to reduce the co2 emission. the best option. a very big challenge for us. and to reduce the co2 reduction from a coal-fired plants is mainly realized by the improvement of efficiency of the generations. and in the current situation , the most advanced technology, the have more than 45 percent energy efficiency.

almost 20 percent. you can reduce wheat pit technician but 20 percent hit by introducing very high efficient coal-fired plants. at the same time, this kind of high-tech, highly efficient coal-fired plant indicates a supercritical plan, it takes almost 1 billion to introduced those kind of like you would see. it is almost 40 percent more expensive compared to the conventional. if you compare the total cost, for example, is almost the same in the case

subcritical. this initial cost should be financed. i need to encourage the countries to introduce possible technology and concerning coal power plants . and by doing so whee can avoid the deployment of load efficient coal-fired plant which may be supported by finance. if you can effectively encourage them to introduce political far plants. reduce by 20 parts of most.

and in this situation is very important function hiss , first of all, there's a very high efficient cold power plant in operation, especially supercritical with very big strings of operational technique and also the main sticking. was enables us to maintain this high efficiency rate over a long time which is the important point. and also a we are now investing a lot in the next generation technology. in addition to that we have made a lot of effort in cooperation with the u.s. government's in the area of

carbon capture utilization. recognition is important. and already at the end of august japan had a ministers' meetings half -- meeting and issued a joint statement related to the introduction of clean coal technology. so in some we see that in the future there is an area of demand, but we need to have a very strong concern. that is why we need to have some solution to make both compatible and introducing the encouragement of the

deployment of common core technology. thank you. >> thank you very much. that was very helpful. our third speaker is an energy economist. they have a very long name, even longer. economic research institute for east asia based in jakarta. dr. hondas work here on energy security, energy efficiency, coal technology, power, infrastructure, connections. he is a graduate of economic development and policies for the university of japan. >> thank you, ladies. and delighted to be here to have their virginities btu.

what like to stamp -- start off by saying there are several challenges. the of the way of thinking a slightly different perspective. that is why i want to start off with what we are freezing so that the conclusion will be understood by many participants here. as you see coming asia is growing in terms of economic growth to my their economic growth. that that grow with many challenges. not including the rising of energy demand. the rising of energy demand is not where we had to curb the energy demand by various measures. and also with the growing population is, they have the population.

and imagine how many populations are denied in terms of energy access, for electricity. some in terms of energy demand in the region by today, right now, intel 2035, for east asia as a whole, energy demand will grow from 400 up to 8,500,000,000-ton. and in terms of energy prospecting, it is an enormous issue, how we secure reliable energy in terms of affordable price to keep up their growth by judging how many populations need access to morning commercial energy. so to say that, i think, the issue we are facing providing energy access to energy security, and the

issue of keeping economic growth. so we are at the crossroad. so how actually has a zip positions in terms of energy , i think it depends on how you look at energy security, the expert on energy security, and it depends on how you look at it. as in the energy mix and asia to a particular you will see that among energy you have fuel, you have cole, you have renewable and others. but called plays a signature and important role. striving economic growth to say that u.s. have been enjoying poll -- : to keep u.s. by now until you have a sale that could push another issue.

but we are not really enjoying michele gas because the price, four or five times and we do not have infrastructure and connectivity is like in north. so the connectivity, they're not buying imports. and how the production goes, it is low, but it is mostly by 31 percent of imports for energy. but you look at the energy makes, more coal. kohl has more than 50% and continues to be almost 50 percent in energy makes by 2035. so energy, one new staff a reliable delivery and affordable price. so cold, in terms of the price stability, for asians, it is very good. so having a very reliable

price and supply in the region. so in that regard coal remains a very sturdy import for energy security. i think then we are coming to strike a balance between how we are concerning the way nicole works currently. in the practice actually, emerging economy and poor countries. there are burning coal. the current power plant has very low efficiency. so they are -- the option there including these clean coal technologies to mike by introducing clean coal technology you can burn coal more efficiently and at the same time save fuel and minimize operations and management and cost. the key issue is the of cost investment is higher

compared to low efficient coal power plant. and there is a variety of technology there. currently japan as a highly efficient coal power plant. angina is emerging, but i think there is some struggle in terms of how reliable the power plant is. so in that regard it is an expressed interest in high efficiency coal power plants, but then not able to afford that upfront cost. so with that regard my institute where i'm coming from, we conduct a comparison of the economic return in terms of different types of clean coal technologies and have found that by using the power plant it provides a very good outcome for economic and environmental benefits just within 25 time frame. and in terms of the writer

-- so the strong recommendation. actually afford this kind of highly efficient technology called power plant. the current technology, commercialized. the wire then not able to access? with that context i will say that this deployment of clean coal technologies, i urge us to support that if they cannot afford lower, cheaper technologies that would give many years. so that must be an international framework to support to afford clean coal technology, but particularly would be in need of public financing because the up-front cost will be had. in company at think it is

difficult to access by itself without support from a public financial support on clean coal technology. and with that regard, i'd think it is very crucial to support that in the absence of the public financing and clean coal technology, imagine particularly emerging chinese company, they are ready to experience a lower-cost. so more likely to afford. current efficient technologies are available, and we are not able to afford it. so in that regard i think would like to say that any of these public financial supports, in that regard, otherwise you will find the economy in the future. so with that i will stop and then take questions later on thank you very much.

>> thanks, doctor. our fourth speaker batting cleanup is michael weisman, he directs ge power and water long-term power generation forecasting. prior to working for ge michael led the modeling efforts at the department of u.s. department of energy's office of energy efficiency and renewable energy. michael, thank you very much. >> at the michael wants to use a power point. >> yes. thank you. thank you for hosting and convening this interesting and important date. while the power point is being opened, i should send i noted i am the odd man out . the representative for microsoft to not bring a power point. i apologize for looking at

my slides. i will echo some of the remarks about energy makes. i might have a few different conclusions, but will talk about energy security through energy diversity and then focus really on the power sector. will not talk about transportation. so the first thing i am showing is that this is a mix of capacity across asia including china, india, japan, korea. and you can see the big wed on the right as increased substantially. it looks like my percentages are not visible, but you can see that the percentage currently at the end of 2015 is slightly more than 60 percent cold. they're green box in the middle there at 5%, the renewals. the 2% in red, that is not clear. you can see that our

projections show the beginning of a reversal of the trend for the last ten years. again, lot of this is because of china, this great run-up of : china, and floods in the entire asian energy picture. never the next ten years some of that begins to reverse. there is more nuclear, more wind, more solar. and gas kind of hold its own next slide. now, across the different economies in asia the growth of various command there are different reasons for that. there are different priorities, for example, perris on nuclear and japan which is figuring out what will happen to the oil plants that are now offline versus some of the economies are beginning to seriously consider nuclear as part of their energy future. you can see huge increases in the rates of solar and wind. and of course, 700 percent growth in those capacities over the next decade.

