a way that you can answer the radical threats by showing families around the world that there are better ways than brighter opportunities for families and children in the economic trade issues are indicative of the potential the united states can unleash. like the national security council to encompass a much broader response to traditional threats. . . really the way of the future. i'm very excited by the potential. >> drill down on that a little bit, particularly in the energy

sector which you talk a lot about and quite passionate about. the transatlantic trade investment partnership tpp, what could that mean for expanded access to suddenly plentiful american energy for our partners? how do we use energy as national security tool? this may come back to you, caroline, because many of our allies would like an energy charter which is not on -- also they would like to have finance but that's another issue. should an energy charter be in this? is the u.s. open to that? first caroline and then to you. >> i think that the way we use energy and the way we see energy in the future has to be a global approach. it can't just -- i cringe a little bit when i hear the

term -- that energy is -- we have ours and everybody else is kind of on their own. i think that the difference between the russian president's position, which tends to use energy as a weapon, and ours is completely different. should be completely different. we can use energy and our good fortune in energy and technology to help developing countries skip the pollution stage of energy. sharing technology. providing american leadership, and leadership of our friends and allies holistically to help jump start economies from struggling economies all over the world. you need energy. those who have it are blessed. those who don't, need it. and to me. enlightened american foreign policy should include the ways in which we'll try to make energy and climate an issue that

is -- that typifies all of the best qualities of american leadership. ...

>> for anyone who wants to work on that report, senator jones is the cochair. so it's really gaining traction at the moment here. >> i would pick up on what the general said which is that we need to do and we are working on with energy and climate seeing that as part of our general and national security and international work. and so this is part of the global economy and we are already seeing ed in that and we are working intensively with china on climate and clean

energy there, sharing technology and we are working with india and other countries especially on how to work towards this stage as the general is pointing out. so the department of energy licenses they have a very large private sector. and we also have a link with countries that have a pre-trade agreement and so that will expand the most automatic licenses for projects in those regions, we have worked a lot with europe in the last 15 months and there is a g-7 track

with ministers. and we have also worked with in europe especially in some parts of europe there is room for energy efficiency and room for breaking down the european energy market and at the moment they do not send the gas into europe because there is no way to transmit it. so they put it onto asia. so we have wind power in the north sea that cannot get to where it's needed with the south. so there are many issues and we certainly believe in promoting a strong global market for oil and gas and other energies and of course the green energy as well. >> at this point there is not a particular need. >> yes exactly. >> okay, drawing upon your career in government talking

both about the national security objectives that are locked in with trade agreements and perhaps you can also talk about how hard it is to get these deals done. and it's crucial to this end she said to me that they have no idea and it takes a huge amount of effort and a huge amount of concentration to push one of these quite ambitious situations through. >> let me congratulate you and the atlantic council for bringing us together. because the focus this morning is not just on economics which i think is quite important, but it's pointing out how these trade agreements are really absolutely crucial for international security and let

me start with that one. because obviously there are the political elements and with trade economic standing it's so integral and interwoven with the military standing and the ability to show strength and to be able to achieve this objective. i remember when the admiral the chairman of the joint chiefs had said, that we have to worry greatly about our economy. and the integration here is not just about the aircraft carrier and that matters, but it is also about your economic standing and what impact that has. so let me mention two others that are sometimes often forgotten and that is referred to the importance of values and standards and here there is also

a paradigm that has been established and again, it is interwoven with other paradigms, military alliances and what they need and not just only that but also the kinds of humanitarian alliances that you have and the rule of plot and the values that we have, oftentimes with the global challenges that we have around the world you know it does contribute in this case to the international global order and paradigm. and then there is a fear that i would put forth and that is one that we look at and also audiences in asia and europe. and that is how you build a consensus at home. and that leads to greater consensus in the arena and that has been a challenge for us in

the in terms of trying to galvanize that support and point out that state that we have events abroad. i believe strongly that these elements are part of this if we go forward, if we have the agreement it bolsters this end and turn it helps to build a consensus at home for dealing with national security challenges abroad. >> okay, so you see a direct connection taking this a step too far between the conclusive and the strengthening of nato. >> there are direct connections and we know in regard to this one of the mandates we want to see is greater burden sharing and towards that and if you bolster the economy, you're going to have resources to be devoted in the national security area as well as a deepening of

