are based around asean as really central to -- both geographically, but also conceptually -- to a free and open indo-pacific. the quadrilateral constructs is sort of a natural expression of -- it's a natural coordinating venue for four major democracies that also at least as we sort of envision, the gee ogg any of -- geography sort of touch the four corners of that region. it is meant not to work -- it is meant to work not as a substitute for asean, but in many ways it's designed to draw

all -- martial all of the strength of those four countries more closely into the heart of the region. >> [inaudible] >> please. >> singapore is in the asean chair. i think since we've seen the revival of the quad concept last year what's happening in the region is there are multilayers of conversations and organizations. there is the quad, there are things like the cptpp which the u.s. is not part of, there are smaller structures even within asean -- indonesia, malaysia, philippines doing a number of things. and it is quite natural. i think what's emerged with the revival of that quad is that most of the quad meetings take place on the sidelines of asean. i think it speaks very much and the administration has reinforced that the whole idea of asean centrality is key in many of these conversations. and that's where these partnerships take place and engage with. so as long as, you know, no

matter how you draw the map, asean is in the center of that. now, it falls on asean to make sure we do remain a coherent, organized structure. if asean starts breaking apart, if asean doesn't work as effectively, then you will start to see new structures emerge. but as long as asean remains coherent, that's why the ideas of connectivity 2025 and all these things, to make us a better, stronger central organization that many of our partners can see value in engaging. >> wonderful. maybe building upon that then for the three representatives of asia, of the indo-pacific, let me ask you about rsep. we've had a couple of questions to come in to say, you know, rsep -- when it's concluded -- would be a free trade agreement among 16 states which would represent the world's largest

economic bloc. how significant do you see this agreement? what do you hope to achieve through it? and then i'd like to get matt's thoughts on it as well. but let me start, first, with -- i'll start with you and work all the way back here and then circle back to matt. >> well, thank you, nisha. i think taking off from the last comment, i also want to endorse the fact that the centrality of asean is absolutely important in terms of the success of the indo-pacific. and as far as rsep is concerned, i think we see it as an initiative which could actually be fulfilling one of the ideas that we have been talking about, is to create a trade and investment climate and an environment which actually lifts all the countries upwards

together and thereby fulfills the purpose of creating all-around prosperitity. i think -- prosperity. i think what is essential for us is that it should be truly comprehensive. in other words, it should balance trade investment and services. and and when we're putting all these things together, i think this would be served. >> [inaudible] >> the free trade agreement is very important for us especially since recently we've heard a global movement taught protectionism. protectionism is not good because in 1930s it is one of the main factors that created the depression. in 2008 all global leaders a agreed to -- protectionism, and as a result the global economy can rebound very, very, very

fast. the lcep -- the rcep would bring back fair treat. this create a new hope for us because under the current condition i believe the global economy is slowing, and if we continue to conduct this protectionism, it's slowing even further. so this trade agreement give new hope. so we hope that this will unleash the spirit of global trade and cooperation among the countries in the world. thank you. >> what you are seeing in the region, and there's a very interesting development over the past two decades, is a network or noodle soup of free trade agreements. some are bilateral are, some involve three or more partners, and some are larger multilateral

frameworks. we had, obviously, the tpp, and the 11 countries have gone ahead with the cptpp, and that's one important structure. rcep is focused on asean, and asean's six free trade agreements with dialogue partners. asean has got free trade agreements with china, japan, new zealand, australia -- we decided to even out this noodle soup to make it a little bit smoother for businesses. you can say all this is really meant for businesses. several countries in singapore are working with the pacific alliance. so you're going to see a movement of these free trade agreements. and we're not just doing this because trade negotiators like to sit behind tables and negotiate these things. these are really meant for businesses, and these are meant to reflect the new realities today of regional supply chains. things are no longer made in one

or two countries as they move about. they're made in multiple countries. so what we want to do is create these frameworks. some may be higher standard agreements, and it's one of those gold standard agreements. some are just pulling together what we already have and making them neater and smoother. so we will have to have all these things going on. again, what i think we would like to see is how the u.s. can engage itself with some of these frameworks. whether it's some of the more bilateral frameworks or even some of the elements that they can connect together, stitch together some of those agreements together that they can feel comfortable with. >> so, matt, i'm going to give you the last word on this as we think about 50% of global gdp could be comprised by the nations of the indo-pacific by -- in the coming decade. how does the administration think about engaging with this

very consequential bloc of countries on trade and investment, and how do you insure that you're able to maximize the access for american companies into these important markets? >> well, the point certainly about high quality and high standard agreements is, the instructions the president has begin all of us is -- has given all of us is that the standards represented in tpp should be the baseline. so the goal is the same, it is to achieve increasingly high standard agreements because those are going to serve, certainly, u.s. business and our strength the best but also the aspirations that i see represented by all that just came back from visiting four countries in southeast asia, across the indo-pacific more broadly. these are countries that are ambitious. these are countries that are

hungry for major role as high-tech entrepreneurial drivers of global growth. and, you know, if i could clone our u.s. trade rep so that we could have a whole fleet of his team out there negotiating many ways to -- in ways, both bilateral agreements and also finding ways to plug into multilateral agreements, i'd be cloning them right now. that said, they're going out there. we've got a large number of people out at our posts who have been empowered to find opportunities to negotiate new, better agreements, additional ftas, things that are going to make it easier and more attractive for u.s. investment and exports to flow into, as you've said, really the most

dynamic part of the world. and we're part of it. we are a pacific nation. we're an indo-pacific nation. and so just very delighted that you had us here today for this. >> great. well, thank you very much. i want to thank all of our panelists this afternoon, to give their thoughts and perspectives on what has been, i think, a really interesting, thought-provoking and very hopeful conversation today about the direction of u.s. engagement in the indo-pacific. we're going to bring our final conversation onto the stage with senator sullivan and with matt frederick of cognizant so that we can round out today's conversation with some perspectives from from congress. and that's going to be very important as well a on the way forward. but i want to thank all of our panelists for their very thoughtful and candid observations, and let's give a round of applause.

[applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> we're not going leave the forum here, but you can watch today's earlier panels online, c-span.org. the senate will be in shortly, about 15 minutes away,

continuing work on the nomination of a judge to the 11th circuit court of appeals. while we wait, we'll take you to today's "washington journal." >> host: this is lanae erickson here to talk about issues of importance to democrats represented by the group. good morning to you. >> guest: good morning. >> host: howhow would you descre your group, particularly the kind of democrat you appeal to? >> guest: we were really looking at how do democrats appeal to people in red and purple places. so you could call us center-left. you could call us kind of mainstream democrat, but we're trying to figure out how democrats can appeal to the widest swath of a big tent in order to defeat donald trump. >> host: as far as the message then, what's the message of appeal to those people in those red and purple places? >> guest: well, we're out with a new poll this morning, andt