whereas cole, you know, still growing, but not nearly as quickly as some of the other options. again, you know, the strong push forward for the increasing role of gas across many asian economies. now, to get to this, to get to an energy system more power system that has more diversity in it, was : it, there are a number of challenges that the economies will face. the first is, as was mentioned, the fuel price. so you can see on the left of these various bars, but coal price across the region , significantly lower than both the diesel price and the gas price. the second bar their is a price and 2024. so the differences between $2 gas and $14 gas, for and

16 in japan. these are enormous differences. and so getting away from coal is going to depend on some required -- you know, it will require some concerted and long term action. another challenge, really huge increases in electricity demand and the intended costa come along with that. their is a lot that needs to be built. despite that huge growth, by the end of the following ten years we still don't see the same energy access across asia that we see in japan or certainly not in the united states. for example, by 2024 you expected to see and valuable increases in electricity demand like we have seen in china and we expect to see. we will still have two-thirds of electricity per capita to say nothing of

india. so huge gaps will remain even after the coming decade of growth. but there are even more challenges. for example, what will japan -- how will japan replace the nuclear fleet, the portions of the nuclear fleet that won't return? in japan there is some very, very high tariffs that wind producers get an incentive to produce, but there is very arduous permitting. in korea very, very difficult. china has lots of new policies to discourage or almost private in some cases the citing of new coal plants in many of the coastal provinces. many of these power technologies require an enormous amount of water. from -- pressure from agriculture.

grade deposits, something that people don't quite appreciate. is very hard to power an island. first of all, if you don't have someone from which to move power and you have to have more plants available to provide reliable power. the transmission connections across islands or gas connections across islands is enormously difficult. and then in than non island countries to a vast expanses financing, we talked a little bit about how large it is to build a heavy plan to. the long-term operations get worse if you've got foreign exchange issues. fuels' and your local economy is weaker against the dollar, the cost of buying the fuel overtime just gets harder and harder. okay. so some of the solutions i will present are mainly

technology solutions. so one way forward is more gas and more efficient use of that gas. so the chart on the left is the increase of a projected increase in the natural gas supply and china over the next ten years. it is about a threefold increase by 2025. some of this is increasing liquefied natural gas. purchases from all parts of the world. some of that is conventional gas, shale gas resources. so more gas is available through china. a similar kind of story, not as dramatic. but there is also a technology story. you know, in addition to the supercritical, the new combined gas plans are for those familiar with the terminology, using both the gas turbines and the steel turban. it is about twice as

efficient as a coal plan. and the very latest and newest, most efficient from loss, the age a combined cycle. 61 percent efficiency was just a few years ago was unthinkable. this is a dramatic improvement in how efficiently we can use gas. next slide please. this is something that i think is really blind to lead to dramatic changes. talk about the lack of infrastructure for gas. one of the wastes that countries are beginning to get around this is something called a virtual pipeline. so what does this mean? is said of the traditional route where you have got an actual pipeline brought in on a huge tanker and a humongous facility, basically you have a smaller lng, compressed natural gas. so if you can compare that

in a box, you can't put it in a truck in these rows and barges to get it to where you need to get it without building all expensive pipeline. here are not committed to one pipeline have much more flexibility in how you get from origin to destination. it provides a new degree of flexibility to be the first one in indonesia, and mu with indonesia is c30:00 p.m. when. and we just commissioned recently the power plant. it's about a 35% savings of this incredible change. the scale, of course, is quicker, munson said of years to get this thing down a lot of advantages. in addition, some of the engines that can use these gas turbines -- i'm sorry, that can use the gas can use biogas spirit of the biomass resources in asia, talking

about the remote islands in particular. you can use it would be biomass and put them in a reciprocating engine. flexible power solutions, modular, small. postage reggie, you cannot think of a nuclear without first questioning how it will be safe. one of the new technologies available is the economic simplified boiling water reactor. not much less of a mouthful, but it is now the safest reactor design available. actually just about a week ago it passed another review by the u.s. nuclear regulatory commission. twice as good as our competitor. simpler and that there are far fewer components than traditional. you don't even mean steam generators anymore. fewer things can go wrong. you need fewer people to operate. fewer things that can fail.

eleven fewer systems in total. 20 percent fewer staff to operate. all these advantages to nuclear that i think we need to consider rather than writing it off entirely. lastly, in terms of the solutions we are offering, wind plants that are designed specifically for land constrained environment 285, this a very big turban. and the idea is that if you have a land constrained environment unique power density, power from one turbaned. this is a design that is made specifically for japan but obviously it could be transferred with just a minor modification to other land constrained environment i think that said for the kinky free time.

[applause] >> excellent. thank you. i guess as a layman, not an energy expert, one of the questions that emerges almost immediately when i listen to these different presentations, michael has suggested there's a lot of pretty nifty technology out there that is a lot cleaner and a week using now. and dr. hahn says we like that plane technology. we can't afford it. my question really for any of you particularly for jonathan, whether you know of financing that is available for emerging economies in asia and that want to buy cleaner technology but can't afford it. is there credit out there someplace? >> in the case of japan, japanese investment bank is

now supplying some financial support to asian countries to do this highly efficient. and also we have many more schemes to help developing countries in asia to deploy low carbon technology. >> speaking from the u.s. perspective, this is a tricky landscape and lots of different ways. first of all, the technology landscape itself is never static. so one of the things that we spend a great deal of time and focus on at the u.s. department of energy in some of the technical collaboration is that we have with international partners and with industry domestically in the united states is on technology

development and coming down the cost curve. you can see if you look at some of the difference suites of technologies that cross the energy landscape how dramatic the progress has been. so you see massive reductions, for example, and onshore wind, solar pc, the same is starting to happen in concentrated solar power. some the opportunities of today end of tomorrow are not identical. one. .2, there is any strategy issue that is an important one to grapple with. when it comes to coal technology, the united states understands that coal will be a part of the global

energy next, certainly as a part of the energy mix of the united states, although today's share of coal in our total fuel max is significantly reduced from that which it was as little as ten years ago. you have seen a drop in a room where "traditionally has been about 50 percent of the u.s. feel makes and today it is just under 40. there was appointed couple of years ago in response to the real time movement of natural gas prices in the u.s. where a very surprising thing happened were you had a coal and natural gas representing roughly equal shares for a short time, about 32% of our film backs. and so we expect that coal will be a part of the fuel mix going for both in the united states and elsewhere. but then there is what technology. so this has been -- it is certainly true of things