things and there is a challenge here to the alliance. so this can only undermine our strength and our foundation of strength and not just in the military but economically. even basic questions of transport. so when you think down to the details, these trade agreements can have a great impact. and i think that the important elements here is the fact that europe is looking at a diversified approach and i think that in that sense that only adds value and it is interconnected clearly with the agreement. so it's a win-win situation. the other part of your question is very difficult and i had it from the other side of the ledger that caroline mentioned labor and environment, i spent my time when i was in government in dealing with environmental issues which are part of these

questions. but let me just say that it is doable and it requires patience and it requires being able to listen, not only to put forth your own objectives but also to listen and you have to have give and take. and i firmly believe that these agreements in the end even with the kind of give-and-take of challenges that exist like in the agricultural area the bottom line is that everyone realizes who'll be around the table and who is around the table and they realized that you give this here, but you get benefits there. so patience and leadership, multilateral perspective and of course looking at your own interests and also i think also two other important aspects, i think the executive alleges weight of relationship matters and i also think the ngo

community and business community matters. so in that sense in terms of this, it matters greatly because you have to have the voice of the business community and also the nongovernmental community. patients and openness truly matters. >> i am just going to be part of the panelists for 30 seconds to agree. to add one other thing and that is 15 years of europe having had half the rate of growth in the u.s. is actually not good for us and it's not good for our security or geopolitics either. so we are seeing potentially more resistance to this in europe than in the u.s. and we have to see how that but you know that the programs are really pushing forward to the growth initiative as not just this but a national security

story and since you have been appointed here you have been a strong supporter of free trade and concluded agreements with japan and korea and most interestingly that is where i want to go with this question, with the asia pacific economy growing faster than any part of the world, how have these trade agreements benefit australia but you already have this bilateral agreement with the u.s. and so why do you need this and then what do you do about china? and that part of ttp. >> that's a totally different plan. we are going in place the asian nations that love organizing the trade agreements between them. and i think the three that we have negotiated with with korea and japan and china are more

exciting. but partly what is driven with by the education that is being delivered in the countries and the region following what has been part of the ttp and getting an understanding of how much more they ought to be including in their trade agreements. and and it is generating to a considerable degree and they have a last resort as the obvious to bates that are being taken place. these are part of the debates. after the ttp it will be one and a half precent. if not, it will be 1.5%.

and you have been opened to the supply chain that can operate out of the asia region and we have driven the prosperity of those countries and you have an opportunity to get this. and asia was excluded in this from the arrangement since world war ii. in the united states, finally finally cracked open and it is into the way in which trade arrangements are done and integrity and certainty. all of the rest around the european empire.

and behind the border and it's not just there is a range of those sorts of things that are coming through. and that will be part of the asia pacific region. and it will be a standard to which we will be repaired. and after it is put in place the meaning of the countries in

the situation are part of this. and this is not gaining up on them, this is putting in place and they are introducing these sensible rules and the rest of it. >> this includes our principal ally. how powerful is the united states and i said you know the

happiness and the price prosperity of the united states and in particular the american middle class has been smashed. and this will be the american middle class and there have been changes in labor laws and they have the changes in technology and the american middle class experiences not unique. they are going to give us a chance to drive prosperity and income growth. and that is acquisition of access. and so tenures time will be a

standard. it will be 60% of the world's middle class. you can access that and he will not prosper if you can. >> it's rare that you have someone that is both a defense minister and finance minister. and so you heard him speaking as both. so does this assure asian i lie allies and do they need that reassurance? >> you know in asia, we like to see this. and i often do point out this

and we have great courage and you stick around and i admire you for it. [laughter] >> you know say that it's sort of the -- the worst that you experience, let's leave the north koreans out of this, the worst you experience in the region is sort of a quizzical skepticism by the chinese and that ranges in australia and everyone is in between those two markets. and so the area is very accepting of u.s. leadership and it is also very understanding of the values that the united states has been to the region in terms of the product being exported to the united states. experience experiencing the region is okay.

