covering 3.9 billion population. my question is do you have@@@@@) if we don't exercise on a bilateral basis for a multilateral basis, if we do not, how do we know what might happen and what might have -- what might not happen. we work hard to make sure that we are an invited guest everywhere we go in the area of responsibility. it is not just my luxury,

pleasure. we have not been turned down yet, except [unintelligible] -- we have not been turned down yet, except in myanmar. we had 36-some helicopters, part of a coalition effort in the bay of bengal. we were able to fly into and arrington, but we could have done so much more. that is the one example i can think of where we were told no thanks. in every other situation, countries -- we remain the indispensable partner. we want to be humble about this. we want to be invited to the best. in invitation tendered is an invitation received, and that works both ways. the second part of your question was -- oh, yeah.

thank you. joint lessons learned. you bet. lessons observed are not necessarily lessons learned. so when we do have these exercises and we have cultural and language opportunities, shall we say, we want to try to get down to a couple of really big hidden items that countries in young men and young women and old men and women can understand, embrace, and six is necessary or pursue its desirable. so lessons learned is a great big ticket item. lessons observed -- volumes and volumes -- all of us have seen them on the shelves. we are interested. we are not persuaded by this. we are interested and persuaded by lessons learned. we are working very hard with all the nations with whom we engaged to make them concrete, simple, and fixable.

yes, sir. >> thank you, sir. i would like to ask a question on north korea. the u.s. government has been watching several north korean vessels right now, which are possibly carrying weapons. are you going to keep watching the vessel continuously? until when? second, do we have any expectation when the north korean launch will be, and what we are -- what we should be ready for? thank you. >> sure. our response is and is it 6:00? -- are we not supposed to finish at 6:00? [laughter] north korea as activities are disturbing and unsettling for all of us.

as far as shipment of proscribed cargo, i cannot comment on operational matters like that with intelligence matters. our president has said he is satisfied that the pacific command and the military of the united states is well prepared to execute whatever did mention he gives us. you can read whatever or not you choose to read into that. as far as the launch from north korea, the recent launch following by a couple of years the july of 2006 launched, the secretary of defense just said a couple of weeks ago -- i think he said it very well, we are prepared to protect americans and american property and american citizens and american territories. we do not want to tip our hand too much. we want to indicate specific

areas of readiness for operational patterns, but we are prepared to execute whatever direction the president and secretary give us. yes, sir. >> thank you for your time today and sharing your wisdom with us. one to get your assessment of the joint special operation task force operating in the philippines. what have been a positive takeaways? do you think those forces should be sustained in the philippines, even grow, what is it time for them to go home and let the filipinos take over? thank you. >> thanks for the question. joint special operations task force philippines -- we were directed to provide forces in conjunction with the united states special operations

command to help the armed forces in the philippines in their struggle against violent extremism, principally in the southern regions of the philippine country. we have been there for about six years now in some number. we have got -- i will just say several hundred special operators there right now, as you probably know. been there for awhile. incredible mission. helping significantly on force of the philippines in our view of it to the metrics question. while there are still kidnappings, we are not entirely sure that they are terrorists. it little bit of a borderline in some areas between criminal activity and terrorist activity. i was able to go with a real dynamo and a great ambassador for our country. on a trip to visit our personnel about a year ago.

we flew down, helicoptered down, drove over -- it was not interstate '95. a little bit bumpy. in about it for your 05 convoy. escorted and followed by armed forces of the philippine marines. so we take this trip in the true heart of darkness philippine jungle. as we leave, visible elements of civilization and get into less opulent villages and isolated realms, young kids are running out, waving and applauding and jumping up and down and hollering in their native tongue what i'm told this "is good to see you." with their mothers and fathers nodding approvingly. i saw this with my own eyes. i thought this was wonderful, terrific.

ambassador said that two years ago, the mother and father would have pulled the kids back and stayed well away from the street. have there been any demonstration, it would have been unfavorable. i saw with my own eyes enthusiastic support from the citizens who had been previously terrorists are violent extremists. i believe we have made significant progress. it is a tough match. but to her question -- we have the guys there that we have now here we are going to keep them there for the foreseeable future. it is a situation we analyze constantly. we are there for the foreseeable future, and i think that the benefits we came in spite of significant attention and special operations forces are important enough that we maintain our posture and presence in the philippines. serve.