being equal, it is preferable to have higher efficiency coal technologies in the marketplace. there's no question about that. the u.s. perspective is that the use of public finance to support non carbon capture technologies in the marketplace is not something that we feel is appropriate. why? because some as the eye a energy technology perspectives document that was just released in the summer stated, and i will quote because it is a very appropriate distillation of this issue, the unrelenting rise in coal use without the deployment of ccs, carbon capture sequestration technology to my is fundamentally incompatible

with our objectives. this is the dilemma we are trying to find a way to manage. the united states does not support the broad use of public finance through multilateral or bilateral sources. we do have an exception to that rule, which is for the least developed economies, but otherwise this is a conscious choice to try to put our emphasis in moving that technology frontier, and sensing the emergence of carbon capture technology into the marketplace is we're doing in our own market, and from that seeing cost change so that the technology is broadly affordable. >> opening up to questions. please. >> i just would like to pass

an idea. i respect the idea in terms of how public finance on coal, but i think perhaps we have to stick to the reality in terms of the foreseeable future. in terms of coal power plant it continues to rise. i think in that regard in terms of climate change, i think we have the same concern. but let's look at the reality carefully. the lack of public finance on the cc t, this committee will find the financing system, that financing system will link to less efficient coal power plants. so i think which one you actually going to take? let's say a superpower countries like u.s. concerned and our rental issues, i think you

carefully aligned because you're going to end up in power plants for the foreseeable future. in that regard there are seeking the current available best technologies for better environments, but the lack, i fully agree. but they have to stick to reality. for that we need have support to make sure that until they have something breakthrough in terms of technology like lng and others, he stays the cannot afford. this assignment about shale gas, asia will not enjoy an all. in terms of the liquidity, the gas demand is continuing , but in terms of energy makes coal is more reliable. coal is the most. there will build more power plant.

in that regard i still look to financing. to be more realistic and also provide a better environmental issue. it is a global issue. i do not -- my concern. thank you. >> we will open that up to the floor. wait for a microphone, and then please introduce yourself. >> nancy from the carnegie endowment. i just wanted to follow-up on the previous question, the world bank being more reluctant to finance coal power plants, was wondering if other financiers might actually stepped into public financing like chinese financiers, japanese or like the newly established bank. i would like to hear your opinions on that. >> anybody have an answer?

>> definitely concerning. there is no public support for the world bank or adb of something like that. the other organization may have some ability to finance but in such a case, if your institution had this same discipline, focusing only on the high efficient, then it is okay. but they have no discipline. just financing. every new project, it is quite foreseeable to end up in a situation. that is why we hope that the

developed countries should encourage the developing countries to deploy the carbon bring coal technologies. >> tom. >> my name is tom keller, independent energy consultant. want to compliment the panelists on their conversations, the long-term aspects of the changing calculus. my question is on the short-term aspects of energy security in the region, let's say contingency planning for an oral the subject -- oil supply disruption. the questions are, is the region prepared in terms of strategic oil stocks are oil sharing plans for an oil supply disruption, is the

institutional architecture of the region the various international forums such as the iea, ozzie on, ozzie on plus three, a pack, as well as the east asian summit, are they up to the task in terms of their regions institutional framework in dealing with short-term energy crises such as in all supply disruption using tools such as strategic oil stocks or international oil sharing plans? if not, what can be done? >> thank you. that is a great question. and it's kind of brings up the reality head simultaneously we altogether have to do two things. one is to manage this situation and which one exists now. the other is put in place the tools both institutional

and technological that can help us to move forward. and i would say that from the u.s. perspective we think that this issue that you have raised is an important one and one where there has been some very, very promising collaboration's that have gone on, but i would not for a moment said that it is sufficient. in some regards -- to highlight a couple of examples of collaboration that has already been under way, you could look at the work that the international energy agency is done living with a number of east asian partners looking at preparedness to my responses, was strategic reserves are in place, what one would do, how industry could meet its requirements and continue to provide for the population. thailand, for example, has

been of very active participant with iea, has done a couple of emergency response exercises, has hosted a regionwide engagement. china, of course, another very important east asian partner in this regard as now the world's largest oil importer. their i would say, to be candid, we hope to find deeper collaboration going for with china. china is building its own strategic reserves, which is an important step to happen. we think that there is a great deal of scope for technical and policy and other interactions so that china, which has this enormous stake in the functioning of today's global oil markets, can provide that kind of transparency that is the necessity for all global

participants, including china to make informed decisions. we welcome the steps that the chinese national energy agency administration has taken together with the department of energy to deepen collaboration in this area. we think it is an important thing. so the institutional framework, a good start. much more needed. >> thank you. the one he really understands more on this issue. actually, we tried to come up with a similar kind of requirement of 90 day. i think in terms of stock pilings and, of course, gas could be included. regionally. and not many countries meet

those nine day requirements. not all the stock at these company levels. cell only some countries to step up and commit to 90 days, 60 and 90 days. i think they said japan, having almost 200 days to my guess. china currently. and in that regard, particularly we understand that building this kind of diversity would cause investment. one * during this. the authorities with support from iea, it is important that when you build this it has to be linked closely in terms of economy. it does not before real

country to have stock. sometimes it's not necessary there are many practices in the region. you can it change. it is important to look closely in terms of structure or economy. if there is disruption is it could hit their economy. so some countries are small in terms of structure. they do not have to step up. that regional cooperation in terms of trust and access is more significantly important. so look at the requirement, but also the way it is cost-effective lee unimplemented. thank you. >> in the case of japan, the cooperation among asian countries, to respond to

such kind of crisis. so that's why in recent years we have talked with colleagues. the mechanism as to how we can tackle this issue in a cooperative manner. the discussion is still in a very early stage. so it would take some more time until there is some kind of morally country solution that is decided or greed. >> other questions? the gentleman here. >> i am mark wall, former u.s. state department, more recently the university of wyoming. my question concerns nuclear power. we have some comments on that. but would the panelists care to comment further on the

future of nuclear power in the energy mix, particularly in japan, but also elsewhere in asia. >> to japan, at this moment, as you know, there is no nuclear power plant in operation among the 48 nuclear plants in japan. the portion of the nuclear plants in the total power supplies were 32%. but at this moment since zero. now, some kind of effort to nuclear power plants. and as to the initial two nuclear power plants, the new clear authority approved the stickiness of those two nuclear power plants. that is why we are now in the process of the local people. the hope that in the early

next year they will have the restart of those two nuclear power plants. and already 20 nuclear power plants have already prevented the plan task for the approval under the nuclear regulatory authority. so the obligation will be. and during this one or two or three more nuclear power plants will be restarted. but it's very difficult to expect to what percentage we can regard the nuclear power plant. the very clear direction is that the japanese government needs to decrease the dependency on nuclear power plants for long-term.