>> you have 650 billion invested directly and indirectly. and we have 470 billion per year. and we have stories not with that extremity. but it is certainly -- what you haven't have done is put this into india. you put enormous effort and you actually put a great deal of effort into japan and we will see that, a very different sort of japan as well. but also i wanted to be prepared as well. and so this gives you the chance. but more important than that it makes the rules.

and there are no rules, there are agreements. >> let me go back and ask if general jones has any other suggestions. >> yes, i want to jump in and thank you for your terrific explanation about happiness, and that is what drives me. two points, the first is that he is absolutely right about how welcoming an important it is to establish rules and norms and standards. and it has been put into that and it will come to fruition when we are able to close this on the basis of a strong bipartisan support, which goes

to this functioning. the other thing is that if we do not do this and i agree with you that this will happen, if one imagines not going forward, it wouldn't stay the same and it is going to turn into 3 billion in 10 years time 95% of the world's consumers are outside of america. they will go on without the rules and norms that we have with whatever we do. but if we are there, working with them to set this level playing field, we are showing leadership and if you are not there, that would be an absence

which would be this also. >> in terms of windows of opportunity, if this fails you have another shot at this for five years from now. >> this is the time to move and this is the time to move as someone referred to the fourth quarter and there are a lot of things that happen in the fourth quarter. and this is something i haven't quite heard in the conversation as people stability.

and because when you do have a paradigm, you do have rules. >> i spoke to you also while you are in national security adviser, i was surprised about what keeps you up at night. and you did not say terrorists with weapons of mass destruction but national competitiveness. is this part of it? >> yes it vocalizes my belief that as you transition into this century, a legitimate strategic question that we should be asking ourselves is where you want to be in 2050. so 1945 we charted a course that

got us to the year 2000 with some success. and i think the drivers to that position are different than they were in the 20th century. it is not as one-sided as it used to be where the province of just the defense department and a little bit of the state department and national security council, it has a lot to do with our energy department and the secretary of commerce the whole of government approach and i think that this transition of how we make these pieces work with greater cohesion, to understand that this is not about any one department solving any particular problem, it is much more complex than that. and the problems have arrived at us in ways that we haven't seen before.

we built a world in the 20th century to deal with serious problems with a sense of order and rebuild the institutions that dell with those as well. this world is more disordered and we have had to deal with not only the national community of nations but also the evolution of and the importance of organized crime and drugs and illegal trafficking of arms and human trafficking, terrorism, everything else these people are working much more closely together. so the way that we have responded has to be much more holistic. and i think that one of the things and i hope it comes as a result of this timeframe, and it's a reaffirmation of america's commitment not only to

participate but to lead with and to also convey that we are all in this together. and that the day when you can say okay, you guys fix it those days are probably gone and that is probably a good thing. and so i think that there's an enormous opportunity and this is the time in the moment were the friends and allies that we have in the united states can work together and we can really adopt the spirit of what i would call conflict are mentioned, how do you prevent these things from happening. and if you can get to that point, the investments that you make will be a lot cheaper and you'll really, i think, you will strike a blow against radicalism wherever it manifest itself, because at the end of the day if you can show people that there

is a better future by using the totality of your assets and energy it might end with the public and private partnership that we are talking about where the united states is concerned that you can do some amazing things and by 2050 i think that the position of the united states in terms of the many things that are going on will be secure. >> thank you very much for that. please identify your questions. >> i guess my question is for the whole panel. but given the importance of this national security agenda, are we going to use it as an opportunity to fix our own agricultural problems with our subsidies or local content requirements, many things that are actually in violations of

the rules which make it difficult to change and i think that that would actually help the sense that we are in this together and there is a free and fair global trading system. >> also will what role agricultural situations will play. >> it is playing an important role and we look forward to getting american farmers to be big supporters of trade in many ways. with europe we share similar economic structures and what is particularly important about that agreement will be the rules and standards based on values and understanding the agriculture that we have science-based regulation. i don't want to get into the

details of how we might be negotiating on some of the different topics. but i believe that we have very strong and ambitious negotiators on the other side and the commissioner really believes in making a good deal. and a good deal that we have to recognize has to be good in the end for both sides and you have to believe that there is a whole that is in everyone's interest. >> you are a wise public servant. >> thank you very much. and thank you for putting this panel together.