>> i want to know, sir, have you personally learn. do you read a lot? do you have smart guys who brief you and up, or do you just go and see it with your own eyes? >> i have the great luxury and a privilege of being surrounded by smart, brilliant dyes -- brilliant guys. this is going to be syrupy. i have the best job in the world. think about it -- i get to live in hawaii with my wife. fabulous house. my enjoy a nice airplane of your that rarely takes off without me being on it and generally goes where we like it to go, so we

have astounding support -- personnel, administrative, logistics, equipment. pretty good funding. i learn by listening. go back to him. but to him. oliver, magnus, many in the room. some of the names i do not recognize, but faces i do. i tried to keep my mouth closed and might use open. my wife would not necessarily agree. -- i tried to keep my mouth closed and my years -- might years -- my ears open. the spend more time in our embassies. we are spending more time as we can with commercial partners and

commercial interest. we spent a full day in india not in the district of foreign affairs, but at luncheons and gatherings, so there is a pretty good exchange of ideas on those terms and on those issues, so i tried to listen more, talk less, and generally, what the staff recommends is almost always spot on, and on those rare occasions when is just need to give orders, studying the feet of masters. it has been my privilege. >> as the defense department does its review, what priorities are you advocating? >> we were just in town two weeks ago, talking about this. it is a singularly important

effort, as many of you know. i am pleased to report that, commanders have a larger say so then my experience in the past, a reformulation of this review. it is a huge challenge for the apartment, as you would anticipate. we are more active in the formulation of the review. we submit an integrated priority list, and this will be mind- numbing for a lot of you, but we have 10 items on our list, and these are issues where we would prefer a little more funding, a little more emphasis, little more input -- we're more of from the department of defense on those priority issues of hours.

of our 10, all of them, tend to attend, are being addressed in the review. we think that is beneficial for us. you might as what those issues are, and again, i cannot go into them, but if you were to think of areas where we might like because of the size, because of the various countries with whom we are exercising, that we might like intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities, for example, it is being addressed in the review. we are very happy with the role that we have. we have an active voice in the formulation, and it is a singularly important document for us, and we are cautiously optimistic that it will be not just a heavy tome that goes across the street to congress, but that it will have an impact

with congress and that the american people will be persuaded by the analysis that goes into it. i am optimistic. >> great pleasure to see you again. question -- i will just use the framework of our strategic relationship with japan and japan looking into the future. two parts list. first off, the policy realignment initiative, a series of 19 different plans that of 19 different plans that basically restr number one, how do you see that change in our laydown posture and how it affects our relationship with japan? and second,guam is further east

and south, and it is going to be a challenging place to train marines. could you talk about both of those? >> sure. is a great question. the defense policy review initiative in the implementation plan -- there are a number of subsets, all of which are in some process of execution now. we will take the a b -- navy unit of one area and put it into another. we are shuffling around some army flags. i do not mean to sound trivial. not mean to sound trivial. it is very important to us in

the japanese. we are combining with the air force in japan to have a combined operation center, which will be very important. all through those 18 other parts, on track, generally well funded, and very beneficial to us across the board. the previous administration, president bush, the current and ministration, president obama, secretaries of state in secretaries of defense from both administration have reaffirmed our national commitment to get aip done. got it. loud and clear. it is going to take some money. it is going to take some time. there is an understanding that working inside the defense line will not get a defense line.

properties just will fidget working of the properties will not get it done. there have to be improvements on the infrastructure. those of us who have had a pleasure of going there understand. it is 10% growth almost overnight. you cannot do that anywhere in america without some infrastructure considerations and improvement. that means money, and that takes time. there are labor cost. you have to go back to the marine corps. there are training issues attend to the transfer. the marines in okinawa still not get all the training they need to get them right there. we have to move some of them around. aip is not without challenges. previous of the stations have expressed their commitment to get it done. there is a new group working inside the pentagon that is at a little more senior level to those who are working very hard to get this done in years past. we are doing all that we can to

support the department of defense and increasingly in interagency look at the opportunities and send it to moving moments of fear you could raise the point where of warm -- where guam is l little bit off the beaten path. yes and no. once we get through the environmental assessments, i think we will 5 -- i have deployed a bunch. then on the carrier once it twice. i have been flown a whole lot in that part of the southern pacific. perhaps you have been down there as well. great training opportunities. it is going to take a little while to get there. we have the flag of the united states flying over guam. as we develop it, we will have more forces down there. it will be a training center for us, and we can move folks. granted, there will have to get on a ship or an airplane to get where they are going. we have a few of those. i think it is a strategic imperative for us, and i believe

in time, we will find the money, and get the infrastructure upgrades, improved to the point where we will be happy once we are down there. our marine corps has said he will walk every marine goes there to say when they are done with the to to not want to leave, and guys who are outside to want to go. we are hopeful. yes, sir. >> thanks for coming, admiral. i have a question. you mentioned the nuclear posture of view a little bit earlier, and i was curious about how you see that playing out in your area of responsibility, the defeat given the call of the president for a world free of nuclear weapons. in particular, dealing with japan and the question of launch