>> thank you. in that perspective, you can understand, we do not deny any nuclear power. it's already option of the energy mix. that requires a a lot of human capital and also capital cost itself. it is expensive. currently the construction of a nuclear power plant. but thailand, malaysia, also. i think a public opponent to those kind of a nucleus in asia. it is very strong. i think we are really concerned about nuclear power in the future. the area that i'm looking for, now we're working more on the emergency response unpreparedness in terms of

support to my how countries are cooperating in terms of sharing data and information so in that regard we can build a working group. again, this is one of the options. perhaps it is not really now. and also up-front cost very high, four or five times higher than current coal power plant. thank you. >> thanks you for the question. you know, one of the issues with nuclear is also the infrastructure that needs to be added to the grade. and so you can't just put a nuclear plan anywhere. the transmission system itself needs to be robust. and so for countries in particular, that is one of the challenges, not just the up-front cost of the plan but the infrastructure that comes with it. elsewhere in asia, the chinese ambitions for nuclear are sort of

startling. think it's on the order of 50 gigawatts of the next ten to 12 years that they're planning on having. and in india, we have an interest with the recent news requirements, signaling some willingness to look at the nuclear liability law which is a major obstacle. >> i just jump in to take advantage of this question and link back to the frame of this panel which is about energy security by its title from our perspective in the u.s. we feel very, very strongly that energy security drive's first and foremost from a high degree of diversification and good systems, including institutional systems around the energy economy. we certainly will see nuclear continuing to be a part of the fuel makes the united states. obviously other countries need to make their own

choices, we do see a real value, particularly in the world looking for low and no carbon and she solutions, we see a real value in the civil nuclear sector and see this as being an area that is full of potential for imported collaboration's. again, to move the frontier, the technology frontier whether one is talking about small modular reactors or other new promising technologies that may be just over the rise in. >> here almost seven times. is your question fairly short? we have two or three minutes standing between us and lunch. >> the question is addressed. >> please identify yourself. >> i work for the children's national medical health system. this question is addressed. you mentioned population has one of the things they you

would have to face eventually down the road. the institute that you work with, as it partnered with any department of health agencies either at the regional, local, or national level to address this with the hope that it would eventually reduce the number of consumers and the demand for energy consumption? >> they do very much. this very hard for me to address this besides china having a clear policy on those populations, but as we do not have any population policy in terms of how to actually -- we do not have a

restriction, but because i am -- i am aware of the issue, but i think there's a lot of public programs in terms of providing more safe for children, but it is not really controlled population growth in itself. so actually, there is a sector working. but not really a particular type of issue. there are no policies that are controlled. >> now, more from this conference on asia where the panel discussion looks as security issues along the asian peninsula. participants include a pentagon official, singapore's ambassador to the u.s. command of foreign policy adviser for senator john mccain.

this is just over an hour. [inaudible conversations] >> ladies and gentlemen, i hope you all had a chance to grab a coffee and a cookie and absorber senior director madeiras speech. i thought that was excellent we are back on the record, by the way it. so you can turn the cameras back on. in the recording devices that you may have. i am marty bauer, again. i am the chair of the southeast asia program here at csi yes. it is a real pleasure for me to be introducing our third

and last panel today as we talk about asian architecture ahead of the three summits in november, the apec, eas comanche 20 summits. and we have done a terrific panel with us today. there really appreciate these gentlemen sharing their time away from very busy schedules to join us. on my right we have the newly ensconced at davis year who is our assistant secretary of defense for east asian and pacific. you know that david lewis -- and come back from hanoi to do this job. he was a u.s. ambassador there. david is an expert on china, southeast asia to and from many of us who are sort of in the trenches every day on these issues, could not think of a better person for the pentagon to put into this role.

next to him is one of the top of southeast asian in the united states. and he also is singapore's ambassador to the united states. he was most recently singapore's ambassador to indonesia. in the past he has been singapore's ambassador to australia and to kuala lumpur for and has all along career in the singapore ministry of foreign affairs working on asian-related affairs. and finally a good friend and a real hero of southeast asia and asian policy and the senate is crisp prose. he works with senator mccain and senator mccain's office. before that he was a senior staffer in the senate armed services committee began the

chris rose through the ranks doing some pretty interesting things including writing speeches for and advising people like colin powell and connolly's rice. so he really knows what he is doing and to spend a lot of time in asia, much more than most senate staffers, unfortunately. so, without further ado we want to talk about in this panel is architecture as it relates to security. i am going to ask my colleagues to kick it off any order that we are seated in command and will open up the panel to question and answer. david, it is to you. >> thank you very much. it is great to be back at csi yes. it is a great honor to be joined appear with the ambassador. i have been in my job to my new job at the department of defense for almost exactly one month now from my

experience during that one month that the secretary of defense certainly has a very strong personal interest in asia and east asia given of its history. the secretary of defense, the deputy secretary of defense, the undersecretary of defense for policy, a chain of command and deeply committed to the rebalance the station. we have seen that most recently and that the secretary works travel to the region. you will see a flurry of senior level meetings and encounters this fall including coming up security subcommittee meeting at shares on the american side by myself and east asia assistant secretary of state danny russell in tokyo next week. danny and i will be going to solve before rigor tokyo.

you will see a defense contemplate of talk with the chinese. you will see military contemplated me in security council to it meetings with our are okay allies. also of course president obama will be visiting beijing and defense issues will, of course, be part of his agenda in his bilateral discussions with president chief. so again, the reid balances among the highest priorities on my agenda as well as on my senior agenda, and you will see me focusing very clearly on rebalance related issues in my earliest days in my chair. i would like to share with you some of the issues as of the big issues of focusing on as assistant secretary of defense over the next months and years.

the first one is modernizing our alliances and partnerships. their is a lot on the agenda in this regard from the review of the defense guidelines with japan to the optacon issue with our are okay allies to updating the defense from work with india, which we mentioned in the joint statement, prime minister muddies recent visit to washington. the philippines and the fda with australia. all of these are foundational issues in the strengthening of our alliance architecture and the western office effect. and all of these will guide the way in which we shape our alliances of the next ten to 15 years. we are going to want to finish strong on all of these agreements. a successful conclusion and implementation matters, and

this certainly will set the stage for closer cooperation between the united states and its important allies in east asia and the pacific. second, very important big issue will be working on is solidifying the military to military relationship with china. secretary hegel has a very good meeting with foreign minister wong me the other day here in washington. the foreign minister was here, of course, to review u.s. bilateral regulations and planning for the president's trip to beijing. as you probably have seen in the strategic and economic dialogue, both sides recommitted to working on a set of confidence-building measures and we will be working on asset in advance of the president's trip to

beijing. in a third set of big issues we will be working on is knitting together ally and partner corporation. and spoke during his remarks of our trilateral partnerships, particularly u.s., japan, australia, u.s., japan, india, we're interested in encouraging greater cooperation among our allies and partners in east asia. very gratified to see increased corroboration between japan and australia, between japan and india. there also gratified to see greater diplomatic coordination between partners and friends like vietnam and the philippines and malaysia. ..