as someone who worked in the clinton white house the last time that the democratic president tried to get fast-track, i know how difficult this can be, newt gingrich was unable to muster a majority in favor of fast-track and it had to be pulled in 1997 before a vote and it went down in defeat. so facing the difficult congressional agenda today you are faced with the fact that senator obama voted against this in 2005 so how do you address those that raise that? >> i think that the president has addressed the remarks that he made about trento. and what we are doing is improving on trade deals. you know you learn as you go

along and never before have environmental standards been included as part of the trade agreement and it's referred to as all of the modern nature of this agreement that is being negotiated with the asia pacific and of course the politics are difficult. because when middle-class families have been disappointed and given stagnant wages for a long time, they are looking for what is going to make life better. and so this agreement is different from previous agreements. this is a better and stronger

agreement. no doubt things could change in the future and will hire even more improvement. but this is a strict change from previous agreements including ranging from vietnam to japan and so also subtle and the scope of earlier situations as well. >> i think i heard the president trying to articulate as well the u.s. has already given us thought, in terms of the relationships not simply with the countries appear, but you have to remember that it's not as important as the outside. and that is it is the rules that ultimately have impacted this. so what we have is a cracking

open with others left in place. most that matter in the manufacturing this is your one chance to get into other situations as they are into yours. and it just falls apart. it does not mean that trade agreements go away. they are involved in the negotiating which is by no means a comprehensive part of the rules and that will be what goes into place. it will disappear and reemerge probably about four or five years from now with the free

trade agreement, the asia pacific region. [inaudible] >> please go ahead. >> one of the most interesting things about was asked to do during my time as national security advisor was to meet a delegation composed of the secretary of defense and secretary of state, the secretary of commerce to capitol hill the congressional leaders on both sides, to talk about the importance of u.s. control reforms. and it's not something that you would typically associate with a national security advisor. but it gives us some insight into what the president is thinking even back in 2009 about the urgency of doing that kind of thing. i think that this is an opportunity for congress to do what is in the best interest of the american people and i think that most americans favored trade and free trade

opportunity growth, and they don't approve of anything that gets in the way and i think we have a lot of things that congress can get together on to make it easier for the private sector to compete and enter the markets and so on and so forth, and also to make other countries willing to invest in the united states and it was announced not long ago in an attempt to invest her to $5 million into the united states, that is remarkable and we are working to try to make sure that when that happens they get a fair return on their investments and it also helps where we need help and perhaps regarding our infrastructure and so on and so far it has really been an

important not only economic issue but a political strategic issue and an international security issue. >> thank you, general. let me go here as i saw these questions first. and i will pick up look of those questions. >> thank you chairman. my question about this the chairman proposed it how do you explain the administration handling that your closest allies germany france with a position. thank you.

>> that question you can comment on as well. >> if i may in a private conversation the china policy is based on two words, and that was reported by the media. how do you explain that? thank you. >> let me turn to the second question their and this may have to be our final round. >> sort of a follow-up. just to delineate differences between this and some of the other games in town and the u.s. situation. >> please identify yourself. >> tobias burns from northwest

university. >> okay, thank you. >> first of all i want to repeat what the treasury secretary has said. that we welcome this in infrastructure and asia and we see that there is a great need for it, we are encouraging the existing institution and the asian development, not just to move forward with their own plans for infrastructure but to work with the asian infrastructure bank when it is established. we have to maintain that it is important that this complement the existing institution and that it is if it is to be useful and has high standards of procurement governance for the infrastructure projects that are put in place, we would like to

see the active discussions along these lines. we believe that it is important that this bank works with the other institutions and the other institutions work for this and that we are continuing to be directing ms. am laying out what we feel is important for standards. >> before you go there do you have thoughts on this? we have christine lagarde, the imf chief here, she was actually pretty embracing and thought that this could be brought together with what they and others are doing and could be of additional value. >> you know, when you are dealing with a situation like this, from time to time you do have to make way to see what we

have to offer in terms of any thoughts that they may have and the way in which global financial institutions and the like should be conducted. but i think that the main point here is to ensure that as it is developed that it does not include governments associated with arrangements in the region and i think that the american position outside of the negotiation and the europeans and others, is to try to get into the structure. there are sorts of standards that will give you a level of confidence for what could be a instrument of financial importance and it ought to be

put out in this way. this is very much a work in progress and from what we can see from inside and outside they are causing them to adjust quite a bit. the governors arrangements they are putting in place. so i think something rather than initial offers will be created out of that process. i thank god that my private conversations not broadcast to the rest of the world, because most of them would have meant my political demise a lot earlier than it would've happened. and there have to be very strong motives in human intercourse and in relationships between nations. and i think that we have a different view actually. we see the rise of china as

positive in principle. but that does not mean that we accept the judgments that are made and emanating with what is in the security interest of the region. the chances are that it will be a much better discourse than otherwise. >> you had a question? >> no, that is fine. >> okay, you want to make a final comment as we wrap it up? >> no, i do not. >> okay. first, i want to thank our panelists because this was a rich discussion, there were many more questions that people would have liked to ask. as one would ask you all to remain in your seats for a short period of time. the security detail has asked

you to do that while we change the stage and rearrange the stage and if you meant secretary john kerry will join us. i also want to salute the team that not only puts together this but also is putting together the new initiative and trade and security and the business coalitions. and that is the director and the deputy and this is just an incredible can-do team and i want to salute them all in front of you. so thank you very much to the panelists. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