cruise missiles and how you see that playing out over the coming years, carrying out this vision. >> thanks. this is my personal -- you might ask the difference between my personal and professional, and there really isn't any. this is a great big deal for us in the united states of america to review our nuclear posture. i mentioned we have been 27 or 28 countries out there. sooner or later, many of the folks with whom we have discussions will get around to asking -- is your nuclear deterrent umbrella going to continue to extend over [still in the blank] country? our abilities on a taken for granted. sooner or later, the

conversation comes up, and i said that it is not mine to determine policy, but it is my hope that our nuclear deterrent umbrella will continue to be effective, and that probably means it will continue to extend over wherever in the world i happen to be. the nuclear posture will be aggressive. our president has made clear certain aspects that he hopes to be addressed in the nuclear posture review, and i'm sure the guys doing it understand. part of that was japan, and what was the second part? i am unaware of specific japanese interests in that particular system that you described. i am aware of japanese interest in the nuclear umbrella, continuing to expand.

>> just as a follow-on to the question earlier about submarines as being critical to maintaining freedom of the seas, what about surface vessels? would you like to see more of them -- >> yes. >> ok, but also as part of that, not just more, but i'm curious what types for capabilities in particular -- what types or capabilities in particular. >> let me go back to our strategy -- presence. i can make a case -- we have made the case -- quantity has a quality all its own. for us, in the broad reaches of

the pacific, it is very helpful to have a larger number of surface assets that we can deploy. remember what our partners say -- we would like you to hang around for a while, but would not bother us if you leave. sometimes, they did not know if we are two, 20, or 200 miles over the horizon. they trust that we are nearby. there are advantages to that. so it is to the pacific command's benefit to have more than less ships. the more capable they are, the better because we will ask much of the cruise on those ships, as we hope to engage, demonstrate readiness, and enhance partnership, the higher end technical capabilities those ships have, the easier it is for us to ensure the secretary of defense ability to execute whatever our operations he tells us to execute. whether it is united nations

security council resolutions, whether it is exercises like small bar, or whether it is the high-end operation and iraqi freedom, and during freedom type of operation. lots of ships are better than less ships. there is, of course, the issue of affordability. the ddg 51 is a wonderful platform. if that is how the navy chooses to go, we would be happy with that. their decision to make. we just want our fair share when the decision is done. a little more than our fair share. thanks. >> before you take this question, the admiral has been generous with his time, and i think we should take just this question and maybe one more. one of the things one learns at the pentagon is meetings are supposed to start and stop on time. >> i hope this question does not disappoint you.

we traditionally think of warm places when we think of your aior. you outline the beginning of your strategy. as you are looking up 20 years, to the north of your aor, the bering strait, bering sea, and thinking presence and not talking submarines. how much did the arctic feature in your thinking in your formulation strategy? >> it is a terrific question. the shortest answer is it did not figure much, but we did not ignore it. there are all manner of the interesting aspects to the

global warming, if that is what is really happening. as there is an unmistakable evidence of increased access to be number passage. it you come up here, what military command is responsible? visit northern command? i could have made a pretty compelling case two and a half or three years ago. is it pacific command? you bet. is it european command? and what about canada? is it their water? how do we work through the policy challenges attended to military operations of here, as is certain will be more than less involved in the out years in operations, or at least guaranteeing freedom of access in the maritime domain, so it is an issue that we are studying more closely. the classics that responses we will take that lesson, but we

are working on with european command, through the joint staff. it is complicated. it is challenging. it is important. we talk about the trade, that $1 trillion of trade that our countries do with the united states. the decrease in transit time is startling between the far eastern countries and the u.k. and our nato allies. we can cut a for your 05 steaming days off. an issue of significant strategic and economic importance. we are working in concert with -- not been contest to northern command from a european command, our friends and allies, and the department of state. >> the menil, have complicated, challenging, and important, it

you are dismissed. thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> how is c-span funded? publicly funded it. donations may be? i have no idea. >> government? >> federal funding? >> may be, i do not know. >> how was seized in pandit? 30 years, america's cable companies created c-span -- how is c-span funded? 30 years ago, america's cable companies face c-span as a public service. no government mandate or money.

>> "washington journal" is next on c-span. this morning, a pentagon briefing on iraq with a juror not -- general odierno. later on in the day, in the that the elections in iran. live coverage from the woodrow wilson international center begins at 12:30 p.m. eastern. . and later in the program, a reporter from slade magazine on the end