>> we hope that that can be a future fixture in our relations. of course, as we work all of these issues with partners and friends and others in east asia,

we've also want work with them to manage disputes and issues that generate tension and i don't need to mention how important this is to us in the south china sea. our position on this has been made crystal clear on many occasions and it is going to remain a strong focus for me and for my leadership and the dod in the coming months. let me stop there and let my other friends comment. >> thank you. thank you so much and congratulations again to you and your colleagues are putting together this conference we look at some of these bigger pictures and how critical it is for u.s. interest going forward.

and there is much of the architecture that really focuses around us centrality. and the main reason that this picture is important is that the region has enjoyed a peaceful and secure stable environment for several decades. something that many of us take for granted. and if the key thing that we want to see out of the asia pacific area and so the picture that we see is really designed to preserve it. and we want to see fairly dramatic shift and that is work that should become important. and the environment is shifting and southeast asia in particular is becoming more complicated as

the region as we have to reposition ourselves in the context of washington's search for a new group. and this includes how we adjust our relationship to each other and tensions in the region have risen and there are flashpoints it have to be managed and that makes us a very important issue for us to look at. and it has in many ways played a very played a crucial part in maintaining the security but i don't want to overplay this. those of you who know the rest of the region, we have a central role that is due to the fact that we are neutral rather than we carry such a strategic test. because in that neutral platform are senate has offered all major

powers to discuss can issues of concern and what we have done is to promote an open and inclusive approach and welcome the critical part of this, not just an inward looking organization but an outward looking organizations organization. and this is what we have made it is put in place and this is inclusion and outward looking. we are driving the contribution of the u.s. all of these afghan led forms such as the meeting and the east asia summit. for more than 60 years the u.s. has been under a stabilizing influence. and there are, and we will hear this regularly, multiple and

overlapping structures that reflect in many ways the conflict diversity of the region. we have these overlapping structures are actually making the regional framework more flexible. briefly going through each one of the structures that we have in the security area. the first and the longest running has been created in 1994 as a form of security discussion to engage and not just the major powers but also middle and smaller regional powers. to preserve their stake in the regional stability. for example, they are the only multilateral security framework in the region in which they participate. and another thing that we have is the meeting plus which comes across in 2006 and it has an establishment that was really

the most recent establishment to work together to address transnational security issues. we then expanded this which comprises it with the other partners and it has become not just a channel for dialogue but also an action or an interest with defense ministers from the region to come together to discuss practical solutions to manage this. they have done exercises into these operations. and the third structure which we are looking forward to, with the establishment of this and it has brought the major powers together into this leaders lead form. a key focus is really the focus in consolidating for the future. and while it remains strategic

and discussions for the future and these help to build on the agenda and architecture in order to keep this alive and healthy. ensuring that the u.s. remains a credible forum for this situation. and we have included obviously disaster management and education, finance which we spoke about earlier this morning. and looking ahead at all of these structures, a frequent complaint enormous criticism has been that all of these regional architectural structures that have emerged as people find them difficult to unravel. these mechanisms play unique role and they complement and reinforce each other to serve

the common interest of maintaining regional stability and growth. the perspective of trying to rationalize the security and architecture into a single arrangement, to try to impose a hierarchy among them will be very difficult if not impossible. instead our view is that these regional structures and architecture should be allowed to adapt and find a natural dynamic as we improve ways to get better coordination and develop synergy. in this regard we welcome the dialogue partners. to give us an idea for the future of this architecture in taking on proposals and how to improve it with a different framework. what is critical in all of this is that we must ensure the regional architecture for all the reasons that we are successful and remain at the core. and this continues to reflect the diversity of the region and

they have proposed a treaty in the framework will need to reframe the ideas on how we can make this architecture much better. so let's talk about the u.s. engagement. as i said earlier, the u.s. has played an integral role in remains a critical and unique component in the future. it is important for the u.s. to stay engaged in this engagement must be brought based in this way. the u.s. continues to support neutrality and speeches have been made about how important this is involving regional architecture. the u.s. shares many strategic perspective and we should work together to continue to build out the existing executions and

keep the architecture open. we also welcome peaceful revolution in accordance with international law and the right of freedom of navigation. in conclusion, let me just summarize that we really look at regional architecture from many places. first, in order to maintain our community and corporation, second it should reflect the diversity of the region and third it should remain open and inclusive. so as there are overlapping structures that are sometimes redundant, from our point of view it makes this architecture more resilient and stable. from our point of view the architecture falls into the agenda. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. chris, i think -- do you want to give the ambassador a round of applause? [applause] >> i don't want to deny that to

you. >> thank you. thank you for having me here today. obviously i'm extremely flattered to be among the companies that i am an and clearly you can tell one of these things is not like the other and my first name is not ambassador and by way of making the point further, telling to you earlier that my sort of signature accomplishment on asia this year has been playing a small moral in the confirmation dave scherer. [laughter] and so congress is not a participant in asia's architecture and maybe we can all be thankful for that. but what i would like to try to do is just to give you a little bit of a sense is how the hell is looking at some of the security challenges, kind of back into this architecture question. and what i would like to do is try to remain in terms of two

questions, both of which kind of appeared on the cover of the economist this year and i think that these are the tube russians that are really kind of overhanging. the first is a couple of weeks back, what does china want. this is something that's -- i think is members of congress, they are increasingly traveling through the region, there is a small group that is not by any means expensive to the entire body. this is the question that i think members of congress are confronting. they want the united states to have and believe the united states can have and should have a very constructive relationship with china and they see all of the benefits and the common areas of cooperation between the country. and they recognize that there is a lot of upside there for both countries together. yet they look at it as a pattern of behavior that is concerning to them. the pattern of behavior is something like this. it is a series of actions that

are not purely diplomatic and neither are they purely military, they sort of occurred in a gray area and there appears to be sort of a strategy in an incremental creation of facts on the ground or in the air. and there is a concern that what we are seeing is sort of a long attempt incrementally move by move change the status quo unilaterally and never in a way that sort of trips the wire fundamentally on behalf of the united states, but nonetheless continues to move the needle such as a five to 10 years from now we are looking back and it is a very different region that we are looking at. and i think that there is a sort of prevailing view at which is what china thinks about foreign policy. when people's day, well, they