[applause] >> mr. secretary, ladies and gentlemen. good morning and thank you very much. it gives me pleasure to be here with you to introduce my friend and great statesman secretary john kerry to the atlantic council. for those of you that watched the atlantic council closely and i put myself in that category, you'll know that the secretary spoke with the council a month ago about the national security implications of climate change. the fact that he has spoken with the council twice in a month is a complement to the impact that the atlantic council has made to the important issues of our time and the tireless leadership fred, we congratulate you for that. it also demonstrates that the secretary is providing leadership on the international

agenda of the 21st century. secretary john kerry and i began our careers fighting in the defining conflict of the 20th century, the cold war struggle to contain totalitarianism. the peaceful end of the cold war and the onset of globalization ushered in a new security environment american leadership was defined by the capacity to endow and enrich as it is by her ability to defeat adversaries to a military force alone. the strong defense remains critical to american national security and global influence. american diplomatic and economic leadership our great military power in the 21st century is to remain. along with this visionary colleague at the department of commerce and the secretary at the department of energy secretary kerry understand that the american private sector is a critical asset of american

diplomacy. this includes investments with our partners, at home and abroad with what has become a global landscape. this is why it is so important that the secretary is with us to talk about the strategic importance of trade in the american leadership and security. throughout his long political career, he has worked tirelessly to advance the cause of international peace and security to benefit global interests and values, we have known each other for many years, dating back to his service as chairman of the senate foreign relations committee. during that time he was a friend of the u.s. military and a supporter of american leadership at nato, which i came to appreciate in my time as commandant of the rain pour and my time as national security advisor i found him to be a thoughtful and trusting advisor on capitol hill who the

president could always rely upon to do what is best for our country. few people may appreciate the critical leadership for our country at difficult times during the christmas time during 2009 when this personal diplomacy helped to prepare us in the u.s. relationships with than the president of afghanistan hamid karzai. secretary kerry is working diligently to bring a number of diplomatic efforts across the finish line on matters of great importance to the american security and prosperity and global security and prosperity. should celebrate his leadership even if it takes a terrible toll on his health. i'm pleased that he's chosen to speak at the atlantic council and be with us to speak to the importance of trade to american national security. please join me in welcoming john kerry.

[applause] >> general jones, i thank you very much for that very generous introduction and more importantly, i thank you for your extraordinary years of service to our country you held so many important positions and working your way up from a young lieutenant in vietnam all the way to national security advisor in many places in between we all admire you and the world appreciate the extraordinary contribution and that we thank you very much. [applause] >> i feel great, folks.

and it can take a terrible toll on the family. but madam, thank you so much for being here today. it is an important statement about the importance of this topic that summoning ambassadors are here reflecting their interest in this trade and i am delighted to be here with all of you. it's good to be here and i'm going to surprise you a little bit because i'm going to talk about the atlantic and the pacific today security and trade. that is a very timely topic in almost a guaranteed way to get into a pretty good argument. within or without this. and that is exactly why we are here the atlantic council and

for more than half a century this product the council of the greatest generation we have been part of close economic ties in the united states, canada and europe. in that time the council has had a lot of superb leaders beginning with christian. coincidentally the former u.s. secretary of state from massachusetts. fred kemp also belongs to that good tradition and visionaries and internationalists and i appreciate his invitation to be here and his leadership and i think that all of you do as well with what he's doing with the atlantic council. and the introduction of the bipartisan congressional trade priorities and accountability act is, in fact very good news.