surely know that they are causing other countries to gain up against you and criticize you and etc. coming driving closer to the united states. i think that these kind of prevailing views show that there is intent there, even if we have to hunt for it from action and that is perhaps unsettling which come in to some extent does reflect conscious action and it's about more than the particular territorial things we can discuss further today. it is about changing the balance of power and changing key elements or challenging key elements of the international order, particularly the peaceful resolution of disputes. most fundamentally i think that even americans are concerned that it is a challenge to the american presence in sort of a historical role in asia and commitment to countries that we have, either formal treaty commitments or otherwise. so i think that the question that many members of congress with this prevailing view in the

congress comes back to it again, what does china want. the second sort of security challenge that i would point out, may be somewhat provocatively, also appeared on the cover of the economist and it was what would america fight for. not necessarily to be used liberally, but i think the point is what is america ultimately seeking to do and what are we committed to doing, what are our red lines and etc. and so i think that is members of congress and congressional staff that travels through asia, particularly ones that are maybe less experienced and they are struck by this prevailing sense in pervasive sense of doubt and question about the united states. and this isn't something that is so much about questioning america's capability. there's a lot of capability economically and etc. but i think increasingly people are assuming that as well as we see the effects of sequestration

and declining budgets and etc. i think it's more a sense -- and again, people sensed this traveling through the region, it's a question of our resolve, commitment, judgment, what is ultimately being sought to be done here. and there are different reasons. obviously i think there is the sense of people looking at her opinion polls and obviously they can discern that americans are not too much into foreign policy at the moment and that could be changing. there is a question of national distraction to what extent americans are focused on. there is also sort of the question of national dysfunction you know, the question that america can't even fix its own fiscal problem, how will they help us when we really need them. and there is that fact that lingers out there. and then i would say that when it comes to asia and security policy, there's a lot of partisan security cooperation and it really is an area that is

somewhat unique compared to other aspects of our foreign policy. broad consensus on the rebound. i think there is a real question about whether the rebalance this sort of coming into being. and that is something that we hear as we travel throughout the region as well, is this more rhetoric than reality. and i think that part of this is a question about the u.s. response to asia. i heard most of them that i would agree with and i think the question is not -- is america doing something. clearly they are. the question is what america, what are they doing, is adding up to a set of actions unilaterally multilaterally and fundamentally impacting china's calculus as it presses out in the east china sea and south china sea and etc. there's the other piece that overhangs this which is that it isn't just about asia. something is talking about how

much and security issues with asian partners, how much of it comes back to the ukraine and what is happening there and how the u.s. is responding. last year the response to syria, the crossing of the purported red line and many people in asia asking what are the implications of this for us. maybe that is an unfair question and out of bounds, but it is real. it's something that i think that many members of congress are sensitive to. so i would say in conclusion the architectural issues that we are discussing, there's a lot of potential for them to resolve these kinds of challenges to clarify peoples views and thinking. but the age-old problem with geopolitics really determines the capacity and ability of architecture to function. and i think when it comes to the geopolitics right now, the two questions that i try to lay out

today are really concerning as they are questions that are still something that we are seeking answers on. we are trying to come up with other answers. it's going to overhang the diplomacy and what we are seeing as the region comes together. >> thank you very much for those remarks, chris. and thank you for the panel for your excellent insights. i would like to start with the question and then open the lord. the question is that many have argued that the foundation for long-term security in asia is economics. and i didn't hear any of you sort of talking about that and i wondered if you agree or if you think it's sort of a accepted channel security thinking is linked to but not related to you. how do you think about it?

>> [inaudible] you know, how that whole thing works. because we had this discussion on the economic architecture, i didn't want to get into all that. the key thing that obviously is there is ttp. it's on the top of the mind of every asia leader. even if they are not. those wonder what it means to them and those who are in our obviously in the throes of ethical negotiations to get it done. and particularly for the u.s., the constant conversation that comes up is one we going to get this thing done. and it really is that key, not just about the economic future of u.s. interests, but also the key of the strategic engagement of the u.s. in the region and

it's becoming in many ways a test of how we see the u.s. engagement. and so i think that looking ahead, there are other elements of this as well and we have structures and other things that do not include the u.s. it comes into force next year, all of these things are happening. but for the u.s. come i think that getting this done is a critical thing. >> i want to address your question from a slightly different angle. >> especially regarding my experience is in vietnam. some people have said that the rebalance is primarily a military strategy and i want to try to talk about that impression. the rebalance certainly brings all of the tools together to pursue her interest in the region. in vietnam we were pursuing a

diplomatic tool by increasing our diplomatic coordination, particularly on regional issues within the context. on the economic side of course are negotiating with vietnam is a member of this partner. both americans and vietnamese recognize that they are not just benefit us economically but also strategic in many ways. and we strongly promoted this cooperation with vietnam and we see the fruition of our efforts in that regard with the ban on illegal weapons sales from this yesterday. so the implementation and the rebalance certainly was all type wrong and again the light on all

of the abilities to pursue our interests and that is what we are doing throughout the region. if there is uncertainty in the region it should be uncertainty about the u.s. commitment continue peace security and prosperity. >> is the very brief point. and i agree completely with what was said. it is critical to get done and without it it's going to be a really big problem that the u.s. faces and they cannot be one-dimensional. i think the challenge is that if you look at the economic trend in the region it is toward greater integration and a positive trend and it's not exactly in the same direction, maybe not fragmentation but certainly rising tension in this is something that bob manning had pointed out. can you continue to have economic integration when you

have strategic challenges and is that something that is sustainable or not? >> thank you, the floor is open. >> let's start here. >> please tell us your name and your affiliation. >> thank you very much. i am a reporter. [inaudible] you mentioned this is related to the modernization and as you know, they announced the agreement on this when they hold the annual defense ministers meeting in can you tell us how close these countries are to agreement at this point. thank you. >> we agree with you that that

remains the deadline for our discussions and we are discussing the conditions-based approach with our counterparts. and this is going to be an issue that i certainly focus on during my presence next week in seoul. >> okay. >> you are getting good at this defense. [applause] >> right here. the gentleman in the front. >> thank you. it's a great presentation. the retired foreign service officer. i would just like to ask the other two panelists answer if they can the question [inaudible] your opinion on what china wants

and ambassador, what would america fight for a map. >> wow. [laughter] >> unlike members of congress, china is very important presence in southeast asia. they are a growing economic presence and have become the number one trading partner for all of these countries and we value the relationship that is being built economically. traffic, trade, investment, we have proposals and ideas for how to link the region closer together. in from where they said as the economy grows, i think that southeast asia will benefit from the prosperity. and the question that keeps