why is that? because it reflects exactly what our nation needs and a bridge over three divides executive, legislative, the senate and the house, and between the two major political parties. so i would like to commend the senate finance chair orrin hatch and the panels ranking member ron wyden and the house ways and means committee chair paul ryan. i commend them for providing a framework for moving forward on a pair of the most significant trade negotiations in our history. the transpacific and the trans-atlantic trade and investment partnerships. those of you fond of acronyms can understand. the new bipartisan bill if

enacted will fully respect and preserve the rights of congress. but it will also give the president of the united states the flexibility that he has to have to negotiate on our nation's behalf and make no mistake that the questions of whether the president should have trade promotion authority in the end really does come down to whether the united states should even pursue significant free-trade agreements and that is what is at stake. during my 28 plus years of service in the united states than it i have a lot of conversations on the subject, factory workers union representatives, business people and other professionals often these discussions were very heated and emotional and challenging. because men and women are understandably upset if they see

a company closed down with jobs lost and they deemed the causation to be directly responsible for a trade undertaking. it's only natural that in their distress they are going to find someone or something to be able to blame and it's sometimes easy. as a democrat by somebody who won the nomination for my party for the presidency, i understand those tensions as well as anyone. but i voted for the trade agreements including nafta when it came to the united states senate. i have a lot of other conversations as well on the other side of that coin with entrepreneurs and innovators. people that were eager to take advantage of new opportunities and whose ingenuity helped to

create jobs, move our country forward, change our economy, open up new opportunities reinvent this mix of our economic base and cities like boston and philadelphia and los angeles, new york and elsewhere. whether we like it or not my friends what is new particularly in business and not in everything but particularly in business, catches up and ultimately overtakes the old practice. and that is the reality. you can trace that from the beginning of the industrial revolution. it is what we always call progress. and yes sometimes in the social fabric it has been a part of that. but the resulting gains don't come often without some element of loss at some point and that

is why we put in place and adjustable system and why we have done a lot of other things in order to respond. it has always created a dilemma for policymakers but should we try to stop change? as inevitable as it is? is that even realistic? we fight as hard as we can to maximize the benefit and minimize the dislocation. my own convictions are twofold. first in the modern world, we simply cannot expect our economy to grow and generate new jobs if all we do is buy and sell to ourselves. it is not going to work. trade is a job creator and the

record of the past five years, the past 100 years or more bears that out. as i speak, about 11.7 american jobs, export, that number is only going to go up. why is that? it's pretty simple math. 95% of the world's consumers live beyond our borders and if for some reason we decide not to do business with them, our economy will absolutely gradually wither and shrink and we will see going out of business signs from one side of america to another. embracing globalization is not easy and i understand that. in fact it can be hard. but trying to pretend that it doesn't exist would be catastrophic. so my second conviction and by

that i mean the united states, that we should be deeply engaged in helping to write the rules for trade. once again common sense. so why would you sit on the sidelines and that other people do that two do think that they would go for our high standards automatically two you can measure what happens to companies across the world. how many countries try to ask their companies to operate by that standard. failure to do this would be a felony against the future of our own economy. and we have to be engaged because if we do not protect our interests, no one else is going to and because we have learned from past experience to insist upon tightly written and enforceable standards on the issues that we care about the most. and that is why it is important that these lessons are the

center of the bipartisan bill that are being considered by the congress and of the high standard trade negotiations under way. and the proposal on capitol hill goes well beyond any previous measure of its type. rather than settling for the status quo is designed. it says were trading partners that if they want to take part in this global market, then it's important for them to comply with the core international labor and environmental standards. and they have to color within the lines of intellectual property rights. ..

in fact we were facing the greatest financial crisis of this country since the great

depression and we were looking at the prospect of even entering the great discretion. the discretion. the entire financial structure of the country was on the brink and ready to collapse. and i'm not saying that, that's what a republican secretary of the treasury said to me and my colleagues in the united states senate on an afternoon when he came up to implore us to engage in a bailout of that system. unemployed employment was facing 10% and the market of housing was in shambles. since 2010 u.s. businesses have about it. we put people back to work than all the other economies combined. the single biggest cause of the success is that our exports have reached a record level. that's more than a statistics folks, that's a policy. when we increase the sale of u.s. goods and services our payrolls get bigger and american

paychecks get fatter. on the average, exports supported jobs pay more than other jobs. all of this matters enormously because as president obama has often observed, america's capacity to lead globally begins with our economic vitality here at home. now if we are all satisfied with our progress perhaps we could sit back, forget about trade agreements and about the chance to further pry open international markets where 19 out of 20 of the world's consumers live. but were not satisfied nor should we be. because we be. because we know if we attempt to stand still were going to get blown away economically. we've got to keep generating new

jobs. we've got to insure american workers, famers, ranchers, and businesses receive equitable treatment. you can't do that by sitting on the side of the road folks while other countries write the rules of the road for world trade, which is where the future is going to be divine. most americans understand that. a recent gallup poll shows that almost 60% of our citizens view foreign trade as an opportunity, not a threat. here's the reason, the u.s. market is one of the most open markets in the world. our environmental and labor standards are among the highest in the world. that's why we actually have so much to gain and nothing to lose by reaching deals that lower barriers and raise the norms of business behavior so that our businesses can actually wind up selling more in other places.

now consider that small and medium-size businesses, which are the backbone of the american economy by the way they face a unique set of challenges when they're trying to increase exports. for example health enterprises in massachusetts ships consumer healthcare items to more than 60 countries but is hurt by bureaucratic issues such as costly reregistration process in the eu. the seattle-based cascade designs company exports outdoor equipment, recreational equipment, but it faces high tariffs in tpp countries. an agreement could change that enabling both exports and payroll to grow. concorde supply in san antonio texas is a seller of industrial materials and it depends on patent enforcement to keep its

innovated products from being ripped off. more generally, the u.s. is the world leader in many service industries and therefore stands to gain significantly from greater openness in that sector. the list goes on. our companies need agreements that will reduce both tariff and nontariff barriers to trade. that will enable them to participate more fully in the new global supply chains that are creating unprecedented opportunities to establish winning connections around the world. in fact, the economic case for tpp and t tip is overwhelming and i've argued a lot of cases over the course of my career. however as secretary of state i'd like to offer just a little bit of additional food for thought, wearing the secretary of state hat, not the business or trade hat.

it is no secret we have reached a very fluid stage and global affairs where people are wondering all around the world frankly, how the world will look a couple of decades from now. this turbulence that we are witnessing comes from a combination of factors but it comes significantly from technology changing economic and political relationships. it comes from the fact that even as the world grows closer there are powerful forces driving us apart. these include terrorism but also extreme nationalism complex over resources the imbalance between the number of people coming-of-age in many regions and a dangerous shortfall in economic and social opportunity. we also know that everybody in the world is in touch with everybody in the world all the

time every day. and believe me, that changes aspirations and it changes politics. it changes possibilities. it makes it harder to build consensus, harder to govern. when we add all of this up we are confronted by a couple very basic questions. are we going to look backward and decide the best way to prepare for the future is to try and recapture the past? are we going to fear change and give up even attempting to negotiate a a trade agreement that will spur sustained growth and address precisely the labor and environmental concerns about which critics have previously complained? i sure hope not. the fact is we could try to build a wall around our economy as big as fenway park's green monster, maybe bigger but it

would be a lot more harmful than it would be helpful, my friends. instead of walls what we ought to be building our alliances and partnerships and understanding and rules of the road by which we can all act with certainty, rather than hunkering down and just thinking somehow the storms going to pass over you and you're going to be okay. we should be and we are believe are, believe me, all the tools at our disposal to generate shared prosperity, so that we and our partners can move forward together. and we need to we need to make certain that everybody up and down that foodchain, the economic food chain, shares in the benefits of this much more effectively than they have it sometimes in the past. now the good news is that our engagement has been welcomed across every ocean not because we always agree with all of our

friends on every part of this or all of the impacts, but because we know all of our markets and our futures are linked. when the chips are really down our partners will be able to count on us and just as we know, that we can count on them. that's what we'll them. that's what will give the world greater strength and frankly greater stability in this extraordinary moment of challenge on a global basis. the right kind of trade agreements are actually critical because they create habits of cooperation that help us not only economically but in everything else that we are not only determined to do but that we need to do in order to reduce the instability and address the challenges of the future. the united states and europe are bound together as shakespeare put it by hoops of iron.

t tip will enable us to take further advantage of our combined economic muscle. a few years ago when it was first talked about i remember in the middle of the economic crisis, people said wow, this is going to be able to really help us get out of this crisis, lift up and create the jobs we need. that hasn't changed that need. there's still crisis in a number of countries in europe. as we look at greece struggling with the euro and other challenges, teach up has the opportunity to be able to provide the acca top economic kick that people need and want and thereby serve as a strategic pillar of the transatlantic community. it will be_democratic solidarity that has defined us and united us since the berlin wall was pulled down by the courage of both sides of that barrier. and

looking ahead, t tip will reinforce our common effort to counter violent extremism, support the sovereignty of ukraine, ukraine, build energy security and independence for many nations in europe that have currently have to relate rely on one source, russia. it will also help us address global problems such as nuclear proliferation and climate change. that's what comes out of this kind of operative effort and the growth that it will spur. of course the asia-pacific is also a major focus of our international economic policy and diplomacy. the markets there are huge and are growing very rapidly. they are expanding right along with them is the range of the american economic, economic, political and security interest.