coming up is can you keep having this economic integration when you do have ongoing security tension and that is something that southeast asia discusses extensively with chinese, talking about the code of conduct, because what we want to do is to use this platform to try to manage this and new tensions do arise. and how can we then work together in this, how do we work together to work with china where there are certain rules that we all respect and look forward to. >> i strongly agree with the ambassador on this. it's clear that would've try china's highest priorities is to maintain an atmosphere and a

situation in east asia that allows them to continue growing economically. i think that is probably among the highest priorities. of course, the chinese want to defend sovereignty and territorial integrity. that has always been among the highest priorities of the people's republic of china. but the question is how do you do it. and that takes us to the second part of your question where among the highest priorities in the region is to increase respect for the rule of international law. and this has been an issue in the south china sea and an issue in the east china sea as well. we will look to our partners and we will look to china to work with us and strengthen rule of

international law in our interactions with the chinese and in the future. >> the gentleman here? >> thank you. i have a question for the gentleman. this is interesting in a comparison [inaudible] and so one can comparison is for the u.s. to adopt something like this [inaudible] and or if we will adapt with the urge or at least to watch carefully.

and so if we decide to buy this, how will it work? >> thank you. >> the questions have been a double standard in the u.s. policy toward asia. and i think that the policy that the u.s. is trying to have in both places is that we are objecting to what russia is doing in the ukraine because they are violating the sovereignty of an independent country and they are clearly not trying to resolve disputes peacefully. i think that in both parts of the world the goal is to uphold this international order that the u.s. has played a

significant role in and i think that we see this as different challenges that in some sense is very similar. >> right here. >> thank you. i have a question to mr. secretary. you just mentioned the president obama was in china. what would be on his agenda in terms of trying to imitate the relations with china. and also providing lethal weapons to be a non-yesterday. so how do you think about that and will that create more stability in the region? thank you. >> thank you very much. well, as i mentioned in my

remarks, we want to create a strong and stable military to military relationship between the united states and china and at the sunny land summit in 2013, the president proposed that we slower establishing a set of building measures between our two militaries and we've reaffirmed the interest in doing that at the strategic international dialogue. we are looking at two different confidence building measures right now, one of them is a notification of major military activities and efforts and the other is on the rules of the road and behavior for maritime counties and we are discussing both of these and we hope to have something positive to say in this regard during president

obama is speech. so on your second question, we established a comprehensive partnership with vietnam in 2013 when the president visited washington. and we were in the process of implementing that partnership in all areas of the relationship. we thought it was only appropriate that we look at lifting the ban only the weapons sales, which we think is about time that we did that, given the growth of our relationship with vietnam and we believe that this will help vietnam contribute to regional peace and stability and it will help vietnam in disaster relief and humanitarian assistance, for example.

and it was time. the reason we did it partially is that we wanted to see further progress in human rights on the vietnamese park. but we thought the current progress was sufficient for us relating to items in maritime security. >> just following up on that, you guys worked on that vietnam issue on the hill with the bipartisan support for that movement? >> yes, and this is something that we have been working on previous to the decision maintaining it under executive authority. and so it didn't require an act of congress to ease it. but the administration i think rightfully wanted there to be political support for this and they wanted them to be favorable. senator mccain introduced a

resolution back two weeks ago and had on it is cosponsored senator pat leahy and senator corker, very key leaders of the senate when it comes to asian issues and asia policy issues and so yes, there is a very good degree of bipartisan support this kind of building further into that. >> the lady here? >> hello. first of all, i would like to ask as we ask for the u.s. [inaudible] first of all, has any decision been made from a dod point of view and you think that this will contributions to the stability or instability of the region two.

>> the u.s. remains committed to providing taiwan with the defense articles and needs to maintain security and i have been strongly committed to this throughout mike minter, particularly during my stint as the director -- deputy assistant secretary of state for chinese affairs when i was in the state department. i continue to be strongly committed to that. and the question of submarines is under discussion. no decisions have been made yet, but as part of our overall interactions with the region's, of course we will be staying in close touch with our counterparts from taiwan and this and they range of defense related issues. >> thank you.

i'd like to get back to the question on what does china want. that question presumes that china is a unified actor capable of acting in a to liberty than rational way. another way to look at this is that china has foreign policy actions reflective of struggles within leadership and robust bureaucratic actors that are resistant to party leadership and i have a colleague in beijing that has sent me a message last week that he has heard rumors of an assassination attempt. and i'm wondering if instead of thinking of china is a strong state capable of foreign policy behavior, that what we are seeking is actually reflective

of internal weakness is. >> i have no doubt that the political considerations contribute to chinese foreign policy and that he strong bureaucratic interests also contend for an and influence within the chinese governmental firmament just as they do here and just as they do everywhere. and so part of our challenge is the fact that the chinese are not transparent about the decision-making, particularly in defense relations. part of our effort at engaging the chinese in this area is to help them increase their transparency in the defense area. and that will be part of our

goal in pursuing these confidence building measures. [inaudible] >> hello, i am the chief representative for the interstate trapping company. this is a wonderful panel. my question is a wonderful speaker from the president's executive office, he was wonderful and he sounded very strong and positive about the ability of ttp. i wish i felt as confident as he does. and so what is the prognosis and what are the biggest obstacles to getting it done with domestic

policy here in the united states or protectionism. no country is more in the game on singapore than this one. [laughter] >> i heard recently that the ttp will be done by november. >> we have been hearing this every november every time we come together for a meeting. and i want to give you a sense of how difficult it is. singapore already has a bilateral trade agreement with the u.s. in a very different type of economy and they are a small island state. it took us a long time just between two countries. so can you imagine the

complexity of 12 countries, including the world's third-largest economy and countries like vietnam and have to make significant changes, economic changes, canada, mexico, covering 40% of the world gd and you can understand why it's taking access on and we may have to take time to make sure that what we get is useful for everybody and make sense and you need to give the negotiators a room and i think that they are working and they are giving the

directions on what they would like to see done. and so we are hopeful. there is no reason to keep this away. but just try to understand and appreciate the complexity that goes into putting this thing together. as i look at the process i'm sympathetic to them with even what they are trying to achieve. >> if i could just say a word on the domestic policy, you know, i think part of the challenge if that is, they did not give the promotional trade authority and that came down to a position with the senate majority leader and an added challenge to the incredibly complex negotiation. but if you're a trading partner of the united states, you're going to put your best offer on the table that you might not then have to negotiate with congress afterwards. i still think that this can be done. when it gets done, what i would

simply say is that i think politically speaking whether this happens this year or not and if there isn't a will to do it, you can get past american politics and that seems to be a part of this and you don't want to see this drag into next year as it flares up again. >> this question is for secretary sure, you mentioned

that they are unveiling a set of guidelines and i was hoping you share more detail about that and if you could speak more about that. >> we certainly welcome the decision to review the self-defense issue. we welcome it and any opportunity to strengthen the alliance and for japan to play a stronger role in the alliance. i will be going to tokyo with danny russell and there we will hold a session that we will cheer for the u.s. side, a session on the ssc as well as the sbc and this is art expectation that we will release the interim report on the revised guidelines and that will

help us map the way forward for the ultimate revision of the 1996 guidelines. >> for those that don't know those acronyms, ssc and sdc is the security defense committee. [laughter] >> you should've seen the book that he got of the pentagon. >> what is the most hard thing about the defense review process and what is the most important aspect of issues from the in

this process. >> i'm going to answer this second part of the question by saying that a strong u.s. alliance is a foundation and a keystone for overall regional security stability and that has been the case for decades and to keep the alliance strong and vibrant and up-to-date. >> right. the gentleman back here in the blue shirt.

[inaudible question] and south korea now it is pretty controversial. so can you clarify additionally the asia pacific commander with north korea's military that is taking steps with this and that could reflect the u.s. and also north korea has completed a major upgrade including its name. would you evaluate about this.

thank you. >> we are always concerned about developments and the expansion of the north korean threat to stability on the north korean peninsula. we are also always discussing that with her counterparts, including the developments in this area. we have made no decisions on that on the korean peninsula and we have not discussed that with our counterparts. but we do discussed generally the issue of the missile threat that south korea presents and we look forward to working with the allies to meet any potential missile threat to korea or the region. >> just to inject a question, i

was involved in a couple of meetings when the prime minister was here from india. and i have to say that the energy around that visit was incredible. we haven't really talked much about it and i wondered if, i think that a lot of us who work on these facets of issues think that the new sort of power shot is coming over to australia and south east asia in the pacific. what are the prospects for india to be a player under this in this new managing security architecture across the pacific? anyone want to take a swing? >> i think the visit to washington was very successful. those of you who have read the joint statement that probably noticed that there was a strong defense component in that joint

statement. and the two sides agreed to this framework and we will be addressing ourselves to that issue with our colleagues very soon. and so we held the first round of the defense trade and technology initiative just before the prime minister arrived. and this is an effort to increase our technology and defense tech elegy cooperation with the indians. under the secretary of defense for acquisitions and technologies, frank kendall is very interested in pursuing this with the indian side. and he will be visiting india in the near term and i think that this is a very important aspect

of our relationship that we are ready to move forward on. we also discussed desirability of increasing our overall military cooperation and i would look to a stronger u.s. and india malabar exercise in the future, perhaps with japanese participation as well. and these are all positive developments in the u.s. and india defense relations and we will be looking to carry forward the momentum by the prime minister. >> we have tried for a long time to keep india engaged and they are a participant in the east asia summit. and india plays a very important role from this perspective. we bring them in economically

with strategic discussions, even before the prime minister took off for a time, each one is structured as a key player in its how the general expectation has been talked about in the region. as all political leaders do. so we encourage them to play an active role. >> i will just say very briefly that the senator and i had the opportunity just after he came into office and we were certainly struck that there is a lot of opportunity for the u.s. and india sort we gain some altitude and the partnership has lost quite a bit of this quickly. it's a good first step here in

that regard and i think that our hope in the hope that is shared in the congresses that will be really ambitious and that we will have this sort of genuine consultation of how we view the world, what we want the world order to look like, and bring it back to those kinds of questions. obviously the sort of domestic priorities are going to be very important for india in the u.s. can make a huge contribution on that and be a partner of choice for them. but when it comes to issues that we're talking about here and one of the things that we are very pleased to see is the extent to which india is building its relationships with other countries in the region and the relationship is obviously the one that has a lot of focus and we hope that it kind of builds on the u.s. and japan and india trilateral strategic content into it and elevated it and i think that that would be an

enormous positive signal. >> thank you. >> we started the day with one of the real advocates and tichenor's of developing modern asian architecture. and he talked about constructive realism in the sense that the key for him in all this discussion of regionalism and regional architecture is really the need for countries to find a common narrative that focused on this to build confidence. i found throughout the day to whether we are talking about economics or energy or security issues, but the panelists in general agree with kevin that that is where the progress is going to be made. and i hope that you will join me in thanking this panel and

thanking everyone who put the program together. [applause] >> thank you all for coming. [inaudible conversations] >> expands campaign 2014 coverage continues with the debate today in north carolina second congressional district, including renee ellmers, who is running against her democratic challenger, against former american idol contestant clay aiken. and we have mary fallin and her challenger joe dorman facing off in their one and only debate. here is a brief look at some of

last week's debate. >> in light of recent natural disasters in school shootings come out of each of you plan on updating emergency plans or oklahoma's public school system? >> that's a great question. we certainly want to make sure that all public schools are safe. just recently this week i received the nra endorsement which i'm very proud of. i'm a big supporter of the second amendment of oklahoma and i want to make sure that we are creating safe facilities at our schools and that is why i propose to look at local school districts and be able to decide if they need to enhance their safety school facilities and to make it clear how much they can afford. and that is something that is very important to us.

i certainly work with highway patrol and homeland security to make sure that we keep the public aware of any potential threat and that we have certainly had a tragic episode that happened in oklahoma this week that took us down to the very foundation. we want to do everything we can to make sure that oklahoma is aware that whenever there is a threat that the we address those concerns and keep the public informed. and so we are doing everything we can to make sure that we have an emergency plan in place and that we certainly have initiated that many times. it is actually the lieutenant and they are doing it very difficult time in oklahoma's history and we want to do everything we can to make sure that we protect our second amendment rights. >> thank you very much. representative, you have 90 seconds. >> we need real leadership and

action to respond to this. four years ago, when janet took over and the state department of education wanted to take the program on, one of the things she eliminated with the emergency hotline to holland for issues that might be facing schools. we saw when the council met a couple of years ago that that was one of the first suggestions to reinstitute. the board and my opponent appointed has backed up all of these policies that we have seen going through the school policies that have hurt our schools and we need to see real action and real leadership. i've championed the that after the school shootings a year ago and we had a meeting in my hometown of russia's springs and i invited school professionals and superintendents and teachers and parents from all over the state to discuss what we can do better. we almost saw a tragedy similar to what we saw in sandy hook. that was averted because students acted the right way and

they reported the situation. we must encourage the students to look for the situations and work with their school administrators. i certainly want to see more resource officers in the schools. partnerships between municipalities and others to have that law enforcement officer in the school to help provide that security. we must work to make sure that our teachers have the right resources and we cannot continue these cuts. >> coming up on c-span2, the communicators. then scott brown of massachusetts discusses foreign policy and the midterm elections. [inaudible]