seven agent countries are among our negotiating partners on the tpp. these include japan his prime minister will be in washington next week for a state dinner and to adjust a joint session of congress. the transformation of the united states and japan from enemies to allies over the past seven decades is truly one of the most magnificent and achievements of all history for both countries. an example of countries. an example of a remarkable turnaround for reconciliation and of possibilities. the tpp is one way to guarantee that our bilateral ties already strong grow even stronger while serving to reassure the our allies that america's commitment to the region is both deeply rooted and long-term. because the asia pacific matter so much, president obama announced early in his presidency a plan for a plan for a rebalance in foreign policy. but that is grounded as well and the need for regional nurse to

proceed a level playing field within asia so the geopolitical clout is not overly concentrated in any one country, including country, including us. were not seeking that. we want to see it spread and shared and understood and engaged in by all countries rather than a great game as we have known it into many places through all of the last few centuries. that equilibrium is crucial because the economic models and trade standards that hold sway in the asia pacific will have a decisive impact on the norms elsewhere. it's in america's interests and in our allies interest that these standards be as high as we can make them because when the competition is fair, those countries that practice by those

standards are the most productive in the world, and i'm glad to say the united states is among them. the bottom line is this 2015 is simply not the time for us to decide that trade negotiations are too hard or to somehow vacate the field and let 70 years of lessons from the great depression and world war ii get tossed aside. it's not the time for us to sit back and allow the principles of free and open trade to be supplanted by the barren twins of protectionism and mercantilism. why honors would we ever think that to do so would be in america's best interests or in the interest of the world? that's what's being offered by others, opponents. why would you even consider that? if there is any message being sent to governments by the young people in the world today which

really was at the heart of the arab spring, at the heart of the revolution that was attempted in syria, at the heart of to. >> reporter: square. to hope for jobs and education in the future. if we don't meet the needs of those young people today and they are demand for openness and freedom, the desire to give nature the environment the same protections that we pursue for commercial contracts and property these young people insist that we live by the rule of law so that the corrupt are held accountable and it's possible to achieve prosperity without being either a giant corporation or born rich.

as americans these are the kinds of demands to worry us. these aren't aspirations we should be scared of, we should welcome them because we've encouraged them all over the world for decades. they are on the contrary, the hopes and expectation that the united states should embrace. they reflect principles that can help us modernize and strengthen our partnerships across the oceans. they can elevate the way the whole world does business. the road to the realize asian begins with the approval of the trade promotion if they are authority for the president, followed by the completion of these two agreements each of which represents an agreement with 40% individually of the gdp of the world. ultimately my friend, trade issues cannot be separated from larger questions about america's global leadership or about the choices let to be made by our generation. if we retreat on trade, our influence on the global economy will diminish.

and if our economic stature is in doubt, our ability to deliver on defense and political challenges will be increasingly questioned. in our era the economic insecurity realms are absolutely integrated. we simply can't pull back from one without diminishing our role on the other. we have to be fully engaged in each. more than 50 years ago when christian herder led this country counsel american exports were worth only about 1/20 of their value today. in other decades since our commercial relationships have been utterly transformed transformed, our leading manufacturers have changed, our trade in services has exploded and technology has made what was once barely imaginable now the new normal. we are living in a wholly different world except for one

thing, the need for american leadership. like the greatest generation, we face the tests that we cannot allow partisanship or any other source of internal division to prevent us from meeting. we have an opportunity before us to shape and elevate the global rules of trade for decades to come. on these rules will be written the economic history of this century. in congress prominent leaders from both parties are poised to open that door. it is absolutely vital my friends at the atlantic council that you and we all together do everything possible to make sure we walk through that door together and we get this job done. thank you very much. [applause].

secretary carrie i think you hear from this crowd that we just heard a significant speech and we thank you for that. we think you particularly for making the speech of the atlantic council and reflecting on christian heritage because you just did call these historic and nature. if we go forward these agreements we may see that we become historic for their times as nato did, perhaps a different way and we feel that way. we've launched our our our own initiative today and our own business for trade and security today will do whatever we can to get this done because we also consider it historical.